I think a lot of people here besides Carl are underrating Robinson. Sure, he hasn't shown us much, but not every rookie player comes right in and plays like he's been in the league for years, like Parsons (and like Olajuwon and Sampson, for that matter, although on a vastly different level, of course). Quite often, big men take years to reach their potential. There's a good chance that whoever ends up with Robinson will feel like they got a steal, and perhaps that'll be the case. I certainly hope other GM's are thinking that way. It'd make Morey's job easier!
I seriously doubt Hinkie brings back Bynum. And they have to part with Bynum to effectively be able to take on salary. But yes, Hinkie with the #11 pick...wanting Finch. TRob makes sense there. I think Morey may be fishing for Washington at #3. If Cleveland takes Porter and Orlando takes Noel......Washington may be open to talk turkey for #3. It would probably require TRob and DMo but if there is a player Morey really likes in his draft...he's still got TJones. I think if Porter and Noel are gone 1,2 that Cleveland is a possible trade target. I think if Noel, Oladipo, Porter, McLemore, Bennett, Burke, and McCollum are of the board already that Detroit's pick could be in play. Also Minny and Portland's pick could be in play. Just my opinion.
Agreed. People's judgement of certain players after their rookie year is so skewed based on minutes played that its almost ridiculous. For instance - If Michael KG was on the Rockets would he have played heavy minutes? Does he have a complete game? Is he NBA ready enough to be a foundational player on a contending team? What about Austin Rivers? What about Jeremy Lamb for crying out loud? Is the criticism that justified or are fans/commentators getting a bit too caught up in circumstance??? However, fans and some reporters like Spears are ripping the hell out of Robinson for what???.... because he got traded once from a team that was about to get sold, and is going to get traded a second to make room for Dwight Howard? Do you REALLY think the Rockets WANT to trade Thomas Robinson, and wouldn't rather trade Tim Ohlbrecht??? Just shows how short sighted fans can be sometimes. Any GM would love to have Robinson at this stage in his career. Anything otherwise you hear is purely a negotiation tactic of GM's wanting to drive down the Rockets asking price.
I cannot deny that it is possible for Robinson to turn into a productive player, perhaps even an elite player. The question is how likely it is given what available information. It makes a great difference to his trade value if he has a 50% chance for success vs. a 20% or a 10% chance. Let's consider this question: What makes people here think that Thomas Robinson is a valuable prospect? What makes people excited about the trade that landed him? The one reason I saw given most often is that "T-Rob was a NUMBER 5 OVERALL PICK!!!" Not his actual NBA performance, or even his college performance, but his draft order. Valuing a high draft pick is quite reasonable, of course. But why? What makes us value a #5 pick more than the #20 pick? What's the relevant difference between them? The difference is that the higher pick has historically had a higher probability for success. For example, according to one article, which uses a very rough statistical measure (the sum of PPG, RPG and APG, see here: http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm), a #5 pick has a 60% chance of being a "star" and a 15% chance of being "solid" where as a #20 pick has historically had a 5% chance of being a "star" and a 10% chance of being "stolid." As the author admits himself, the system is simplistic, but a more sophisticated calculation (may using Win Shares, PER or a number of other stats) will likely yield something similar. The fact remains that you want a #5 pick as oppose to a #20th pick because your odds of getting a productive player is much higher with the #5. But if instead of looking at all #5 picks (or all picks in the, say, 3rd to 7th range or whatever), we only look at those whose first 1000 or so NBA minutes were similar to Thomas Robinson (measured by stats like ORtg, TS%, FG% at the rim, or non-statistical categories such as those who were traded twice or those who got limited minutes on a bad team or didn't beat out fellow rookies for a rotation spot), what then? You are not going to see 60% of those becoming "stars" with 15% becoming "solid." The players that you leave out-- i.e. the high draft picks who were good or average as rookies-- are going to have better odds than the 60%+15%, leaving the pool of poor rookie year performers with much worse than average odds. So, if Thomas Robinson's probability distribution is not close to that of a typical #5 draft pick, why would anyone pay the Rockets for him as if he was? In fact, the most relevant aspect of his draft order right now is his salary-- scaled at $3.5M next season, with option years at $3.7M and $4.7M after that, so if a team wants to see the Thomas Robinson development story to its conclusion, it's going to cost them a good deal of money and cap room. If Robinson doesn't have the kind of odds that a typical #5 pick has (is his probability distribution more like that of a #12 pick, a #15 pick, or a #25 pick?) but he has to be paid like one, then how good a "prospect" or a "bet" is he for a team?
Count me in as someone who is not sold on T-Rob. Part of the problem here is that athletic big men are so rare that they become an overvalued commodity in relation to their actual production on the basketball court. You aren't paying these guys to jump over the rim and posterize someone once a game. You're paying them to prevent paint penetration, block shots, rebound, make buckets, etc. T-Rob actually played over a thousand minutes last season. It may not seem like he played that much, but 1,000 minutes is actually a pretty good chunk of time given starters play about 2,500 minutes per season (sans injury). So if you have anywhere from 30%-40% of a regular season's worth of full playing time, and you evaluated how T-Rob did both in terms of numbers and in looking at him on the floor, it's hard to see that he has more potential than any of the other guys in the PF rotation. Except, as I mentioned before, for the fact that occasionally he shows these kind of freak athletic abilities that very few people can replicate. But freak athletic ability doesn't always equate to NBA success. In fact, once you get to the NBA caliber of player, pretty much everyone is a physical freak at one thing or another - some physical traits are just flashier than others. If you look at other players and how they do, the first 1,000 minutes isn't a huge predictor of success or ability, but it's actually not that far off. Very few good players start off in a huge hole and then build themselves out of it. Generally speaking, they start off doing at NBA replacement level (an obvious point) and trend upwards, with a big spike during peak years. If you just looked at the guys on the Houston roster from last year, you get a pretty good feel for this kind of thing. Chandler Parsons, for example, didn't play All-Star caliber, but if you eyeball his first 1,000 minutes the numbers are all there. The forever-polarizing Jeremy Lin put up fantastic, All-Star-caliber numbers in his first 1,000 minutes. A better comparison, Omer Asik, put up lower offensive numbers, but based on his actual usage he was much more efficient in terms of scoring - and his defensive value was already very, very high. T-Rob is occupying this weird space where his first 1,000 minutes seem to indicate that he's an incredibly inefficient scorer (i.e., he actually loses the team points when he handles the ball - even more so given how incredibly good the Rockets's offense was last season) and he is about as defensively valuable as the rest of the team not named Omer Asik - which is to say, not at all (sorry dudes, we all know it's true). In fact, his only real value thus far has been in rebounding. The interesting thing here is that out of all the PF candidates, T-Rob actually has by far the most actual playing time. D-Mo has 538 minutes and T-Jones has 276 minutes. Greg Smith had 1,110 minutes, but he was really the backup center and not a real PF option. In that time, both D-Mo and T-Jones have actually shown more actual production on the floor than T-Rob, both in terms of overall value and efficiency. For a simple example, both D-Mo and T-Jones have Win Shares of 0.7, which isn't fantastic, but is not a horrible total given their limited playing time. T-Rob? -0.1. That's right. Negative. Similarly, D-Mo and T-Jones have WS/48 of .061 and .128 respectively, which again, while not great, are at least positive values. T-Rob's WS/48 was -0.002 (given his overall WS was a negative number, this should not come as a surprise). I don't want to just throw a bunch of numbers on the screen and say "this guy is better because his numbers are higher!". That is clearly not all there is to the game. But if you take away the number of times T-Rob makes an extraordinary-looking play and replace it with a run-of-the-mill production play (for example, replace a dunk with a layup), then I think you would quickly get the picture of a guy who is actually not all that good in terms of actual value. Maybe he can put it all together and use his extreme athleticism to be more productive than most, but at this point all you can really say is that were it not for his athleticism, he would not be in the game at all. Other players seem to be given much less rope in far fewer minutes and yet have produced far more, including not only the other two PF candidates in the rotation, but guys like Jeremy Lin. This really feels to me like one of those cases where people are letting their preconceived perceptions of value (TOP FIVE PICK OMG) and their overvaluing of ridiculously athletic plays get in the way of the real analysis. All that being said, I think this is where Morey's decision to move Robinson comes in to play. For one, it's always easier to move one player than two. And for another, T-Rob still has a very high perceived value in the market - one that is perhaps not commensurate to the actual production he has put up thus far. So if you have to choose between trying to move T-Jones/D-Mo/White/etc. in a combination package - guys who have some value but are not highly perceived in the market - vs. a guy who hasn't produced thus far but has a much higher market value, then the choice becomes pretty easy. At the end of the day, though, I think this is just the first of what are dozens of potential options to free up the cap space to get Dwight Howard (assuming he comes at all). I mean, if Chris Paul suddenly showed up Morey would take him and then tell Howard "you snooze you lose". I don't think we'll know what will happen until it actually happens. Given what happened last year, I wouldn't bet on people being even remotely accurate this time, either.
We can dissect Robinson's accomplishments, or lack of them, to the nth degree and we still can't say, right now, how he'll turn out, only that he didn't show much with a terrible organization in Sacramento, and that in the few minutes he played here, he didn't show much, either. All we have is a hunch from a lot of members that he'll be a bust in relation to where he was picked in the draft. Not that he might not develop into a serviceable player, or better, but just that he hasn't looked like a pick at the 5 spot ought to look. I don't think many will dispute that. Is he a "late bloomer?" Will unloading him turn out to be brilliant, or a mistake? Some GM will think Morey's giving up too soon, when reality is that we don't know if Morey is giving up on Robinson, only that Morey needs the freakin' cap space, and Robinson is the most obvious way to get the space we need. If moving Robinson gets us Dwight Howard, or a much better shot at getting Dwight Howard, then moving him makes perfect sense. If we move Robinson and Howard doesn't come here, and we don't use the cap space this off-season, and he turns out to be starting material after some seasoning, then Morey will look like a gambler who lost. I'm OK with that risk. I just think that, again, people are making judgements on Robinson based on a very small sample of NBA playing time.
i don't think much at all of trob. he was absolutely inept offensively when he was on the court. he showed good aggressiveness on d, but he needs to calm down on offense and work on his jumper. he's a good rebounder tho. if he can do that, he'll make it in this league as a solid player. i'd just hope a team like the bobcats are interested.
Assuming we had not traded Robinson, wouldn't PPat be the logical choice if we were looking to unload salary for Dwight?
He could be moved to make room. Or the team could unload, say, Royce White plus Jone or DMo instead. If Dwight Howard does become a Rocket, the team would benefit from keeping Patterson, an NBA-ready stretch 4, over one of the prospects. If Patterson does get moved, my guess is that you'll get at least as much for him as you get for Robinson-- he is more useful and make less money. Team that want to compete can use a stretch 4. My expectation for the trade value for either of Pat or Robinson in a situation where you don't take back any money are close to what the Rockets got for Marcus Morris-- a 2nd round pick (or perhaps a VERY heavily protected 1st rounder for the year 2014 and beyond). People who think Robinson has higher trade value just because he's a recent #5 pick is delusional. Having been traded for Patterson means that his trade value wasn't going to be much more Patterson's unless his performance dramatically improved after the trade (which it hasn't). More important, having two teams deciding to trade him away will make the rest of the league wary of him.
That's not quite an accurate representation of the trade. The Kings sent the Rockets: Thomas Robinson, Francisco Garcia, Tyler Honeycutt The Rockets sent the Kings: Patrick Patterson, Cole Aldrich, Toney Douglas, and $1 million There were a lot of circumstances surrounding the transaction, not the least of which was that Sacramento ownership was going through a fire sale of high-priced assets. Just because we think that T-Rob isn't worth much doesn't meant that NBA GMs feel the same. I, for one, think it would be a good thing if T-Rob was actually not that valuable but everyone else overvalued him because of his draft number and athleticism. Nobody was wary of him after the first trade, and he was widely heralded as the gem in the transaction.
IMO he will be a good NBA player if given the chance. Give him good PT and a good coach he will probably flourish. He averages a double double per 36 both in Sacto and Houston. So there should be no doubt he will able to do that in a good situation. Along with elite defense, he has a place in the L. He has good work ethics and determination. He carried his team to almost beating the much more talented Wildcats, getting 18/17. In the NBA he's a tweener. Offensively he has to figure out what he can do and can't. He won't be able to out muscle and out jump most starting PFs. He won't be able to out quick and out handle any starting SFs. He has to develop SF skills when facing PF and PF skills when facing SFs and that might take a few years. But offense is just bonus, defense and rebounding is his calling card. I could envision a good, old and soon-to-be rebuilding team would be interested in him, such as Spurs, Celtics and Knicks. Bad and young teams like Bobcats, Suns and Magic obvious could give him a try. Lakers and Mavs make sense but it is extremely unlikely they will help.
You just answered your own question-he may worth a #12 pick or #25 pick in this weak draft. His salary is not a big deal for certain teams under the cap. It takes one to bite and Trob's undeniable elite rebounding rate pretty much sets his floor as at least a serviceable rotation player with upside.
Ppat only had one year left on his contract anyway. If his upside were greater than dmo's he would have been kept. But it wasn't. His upside is a nice role player (who would have been very good next to Dwight in the one year they overlapped maybe and he still would have been a likely candidate to be moved). I still think that Robinson is easier to dump. The teams that have cap space are younger and probably more willing to pay Robinson than ppat who only had one year left). But we'll see. I still think its way too early to judge Robinson and that he will be good. He already looks like a very good rebounder if nothing else. Even if he has only a 10-20% chance to be elite, it's 10-20% more than ppat. Teams may take a chance on that. Thats the difference between the two in terms of moveability. If you get Robinson you have possibly three heads to develop him to see if you strike gold. For a bad team required to spend the league minimum, that's an ok proposition. But you are less likely to use cap space on someone with a close to defined Ceiling who is about to be paid market rate. Keep in mind favors in Utah is entering his fourth year and has career averages of 8 and 6. And Utah is planning to build around him.
Like Carl has said, it's the pick order that has people defending him. I dare say if he were picked 40th in the draft, most would say its time to let this guy go and open up a spot for someone else. So why was he picked 5th then because evidently experts thought he was worth it, even though I thought that was a huge reach considering who was left on the board? The answer is: 1 good year. He didn't do much his 1st couple of years but he did have 1 good year before the draft. So now experts have had a chance to get a close up look on how he plays against NBA players. If he truly showed any sign of being a better player than DMo or Jones, don't you think that Morey would be moving those 2 instead? Morey likes taking gambles so why is Morey folding now? Has he seen enough or is Morey just lazy and doesn't want to find 2 homes for 2 players? I mean the pick we will most likely end up with isn't going to be a gem over the likely 2 picks we'd end up with for DMo and Jones so why TRob? Either Morey sees more potential in DMo and Jones or he's just lazy. IMO it's not the latter.
Teams that could trade for TRob before July 1 and give us back no guaranteed salary for 13/14: Boston - 3 non-guaranteed contracts, would require the Rockets to waive 2 players first. Clippers - 3 non-guaranteed contracts (see Boston, very doubtful) New Orleans - 4 non-guaranteed contracts!! (not likely, more likely after July 1 when they can just absorb the salary) After July 1st, Clippers fall out of consideration, however BOS and NOP remain possibilities to absorb TRob with the consideration that we would be stuck with $200,000 of TWill's contract if we send TRob to Boston. Orlando - TPE Bulls - TPE Memphis - TPE Cleveland - cap space and CJ Miles non-guaranteed deal Phoenix - cap space Sacramento - cap space Minny - Steimsma (non-guaranteed deal but probably best acquired after July 10th just in case a multi-team sign and trade presents itself) After July moratorium you can add these team to the list of teams that can absorb TRob and send us back no guaranteed salary during the time frame relevant to acquiring Dwight: Atlanta - cap space Charlotte - cap space Dallas - cap space Detroit - cap space Indiana - cap space (highly doubtful with cap holds on West, Hansbrough) Milwaukee - cap space Philadelphia - cap space Portland - cap space San Antonio - cap space (however doubtful with cap holds on Splitter, Manu) Utah - cap space There are probably other teams that will be under the apron in 2013/14 that could acquire TRob through some sort of sign and trade involving sending guaranteed salary to one of these teams that have cap space for 13/14. And there are a boatload of possibilities to be counted if you consider throwing other players into the deal. But that's gets complicated and convoluted and more unpredictable. Suffice to say, there is plenty of teams that can trade for TRob. * some posters are adding GS to this list. I'll leave it to you to show how we can trade TRob to GS and bring back little to no salary.
How many times has Morey done a simple deal, just involving one player straight to another team? Morey's trades almost always have multiple moving parts and can be broken down into multiple trades within a single trade. In my opinion, it is crazy to just limit the possibilities to straight up deals and ignore the possibilities of multi-player multi-team deals and ignore the prospects of time breaking a deal into multiple deals. In fact, that's the side of the trade equation we should spend our time speculating on, not straight up one-on-one deals. I posted above just to illustrate to you the number of teams that can take on TRob directly. Do I think it's gonna happen that way? Absolutely not. I'll be very, very surprised if a trade involving TRob.....or any player on this team... is just as simple as a one player out/non-guaranteed salary back in deal. It will be bigger than that. We should be discussing the likelihood of a combination of trades that would up the value of what we get back (future draft picks, young players, etc.) rather than simply trying to figure out which team is going to give us a second rounder for TRob.
I could see us receiving a future protected 1st for TRob but would you rather want the 27th pick in a draft or something like the 33rd, a early second, that makes the rookie contact more favorable.
