I'm kind of on the fence about this one for the simple fact that I really don't expect there to be a huge gap in the realistic maximum and minimum returns you can get for trading Lowry, Gay and DD.
First off, with Rudy Gay you're looking at a very narrow list of trading partners due to the dollar amount of the contract. Ideally if you're rebuilding/tanking/stockpiling assets/whatever-you-want-to-call-it then you'd get back a first round pick or a talented young player (maybe more than one if you're lucky) and a bunch of salary ballast. The question is how much talent is a team willing to give up in order to acquire Gay. Given Gay's massive salary and potential for either walking or re-upping at an enormous cost, it's much more likely that the realistic haul is going to be expiring contracts and middling talent. There simply aren't enough huge millstone contracts out there to trade for and teams are going to be valuing their first round picks too highly to expect much of a return for him. In other words, I can't see this being a Baron Davis for a first round pick type of deal. So the difference between trading him for contracts and assets vs just expirings may come down to a late first round pick and a flawed-but-talented type player. In other words, not a huge gap.
As for Lowry, the way to maximize his value would be to trade him near the deadline to a playoff team that's lost it's starting PG for an extended period of time. The catch is that those types of teams don't tend to have a lot of high draft picks or exciting young assets to throw back. You might get yourself another future starter back, but the odds of getting a future star for a rental player are slim. So much like for Gay, the difference between dumping him and maximizing his value probably isn't all that great.
DeRozan represents the best chance at getting something solid of value in return because of his contract situation, but he's still a very flawed player whose value isn't great enough to get you back a lottery pick or a potential future star unless that star just happens to be buried behind another star and DD fits a position of need for the trading partner.
Add that up and really is there going to be much of a difference between Ujiri waiting to maximize each player's potential value and just dumping them for the first good deal that comes along and allows them to bottom out this year? Will the assets he gets by waiting compensate for a drop from pick #7 to pick #11 for example, and missing out on a future all-star (and yes I realize that lottery is random, etc etc, this is all just speculation)?
All that being said, I think waiting is probably the way to go, because those extra assets allow you to deal down the road and because although teams may not be willing to give up picks this year, future picks may prove just as valuable (especially if a couple of players choose to stay in college for another year and make 2015 a strong class as a result). A lot of young guys just need playing time and the right environment to succeed, so you never know which random throw-in could end up being a useful player/trade component if given a legit shot at developing.
First off, with Rudy Gay you're looking at a very narrow list of trading partners due to the dollar amount of the contract. Ideally if you're rebuilding/tanking/stockpiling assets/whatever-you-want-to-call-it then you'd get back a first round pick or a talented young player (maybe more than one if you're lucky) and a bunch of salary ballast. The question is how much talent is a team willing to give up in order to acquire Gay. Given Gay's massive salary and potential for either walking or re-upping at an enormous cost, it's much more likely that the realistic haul is going to be expiring contracts and middling talent. There simply aren't enough huge millstone contracts out there to trade for and teams are going to be valuing their first round picks too highly to expect much of a return for him. In other words, I can't see this being a Baron Davis for a first round pick type of deal. So the difference between trading him for contracts and assets vs just expirings may come down to a late first round pick and a flawed-but-talented type player. In other words, not a huge gap.
As for Lowry, the way to maximize his value would be to trade him near the deadline to a playoff team that's lost it's starting PG for an extended period of time. The catch is that those types of teams don't tend to have a lot of high draft picks or exciting young assets to throw back. You might get yourself another future starter back, but the odds of getting a future star for a rental player are slim. So much like for Gay, the difference between dumping him and maximizing his value probably isn't all that great.
DeRozan represents the best chance at getting something solid of value in return because of his contract situation, but he's still a very flawed player whose value isn't great enough to get you back a lottery pick or a potential future star unless that star just happens to be buried behind another star and DD fits a position of need for the trading partner.
Add that up and really is there going to be much of a difference between Ujiri waiting to maximize each player's potential value and just dumping them for the first good deal that comes along and allows them to bottom out this year? Will the assets he gets by waiting compensate for a drop from pick #7 to pick #11 for example, and missing out on a future all-star (and yes I realize that lottery is random, etc etc, this is all just speculation)?
All that being said, I think waiting is probably the way to go, because those extra assets allow you to deal down the road and because although teams may not be willing to give up picks this year, future picks may prove just as valuable (especially if a couple of players choose to stay in college for another year and make 2015 a strong class as a result). A lot of young guys just need playing time and the right environment to succeed, so you never know which random throw-in could end up being a useful player/trade component if given a legit shot at developing.
Comment