The Major Discussion Point for Me With the Trade

[Sothron]

Was about to ask the same.  @Sothron would have some insight there.  I've always been under the impression that Love wants to be on the west coast.  Am I totally off?  That's why I don't want us to trade for him.  I just don't think he'd sign here long-term, even though he'd fit well here.

 

Everything Kevin has always said is that he wants to play for a playoff team that can be a contender. He has never said he will only play on the WC. That line of thought has been put out there for a long time by Laker fans convinced he was coming there because he played at UCLA and his dad used to be a Laker. Now you see GSW fans aping that line of thinking but now are putting the Warriors name.

 

FWIW I think Ferry would trade for Love if he could Minn to bite and if Love gave him enough reassurance that he would resign with us. And yes, I do think that making the playoffs and having a system like ours would in fact convince him to stay.

[MaceCase]

I see that as poor value from the 16th pick.  I would rather he flip it to an currently studly team for an unprotected future first in a couple years - like say having given it to the Trailblazers who badly needed bench players last season for a 2016 first rounder or to the Grizzlies who had pretensions of contending or the Lakers, etc.  That pick could be flipped in a deal like the Lou trade or could blossom into something amazing if those teams go down the tubes.  Either way, it seems like better value management than taking and stashing a player you have no intention of ever being on the roster.

 

If he did intend for Bebe to be on the roster, then maybe it was just a missed pick, which happens.

 

I certainly think teams should expect to commit more resources to playing and developing their first round picks over their second rounders.

Well that 16th pick was poor value period.  Again, stop discussing the pick, discuss the player and more particularly the circumstances surrounding the selection.  Because the pick was a late teens pick in a historically weak draft it does not hold the value of which you want to apply to it.....and this is a particularly weak pick slot to begin with in the grand scheme regardless. 

 

In this current or any typical draft for that matter that 16th pick, Bebe precisely, is closer in value to the 30s and 40s pick selection so you need to apply your thinking in that vein.  You're trying to apply 1st round logic to a prospect that you know good and well was a 2nd round talent.  The unusualness of stashing a 1st rounder in the teens should only add further evidence to what many scouts, pundits and GMs had already said about that draft.  So with all of this, why are we still trying to overrate the selection?  Do not go the Northcyde route either by trying to come up with "plausible" scenarios where a negative or neutral asset all of a sudden gains positive value either.  This is a clear cut situation where it is what it is, I do not see the use in trying to pretend otherwise.  It was a small price to pay for a small gain.

Edited June 30, 2014 by MaceCase

[AHF]

Well that 16th pick was poor value period.  Again, stop discussing the pick, discuss the player and more particularly the circumstances surrounding the selection.  Because the pick was a late teens pick in a historically weak draft it does not hold the value of which you want to apply to it.....and this is a particularly weak pick slot to begin with in the grand scheme regardless. 

 

In this current or any typical draft for that matter that 16th pick, Bebe precisely, is closer in value to the 30s and 40s pick selection so you need to apply your thinking in that vein.  You're trying to apply 1st round logic to a prospect that you know good and well was a 2nd round talent.  The unusualness of stashing a 1st rounder in the teens should only add further evidence to what many scouts, pundits and GMs had already said about that draft.  So with all of this, why are we still trying to overrate the selection?  Do not go the Northcyde route either by trying to come up with "plausible" scenarios where a negative or neutral asset all of a sudden gains positive value either.  This is a clear cut situation where it is what is, I do not see the use in trying to pretend otherwise.  It was a small price to pay for a small gain.

 

Just to name a few players that I think carry fine value taken in the 10 picks after Bebe:

 

Dennis Schröder

Shane Larkin (primary target for the Knicks in the Chandler trade)

Gorgui Dieng

Mason Plumlee

Tim Hardaway

 

I do attach more value to the pick than you do.  3 of those guys are among the top 6 in rookie win shares last year (Plumlee #1, Hardaway #2, Dieng #6).  The top 4 WS/48 in last years draft were all selected after Bebe.  

 

This was not a draft that was bereft of talent after the #16 pick.  That draft's weakness was more about how weak the lottery was than the rest of the first round.  I do agree that this year's draft was so deep it puts the 2013 draft to shame which makes me think no one smart would have flipped a 2014 pick for it but a 2015, 2016, 2017, etc. pick?  That strikes me as being quite possible and would have given us the trade asset and the player upside.  

 

Including Bebe in this deal seems like selling that asset at a low point in value to me.

[HawkItus]

17 Dennis Schröder PG Germany Atlanta Hawks Phantoms Braunschweig (Germany)

18 Shane Larkin PG United States Atlanta Hawks (from Houston via Brooklyn, traded to Dallas)[D] Miami (FL) (So.)

19 Sergey Karasev SG/SF Russia Cleveland Cavaliers (from LA Lakers)[c] Triumph Lyubertsy (Russia)

20 Tony Snell SF United States Chicago Bulls New Mexico (Jr.)

21 Gorgui Dieng C Senegal Utah Jazz (from Golden State via Brooklyn,[d] traded to Minnesota) Louisville (Jr.)

22 Mason Plumlee C United States Brooklyn Nets Duke (Sr.)

23 Solomon Hill SF United States Indiana Pacers Arizona (Sr.)

24 Tim Hardaway, Jr. SG United States New York Knicks Michigan (Jr.)

25 Reggie Bullock SF United States Los Angeles Clippers North Carolina (Jr.)

26 André Roberson PF United States Minnesota Timberwolves (from Memphis via Houston,[e] traded to Oklahoma City via Golden State)[E] Colorado (Jr.)

27 Rudy Gobert C France Denver Nuggets (traded to Utah)[F] Cholet Basket (France)

28 Livio Jean-Charles# SF France San Antonio Spurs ASVEL Basket (France)

29 Archie Goodwin SG United States Oklahoma City Thunder (traded to Phoenix via Golden State) [E][G] Kentucky (Fr.)

30 Nemanja Nedović PG  Serbia Phoenix Suns (from Miami via Cleveland and LA Lakers,[c][f] traded to Golden State)[G] Lietuvos Rytas Vilnius (Lithuania)

2 31 Allen Cra

 

 

So tell me of the above who is getting anything more than a late second if that in a trade?

[AHF]

 

 

So tell me of the above who is getting anything more than a late second if that in a trade?

 

 

See the above.  Larkin was a key part of a trade for Tyson Chandler this week.  I think Dieng, Plumlee, Schröder and Hardaway are all valuable young assets.  The idea that Minny could only get a "late second" for Dieng at this point is just laughable.

 

Wasn't it just last week that we were thinking we might be able to flip Dennis for the #8 pick in this year's loaded draft and now he can only get a "late second"?  I don't buy it.

[TheFuzz]

 

 

So tell me of the above who is getting anything more than a late second if that in a trade?

 

 

Quite a few, actually. In any case, I think this is a reflection on Lou's poor value than anything else. Virtually all the teams that might make use of Lou (i.e. playoff teams, for the most part) are jockeying for Melo/Lebron or don't have the space to absorb him. Dealing Bebe is the price we pay.

 

Edit: We also don't have a lot of roster space if we're gonna commit to Teague/Korver/Millsap/Horford/FA, which I think we should.

Edited June 30, 2014 by TheFuzz

[HawkItus]

See the above.  Larkin was a key part of a trade for Tyson Chandler   cap space this week.  I think Dieng, Plumlee, Schröder and Hardaway are all valuable young assets   _{that played in the NBA last year}.   The idea that Minny could only get a "late second" for     would even trade Dieng for a second rounder  at this point is just laughable.

 

Wasn't it just last week that we were thinking we might be able to flip Dennis for the #8 pick in this year's loaded draft and now he can only get a "late second"?  I don't buy it.

 

You just proved my point.  If Bebe had the resume or value of these guys he wouldn't have been traded.   Danny Ferry is not in the habit of losing trades from what we have observed in his time as GM of the Hawks......right?  

[HawkItus]

Quite a few, actually. In any case, I think this is a reflection on Lou's poor value than anything else. Virtually all the teams that might make use of Lou (i.e. playoff teams, for the most part) are jockeying for Melo/Lebron or don't have the space to absorb him. Dealing Bebe is the price we pay.

 

Edit: We also don't have a lot of roster space if we're gonna commit to Teague/Korver/Millsap/Horford/FA, which I think we should.

I think AHF's list was conclusive.  The point is Bebe has more in common with these other stiffs than the list AHF compiled.  

[TheFuzz]

I think you and AHF are arguing different things. AHF seems to be arguing the (possible) value of a 16th pick whilst lamenting an asset lost (I won't say it was wasted, obviously it was necessary to unload Lou). I don't think AHF is discussing what Bebe himself should fetch, because he is still somewhat of an unknown.

[MaceCase]

Just to name a few players that I think carry fine value taken in the 10 picks after Bebe:

 

Dennis Schröder

Shane Larkin (primary target for the Knicks in the Chandler trade)

Gorgui Dieng

Mason Plumlee

Tim Hardaway

 

I do attach more value to the pick than you do.  3 of those guys are among the top 6 in rookie win shares last year (Plumlee #1, Hardaway #2, Dieng #6).  The top 4 WS/48 in last years draft were all selected after Bebe.  

 

This was not a draft that was bereft of talent after the #16 pick.  That draft's weakness was more about how weak the lottery was than the rest of the first round.  I do agree that this year's draft was so deep it puts the 2013 draft to shame which makes me think no one smart would have flipped a 2014 pick for it but a 2015, 2016, 2017, etc. pick?  That strikes me as being quite possible and would have given us the trade asset and the player upside.  

 

Including Bebe in this deal seems like selling that asset at a low point in value to me.

Eh, we all had a good laugh at the idea the Kings supposedly considered Dennis for the 8th pick.  The Knicks were more intrigued by getting two 2nd rounders in this deep draft more than Larkin himself as he's likely yet another Jared Cunningham throw in.  Dieng, Hardaway and Plumlee had about 25-30 games of decent production and are all upperclassmen.  You'd expect better initial production over underclassmen but low ceilings as well meaning that you should seriously cap what you'd think you'd get in return for any of those players.  If you believe that those guys would warrant a future 1st based on their age, potential and what they produced from any team not picking 30th in the draft then I will just have to bow out of this discussion because we are at entirely different spectrums on what we believe draft picks are worth.

[BrazilianHawk]

If I were the hawks I think I would try to trade

1) horford for love because I don't think they would want millsap on an expiring contract

2) Larry Sanders and a pick for Paul Milsap. That give k-love a real rim protector to play with, and I just read an article saying the bucks are looking to trade sanders for a veteran big man.

3) Sign Chandler Parsons

That's a pretty good, very balanced team. Especially in the East

Teague

DMC

Parsons

K-love

Sanders

Korver off the bench

 

LOL. If Milwaukee wants a veteran big man, they can have Elton Brand. That's all Sanders is worth in my book.

[Alex]

Yeah this is a puzzling move for sure. I only hope it's a precursor to something bigger that actually improves this team.

If they sign a Luol Deng and nobody else like I am thinking they do, then what was the point? I hope this isn't another wait until next off season type of summer.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AHF]

Eh, we all had a good laugh at the idea the Kings supposedly considered Dennis for the 8th pick.  The Knicks were more intrigued by getting two 2nd rounders in this deep draft more than Larkin himself as he's likely yet another Jared Cunningham throw in.  Dieng, Hardaway and Plumlee had about 25-30 games of decent production and are all upperclassmen.  You'd expect better initial production over underclassmen but low ceilings as well meaning that you should seriously cap what you'd think you'd get in return for any of those players.  If you believe that those guys would warrant a future 1st based on their age, potential and what they produced from any team not picking 30th in the draft then I will just have to bow out of this discussion because we are at entirely different spectrums on what we believe draft picks are worth.

 

I think Minnesota could get a first round pick today for Dieng without a doubt.  Hardaway and Plumlee look like they would be in that range as well.  All of those guys have more value than any pick by Ferry other than perhaps Dennis and Payne.  I am saddened that we ended up with so little value for the #16 pick because I had hoped for more from Ferry's draft picks than that type of sweetner for impact.  

 

If we are looking at Dennis not having developed and Payne being as limited in impact as you think these guys are, we will be in a sad state in a few years.  We need to start conclusively hitting on some of these picks.  (Our biggest "hit" so far has been Mike Scott and there is debate on this board about whether we will even bring him back next year.  I remain optimistic about Dennis' talent and am looking forward to seeing what we have in Payne and Patterson this year.)  Part of the Spurs' success story has been grabbing talent from our range and later and turning those into significant pieces of their team (and they have a much better core to start with).

[ATLBob]

Yeah this is a puzzling move for sure. I only hope it's a precursor to something bigger that actually improves this team.

If they sign a Luol Deng and nobody else like I am thinking they do, then what was the point? I hope this isn't another wait until next off season type of summer.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

This is pretty much exactly how I feel.

[Sothron]

You can tell who never watches TWolves games if guys think Dieng isn't worth anything. Dude was on beast mode in the second half when Pek and Turiaf were down with injuries.

[MrMeltdown]

http://hawksquawk.net/community/topic/395549-peachtree-hoops-hawks-john-salmons-move-to-extend-waiver-deadline/#entry702969

 

Can Salmons be moved again? Seems to me that would be the only reason to extend waiver

[MaceCase]

I think Minnesota could get a first round pick today for Dieng without a doubt.  Hardaway and Plumlee look like they would be in that range as well.  All of those guys have more value than any pick by Ferry other than perhaps Dennis and Payne.  I am saddened that we ended up with so little value for the #16 pick because I had hoped for more from Ferry's draft picks than that type of sweetner for impact.  

 

If we are looking at Dennis not having developed and Payne being as limited in impact as you think these guys are, we will be in a sad state in a few years.  We need to start conclusively hitting on some of these picks.  (Our biggest "hit" so far has been Mike Scott and there is debate on this board about whether we will even bring him back next year.  I remain optimistic about Dennis' talent and am looking forward to seeing what we have in Payne and Patterson this year.)  Part of the Spurs' success story has been grabbing talent from our range and later and turning those into significant pieces of their team (and they have a much better core to start with).

Would any of those players receive a pick at or greater than where they were drafted without any secondary assets attached based solely on their rookie seasons?  I'll doubt that till I see it given that overall, it's rare occurrence.  Again, I ask if Dallas has the same lamentation that you have giving up that very same 16th pick and another 1st rounder in the first place to save money on a 18th pick that they later had to package with two more 2nd round picks in a deep draft, a unguaranteed contract asset in Dalembert and young player in Ellington in addition to getting rid of a very productive starter in Calderon to get an expiring Chandler coming off his worst season in 4 years while still having to eat Felton's contract.  If Ferry's asset management is questionable on this trade then the Mavs must be apocalyptic yet a quick gander on one of their boards shows me that their fans are almost entirely neutral on the deal rather than starting suicide watches. 

 

Part of the whole success story for the Spurs is turning those picks in that range into contributors on their team not flipping them for future firsts which seems to be your major contention on the Bebe trade.  I've already pointed out the glut that exists in the frontcourt that would make this difficult for Bebe without it being at the expense at some vet or other draft asset.  If you take a gander at the Spurs history they have had extreme difficulty flipping any of their 1st rounders (and 2nds) for other 1st themselves no matter how productive they are besides Hill (26th) who was entering his 4th year as a rotation player and spot starter for #15 and the rights for Leandro Barbosa (28th) for #30 (David Lee).  They've seen nothing for Udrih, Mahinmi, and James Anderson to say nothing of their second round selections of Scola, Dragic, de Colo, and Blair which they have seen less than nothing for yet I doubt they are saddened by this.