Anyone blaming presti for the original Harden trade is making the same dumb mistake as those who blame Morey for the Westbrook trade. Presti didn't want to trade Harden just like Morey didn't want to trade away CP3... In other words, they had little choice.
Collecting Assets. thats what a rebuilding team should do. ITs about collecting as much talent and assets as you can, taking on bad contracts, and rebuilding a team. Atalanta did it, Thunder are doing it. Both worse markets than us.
I don't understand why Kemba and Wall are a part of this. They are both under contract for two more years, with the final year as a PO, for their age 31 & 32 seasons, coming off of injuries, playing the same position. What are we accomplishing there? Isn't this trade just the picks swaps? I get that Kemba makes $8mm/yr less, but we are very likely to be operating over the cap next year anyway, that $8mm isn't going to make a functional difference.
Actually, some people think that he actually liked the trade. The extension Harden wanted was only 10M over 3 years more than what they offered. Given the cap spike that was going to come that would've been almost nothing. Also, Harden had an entire other year before free agency when he was traded. They could've waited a bit before making a deal if they really didn't think they could get an extension done. Finally, they could've always traded or amnestied Perk who was completely useless if they really didn't want to go into the luxury tax. Bill Simmons and others who had some inside information think that they pulled the trigger because they really did think that Kevin Martin would provide most of what Harden did off the bench with the 1st (Steven Adams) and Jeremy Lamb providing bonus assets.
I'm sure Tilman would rather pay the bare minimum salary that a team has to pay out a year. Anything that gets him closer to that probably makes him happy. Just a dumb trade idea I threw out to see how much people here value the 5th pick.
Fair enough, it is just striking how similar those two players situations are. From the draft pick perspective, I think the Rox would do the trade in a heartbeat, but OKC has so many picks this year already, they would say no. A draft value chart would say that a 48% chance to get the 5th pick is ~1.5x more valuable than a 100% chance to get the 23rd or 24th pick. Throwing in pick protection removal makes it closer, but I still think OKC says no.
Its common knowledge that the trade was made because the owner didn't want to go into the luxury tax. Clay Bennet was notorioius for being cheap back then. In addition the luxury tax was a huge deal, since that iteration of it was fairly new. NBA teams in 2012 also had far less revenue compared to today... ie the cap was under 55-60 million then its over 100 million 8 years later. https://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-oklahoma-city-thunder-traded-james-harden-2012-10 Furthermore the OKC offer wasn't 10 million short or over 3 years. Harden wanted the max which was 60 million over 4 years. OKC offered 55.5 over 4 years. https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/8562868/oklahoma-city-thunder-trade-james-harden-houston-rockets Could there have been other issues which contributed to the trade, sure. Many have reported that concerns about Harden's lifestyle, satisfaction with role and other things were factors, but ultimately it was driven first and foremost by finances.
I know that that's the common knowledge. I'm saying that certain people who may be privy to more information think that there might be more to it than that. Also, if the difference of what they were willing to offer and what he wanted was 1 freaking million a year that makes it so much worse. They could've very easily cleared up that 1mil if they wanted to, like using the amnesty on Perkins.
Shows how badly the Celtics really wanted to start over, they felt the need to include the 16th pick and a mid tier PG for more cap flexibility. Not a bad trade for both teams, wish the Rockets could have gotten something like this for James Harden. It's clear James Harden is a tremendous player but the truth was not alot of teams were willing to give up a Kings Ransom for someone who didn't clearly want to go anywhere but the Nets.
It really was more about bad timing man. Look at each situation where we could of potentially gotten some decent talent: Nuggets: Murray+MPJ Murray had an incredible playoff run and likely thought that they rather keep their young core rather than go for James who may not fit as well with Jokic. Celtics: Brown + Picks Ainge has always been stingy and more than likely did not want to give away the picks. 76ers: Simmons/Thybulle + picks (protected) Morey got stingy and didn't throw out his best offer. I bet he would of eventually thrown in the 3 unprotected FRPs if given a little more time. I'm sure he is regretting things now since Simmons is killing his value with his non-existent act on the offensive end. Other teams just didn't have the draft capital anymore and usually you won't trade a disgruntled superstar to a shitty team because disgruntled star usually is looking to win a championship. It was just bad luck.
That makes it even worse and that's when you convince the owner to find other ways to get under the tax.
I think everyone agreed the trade was a terrible idea but the prospect for getting under the tax for the long term wasn't possible (without more trades). Amnestying Perkins gets them under for one year. After that the thunders are paying 4 max contract to KD, WB, Ibaka, Harden since all their contracts, extensions would have kick in the following year. Should they have still done it, most would've probably agreed, but the only opinion that matters was that of Clay Bennett. Just like Micky Arison once cut cost with the Heatles angering Lebron or Les Alexander or Tilman avoiding the tax angering rockets fans... its tough to tell a billionaires what to do with their money. The big what if in the Harden trade for me is if Harden decided to stay with that budding young championship contending team. The OKC offer was only 4.5 million off from the max. How many championship would the Heat, OKC, Cavs and Warriors have.
Exactly, its not their money. Why would they not take all the assets and go all in to get the best chances of a ring. They all have mandates, budgets, and limits depending on who your owner is. Its like if tilman decides on his landrys restuarants he can cut a certain menu or quality of certain item to make things cheaper and then the customer comes and blames the manager for implementing that rule.
I don't believe that. They still had Harden under a rookie contract for another year, and then he woulda been restricted. I highly doubt the owner came down and told the GM only give Harden 1 day to make up his mind on their final offer.
They were definitely trying to maximize his value. Presti knew they wouldn't match whatever offer he received in free agency the next year so he instead cashed in. He tried to get Beal, failed, and then turned to the Rockets to get Lamb who had a lot of potential at the time, plus another lotto pick in the year after that (Steven Adams), and Kevin Martin. It was not such a bad trade, but then Harden turned out to be an all time great, and now hindsight, the trade looks stupid.
