[RealGM] The Overstated Power of Sign & Trade

I don't understand his argument. If you're a team without cap space but with valued pieces for a S&T, and you can convince the free agent that your team is his best option -- then how is that an "irrelevant" strategy?

To me, its a smart strategy because: (1) if you can't get the free agent you want, you still have your players who are pretty good, (2) free agents can get a more money going to a team via sign &trade then by signing with a new team.

 

Personally, I think it's understated, not overstated.

Bottom line: these free agents want to win.

Can you win if you go alone to a team that has cap space but not much else in terms of support? LeBron has that now with the Cavaliers and it's simply not enoguh. Can you win if two of the max free agents go somewhere but have an awful supporting cast? Still, probably not.

If they're saying the truth about wanting to win, they need to go to a team with a top-notch supporting cast. Somewhere they're the star, yes, but the supporting team is also very good alone while the star is on the bench. These teams generally aren't the ones with cap space (exception: Chicago with Rose/Noah).

Honestly, would the Knicks be contenders if they got LeBron and Bosh (best case scenario for them)? Unlikely given the players around them. How about if Miami got Bosh? Probably not considering the only other decent player is Beasley. I think people are overrating the effect a single free agent can have on their team and highly underrating the effect that free agent could have on an already established team.

If these players truly want a championship, they'll go to an established team. If they want to expand their brand name, they'll go to one of these teams with large amounts of cap space.

 

For the lazies like me:

Spoiler

 

He's saying when you look at each bit of approach that happens in a sign & trade, when you list them out there is more ways it CAN'T happen favorably than not to the team that wants the free agent. And really none of the teams have any leverage. Making the odds that much greater against it.

What WE the fans and some basketball people are saying, is most teams don't even TRY to do the approach of sign & trading to benefit themselves in the FIRST place. So overall its still an underused strategy.

In his last reason, he stated how it can be beneficial. A GOOD team with GOOD players and DEEP pockets getting the max player might already have good players the other team actually wants. Yeah the Raptors would take Andrew Bynum when they relinquish Bosh. They wouldnt get anyone off the open market better than Bynum.

 

That was just a wierd article, wierd being a euphamism for not very well done in this case. The point he is supposed to be getting across to us per the first few lines"
"Over the past week, there has been a surprising amount of chatter about the possibility of sign-and-trades, particularly as it comes to the top guys. While those discussions may be relevant in previous years, they prove to be largely misguided as we head into free agency.
Here is why that path is largely irrelevant"
but then by point 5 he is assuming that he already won his argument
"5. The new teams know this dynamic and have a massive incentive to use it."
He is saying that the teams that have cap space can't give in to any S&T deals or other demands from the soon-to-be former teams of the FA's because they have nothing to trade. What does that have to do with him trying to convince us that a sign and trade is not going to happen? Nothing, there are still teams that don't have cap space that do have things worth trading in a sign and trade, at least one team that I can think of.
Why does he think that we are convinced that a sign and trade is not going to happen, because of his point 2,
"2. The teams the big FA’s could jump to almost universally have plenty of cap space."
I like the pairing of the words ALMOST and UNIVERSALLY, those definitely make for a strong argument. One point, that he does not even bother to flesh out for more than a few sentences, is really the whole basis of his argument.
Sorry for putting more thought on this than the original author, I just don't like these articles that on the surface seem to make an interesting argument but really say close to nothing at all... Call it a pet peeve.

 

Absolutely agree with you. Writer does not what he is talking about.

He actually proved that the Snt is more understated than anything else. Even if a team with cap space had nothing of value to trade the home team, they may be still inclined to do a SnT because of the huge trade exception they get by doing the deal.

The one thing that his argument showed is the player has the power. Whether it's sign and trade are outright signing to a rival team.

So in almost all instances a Snt is more beneficial for both sides. Which actually made me think if Scola was to sign with another team with Cap Space could we do a SnT to get the trade exception.

 

This is why I don't read things on RealGM

 

Poorly thought out article. RealGM pieces should be banned.

 

I didn't put as much thought into breaking it down, but I agree 100%... that article was absolute RUBBISH.

 

All his arguments actually supported sign & trade.

More money for said player
original team getting a trade exception that allows them to get a better player than cap space alone
original team gets draft pick
original team makes team worse, if they opt to not do a sign and trade to spite player.

 

I think the sign and trade will be useful if the player wants to go to that team,but if the home team doesnt want the exception, which i cant see why they wouldnt, then the player can just sign outright. Houston can put together a great package, but say toronto may just want the te and a 2nd rd pick. The te can be used as salary absorbtion in parts for instance, bosh wants to go to chicago and they work out a sign and trade. Well, toronto would get that 17m te they can use on players in any combination they so choose. If he wants to come to houston and they dont get the players houston is willing to cough up, then they can tell bosh do what u want to, but we will just take our 10m of capspace and chill. This is why i think houston is at such a huge disadvantage.Unless Bosh just really wants to come here and toronto wants to take some of our young players.

 

I agree that it's a poorly written article but I believe that he author was trying to say that the SnT is less of an asset this year for teams that are going to lose players (i.e. Toronto losing Bosh and Cleveland potentially losing Lebron). If you look at it from that perspective then the arguments make more sense.

 

An article which further proves why realgm is worthless here.