Bill Simmons Blasphemy: DeRozan for Henderson/#9

[MACK11]

Wasn't DD a #9 pick?

Wasn't this season rookie of the year selected #11?


Don't get me wrong, I think the trade is not near enough, however, we won't know what this draft produces for a couple of seasons.

Yes DD was a #9 pick but I dont want to trade a proven players such as DD for Gerald Henderson and #9

[DanH]

I think everyone here is completely misinterpreting what Simmons said. He is intentionally choosing a player who is clearly lesser than DD, and says that's the sort of move Masai makes, where he trades for a lesser player, gets picks, and then suddenly the lesser player is a superstar because Masai is just awesome. He in no way is suggesting Henderson and #9 would be a fair return - he's saying it's a trade you'd question (like the Rudy Gay trade) until for some reason the team wins 50 games.

[ceez]

DD for Henderson and #9 isn't as crazy as it sounds

DD for MKG and #9 is even better

[ceez]

Package #20 and #9 to move up

get sayyyyy.. Exum?

oof

[mcHAPPY]

I think everyone here is completely misinterpreting what Simmons said. He is intentionally choosing a player who is clearly lesser than DD, and says that's the sort of move Masai makes, where he trades for a lesser player, gets picks, and then suddenly the lesser player is a superstar because Masai is just awesome. He in no way is suggesting Henderson and #9 would be a fair return - he's saying it's a trade you'd question (like the Rudy Gay trade) until for some reason the team wins 50 games.

I'd much prefer to roll with rampant speculation and half truths.



haha

But yeah, that makes sense. I'm going to put your interpretation in the original post.

[Bendit]

Sac's #8 is available for a proven player. If MU did not sell the Rudy deal as "Rudy & Demar dont mesh...hence I need to trade Rudy" then #8 and McLemore for DD would be a good basis for a conversation, no?

[imanshumpert]

A top-10 pick and at least one young prospect, as a minimum starting point, is a pretty decent return for DeRozan (while also keeping all our own draft picks). It also lines up quite well with the discussion that has been going on here at RR for most of the past season.

I would personally hope for either a higher pick or a better prospect (ideally both), but the basic trade idea makes sense (especially if you like Ross and view both Ross & DeRozan as SGs). For this one specific trade, I'd say no and just keep DeRozan.


It would be interesting to go through all the teams with a top-10 pick, to see what similar type trade potential exists (need for a starting scoring wing, cap space or ability to match salary, young prospect to return to Toronto, etc...). I know the Lakers idea has been covered with a thread of its own, and DeRozan is unlikely to land a top 3-5 pick without including other assets (starting with #20), but I'm curious what other teams might at least be intrigued by such a proposal.

How on earth is Gerald Henderson a "prospect"? He's two year older than DeRozan.

If DeRozan is unlikely to land a top 3-5 pick, then don't move him for a pick in this draft imo.

[imanshumpert]

Package #20 and #9 to move up

get sayyyyy.. Exum?

oof

No team in the top 5 is going to trade a top 5 pick for #9 and #20. #20 and #9 maybe allows you to move up to 7.

[Mediumcore]

]#9 and #20 isn't going to move you up more than 2 spots if that[/B].

Not a good trade at all tbh.

Lets just say that's true. Who could possibly be there at #7? Can you package the #9 with other assets to get into the top 5 and within distance of a potential star? This trade opens up a lot of options and also clears a fair bit of cap space I believe.

[Mediumcore]

No team in the top 5 is going to trade a top 5 pick for #9 and #20. #20 and #9 maybe allows you to move up to 7.

Are the #9 & #20 picks the only assets at Masaii's disposal?

[imanshumpert]

Lets just say that's true. Who could possibly be there at #7? Can you package the #9 with other assets to get into the top 5 and within distance of a potential star? This trade opens up a lot of options and also clears a fair bit of cap space I believe.

Even if you ignore the fact that trading a top 5 pick for a mid-lottery pick and a late 1st is just not smart usually (especially in this draft), let's look at it in context. Hmm, would any of the teams above #9 actually trade their pick for #9 and #20? Probably not:

#1 Cleveland: Need to acquire a star, are not gonna ship out #1 for two lesser picks

#2 Milwaukee: Also have a desperate need to acquire a star, same as Cleveland

#3 Philadelphia: Ditto with Cleveland and Milwaukee, plus they already have the #10 pick and a lot of 2nd rounders

#4 Orlando: They already have #4 and #12. Could use a guy with superstar potential. Only 4 guys in the draft are considered to be at all likely to reach that level (not saying no one else COULD). Not gonna trade down for two lesser picks.

#5 Utah: Tank didn't work out too well as they only ended up with 5th. Still not gonna ship it off for lesser picks, gonna take the best guy they can. They already have 4 key guys (Hayward, Burke, Favors, Kanter) that were drafted <= 4 years ago.

#6 Boston: Probably moving their pick as part of a deal for Love. Not saying this is guaranteed. But I think Boston is looking to either draft someone at that spot or move the pick for a superstar.

#7 Lakers: Why would the Lakers want more draft picks and to move down and get a worse player? Doesn't make a lot of sense for them unless they really like a guy at #20

#8 Kings: have already made it clear they want to move pick for a veteran player.


So it's pretty safe to say that we're not moving up with #9 and #20 unless you trade another significant asset (Ross, Lowry, JV, Amir), and still then I don't think you can get in the top 5. And in that case you would've traded DeMar + #20 + Significant asset for maybe a 6-8 pick and Gerald Henderson. Not looking too smart tbh...

And the trade would free up next to no cap space. #9 pick gets about 2M, Henderson gets paid 6M. That's 8M, so you save 1.5M off DeMar's salary.

[white men can't jump]

A top-10 pick and at least one young prospect, as a minimum starting point, is a pretty decent return for DeRozan (while also keeping all our own draft picks). It also lines up quite well with the discussion that has been going on here at RR for most of the past season.

I would personally hope for either a higher pick or a better prospect (ideally both), but the basic trade idea makes sense (especially if you like Ross and view both Ross & DeRozan as SGs). For this one specific trade, I'd say no and just keep DeRozan.


It would be interesting to go through all the teams with a top-10 pick, to see what similar type trade potential exists (need for a starting scoring wing, cap space or ability to match salary, young prospect to return to Toronto, etc...). I know the Lakers idea has been covered with a thread of its own, and DeRozan is unlikely to land a top 3-5 pick without including other assets (starting with #20), but I'm curious what other teams might at least be intrigued by such a proposal.

The thing is, pretty much no teams can make that kind of offer that would be good for Toronto. Charlotte sort of can as discussed in this thread. As can Sacto.

That's probably about it.

-I'd be shocked if one of Cleveland, Milwaukee or Philly is willing to move a top 3 pick. Philly doesn't really have the non-pick assets anyway. I'd take Philly's picks in this draft (3 and 10), but they'd have to be a whole new level of grossly incompetent to make that deal after a season of tanking.

-Orlando has wanted a PG since last year's draft, and I can't see a situation where they trade their pick instead of drafting Exum or possibly even Smart (though more likely Exum).

-Utah has some young pieces, but nothing that fits particularly well on our team. Favors and Burke are the most appealing pieces...Can't see them trading either. They don't have security at PG enough to trade Burke. Favors they've invested a lot in and I see Kanter as the more likely piece to be moved. Kanter has not made the strides that were hoped though and I want no part of him.

-Boston has some assets, but none of their player-assets are very enticing. Don't see them trading multiple picks for DeMar, especially since I'd want this year's 6 pick and I'm sure they'd try to hang onto that and just give you later/worse picks. (See Boston as a more likely partner for their later pick at 17 in a non-DeMar deal)

-LA...Well they really have no useful piece to send back other than their pick. And all the best options could be gone by their pick. So yeah, not a good scenario.

-Sacto...McLemore and #8 would definitely be a conversation starter. But as has been mentioned, the Rudy and DeMar thing not working here can't help that trade. And personally, I'd still want more given that as with LA's pick, all the best options (ie guys with the best chance at being special) could be gone.

-Charlotte....Pretty much same logic as Sacto. If the best projected players are all gone, you're not getting much return. And don't know if they'd sweeten the deal with more assets.

So it comes back to keeping DD. Need that "godfather" offer to be worthwhile and I don't see that as likely connected to this draft.

[imanshumpert]

Like I said. If a team is not willing to move a top 3-5 pick for DeRozan... we don't need to move him.

It's not a requirement to move DeRozan just because his value is at an all-time high. We're not Philly. We're coming off a 48 win season, whereas they were in the lottery the year prior to trading Jrue, and also saw a prospect (MCW) that was basically a clone of what Holiday was giving them.

[DanH]

Like I said. If a team is not willing to move a top 3-5 pick for DeRozan... we don't need to move him.

It's not a requirement to move DeRozan just because his value is at an all-time high. We're not Philly. We're coming off a 48 win season, whereas they were in the lottery the year prior to trading Jrue, and also saw a prospect (MCW) that was basically a clone of what Holiday was giving them.

Honestly, unless the team can get a top pick (and 7 could be high enough if a guy like Vonleh or Exum drops) for DD, or package him for a superstar, then I'd rather wait to trade him either this summer (in free agency, exploring possible S+T opportunities) or at the deadline next year. Waiting any longer than that his value really drops off (due to his contract making him a "rental"), and waiting until after Lowry re-signs really reduces the collateral damage of a DD trade. Obviously there's a scenario where there's not enough value out there for DD as well, but I don't believe that to be the case - his value around the league is pretty high, I think.

[imanshumpert]

Honestly, unless the team can get a top pick (and 7 could be high enough if a guy like Vonleh or Exum drops) for DD, or package him for a superstar, then I'd rather wait to trade him either this summer (in free agency, exploring possible S+T opportunities) or at the deadline next year. Waiting any longer than that his value really drops off (due to his contract making him a "rental"), and waiting until after Lowry re-signs really reduces the collateral damage of a DD trade. Obviously there's a scenario where there's not enough value out there for DD as well, but I don't believe that to be the case - his value around the league is pretty high, I think.

Or keep him... doesn't have to be traded.