I like BBD and hope we sign him. But if we can get David Lee we should do it. However, I'm worried about Lee leaving after one year to get big money. We'll have lost Big Baby for a one year rental of Lee.
However, it wouldn't be horrible to try some sort of sign and trade with Baby and then to resign Leon Powe. Powe is arguably just as good as Baby, and with Lee and Wallace on the bench, we wouldn't really need Powe back at 100% until the 2010-2011 season.
With every passing day I'm seeing less and less that's appealing about Baby in Green next year. I think the ideal thing may be that sign and trade. I just don't see another appealing scenario. I think if he signs a big long money deal he won't live up to and will be a burden on the team. If he comes back for a 1 year deal, I see the combo of KG/Perk/Wallace keeping his minutes at 10 mpg or less, thus dramatically diminishing his numbers, and thus his trade value. And if he comes back even at a reasonable long term contract, will it really be worth it for a player who is only gonna get 10-15 mpg and probably less in the playoffs? Couldn't Powe do the same? And I know that he won't be back until midway or later, but does that really matter? Couldn't Scal or a FA fill the spare 10-15 mpg adequately enough for the team to still win 65+ games?
A hobbling Powe coming off a 3rd knee surgery is nowhere near as good as BBD. Powe is not going to be signed unless he's healthy and IF he's even effective.
I wouldn't be so sure. You'd probably say the same thing if he was coming off his second knee surgery. And he proved people wrong.
But I think Powe's beside the point. I just think that all Baby really offers to this team in games that matter is an insurance policy. In a close game, KG, Perk, and Wallace are all going to play north of 30 mpg, leaving virtually zero minutes for BBD. If he averages 15 mpg next year, it'll only be because the C's have blown out so many teams that KG, Perk, and Wallace came out early. And if it's a blow out, who cares who is out there?
Would Baby be nice if someone goes down? Sure. But only in certain circumstances. If KG goes down for the season again, Baby isn't going to matter. If he goes down for 10 games, this team is good enough that it can win some regular season games with pretty much anyone on the bench (see last season).
Would he be useful if Perk or Wallace went down? Sure. But again, only if it was in the playoffs or if it was long term. If it's a 10 game thing, they can get by with anybody.
So that begs the question, is it worth paying 4-5 million, or even as low as 3 million, for a guy who is really only going to be of use if someone gets hurt? Or would it be more useful to try to trade him for something more valuable like a backup PG or a backup 2/3 that's even better than Daniels? I tend to think the latter.
Because I also don't see him holding value here. If he's going to play sparse minutes, his value is going to plummet, and the C's won't be able to trade him. And it's pretty much useless to stash him for the future: he'll never be a starter on a contender. So why stash a guy who at best might be the first big off the bench? That role can be filled down the road after the Big Three are gone.
So I'll grant you that Powe may not be the answer, but I do think the C's might be better off dealing Baby for a backup 1, 2, or 3, then signing someone like Joe Smith at the LLE. He'd give good insurance and could fill in those spare 10 mpg about as effectively as Baby.
