Bima, I mentioned in an thread that the 21 or 22 would be fair value on that obligation. (Best is 15, worst is 30). I like the idea either way to get rid of that oblilgation but I think the 21 is a fair offer. Trade 16 for 21 and 22. Trade 21 back to NJ. Mathematacally 21 is above fair price. I just think the 16 is too high of a price.
http://nbadraft.net/2012-nba-mock-draft-60 16.Royce White 6-8 261 SF/PF Iowa St. So. This pick could easily be traded and Boston could be a team that ends up moving up for White. Royce White has top 10 talent in this class but the concerns about his anxiety disorder are likely to drop him to the late first/early second round area. Scouts also question his shooting and ability to fit a position. He's a unique player as he's beast with great strength with the ability to handle and pass like a guard. The one big concern is his anxiety disorder that has prevented him from flying in the past. NBA Comparison: Anthony Mason NBAdraft.net is suggesting that Boston might trade with the Rockets at #16 to take Royce White. Would Boston trade Avery Bradley for the 16th pick + Dalembert?
Maybe, but none of those guys have the potential upside that a guy like Eddie Griffin had several years back. Depends on what you think of them. I like Lillard, but struggle to see him being a substantial upgrade to Lowry or Dragic in a best case scenario side, and could easily see him topping out as George Hill. Lamb has great physical attributes, but the production this year (both individual and team) was underwhelming. I fully agree that the team needs to take some shots, but I'm not sure they're in the mid lotto range in this draft.
Actually, I am not sure Brooklyn (not NJ ) is the ideal partner for the "2012 pick for 2013 pick" swap. Specifically, if the Rockets see themselves actually making a "splash" move-- even a "rental splash" move with Howard, that 2013 Houston pick will probably be in the 20s and in a probably not as deep a draft. In fact, if the Rockets propose to include the 2013 Rockets pick in a move that will land themselves an elite player, the value of that pick is decreased by the very trade itself since addition of an elite player will make the Rockets have a better record, thus causing a drop in the 2013 Rockets pick's value. Perhaps the better way-- and I think it's possible-- is to find a lotto-level team willing to trade their own 2013 pick to the Rocket without any protection. Specifically, lets say Perry Jones is still on the board at 16th and some team (Cleveland, Detroit or whatnot) has a serious boner for him-- sees him as a possible top 5 or top 10 player talent-wise in this draft or something. Maybe such a team will give up it 2013 pick without protection for him since (a) the team management thinks he's worth it, and (b) management thinks its team will pretty good next year, making the 2013 pick not so valuable. Anyhow, I think it is possible to find such a trade partner out there if the right guy is available at 16th (or even 14th if you want to trade that pick). And even if there is some low level of protection (like top 3), which takes away the future trade flexibility, such a pick will be a more valuable trade tool than the Rockets own 2013 pick in an exchange for a star.
lol ORRRR he could be talking about Jeff Demps the Gator who is trying to qualify for the olympics (I am aware that you knew that)
Every single GM in the league (not some but all) view their players as assets. If a player is not an asset to the team he is worthless and will be gone at the teams earliest convenience. Was Parsons a failed pick? Scola? Landry? Bud? AB? A very high percentage of DMs moves have been quality moves. The health of TMac and Yao is what failed. No. DM did not trade the 8th pick for a role player that was CD. Regardless the Rockets had TMac and Yao and were in win now mode. I would hope any GM would crunch the numbers of players. Are you saying other GMs just ignore stats?
Did Dalembert come here because he had no where else to go or did he choose us over some other team? I'm curious . .i don't recall Rocket River
I believe he came here because teams were passing on him because he wanted too much money, then he finally settled for us. I think that's how it went, but I could be wrong.
Yep, it would be ideal--again, if a trade up in the draft is off the table and if a top prospect doesn't fall to #16--to maybe do the following: Step 1: Trade #16 to BOS for #21 and #22 Step 2: Trade #21 to the Nets for their future pick back Step 3: Either (a) trade #22 for a 2013 lottery-protected first rounder; (b)take Evan Fournier as a stash pick or (c) trade back again and pick up additional assets Just a thought. Doubt the Nets play ball though, especially if Dwight Howard isn't traded on draft night (since "future first rounders" will be valuable trade chips after draft night). After the recent events involving Minnesota's unprotected first round pick being a centerpiece to the Chris Paul trade to the Clippers, I think pretty much every team has learned never to trade an unprotected pick unless it's for a bona fide superstar. I doubt the Rockets could get anything approaching that (lack of) protection for anything on the roster, let alone the #14 or #16 pick. Even limited (top-3) protection is unlikely. The Nets--then of New Jersey, now of Brooklyn--put only top-3 protection on the pick it traded for Gerald Wallace (a near All-Star caliber player and about as good as any "asset" the Rockets have), and pretty much the entire world is ridiculing the Nets for that trade. Don't think that the other 29 teams realized this as well. That said, I can appreciate wanting to get something like (a) a bubble playoff team's lottery-protected pick or (b) better yet, a projected mid-lotto team's top-8 protected pick. That may be about as limited a protection as the Rockets could hope to get. The added benefit of getting the pick back from BROOKLYN is that, even though the Rockets' actual pick might not be that high, it opens up the Rockets to trade pretty much ANY of its future picks, instead of just the "Undesirable Future Pick" [look it up, folks, as I've defined this in prior posts].
Lin being dropped by us was a mistake, but how were we supposed to know he was going to be the star that he was last season? When you are playing behind 2 quality PGs, there was no way Lin would get playing time on this team.
I really don't think that the recent events with the Minny pick and the Nets pick are lessons that make teams that much smarter and eliminate the possibility of teams engaging in unprotected draft pick intercourse. I mean, it's not like similar things have not happened before and teams didn't learn from the earlier lessons. For example, remember this?
That trade (Otis Thorpe for what became the #2 pick in 2003) was made back in 1998, I think. The recent influx of "basketball nerds" as GMs (as opposed to ex-players) may also lead to fewer bone-headed errors involving such "trivial" things as future pick protection. But here's hoping I'm wrong (except in Morey's case).
Whoever signs Lin to a long term deal will end up with a Matt Maloney. He's barely played in the two seasons he's been in the NBA but has needed surgery both years.
Jason Jones: Regarding Dalembert, I could see him being receptive to return w/ Westphal gone. But any deal would have to send salary back to HOU I assume Twitter
