Everything Derozan

[JWash]

None of us can do a comparison without knowing how DeRozan's extension money would be spent, along with any subsequent roster moves that would be made. Also, nobody is suggesting that DeRozan gets replaced with "role players", except you.

CRF please go back and look at the names that were thrown out as possible 2 for 1 replacements for DD's 20M+ contract that he's likely to get and tell me which ones of them aren't role players. I just say "role players" so I don't have to repeat the list of names that were brought up over and over again. I'm not trying to create a strawman or ruin the discussion, I'm debating what people are using as talking points. I want a good discussion.

Of course there are other options, but they're limited. If you're trying to redistribute DeMar's 20-25M, you could also pay one guy 15-20M and one 5M, but that 15-20M itself is an awkward range. Because it doesn't get you the elite guys like Horford, Batum, Durant, etc so it's likely a range where you're spending a bit more than necessary to get a decent/good starter and then the other guy would be bench caliber or near the end of his career (like a Scola).

[slaw]

Looking through this thread today, you're the only poster on either side of the debate that keeps throwing out terms like "replacement level player" and "role players", in reference to what the other 'side' is thinking about.

I haven't seen anybody on the anti-DeRozan side suggest anything more detailed then a consideration that $25M could be more effectively spent (ie: on a replacement for DeRozan and an upgrade at PF - doesn't automatically mean two $12.5M players) than just on a DeRozan extension. Nobody has suggested that 2 "role players" are better than DeRozan - that's just your attempt to frame the debate so that no real constructive discussion can be had.

Well, in fairness, there's a fairly obvious reason why no "anti-Derozan" poster is throwing around terms like "replacement level player" and "role player" even though it's pretty clear that those are the players available at the applicable price point.

So, JWash isn't framing any debate to shut down constructive discussion, he's just being honest about what replacing Derozan with two players really means.

Frankly, I'm not sure why you object. If Derozan has much less impact on the game as you claim (or as many on here claim is a detriment to the team), then adding two replacement level players shouldn't matter all that much and, in fact, should help. So, why the hesitation to be honest about the kinds of players that would be added?

[JWash]

Well, in fairness, there's a fairly obvious reason why no "anti-Derozan" poster is throwing around terms like "replacement level player" and "role player" even though it's pretty clear that those are the players available at the applicable price point.

So, JWash isn't framing any debate to shut down constructive discussion, he's just being honest about what replacing Derozan with two players really means.

Frankly, I'm not sure why you object. If Derozan has much less impact on the game as you claim (or as many on here claim is a detriment to the team), then adding two replacement level players shouldn't matter all that much and, in fact, should help. So, why the hesitation to be honest about the kinds of players that would be added?

Seriously man, like that's not what I'm doing...

[Snooch]

Nobody is arguing that DeRozan is more important than Lowry.

We're arguing that DeRozan is not a replacement level player, he is playing like one of the best scorers in the NBA. His impact this year as you just pointed out is actually higher than Lowry's was last season. So obviously he's not out there doing things that can easily be replaced by role players.

And that is where you yet again are wrong. You talk replacing demar when conversation is about changing more than just demar and upgrading pf.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

[JWash]

The NBA market is so different now. Looking around the league at the kind of deals that have been given out it appears to be like this to me

<10M/year = Bench players (Lou Will types, Jeremy Lamb, etc)
10-12M/year = Fringe starters (TRoss, Amir Johnson)
12-15M/year = Good starters (DeMarre Carroll types)
15-20M/year = Strong starters (Wes Matthews types)
20M-25M/year = All-Stars/Star but not superstars (DeRozan, Batum)
Max = Superstars like KD and guys in the tier below that might get overpaid like possibly DeRozan or Batum

Like if you think about it we're getting close to a point where the NBA cap is going to be at over 100M. Considering the last 5 players on a team usually only make like minimum salaries, that's basically 100M divided amongst 10 players. Which means that an average player is going to be getting like 10m a year.

Average contract in the NBA used to be like 5-6M per year, it's insane how it's changing.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

CRF please go back and look at the names that were thrown out as possible 2 for 1 replacements for DD's 20M+ contract that he's likely to get and tell me which ones of them aren't role players. I just say "role players" so I don't have to repeat the list of names that were brought up over and over again. I'm not trying to create a strawman or ruin the discussion, I'm debating what people are using as talking points. I want a good discussion.

Of course there are other options, but they're limited. If you're trying to redistribute DeMar's 20-25M, you could also pay one guy 15-20M and one 5M, but that 15-20M itself is an awkward range. Because it doesn't get you the elite guys like Horford, Batum, Durant, etc so it's likely a range where you're spending a bit more than necessary to get a decent/good starter and then the other guy would be bench caliber or near the end of his career (like a Scola).

Fair enough.

Those are just a couple off-the-cuff examples from a few posters, hardly an extensive list of viable options. I would aim significantly higher than those sorts of names, if I was trading DeRozan or planning on letting him walk.

Conversely, I've seen yourself and others suggest that $25M would only be able to acquire an insignificant upgrade at the PF spot, for example, which is equally limiting.

I've always pushed for a DeRozan trade that would acquire an equally talented player at a position of need (ie: starting PF), while in-house options and/or draft picks (for example) could fill the SG spot. It's not just a comparison of DeRozan VS player X (or player x AND player y), but rather the net difference that a revamped roster with a more team-oriented system (since a heavy usage guy is being traded away) would result in (including more opportunity for remaining guys like JV and Carroll).

I just think too much debate is focused on straight-up player comparisons, when the net impact across the entire roster is what would matter in the long-run.

[JWash]

Fair enough.

Those are just a couple off-the-cuff examples from a few posters, hardly an extensive list of viable options. I would aim significantly higher than those sorts of names, if I was trading DeRozan or planning on letting him walk.

Conversely, I've seen yourself and others suggest that $25M would only be able to acquire an insignificant upgrade at the PF spot, for example, which is equally limiting.

I've always pushed for a DeRozan trade that would acquire an equally talented player at a position of need (ie: starting PF), while in-house options and/or draft picks (for example) could fill the SG spot. It's not just a comparison of DeRozan VS player X (or player x AND player y), but rather the net difference that a revamped roster with a more team-oriented system (since a heavy usage guy is being traded away) would result in (including more opportunity for remaining guys like JV and Carroll).

I just think too much debate is focused on straight-up player comparisons, when the net impact across the entire roster is what would matter in the long-run.

First bold: That is not what I've said. People have suggested splitting the DD money amongst two players (replacing DD with a worse SG and getting a better PF), the problem with that is that the only PF on the market who's a definitively higher impact guy than DD is Horford. The other problem, which I haven't even bothered to get into yet is that even if we let DD walk we only actually have 15M to spend not 25M. That gets you a DeMarre Carroll level guy and nothing else.

Second Bold: If you can get me a trade where we deal DeRozan for an equal caliber guy at PF i'm all for it. If I could trade DD for Ibaka or Favors or whoever right now I'd do it. The problem is that is unlikely to happen and even if it did it'd open up a new hole at the SG position and (assuming the guy we trade DD for is making 15M or more which would likely be the case) we'd have no cap space to address it.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

The NBA market is so different now. Looking around the league at the kind of deals that have been given out it appears to be like this to me

<10M/year = Bench players (Lou Will types, Jeremy Lamb, etc)
10-12M/year = Fringe starters (TRoss, Amir Johnson)
12-15M/year = Good starters (DeMarre Carroll types)
15-20M/year = Strong starters (Wes Matthews types)
20M-25M/year = All-Stars/Star but not superstars (DeRozan, Batum)
Max = Superstars like KD and guys in the tier below that might get overpaid like possibly DeRozan or Batum

Like if you think about it we're getting close to a point where the NBA cap is going to be at over 100M. Considering the last 5 players on a team usually only make like minimum salaries, that's basically 100M divided amongst 10 players. Which means that an average player is going to be getting like 10m a year.

Average contract in the NBA used to be like 5-6M per year, it's insane how it's changing.

Even going by your breakdown of salary distribution to quality, how would you evaluate a DeRozan trade that acquires a 'strong starter' and a highly-regarded prospect on a rookie-scale contract, for example?

The point is, we have no idea at the moment to know what sort of return DeRozan would net, either in trade or free agency (and subsequent trades). Simply considering any future without DeRozan to be one filled with "role players" seems quite biased, when there are far more potential alternatives in play.

[JWash]

Even going by your breakdown of salary distribution to quality, how would you evaluate a DeRozan trade that acquires a 'strong starter' and a highly-regarded prospect on a rookie-scale contract, for example?

The point is, we have no idea at the moment to know what sort of return DeRozan would net, either in trade or free agency (and subsequent trades). Simply considering any future without DeRozan to be one filled with "role players" seems quite biased, when there are far more potential alternatives in play.

But CRF what was being suggested wasn't DeRozan trades. It was letting DeRozan walk and using the 25M on someone else (even though we'd only actually have 15M to spend).

If we could trade DeRozan for a guy worth 15-20M at PF and a good prospect at the SG position I'd be all for it. But where would that trade even be available? And why would a team deal players of that value to rent DD for 50 something games?

And I'm not considering any future without DeRozan to be one filled with role players. I was specifically referring to the suggestion of replacing DD with role players like Henderson, Marvin Williams, etc which quite frankly is a horrible idea.

If someone has a plan in place where we could jettison DD in FA, miss out on KD/Horford/Batum and sign a PF who's as good or better than DD at the same position and land ourselves a top prospect I'm all for it. But that's not what's been suggested.

[Mess]

BOS and CHO are far from terrible.

They don't mean this season. They're rehashing last season which is how a thread gets to be 700 pages plus.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

But CRF what was being suggested wasn't DeRozan trades. It was letting DeRozan walk and using the 25M on someone else (even though we'd only actually have 15M to spend).

If we could trade DeRozan for a guy worth 15-20M at PF and a good prospect at the SG position I'd be all for it.

Thanks for the dialogue - I think there's probably more common ground between 'sides' than we realize.

Some suggestions were trades, while others were free agency. Some were just musing about what $25M could buy in general terms (ie: DeRozan vs other options), without worrying about how/when that much cap space was available (theoretically it could be created fairly easily).

I've been a trade-DeRozan guy for several seasons, but I've also suggested that a large portion of blame for what I don't like about his game lies at the feet of Casey. I've also said that if there aren't good options available via trade or free agency (I trust MU, rather than debate 'what if' scenarios posed by fans), I'd be fine re-signing him, so long as his contract is fair for the value he provides and continues to make him a tradeable asset.

[JWash]

Thanks for the dialogue - I think there's probably more common ground between 'sides' than we realize.

Some suggestions were trades, while others were free agency. Some were just musing about what $25M could buy in general terms (ie: DeRozan vs other options), without worrying about how/when that much cap space was available (theoretically it could be created fairly easily).

I've been a trade-DeRozan guy for several seasons, but I've also suggested that a large portion of blame for what I don't like about his game lies at the feet of Casey. I've also said that if there aren't good options available via trade or free agency (I trust MU, rather than debate 'what if' scenarios posed by fans), I'd be fine re-signing him, so long as his contract is fair for the value he provides and continues to make him a tradeable asset.

I agree with that for the most part although I'm not really as aggressive on the trade DeRozan stance. I'm ok with trading him for a great return but not actively seeking to deal him.

And I hope it's clear now that I was not trying to ruin constructive discussion, I was simply debating the points and examples that people were making, I'm not here to blow a hole in every good discussion that happens.

[raptors999]

Thanks for the dialogue - I think there's probably more common ground between 'sides' than we realize.

Some suggestions were trades, while others were free agency. Some were just musing about what $25M could buy in general terms (ie: DeRozan vs other options), without worrying about how/when that much cap space was available (theoretically it could be created fairly easily).

I've been a trade-DeRozan guy for several seasons, but I've also suggested that a large portion of blame for what I don't like about his game lies at the feet of Casey. I've also said that if there aren't good options available via trade or free agency (I trust MU, rather than debate 'what if' scenarios posed by fans), I'd be fine re-signing him, so long as his contract is fair for the value he provides and continues to make him a tradeable asset.

Take Demar over nothing even @Max, but think both Horford offers more at a weaker position and Batum offer more as a SG-SF if paired with another player

[Axel]

Everything Demar Derozan

I just think too much debate is focused on straight-up player comparisons, when the net impact across the entire roster is what would matter in the long-run.

I feel like I've said exactly this several times in the last 24 hours.

It's not about replacing Demar it's about getting a system that works for the other 14 guys on the roster.

[JWash]

Take Demar over nothing even @Max, but think both Horford offers more at a weaker position and Batum offer more as a SG-SF if paired with another player

If we replace DeRozan with Horford or Batum this offseason you won't see much of a complaint for me. Although it would be somewhat lateral with the latter.

However we can't actually do that without making a move, because even if we let DD walk we'd be short about 10M necessary to make a max offer. Of course you could package Ross in a sign and trade, just saying it wouldn't be a straight up signing is all.

Just a note that Horford and Batum are going to get paid as much if not more (in Horford's case almost certainly more) than DeRozan in the offseason. And I could also make the point that DeRozan has been better than both of them this year (has them beat in WS, WS/48, PER, netRTG etc and is only slightly less efficient scoring than both while handling a much larger usage).