Amico/Fox sports: Bucks open to Larry Sanders trade for draft picks...

[fitzhickey]

I'm with Chambers, I think Roy's letting his idea of what Sanders is like color his judgement on how beneficial he'd be to the team.

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

I'd probably bite on Wallace + Clippers 1st (or the worse Between the Celtics/Atlanta-Brooklyn picks).

But Sanders isn't near the level defender Davis is. Davis can have off nights blocking wise, but he will always be an intimidating presence, and no big men play the passing lanes like him. If we could get our hands on Nerlens Noel I'd much rather that.

[ssspence]

Roy ~~ reminding me a little of the Eric Gordon discussion, would you trade Wallace and a pick for him? If the Bucks are scared enough of Sanders in that locker room.... they just might do it. Wallace's deal lines up perfectly with the end of GA's rookie deal -- Crash can mentor him over the next couple of seasons.

My take on Sanders: some players don't belong in a bad franchise. Couldn't the Cs help him grow up, while also teaching him how to play the game? Presumably his offensive numbers would improve playing with Rondo.

I don't know.  I agree it's like the argument I make for Eric Gordon:  you're trading a sunk cost for a productive player (or, in Sanders' case, a guy who *could* be a productive player).

The difference is that Sanders has that extra year on his contract, and he's shown zero maturity.  He seems like an overpaid malcontent.

If he turns back into the player he was last year, then it's obviously worth it.  If he continues to follow the career path of Javale McGee, he's not, and we've paid a #1 for the privilege of adding a year to Wallace's contract.

Ultimately, I don't know.  If you put lottery protection on the pick, maybe it's worth it.  I guess I probably do it in the hopes that Sanders improves enough to boost his trade value, at which point you move him to recoup the #1 and get an expiring.  It's a risk, though.

It's certainly a risk. I would not give up a lottery pick for him, especially considering the 2015 draft might be stronger than the 2014 draft. I'd rather give up 2 mid-to-late firsts for him than a lottery pick, thought I seriously doubt it would take that much if they decide to trade him, because they're not likely to get better offers.

For what it's worth, I don't think Sanders on-court  and / or interview demeanor looks at all like McGee. I get the comparison, but Sanders is clearly a brighter fellow -- albeit one who lacks discipline. I'd be very curious to see how he could grow in an environment like Indiana, San An, Boston or Miami, etc.

[Evantime34]

To be fair I am a huge Larry Sanders fan. Yes he has played poorly this year but last year he was one of the best rim protectors in the league (stat tracker didn't record that last year but he was #1 in percentage of shot attempts blocked last year), as well as a very good rebounder (similar rebounding percentage to Sully this year.

He is only 25 and has the potential to be a player similar to Tyson Chandler before all is said and done. Even though he is not living up to his contract right now, I think it is worth the to trade for him when his stock is at an all time low (his production this year combined with his contract make this true).

A defensive center to run the defense will be essential to the rebuild and I don't see us getting one in the draft unless we can draft Embiid or Cauley Stein (with our second pick) next year. If we could trade him for Gerald Wallace and a first the cap difference would be negligible but we would get a far superior player that will get better.

[Roy H.]

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

Youngest, possibly.  Not cheapest, though.  A guy like Asik gives you more reliable defense (although not the highlight real), and he has a better contract.

[Evantime34]

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

Youngest, possibly.  Not cheapest, though.  A guy like Asik gives you more reliable defense (although not the highlight real), and he has a better contract.

In Sanders you are paying for upside, he is two years younger than Asik with considerably more potential.

[ssspence]

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

Youngest, possibly.  Not cheapest, though.  A guy like Asik gives you more reliable defense (although not the highlight real), and he has a better contract.

But he'll probably "cost" us more...

[wdleehi]

I like Larry Sanders, but he is overpayed now.  There is no reason to give the Bucks multiple picks or a top 15 pick for him.

His play is down.  His team wants to move on from him.



Wallace and maybe the clipper pick and that's it. 


Maybe not. 


Maybe come draft season when the Celtics know where their picks are and have the sense who they are going to pick and need a starting C.

[fitzhickey]

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

Youngest, possibly.  Not cheapest, though.  A guy like Asik gives you more reliable defense (although not the highlight real), and he has a better contract.

In Sanders you are paying for upside, he is two years younger than Asik with considerably more potential.

But in Asik you're paying for a relatively sure thing.

[oldutican]

I posted a few days ago the scenario where the Bucks are one of the teams who have centers, but may still take Embiid. Then Sanders price goes down.

[D.o.s.]

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

Youngest, possibly.  Not cheapest, though.  A guy like Asik gives you more reliable defense (although not the highlight real), and he has a better contract.

Not really. Asik's contract is up next year, after he's slated to make 14 million, and then he's an UFA--and he's almost assuredly going to be offered more than the 11 million Sanders will be in the same season (15-16).

He does have a smaller cap hit than Sanders for the one year that their comparable contracts are going to overlap (14-15), though.

[Who]

Kris Humphries + two non-lottery picks seems like a fair price to me.

[Evantime34]

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

Youngest, possibly.  Not cheapest, though.  A guy like Asik gives you more reliable defense (although not the highlight real), and he has a better contract.

In Sanders you are paying for upside, he is two years younger than Asik with considerably more potential.

But in Asik you're paying for a relatively sure thing.

Asik has had one very good season, just as Sanders did, the difference is Asik played well before he got hurt this year and Sanders didn't. Neither is a sure thing.

[fitzhickey]

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

Youngest, possibly.  Not cheapest, though.  A guy like Asik gives you more reliable defense (although not the highlight real), and he has a better contract.

In Sanders you are paying for upside, he is two years younger than Asik with considerably more potential.

But in Asik you're paying for a relatively sure thing.

Asik has had one very good season, just as Sanders did, the difference is Asik played well before he got hurt this year and Sanders didn't. Neither is a sure thing.

Asik has been trapped behind Dwight, with his minutes nearly halved, and his mentality a bit shaken after being replaced and not getting the minutes he wants. Sanders gets more minutes and takes more than double the amount of shots, while being equally inept at offense, if not more so.

I'd rather Asik, but I understand going after potential.

[ssspence]

Kris Humphries + two non-lottery picks seems like a fair price to me.

Too much. Amico points out they know they'll need to take salary... so make them take salary.

In my opinion, picks are being a little overvalued right now, especially for teams that struggle to attract FAs like the Bucks. Use 'em to dump Wallace... we have plenty.

And if it's picks we need, trade Green to Charlotte for expirings and one of their firsts when you're done.

[Fafnir]

He's going to be the cheapest, youngest defensive center we can get our hands on--unless there's someone in the draft who really looks like an Anthony Davis-level defender.

Youngest, possibly.  Not cheapest, though.  A guy like Asik gives you more reliable defense (although not the highlight real), and he has a better contract.

In Sanders you are paying for upside, he is two years younger than Asik with considerably more potential.

But in Asik you're paying for a relatively sure thing.

Asik has had one very good season, just as Sanders did, the difference is Asik played well before he got hurt this year and Sanders didn't. Neither is a sure thing.

Asik's first two years in the league he was also an elite rebounder/rim protector. He was just stuck behind Joakim Noah for minutes.

Better track record than Sanders, but he is a good deal older I believe.