Semih has potentially 10 good years ahead of him. Parker has maybe one or two. He'd help now with our SF problems no doubt though. I think Erden has more upside and room to grow whereas Parker is at the tail end of his career.
But to me, upside means nothing this year. The question is, if we can't acquire a wing any other way, what's more important, a wing or Semih as an extra big.
I couldn't care less if Semih is a 12 and 8 player 3 years from now if we don't win #18 this year.
A. There are a lot of other options being discusses as wing-alternatives to Anthony Parker, guys that are likely to be bought out or to come cheaper. Is a bought-out Jammiro Moon that much less of a player than Parker?
B. I don't think you can view Semih as an "extra" big, not with the injury concerns on the guys ahead of him. I really wish that Shaq and JO were both healthy and Semih was redundant, but I don't see how realistically anyone can count on either of the Brothers O'Neil, or feel comfortable only having BBD behind Perk.
True. I'm not saying I like the Parker trade. I'm simply asking the question, what's more important, Semih's depth at the 5 or the depth an extra 3 would provide?
And while I agree that there other deals out there, I think it may end up being a pipe dream that a) someone awesome (like Rip) gets bought out or b) that some team wants some combination of Nate, JO, Bradley, or Harangody.
Given that case, we may have to decide whether or not Semih's worth parting with.
I'm not sure. However, I would be more willing to part with him for someone like Battier, who, at 6-8, could play some 4 for us (thus allowing Baby to play more at the 5). Parker really is more of a 2, so I'd be less willing to part with Erden.