Ok, like i said to @DrNuegebauer we can agree to disagree at this point, both parts eplained their point of view and thoughts enough i guess.
Rox won that trade, they saved $$$ while taking a gamble. Thats why PHX GM got fired he got so much salary for a useless player. Clearly from Sarver's POV taking back Melton is not worth Ryan Scrubberson esp. When he started shooting 18% from 3 lololololololz. Did you check out Melton's stats? Dude is shooting 38% FG and 33% from 3. He may be an asset but not exactly a great one, Rivers for example is better asset right now. It may change in the future but until he breaks out you can't lose sleep over him and say he caused you to lose a trade smh.
Well there's nothing to admit, obviously 30M is better than 40M lol, but in terms of value in a trade it's better on paper, it's not a given that will be valued differently, if i'm the Hawks i'm asking two 1st rounders to take back Knight just like i would've asked two 1st rounders to take back Anderson. But i'm telling you more, i'd take back Anderson with two 1st rounders over Knight with one 1st and two 2nds. To be more clear, even though i said this already a couple of times, i don't think a tanking team see Anderson at 40Mx2 as worse value than Knight at 30Mx2, cause both players would get bought out in a year and net them nothing so, as long as they get back the assets they want, they woul probably not care at all about 5M of difference. If anything, swapping them give us more chances to trade with teams that are not tanking and looking to eat salary, but the fact that in a trade Knight is still negative value as much as Anderson remains, again, for me, if that's going to be wrong, good, that's what i hope.
Already answered this two times...how good was Rivers looking with the Wizards? Yep, exactly. Rivers can't be traded fwiw, i think at least...and if he keeps playing well we will probably not be able to resign him next summer, just saying since you come out with this argument. And just to be clear, it's not like i'm saying that trade was a disaster cause Melton will be a star, but still, as today i don't like it.
Stating the obvious: you can’t officially grade this deal until you see what Knight/Chriss nets us either via trade or on the court. That said, one detail people like to ignore when having this discussion: Teams don’t want a $20M stretch 4! Ryno’s strengths at their peak were unique and valuable to our system and our system alone. Nobody else wants a $20M PF that camps out the 3-pt line, plays no defense and inexplicably cannot shoot at home. Ryno is completely unplayable at this point and is easily one of the worst contracts in the NBA. Our only options for dealing him outright were for other radioactive options (Batum, Parsons, pre-buyout Deng, etc). No thanks. Knight, at least in theory, as a talented combo guard has a place in today’s NBA. Ryno does not. This isn’t simply bad contract for bad contract.
What does Rivers have to do with Melton? If Rivers looked bad on the Wizards but looks good in Rockets why does that mean Melton will play great? Are they linked by the soul or something? For reference MCW played bad before coming to the Rockets and he stillmplayed bad when on the Rox. What does MCw playing bad have to do with Rivers playing good? Exactly. You can say you don't like the trade but Tillman saved 10M and Sarver fired his GM after the trade. Clearly we know who is the winner and loser of that trade.
I don't disagree with the rest of your argument. But this statement of yours here is a bit ingenious. First, Melton is a player, not a pick. When a pick is used to draft a player and he starts to show what kind of player he is, you can't use his draft position to measure his value. Otherwise, you would have to say that Kawhi Leonard had less value than Marcus Morris. A second round pick might not worth much because the chances of a player drafted in the second round cracking an NBA team's rotation are pretty poor. But if you use that pick to draft a player who shows that he is a rotation player in the NBA, then he is not a "second rounder" anymore in terms of his worth. Second, Knight and Chriss are not "low risk" players. Their contracts are really bad. They are just not as bad as Anderson's. So if they can't contribute as players, they are dead weights. Getting potential dead weight isn't low risk. Like I said earlier, Knight+Chriss is better than Anderson only because you can trade Knight and Chriss separately. And the cost of that exchange is Melton who turns out to be a serviceable rotation player. Neither Knight nor Chriss looks very promising at this point. Whether the trade is a win for us depends on how much we have to pay to get someone to take one or both of those guys off our hands.
Nothing i guess, but i'm not the one who broguht Rivers into this lol, i just got told that since Melton has not been very good with Phoenix, he would've been 100% down in the G-League here, being a no factor for the first team, just like House i guess...oh wait MCW is...MCW i guess, Melton is already looking wasy better than MCW cause yeah, he can actually play basketball. Please don't bring MCW into this now, i can't take it, that would be too much...and i didn't want to go into that but since you're saying it again, do we have a prove that MCD got fire for that trade? I don't really think so (and i trust malakas here), Ariza turned out to be a bad move, the trade with us definitely not since Melton quickly over the starting spot over Okobo who was drafted with the 31st pick. MCD has been disappointing for years in terms or results so, that's probably the simple and main reason why he got fired.
When I say low risk, it is in comparison to the alternative. Anderson was not going to play a minute this season. If Knight and Chriss play 0 minutes, then they have fulfilled their bargain. Playing them 1 minute is a low risk high reward move in that (a) Knight is a 15ppg career scorer (and dropping every game!!) and (b) Chriss is an athletic 6'9 big with range who our solid big man crew could try and teach to p'n'r (so far seems they can't). I don't see much risk in them on the basis of them essentially just replacing one massive bloated contract. There was the faintest chance one of them might produce something. But the trade doesn't depend on us having someone take them off our hands - we already saved $11 million on the trade alone. Even if just let Chriss expire and roll with Knight as an expiring next season it still saves us big $$
Getting these players is not low risk. (If you signed them to a vet min contract and could waive them anytime, then you could say they were low risk. But they come with dead weight contracts and likely will cost us more assets just to get rid of them.) They are low risk only compared to Anderson's contract. This is exactly why you have to give up an asset to do the trade. I think you are confusing a low risk trade and a low risk piece in a trade. I agree that the trade itself is quite low risk because it is not likely that Knight and Chriss can be more useless than Anderson. But those two pieces aren't costless. Let's say, if you traded Anderson for Chandler Parsons, (Let's assume for argument's sake that they had almost identical contracts.) you could say that it was a low risk trade because Parsons probably wouldn't be more useless than Anderson and his contract wasn't much worse than Anderson's. But Parsons was not low risk. If he couldn't play, he would be as dead a weight as Anderson. You see my point?
Criss's contract is not really bad, it's only 8 mill and is expiring. We don't have to pay anyone to take him off our hands. The trade is already a win because of the cap savings and we are getting more production from House, which offsets the argument for a serviceable rotational player.
Because he said that the two players were low risk, which is not true. How much they will cost us is still to be seen.
There is no cap saving. We are over the cap. The trade did save Tilman some money. Chriss's contract is not that bad. They'll probably just let him walk after the season. He does occupy a roster spot that could have been given to a better player. Knight's contract is as long as Anderson's. Now that Anderson has agreed to reduce his last year's amount, the total difference is only about 5M.
I see your point - but I wonder if it is the same point for Knight/ Chriss? Combined their contracts are lower and equal/ shorter in length. If Anderson isn't going to play there is 0 risk involed in breaking up and reducing the value of the money owed (and drastically reducing the tax bill) Chriss expires the end of this year. No need to dump.him Knight has already saved us 11 million - keep him repeat the dose? There is no compulsion to pay additional assets to dump them. 0 risk and a miniscule chance Knight plays half decent basketball again and can net us a free release from his final year (miniscule!!) ((Parsons would have been high risk imho because he is a primadonna/ locker room cancer! ))
One thing everyone is overlooking is what you could do with Ryno's contract down the road - like at next years trade deadline. It's a $20m expiring at that point and you could extract a player , pick or combination of from a team looking to cut future salary. Basically the same thing Knight is today …. accept knight's deal is a quarter less in value. So you sent out Melton and Ryno in exchange for $8m in savings (not counting Lux tax) over the two year span …. and reduce the value you can bring back at the end of that time by 1/5th. Next year - Knight incoming trade limit - $20.554m Ryno incoming trade limit - $26.68m There is the possibility that they move Chriss between now and the deadline for something other than cap relief which would change the narrative …. but I really don't see them getting any real return there.
There is no intrinsic value for expiring contracts these days and you left out the fact that we still would need to take back matching contracts in a Ryno trade. So how does that make his higher contract any better?
LOL at people ripping this trade. Chriss is gone after this year and is a cheap big body if we get desperate. Knight is a much better expiring contract next season to trade vs. Ryno as he can actually play basketball. Melton is not going to be a superstar and Rivers is already a cheap upgrade
