Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down
 
Author Topic: TOR - BOS  (Read 6634 times)
knightofdreamz
Star
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2247



« Reply #30 on: December 31, 2014, 07:42:28 pm »

Perhaps the Deng trade wasn't quite analogous and it distracted from my point that Toronto would not do this

I completely disagree. I think it was a great comparison and did nothing but highlight the trade value of similar players. Something i had already been doing, and something that fell perfectly in line with those.
Your point of "the Raptors wont do this" is nothing. You don't know if they would or would not, you're simply making that assumption. As am i, that they would. But when we suggest trades the only real aspects we need to consider are if the trade is in line with both teams and what they are doing, and if its of relative value.
Which for both instances, the answer is a very firm and confident "yes".


MCW put up 17/6/6 last year. He would barely play on most contenders. It is easy to put up big counting stats on a bad team that plays fast (Boston is 2nd in pace this year).

Ah, so you go from a player that was very similar in an attempt to show value, to one that is as far as possible.
There is a very good reason as to why you don't put MCWs and Green at a same or similar value, or even begin to compare them.
MCWs was a rookie last season, who put up numbers on a bad team. Trading for him, is a question mark. The guy obviously has skills, but no one really knows his real ceiling, if he can put these numbers up on a contending team, if he can put these numbers up with two or three other options, etc.

Green, is an 8th? year player, who's numbers have consistently gone up or have been similar and/or in the same reasonable area given minutes. We have seen him do better then (Deng) on a good playoff team where he was a 4th option and we have seen him on a non-contender that is intentionally tanking and where he is not even getting starter minutes. So i mean, you can point out what Green is doing on a bad team like the Celtics, but that does nothing to escape the fact that we know he also did great on a near contending team.

These two players, their history and what we know they can or cannot do, are not at all similar or comparable. Which means, their values are entirely different.

TLDR: MCWs on a contending team we have no clue what he will be able to do. Green on a bad team, is roughly 2ppg more then he was on a good team, 5 years ago. This is not out of bounds or inconsistent in any way.


I would like to point out what you've done here.
You suggested we look at Deng and his trade value to get an idea for Green.
A player that is nearly spot on with position, similar production at same age, current production that we can easily make +/- value adjustments for without it being egregious, teams accepting contract/player on similar paths/positions, etc.

You could not have been more spot on and accurate with this comparison and show of value. But, because it ended up working against what you were saying, you try to change it to a player that is of a completely different position, completely different value of production (because of position difference), completely different experience and age, very different team needs, etc.


Quote
You are equally guilty of hyping up Jeff Green. He is an above average scorer that is a shaky shooter from deep. Terrance Ross is a much better fit in their starting lineup for his shooting abilities.

But im not.
In fact everything i said is perfectly backed up and in line with his history.
No one is suggesting he is some superstar player, just someone who could be a second or third option on a good team.... which again, is perfectly in line with his history the skill set we know he has.

I fully expect this guy to be able to put up at least 19 with full time minutes on the Raptors. That is not over-hyping or "over" expectations for him. We know what he did on OKC with better options in front of him, we know what he was able to do and there is really no reason why we cant transition that to the Raptors.
But in what world is that overrating or valuing him?
Even on the low end my expectations would be 17ppg 5-7rpg in 32-36 minutes. Which again, we know he was able to do as a virtual non/part time option.  


Quote
If you don't think that even gets them in contention in the East, that's your opinion.


Yes and no.
Its an opinion but its an opinion based around facts.
We know that most teams outside of one or two exceptions, tend to go through playoff trials. Especially one's growing together like the Raptors. So, first round year one, second year two, WCFs/Finals year three. This may vary depending on the team, but its generally true. There are not a whole lot of exceptions to this rule and there is good reason as to why.
So even if we go by the basic trends that we see in contending and/or serious playoff teams, these guys are pretty far away from actual contention.
And that is without even getting into the fact that they really lack a third option, are still mismatched with at least 6 other teams that will most likely be in the POs.


Quote
Masai Ujiri makes some crazy deals, but he is not giving up multiple assets (however worthless you think they are) for Jeff Green.

1. Imaginary assets.
2. Stop acting as if Green is not an option.
3. Said imaginary assets are risks for the Raptors, this is the exchange of risk for instant reward. Again, you have to pay a price for that instant reward.


Quote
And with that: this thread mind-numbingly stupid, the 2nd trade posted would never happen (OP is possible, but not likely), and I'm out.

See, this highlights the general issue here.
You suggest my trade, that is 100% in line with current player values is out of value and not going to happen, where-as you suggest OPs is possible. No one, outside of the Raptors, gets anything of actual value in the OPs trade. It works if you're the Raptors, but not anyone else. That's the point of making trades, both teams give things of value. You cant just suggest that the only good trades or viable trades, are the one's where only one team actually benefits. That's as biased, self serving and unrealistic as it gets.
Why would the Celtics have any interest in giving up a near all-star player who is only 27/28 for.... (Landry Fields, Greg Stiemsma, 2015 1st, 2016 2nd) 2 3rd string players, a 2nd which has a 70% chance of not being in the NBA after his rookie contract, and one 20+ pick. You understand that if that was the proclaimed starting value of Green, not only would we see teams offer far more but the Celtics would put a reserve price on him. where they would not have to trade him until a price (roughly double that) is met.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2014, 10:14:46 pm by knightofdreamz » Logged

Oliver
Star
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2681


peace coming from the far east


« Reply #31 on: January 10, 2015, 09:06:56 pm »


Here's something that people never consider with the Raptors, why they can never land good free agents and why their window is always very limited. Taxes.
Most Raptors players are citizens of both the US and Canada. Which means they are paying taxes in both Canada, the US and depending on the state they live in within the states, state X.
By the time all is said done 50%+ of their check is going to taxes, plus another 10% for the agent. So if a guy gets 10 mill a year, before he even gets his hands on any of the money 6 mill is gone (on the conservative side). He could continue to deal with that, or go to a Texas or Florida team and face about 13% taxes. 

Link?
Logged

Minichcc
Journeyman
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 119


« Reply #32 on: January 12, 2015, 07:52:26 am »

Pretty far from 3 1st Rounders eh?

Grizzlies: Jeff Green, Russ Smith

Celtics: Tayshaun Prince, Austin Rivers, Protected 1st, 2nd Rounder

Pelicans: Quincy Pondexter


Am I missing something?
Logged
knightofdreamz
Star
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2247



« Reply #33 on: January 15, 2015, 05:41:19 pm »

Pretty far from 3 1st Rounders eh?

Grizzlies: Jeff Green, Russ Smith

Celtics: Tayshaun Prince, Austin Rivers, Protected 1st, 2nd Rounder

Pelicans: Quincy Pondexter


Am I missing something?

The part where i very clearly stated that if we knew one first was going to be a lottery pick then it would dramatically change whats given and the 3 would be too much?
Or the part where i very clearly stated and expanded on, the only reason 3 picks would be given is because they would all be late firsts and not hold the value of... lets say..... the pick the Celtics got that is pretty much protected up until the point it becomes a lottery pick.
Yah, you pretty much seem to be missing the actual details.
Logged

Fitz
Journeyman
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 113


WWW
« Reply #34 on: January 15, 2015, 07:08:44 pm »

the pick the Celtics got that is pretty much protected up until the point it becomes a lottery pick.
It is protected on the high end but not if it falls out of the lottery. Come ~2019 (Memphis already owes Denver a pick which will likely be conveyed in 2017 unless Memphis fails to make the playoffs in '15 or '16), Boston gets the pick unless it is top 8 (then it is top 6 protected in 2020, unprotected in 2021). Boston is gambling on Memphis not being very good by then. There is no guarantee that it is a lottery pick.

Meanwhile with your deal that NYK/DEN pick could quite possibly in the lottery (I would say about 30-40% chance right now), then another 2 late first rounders, a rotation big, and forcing a bad contract on Toronto. But the Raptors clearly deserve to pay that exorbitant price for a 3rd-4th banana because they dare to do business north of the border.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
 
 
Jump to: