Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

What do you think appropriate trade value would be for these players?


Proudiddy

Recommended Posts

Without searching for who the players are (otherwise, you ruin the lesson here), although you probably have a good idea of who one of the players are, answer these questions:

 

In your opinion:

1) Which player would you rather have in a trade?

2) What do you think fair value would be in trading for them?  Obviously, you can't gauge a player for player deal, so we're talking strictly draft picks and/or cash considerations.

EDIT: To help make the decision easier, know that both play the same position (wing players).

GO:

Player A:

Age: 30

PAstats.png

Player B:

Age: 28

PBStats.png

Once we get enough discussion on this hypothetical, I will reveal the players and the significance of this thread.  If you spoil it, your post will be deleted and you will receive a warning, so play nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Player A - older but slightly better FG% and creates more in APG

Player B - still young and a better FT shooter but not as efficient from the floor

these are minor discrepancies but you always go with the younger player = Player B, he's a solid shooter but TBH i need more info to give up anything more than a early 2nd rounder for him..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The production is very similar. Too similar to make a read on it because there are way too many variables to even answer #1: What position do they play?, Do they fit our scheme?, Injury concerns? Salary?, etc.

As far as #2: I'd offer similar trades as their production isn't far off. The value seems similar. (But then again, if there's something glaring in #1 that sets them apart, then it could change my mind a bit).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this didn't garner the participation I was expecting, lol.  Regardless, it may ultimately be irrelevant anyway, but, here you go...

Player A is Marco Belinelli.

Player B is Jodie Meeks. 

We traded this year's 22nd overall pick for Belinelli.

The Magic just acquired Meeks for a 2019 second rounder, lol.

Both guys are making 6M and change on contracts that both have two years left on them.

This is why I really disliked the trade as it stands because we gave up way too much as-is.  BUT, as I said here, it may be irrelevant.  The guys over at HP for the most part are convinced that there is more to the deal than we currently know.  One guy, who has offered up some inside info before and bet his account on Batum re-signing within 24 hours last night, has said he's been told the deal was made with the intention of Belinelli never playing a game for us.  I'm really hoping Cho works his trade magic for a piece none of us see coming.  Some of the speculation among fans I've seen has suggested that it may ultimately involve the same teams we worked the Stephen Jackson draft day trade with a few years back - SAC and MIL - with us getting someone like WCS or Monroe.  I'd be ecstatic with this...  And I'm definitely hoping for something along these lines, because otherwise, as this thread illustrates, we would really have done ourselves a disservice if we traded 22 for Belinelli straight up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and they both can't play defense. To be honest, the trade was very similar.

Also, the Magic had way more flexibility in their cap space. They could afford to take on someone without sending salary out.

I agree that there's more to this Belinelli trade. I think we are going to be heavily involved in the trade department.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Most EVs are in the 90+ e-MPG meaning some measurement house somewhere compares the EV to a similar ICE model and works out how much is costs to charge (on average) versus fill up as a point of comparison. Talking long term, in the hundreds of thousands of miles?  No clue.  Some early signs are that EV batteries maintain 80% charge over 400k miles.  So there's that.   The challenge and charm of an ICE vehicle is being able to park it under a tree, get your jack stands out and tinker with your engine.  There's just not that same level of complexity in an EV.  I saw someone estimate there are 200 or so moving parts in an EV, and 2000 in an ICE vehicle.  I'm not a part counter so I can't really speak to that. I think that the EV is more the future than any type of combustion engine.  Those will still be around in specific purposes, but for most people - an EV will be the superior option in terms of efficiency.  I say that as someone who loves stupid horsepower numbers out of turbo 4 bangers and inline 6s...  I am one of those tinkers when I can be. A bigger issue for EVs is going to be the ownership versus lease.  Right now, there are INSANE leases on EVs, which is great, but what do you have at the end of that lease?  Nada, maybe some equity if you're lucky.  Where as I'm almost done paying for my car, and plan to keep it until the wheels fall off (or my son wrecks it when he starts to drive).  Will EV makers do the smartphone thing and build in planned obsolesce?  Stop updating software?  I love the tech in EVs, and I think getting more cars and trucks off the road is a good thing.  But I am still just a little concerned.  Capitalism has gotten far too extractive.  
    • Blacksheer's time was up when they drafted Etienne. 
×
×
  • Create New...