# Buying a first Round Pick and Tiago



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

http://www.hoopshype.com/articles/chicago_rodecker4.htm
http://www.draftcity.com/articles/0041.htm

Tiago bombed his workouts and now no one wants him.


This guy is a Gasol like talent, the same Gasol who shot 57% and averaged 19 a game against the spurs this year. It looks like he'll be pulling out of the draft because he can't get a first round selection.



I know a lot of you think Sweetney is going to be a mound of rebound. I don't see but fine whatever let him be one. Thinkn if we had a Gasol like player next to him? That'd be a killer backcourt no?

In any event, teams like the Jazz the Sonics and Boston have first round selections. So do the majority of WC finals teams this year,


Does anyone think we could either buy, or trade for a late first rounder provided we could sign Tiago?


I think it would be a franchise saving move.


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

If anything you have seen lately genius, the Knicks are in mood to add players through the draft, hence the trade for Marbury and he trade of Lampe. Also Isiah isn't too high on foreign guys.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

So something like an expiring contract pacakge of Deke and harrington and Amaechi?


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Perennial All Star</b>!
> If anything you have seen lately genius, the Knicks are in mood to add players through the drafy, hence the trade for Marbury and he trade of Lampe. also Isiah isn't too high on foreign guys.


About time you started recognizing my intellect, but I am talking about the draft not the " drafy".


----------



## Perennial All Star (Aug 13, 2003)

?

And how would Deke and Harrington get you a 1st rounder? Granted their expiring but if Tiago does drop out and re-enters next year like your saying, he's a lottery pick. Plus teams hardly trade picks for expiring deals. I like your thought process though...:yes:


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

> I know a lot of you think Sweetney is going to be a mound of rebound. I don't see but fine whatever let him be one. Thinkn if we had a Gasol like player next to him? That'd be a killer backcourt no?


Don't you mean frontcourt?

Anyway, I liked Tiago before but he needs another year of seasoning. We don't have a first rounder and his buyout is excessive anyway, I say nay...


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NYKBaller</b>!
> 
> 
> Don't you mean frontcourt?
> ...


Which is why I stated we should trade expiring contracts for a pick. Who cares about his buyout when we can leave him overseas and let it decrease?


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Knicksbiggestfan</b>!
> 
> 
> Which is why I stated we should trade expiring contracts for a pick. Who cares about his buyout when we can leave him overseas and let it decrease?


I doubt we could get a pick though. Our expiring contracts are not worth even a late first round pick.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I'd think Othella as a player, expiring contract aside, is probably worth a late first round pick. He's a very serviceable backup PF. I bet the percentage of late first round picks that stay in the league for 8 years or more is less than 50%.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> I'd think Othella as a player, expiring contract aside, is probably worth a late first round pick. He's a very serviceable backup PF. I bet the percentage of late first round picks that stay in the league for 8 years or more is less than 50%.


I dunno... how often do you see an expiring contract traded for a late 1st rounder? I don't recall any. I know you trade future firsts for a late first rounder, but I havn't seen any expiring contracts. Also, any team would be better with drafting Tiago and leaving him overseas then trading for a guy like Harrington IMO.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I don't really follow expiring contracts, so I don't know the rules of the game. Generally if you can meet the needs of the other team you got a shot. So ours might only useful to a team still trying to get under the cap to make a play with FAs. 

But in the case of Deke and Othella, I think they have value even as players. For instance, We gave up a first round pick in acquiring Othella. Of course that was Layden, so normal rules don't apply. But a young team thats on the vberge of the playoffs, who wants to add a hustling/rebounding veteran with playoff experience could easily consider giving up a 20something pick for Othella and/or Deke.


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Knicksbiggestfan</b>!
> 
> 
> Which is why I stated we should trade expiring contracts for a pick. Who cares about his buyout when we can leave him overseas and let it decrease?


Your not making sense, you can't make a contract decrease. This isn't sand in an hour glass. You can live him over there until the contract *expires* but who knows how long that is...


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> I don't really follow expiring contracts, so I don't know the rules of the game. Generally if you can meet the needs of the other team you got a shot. So ours might only useful to a team still trying to get under the cap to make a play with FAs.
> 
> But in the case of Deke and Othella, I think they have value even as players. For instance, We gave up a first round pick in acquiring Othella. Of course that was Layden, so normal rules don't apply. But a young team thats on the vberge of the playoffs, who wants to add a hustling/rebounding veteran with playoff experience could easily consider giving up a 20something pick for Othella and/or Deke.


But unless the team who wants this "hustling/rebounding" player is under the cap, we would have to take back a contract(s) back of equal value. Are we going to add more to our salary cap? You look at the back of the draft and you don't see many teams that need a player like Harrington.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dcrono3</b>!
> 
> 
> But unless the team who wants this "hustling/rebounding" player is under the cap, we would have to take back a contract(s) back of equal value. Are we going to add more to our salary cap? You look at the back of the draft and you don't see many teams that need a player like Harrington.


Taking back a player with EQUAL salary does not add to our cap!!! And with a payroll around 95M and a cap of 42M, is cap really our main consideration?

Anyway, if you read todays wires you'll see reports that the Knicks are indeed in discussion with Charlotte to trade Othella for a #1 pick, so... 'nuff said.

Edit: This is the passage I was referring to:

"According to the Post, Knicks President Isiah Thomas has spoken to Bobcats prez Ed Tapscott about trading Othella Harrington, who wants out, for a potential player the Bobcats may select in the draft."

I first thought that meant a player they might pick in the conventional draft, but now I realize it could also mean the expansion draft._Either way Othella has value in the marketplace.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

if we were to trade othella for a draft pick, the best we could get is a 2005 or 2006 secound rounder. who could we get from the unprotected players???? 

well everybody in othellas salary range sucks. othella is making 3.1 mill right????????


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NYKBaller</b>!
> 
> 
> Your not making sense, you can't make a contract decrease. This isn't sand in an hour glass. You can live him over there until the contract *expires* but who knows how long that is...


.... read carefully.


You can make a BUYOUT decrease.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PennyHardaway</b>!
> if we were to trade othella for a draft pick, the best we could get is a 2005 or 2006 secound rounder. who could we get from the unprotected players????
> 
> well everybody in othellas salary range sucks. othella is making 3.1 mill right????????


Keep in mind we gave up a player and a 1st and 2nd for Othella, is it so unfathomable that someone would give up merely a 1st for him now with a small expiring contract?

Back to the bobcats... I have a feeling they may have a FEW first round picks. I'm of the mind that some teams will offer them a 1st rounder just to draft a player off their roster. 

Why would they give up one of those 1sts for Othella? a) He can play at least as well as most mid/late round picks in their first year b) he's cheap c) one of the main thing they want in the future is to be players in the FA market. Expiring contracts will allow that, while signing a questionable rookie to the mandatory 3 or 4 years will not!

I think some of you put wayyy to much value on late round picks!!!


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

Hmm

Okay so the reasons we can get him late round is

A). He Bombed in a workout . Most people speculate that this is due to the fact that he has been playing heavy minutes in the Euroleague playoffs and flew over here... blah blah blah.

B). He has a large Buyout.


So, if we take him in the late first round, we can let him marinate in europe, he's 18, his contract runs out when he is 22.

Next year, he'll be in the lottery, he is just that talented. I just would like to see us do one great thing, that didn't involve veterans, once a while.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> 
> 
> Taking back a player with EQUAL salary does not add to our cap!!! And with a payroll around 95M and a cap of 42M, is cap really our main consideration?
> ...


I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but I was refering to the salary cap after this season. As you said, Harrington has an expiring contract, so we will add on later. You are right that the cap isn't our main concern, but the main concern is more of who we are going to trade with.

Well, you brought out your article, but it is obvious we WILL NOT be getting a first round pick from the Bobcats. At most a second rounder, and maybe even a future one. As you said yourself, it could just as well be one of the expansion draft players. Maybe that guy the Jazz left unprotected? Maybe Gaines, Bell, Jones? I wouldn't object to a trade like that, but we are not getting a first round pick from any team in this draft for Harrington. 



> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> Keep in mind we gave up a player and a 1st and 2nd for Othella, is it so unfathomable that someone would give up merely a 1st for him now with a small expiring contract?
> 
> Back to the bobcats... I have a feeling they may have a FEW first round picks. I'm of the mind that some teams will offer them a 1st rounder just to draft a player off their roster.
> ...


We did give up a first and a second for Harrington, but keep in mind that was aLayden trade, the same guy who traded a first for a PG in his upper 30's who played for us (not even effectively) for half a season. And that was when Harrington was young and people thought he had a lot more potential than they do know. Harrington could have been good, but he hasn't developed that way, so the Knicks overpaid. Everyone knows that Harrington isn't as good as hoped, so no team is going to trade a first for him now.

However, if the Bobcats really do get late first rounders for picking players from another team, I guess it is possible for them to trade for Harrington. The chances are still VERY low though IMO. A rookie might be questionable, but most rookies have more potential than Harrington. And while they have a longer contract, a late first rounder earns around 750,000 only. 

I think you put too little value on late first round picks. Our very own Nazr was the last pick of the first round in 1998, and the Sixers had to trade a future first to get him on draft day.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

You know we're both putting way more effort into this than it deserves. But I haven't beaten a dead horse for a while, so here goes....




> Originally posted by <b>dcrono3</b>!
> 
> I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but I was refering to the salary cap after this season. As you said, Harrington has an expiring contract, so we will add on later. You are right that the cap isn't our main concern, but the main concern is more of who we are going to trade with.


Fine, but expiring contracts serve the needs of the Bobcats and others more than us, so a player like Othella, who has talent and an expiring, can be worth more than a late round pick which automatically carries a long contract.

Lets assume the first round of a draft is divided roughly in thirds as such: 

Top on the draft (early) = picks 1 - 9
Mid round = picks 10 - 19
Bottom of the round (late) = picks 20 - 29

Fair enough?

Othella has a 1 yr deal worth $3,150,000.

The #19 pick last year was Dahntay Jones. His contract extends thru '08 as such: 

$1,063,680
$1,143,360
$1,223,160
$1,886,112
$2,702,799
--------------
$8,019,111

Who's contract is more expensive and the greater burden to a team trying to get under the cap in a year or two?




> Well, you brought out your article, but it is obvious we WILL NOT be getting a first round pick from the Bobcats. At most a second rounder, and maybe even a future one. As you said yourself, it could just as well be one of the expansion draft players. Maybe that guy the Jazz left unprotected? Maybe Gaines, Bell, Jones? I wouldn't object to a trade like that, but we are not getting a first round pick from any team in this draft for Harrington.


No sir, nothing in this off-season is obvious yet.



> We did give up a first and a second for Harrington, but keep in mind that was aLayden trade, the same guy who traded a first for a PG in his upper 30's who played for us (not even effectively) for half a season.


Come on, I gave you that out (Layden). You're gonna have to come up with your own argument this time.  



> And that was when Harrington was young and people thought he had a lot more potential than they do know. Harrington could have been good, but he hasn't developed that way, so the Knicks overpaid. Everyone knows that Harrington isn't as good as hoped, so no team is going to trade a first for him now.


I'm not so sure everyone has given up on Harrington. I don't think he was ever projected to be a big time starter, that's why his contract was always reasonable. He's an able backup on a good team or someone to hold court on a bad team. That's what 2-3M gets you in this league.



> However, if the Bobcats really do get late first rounders for picking players from another team, I guess it is possible for them to trade for Harrington. The chances are still VERY low though IMO.


Ah, so it's not so obvious now? And the Bobcats aren't the only possibility.



> A rookie might be questionable, but most rookies have more potential than Harrington. And while they have a longer contract, a late first rounder earns around 750,000 only.


Well I showed you what the #20 pick (Dahntay) costs, I have no idea who's salary you quote.



> I think you put too little value on late first round picks...


Okay, above you say most late round rookiews have more potential than Harrington. Lets take a look at that.

Harrington was drafted in '96. Lets see who were the late round draftees that year:

20. Cleveland
Zydrunas Ilgauskas
Lithuania

21. New York
Dontae Jones
Mississippi State

22. Vancouver (from Houston)
Roy Rogers
Alabama

23. Denver (from Indiana)
Efthimis Rentzias
PAOK

24. LA Lakers
Derek Fisher
Arkansas-Little Rock

25. Utah (b)
Martin Muursepp
BC Kalev Tallinn

26. Detroit (from San Antonio)
Jerome Williams
Georgetown

27. Orlando
Brian Evans
Indiana

28. Atlanta (from Seattle)
Priest Lauderdale
Peristeri (Greece)

29. Chicago
Travis Knight

I see three guys out of nine I like better than Harrington. (Ilg, Fisher, Jerome).

Now lets look at the last draft, '03:

20. Dahntay Jones
21. Boris Diaw
22. Zoran Planinic 
23 Travis Outlaw
24 Brian Cook
25 Carlos Delfino
26 Ndudi Ebi
27 Kendrick Perkins
28 Leandrinho Barbosa
29 Josh Howard

Harrington is a career: 8.1ppg/5rpg guy on .507% shooting in 22mpg.

In '00, on as bad Vancouver team he was 13/7. No reason he couldn't better that on another bad team, like Charlotte.

His first year stats were: 4.8/3.5 .549 shooting in 15 mins per game.

Here are the others:

Dahntay: 1.8/1.2 fg .283 7.7mpg
Boris: 4.5/4.5 .447 25.3mpg
Zoran: 3.1/1.4apg .411 9.7mpg
Travis: 1.0/0.5 .429 2.4mpg
Brian: 4.4/2.9 .475 12.6mpg
Carlos: not in league
Ndudi: 0.8/0.2 .429 1.9mpg
Kendrick: 2.2/1.4 .533 3.5mpg
Leandro: 7.9/2.4apg .447 21.4mpg
Josh: 8.6/5.5 .430 23.7mpg

Less than half those guys have shown themselves to be as good as Harrington's first year and only Howard can be counted on to produce what Othella has over his career.

So 3 of 9 from the draft of '96, and somewhere between 1 and 4 from the draft of '03 have thus far shown themselves to be as capable as a Harrington. Hardly the great odds you suggested.

Clearly a team that wants an inexpensive player of known quantity that can put up 8/5 in limited minutes AND who comes with an expiring contract should be very willing to trade a late round pick for Harrington. Based upon looking at the '96 and '03 drafts I'd say they'd have about a 30-40% chance of doing better than him with a late round pick, which comes with a much longer contract attached.

As for the Bobcats, it's known they want inexpensive players, as well as expiring contracts so they can be active in the FA market in upcoming years when their cap increases (right now it's only about 60% of the rest of the league, so free agency is obviously not realistic at this time). Harrington fits both those criteria. Plus he's a solid citizen, has a good work ethic, would be a good mentor to some young guys, and he can produce now, unlike many late round rookies.

Is all this to say I'm convinced well trade Harrington for a late first round pick? No, but it's certainly possible. Those of you who contend that all our expiring contracts couldn't net one I think are way off base, and overvalue late round picks in a less than stellar draft.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> You know we're both putting way more effort into this than it deserves. But I haven't beaten a dead horse for a while, so here goes....
> 
> 
> ...


OK... so as you pointed out Jones salary. The point is that he earns only 1 million at the begining of his deal. Harrington is 3 million. Even in his second year he still earns around 1 million. It wouldn't make that big a difference compared to those larger vetern contracts. 1 million doesn't make that big a difference for teams trying to get under the cap.

Lemme ask you this, isn't it obvious we aren't getting the Bobcats first round pick? Are you telling me we can get the #4 pick in the draft? Tell me, which team in the late first round would trade their #1 pick to us? Give me a team. 

You gave that one to me? Alost everyone hated Layden and thought he was stupid, just because you might or might not have said it first doesn't mean others cant use it. It is the truth anyway. Layden overpaid.

Harrington hasn't progressed as much as teams hoped. Maybe they havn't totally given up on him yet, but teams aren't so hopeful about him anymore. His value has gone down, and he will not fetch as much as we gave up to get him.

I still doubt teams are really giving up their first round pick to have players picked. Which teams will? Not many teams with late first round picks really need to clear cap space. 

You showed me the high end for a late first round pick. A lower end is John Salmons of the Sixers, picked #26 in 2002, with a 720,000 salary in his second year. Are we more likely to to get a pick closer to 20 or 26 with Harrington? 26.

You pointed out all of those players that did not pan out, but ppl thought they had potential and could have panned out. Personally I would rather take a gamble and pick up a high potential player. It depends on the team in the end. You said a team might want a player like Harrington and give up a late first round pick. Which teams do you see that are willing then? Denver? NJ? POR? BOS? SAC? LAL? SA? IND? I don't see any who are wililng to trade for Harrington. 

In the end this is all pointless, because while it is true that Isiah talked to the Bobcats about Harrington, it is for an expansion draft player. Aaron McKie is suppose to be one of the palyers the Knicks are after.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

Did you really have to quote his whole dam post?


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dcrono3</b>!
> 
> 
> Lemme ask you this, isn't it obvious we aren't getting the Bobcats first round pick? Are you telling me we can get the #4 pick in the draft? Tell me, which team in the late first round would trade their #1 pick to us? Give me a team.


You're being a little manipulative here. I never came close to implying I thought we could get their #4 pick, don't paint me as stupid. I've asserted that it's possible they'd get more than one 1st round pick and if they had a late one they might we willing to trade it for a cheap expiring contract vet like Othella so they can run a cheap team while their cap is so low and then have roster and cap spaced cleared for when their cap increases and they make a move in the FA market. All very logical and plausible, sir.

Now in the very real world I don't know if any of the teams with late round picks would prefer Harrington, because I did not go so far as to analyze each of their cap situations, I only maintained that he is worth one to the right team, and more so if bundled with others. I still maintain that is true even if it doesn't pan out as such. 

But the converse is also true, in as much as you may think we should jump on any chance to grab a late round pick, in the real world, even if offered Isiah might prefer Aaron McKie over the pick. Thus there is a separation between value, worth and what occurs. For instance, you could make a sandwich you tell me is worth $5. Just because I might buy a burger instead doesn't mean you were wrong.

On that note I'm hungry. What's for lunch?


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Okay, without busting my brain over this I glanced at some of those teams with late round picks.

Spurs: Isiah may still be interested in Malik Rose, if he's moved SA could be interested in Othella. He's a good cheap backup with an expiring.

Pacers: are looking at both Shaq and T-mac. Either would deplete them of some front court resources but they'd obviously be "going for it" now and would want to keep a solid well stocked bench. Othella could fit.

Lakers: Their front court is weak. If Shaq, Malone, Payton goes they are a weak young team. The could want some short term toughness with an expiring to which after freeing themselves of Shaqs enormous contract could want to be FA players in a year or two. 

Celtics: are already flirting with being under the cap. Once a team makes a decision to get under and clear space they need all the help they can get in doing so.

That's enough, I'm sure he's a possibility for most of those teams depending on what direction they choose to take. I already demonstrated that Othella is better than 60 - 70% of most late round picks, and he's cheaper in the long term. Any team that wants a positive-influence hustle type role player PF who can come in and contribute immediately but without a high price or a long-term commitment would be willing to give Othella a hard look.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dcrono3</b>!
> 
> I still doubt teams are really giving up their first round pick to have players picked. Which teams will? Not many teams with late first round picks really need to clear cap space.


Posted on Sat, Jun. 19, 2004

Bobcats nearing a deal with Suns

Sources: Taking White could get Charlotte 1st-round pick, cash

RICK BONNELL

Staff Writer
The Charlotte Bobcats and Phoenix Suns are close to a deal in which the Bobcats would get a future first-round pick and cash in return for taking the final season of Jahidi White's contract.


White, a 6-foot-9, 290-pound center/forward, will make about $5.9 million next season. NBA sources confirming the trade talks did not disclose how much cash or which future pick the Suns were offering.


This sort of deal could be either part of Tuesday's expansion draft or a separate transaction.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> 
> 
> Posted on Sat, Jun. 19, 2004
> ...


I say that as well, but I found it kind of hard to believe. Giving up the #7 pick just to too much to get a contract off your hands. I won't believe it until it happens, and even if it does we aren't going to get the #7 pick anyway.

I just don't see this argument going anywhere. It is obvious we have different values for late first round picks. We both have our arguements and data and neither one of us is going to change our opinion. Anyway, I have finals in less than a week so I can't write anything long anyway.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dcrono3</b>!
> 
> We both have our arguements and data and neither one of us is going to change our opinion.


Yes I agree there is nowhere else for this to go. I will just state that while we both presented our arguments, you presented NO data to support yours. You simply presented a dogged determination to be incredulous, and a seeming inability to comprehend the difference between an early round pick and a late one.

I hope your approach to your finals work will be more thorough. So please do put your energy into that.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I'm sure it's also inconceivable to you that a team would trade a #22 pick for a pittance and a dumpable contract, but:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/nets/story/204478p-176499c.html

"Thorn already may be on the verge of one move, as multiple Western Conference sources expect the Nets to trade the No. 22 pick in Thursday's draft to the Portland Trail Blazers for perhaps $3 million and a couple of players with non-guaranteed or small contracts. *The Nets would rather not commit themselves to a three-year guaranteed contract for a rookie who might not play.*"

I know you've found my arguments and data implausible, but current news reports continue to support it. Sorry.

Edit:

Here's more:

"A host of teams, especially ones with multiple first-rounders, are shopping their picks out of financial concerns. In a weak draft, teams aren't in a hurry to make a first-round selection, which requires them to sign the prospect to a guaranteed three-year deal worth in the $3 million range."

However, for better or worse, Isiah also states he has little interest in moving up in the draft. Apparently he's looking to use his tradable assets for bigger fish, like Walker. So if you're gonna stick to the philosophy that you'll only "believe it when you see it", you may be forever blinded to the truth of the reason. That's your prerogative.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

in the hoopsyhype rumors, there was an article about Isiah trying to get JR Smith. This kid can play. in the mcdonalds game he was hitting STEP BACK THREES from nba range.......thats almost unheard of. He has great athleticism too. His problem is his ball handling, but thats a skill that players can improve on through drills and stuff. This kid is gonna be a star, im surprised hes not top 10 in the draft.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> 
> 
> Yes I agree there is nowhere else for this to go. I will just state that while we both presented our arguments, you presented NO data to support yours. You simply presented a dogged determination to be incredulous, and a seeming inability to comprehend the difference between an early round pick and a late one.
> ...


Hey, I resent the fact that you say I have NO data at all. I gave you my values for Salmons salary. I gave you what other teams had to pay in other drafts. I gave just as much data as you did. What did you give that I did not give too? 

Difficult to comprehend a early and late fist round pick? Where in the world did this come up? We were always talking about late first round picks.

Just because we don't agree and I don't have as much time as you do doesn't mean that I have no data and you do, what the heck.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> I'm sure it's also inconceivable to you that a team would trade a #22 pick for a pittance and a dumpable contract, but:
> 
> http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/nets/story/204478p-176499c.html
> ...


I'm shocked that this has happened, and if you ask around, many people are too. I'm not the only one shocked. This makes no sense whatsoever for the Nets. I would like to know why the Nets would do that.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dcrono3</b>!
> 
> 
> Hey, I resent the fact that you say I have NO data at all. I gave you my values for Salmons salary. I gave you what other teams had to pay in other drafts. I gave just as much data as you did. What did you give that I did not give too?


Yes, I forgot you gave that one small detail, you said someone, originally untold who, makes $ 720,000. Where did you give me what other teamS had to pay in other draftS.

What did I give you did not? I Named the salary I was presenting and broke it down for all it's years. I presented stats for Othellas first year, best year and last year. I presented all the late round picks of two drafts to show Othella has produced better than the vast majority and produced their stats for comparison. I presented articles to back up theories you still maintain are implausible. 

BTW, if I'm not mistaken, both Boston and Portland each have 3 (that's THREE) first round picks. That's more data for you.



> Difficult to comprehend a early and late fist round pick? Where in the world did this come up? We were always talking about late first round picks.


Because you continue to tell me how we are not going to get the #4 or #7 pick, as if I ever pondered or suggested that we would. It seems a cheap diversion from the topic at hand, and it's attempts to make me look unrealistic.



> Just because we don't agree and I don't have as much time as you do doesn't mean that I have no data and you do, what the heck.


Don't worry, I'm happy for you you don't have as much time as me, and I'm sincere that I'd rather see you do well in your studies. It's just frustrating to present a long case with much supporting evidence to be continually confronted with insinuations I'm being unrealistic, or that you've presented anywhere near the same amount of evidence, when the brunt of your "evidence" is really just disbelief - then you ask me for more evidence (what teams, who would? etc.) As much as I present you never acknowledge that any of it has validity. If I really thought this topic merited the effort I could go through the past decade of late round picks and compare them to Othella and demonstrate he's outplayed most of them, but you'd still choose to be unimpressed, and continue to neglect the value of his expiring contract, and continue to want to see it before you give an iota of credence to the argument. I'm tired of banging my head against a wall.

But don't worry, just because I get very serious in these discussions doesn't mean I take them seriously. Have fun, live long and prosper.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dcrono3</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm shocked that this has happened, and if you ask around, many people are too. I'm not the only one shocked. This makes no sense whatsoever for the Nets. I would like to know why the Nets would do that.


Because the Nets franchise is a money loser and the new owner is trying to push through an expensive real estate proposition.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2004/columns/story?columnist=katz_andy&id=1825427


Portland now Owns Three Firsts

"The Blazers-Nets deal is the first of what should be many on draft night."


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

Sweet.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

To be fair you have to look at the total transaction,and i still think its incredibly DUMB and shortsighted what the Nets have done...

By trading away the 22nd pick the NETS arent locked into paying someone a guaranteed salary for the next three years.I am not sure how much the 22nd pick gets paid,but I will guess and say 2.5 million.Add in the 3 million Portland paid as well and you are talking about 3.5 million per year over the next three years-1/3 of gills salary...

Thats 3.25 million more you can offer Kenyon martin,which may be the difference between him staying or leaving..thats the reason to trade the pick

on the other side of the coin what if the 22nd pick turns out to be Telefair..Kidd is getting older,starting to get injured and Telefairbeing a Brooklyn legend can play and would put asses in the seats..Thats the downside from a talent and business perspective


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

truth, these guys have new owners, owners who want to move cause the Nets don't make money where they are. Add to that I saw an article that said these guys see Kidd's contract as a huge burden and were it not for his bum knee making him virtually unmovable would try to unload him.

My theory is that the franchise probably lost money even going to the finals (just guessing about that, but we all know their attendance sucks) and these guys feel there is no point in running an expensive winning franchise until they are out of the swamp. I think it's possible they aren't freeing money to re-sign Martin, they may let Martin walk or trade him for smaller and expiring contracts, and they'll do the same with Kidd when appropriate. The other big contract, Kittles, was left exposed.

I know it's crazy but we've seen Atlanta just do it, and Phoenix to some degree too - we don't really know how much their heart is into free agency yet, they may have just been scaling back. 

It's all about what they owners are up to. The van could be backing up as we speak.


----------



## THE COOKIE MONSTER (Apr 27, 2004)

TELFAIR IS OVERRATED THERE IS A REASON HE HAS FALLEN FROM THE LOTTERY. HES TJ FORD WITHOUT THE ATHLETICISM AND YOUNGER. MOST PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT FORD AS A BACKUP NOW AND TELFAIR MIGHT TAKE 3 YEARS TO GET TO THAT LEVEL. AN 18 YEAR OLD POINT GUARD ISN'T GOING TO HELP A VETARAN TEAM. THEY NEED SOMEONE THEY CAN DEPEND ON TO BACKUP KIDD NOT AN UNDERSIZED BALLHOG WITH QUESTIONALBE DURABILITY.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Knicksbiggestfan</b>!
> 
> Sweet.


Are you saying that thinking we might move up in the draft? If so, Isiah is on record as saying he's not impressed by this years talent pool and is more interested in using his assets to try to take someone from the expansion draftl. I'd guess Walker or Kittles, but who knows...

This expansion draft is setting up to be wild. How will it be conducted, is it purely behind closed doors or are they making a media spectacle of it? I can't wait to see how it shakes out.


----------

