Why won't Olynyk or Sullinger be traded for picks?

[Alleyoopster]

One thing that baffles me about the NBA draft process is how seldom picks from the previous two years are used to facilitate trades for players in the current year's draft.

I'm thinking two of the hottest commodities the Celtics have are Olynyk and Sullinger.  Both would likely be lottery selections if GM's had the chance to pick over again.  Yet, as good as they are, it's very, very doubtful they will be traded for a current year draft pick.  Yes, there is noise about them being traded for Love....I'm not talking about that. 

Why is this the case year after year?  Is it because of salary cap rules?  You lose one year of salary protection in trading for a previous year's pick.  To me this doesn't seem to be an overwhelming obstacle that prevents trades. 

If salary isn't the sticking point, then is it more that GM's are afraid of losing what they have.  Or, do most players lose value once they don't perform at an All Star level in the first or second year?  Or, maybe they perform well enough that teams don't want to risk losing what they have?  Obviously, there are legitimate reasons for the lack of trades.  I just don't get the lack of risk-taking by almost every team in the NBA. 

[Celtics18]

Would you trade Kelly Olynyk for the thirteenth pick in this year's draft?

[Alleyoopster]

Would you trade Kelly Olynyk for the thirteenth pick in this year's draft?

I suggested they would likely be lottery picks if GM's could select again.  Why would they trade down to 13th? 
If I could get a top five pick I might trade either or both of them.  Given a choice of picks 6-10 would make the decision more difficult. 

[Lucky17]

One thing that baffles me about the NBA draft process is how seldom picks from the previous two years are used to facilitate trades for players in the current year's draft.

I'm thinking two of the hottest commodities the Celtics have are Olynyk and Sullinger.  Both would likely be lottery selections if GM's had the chance to pick over again.  Yet, as good as they are, it's very, very doubtful they will be traded for a current year draft pick.  Yes, there is noise about them being traded for Love....I'm not talking about that. 

Why is this the case year after year?  Is it because of salary cap rules?  You lose one year of salary protection in trading for a previous year's pick.  To me this doesn't seem to be an overwhelming obstacle that prevents trades. 

If salary isn't the sticking point, then is it more that GM's are afraid of losing what they have.  Or, do most players lose value once they don't perform at an All Star level in the first or second year?  Or, maybe they perform well enough that teams don't want to risk losing what they have?  Obviously, there are legitimate reasons for the lack of trades.  I just don't get the lack of risk-taking by almost every team in the NBA.

I think it is due to the CBA. Rookie year deals allow so much flexibility to GMs. Add to the fact that a single year often doesn't provide enough time to definitively demonstrate whether a player really is expendable (or a bust), and there's very little impetus or motivation for a GM to cut bait on a guy he drafted just one year prior.

[D.o.s.]

He was a 13th pick in a bad draft. It stands to reason he might move to 10 in a good one.

[sofutomygaha]

I think it's a devil-you-know situation. CW says that just about every guy in the draft after the top 10 or so is dice-roll. After one or two years in the NBA, you have a pretty good idea of the young player's true value. If he's useable, he's not worth trading a pick for a comparable slot. If he isn't, no one will take him off your hands.

It's an interesting point, though, that you raise. No one ever seems to hedge their risk by trading away today's lottery pick for yesterday's good-but-not-fantastic mid-1st. You'd think that some team with a quantitative risk model in place would bite the bullet (should we be trying to trade our 6th pick to, say, OKC for Steven Adams...?)

[D.o.s.]

should we be trying to trade our 6th pick to, say, OKC for Steven Adams?

But then who will they use for Nick Collison's body double?

[Future Celtics Owner]

I was just talking to me brother about this. He asked why a team would trade for sully when sully was 21 and we would likely try to trade for a top ten pick. Every pick is a gamble. So to have more information and a guarantee that he can play in the nba, I think that means a lot.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Would you guys do Sully for Julius Randle, lets say Randle falls to 7-9. Or do you think the other teams would not do it?

[greg683x]

Would you guys do Sully for Julius Randle, lets say Randle falls to 7-9. Or do you think the other teams would not do it?

before his foot problem came out my answer would be a definite no.  I still say no, but now Im not nearly as sure.

Its been a bad week for the lottery big men in this draft

[sofutomygaha]

Would you trade Kelly Olynyk for the thirteenth pick in this year's draft?

I would, yes

[Future Celtics Owner]

Would you guys do Sully for Julius Randle, lets say Randle falls to 7-9. Or do you think the other teams would not do it?

before his foot problem came out my answer would be a definite no.  I still say no, but now Im not nearly as sure.

Its been a bad week for the lottery big men in this draft

So no to the trade or no to the other team accepting?

[thedawg]

One thing that baffles me about the NBA draft process is how seldom picks from the previous two years are used to facilitate trades for players in the current year's draft.

I'm thinking two of the hottest commodities the Celtics have are Olynyk and Sullinger.  Both would likely be lottery selections if GM's had the chance to pick over again.  Yet, as good as they are, it's very, very doubtful they will be traded for a current year draft pick.  Yes, there is noise about them being traded for Love....I'm not talking about that. 

Why is this the case year after year?  Is it because of salary cap rules?  You lose one year of salary protection in trading for a previous year's pick.  To me this doesn't seem to be an overwhelming obstacle that prevents trades. 

If salary isn't the sticking point, then is it more that GM's are afraid of losing what they have.  Or, do most players lose value once they don't perform at an All Star level in the first or second year?  Or, maybe they perform well enough that teams don't want to risk losing what they have?  Obviously, there are legitimate reasons for the lack of trades.  I just don't get the lack of risk-taking by almost every team in the NBA.

I got Sullinger in my fantasy league and I am trying to get a top 8 pick for him. I guess that makes me advanced

[obnoxiousmime]

If one of your picks hits, why would you deal that player away? And if the pick doesn't hit, how are you going to get the same value for that player if you start shopping him while he's still on his rookie deal? This is also after the rest of the league has gotten a good look at the player after his first 1-3 seasons in the league, meaning his value has been more accurately defined by each team's scouting department.

Also, if you draft a guy and then trade him too soon, it sends a bad message to prospects. It also looks bad because it suggests your organization made a mistake in that someone you trumpeted as being a good pick is now sent packing so soon. Fans don't want to be in perpetual rebuilding mode, and trading a recently drafted player for a future pick who will require another year or two to equal the same amount of experience is damaging to fan morale.

In the case of Sullinger or Olynyk and this year's draft, you're right in that it won't happen. One, the Celtics would not want to cut bait on players they've spent 1-2 years developing only to deal them away and start the process again with a rookie. Second, every draft is different. This draft is considered deeper than those previous drafts so saying "Sullinger would be 4th in a redraft!" does not equate him to a 4th overall pick this year. Third, the more years each player plays and is not a breakthrough hit, the more his ceiling is defined and GMs would rather take a new player who may have greater "upside."

Finally the years do matter. A good player on a rookie deal gives your team lots of value for the dollar, for 4 years. Sullinger's deal will be up in two years, compared to 4 for this year's class. That's 2 extra years you have cheap labor as opposed to losing a player entirely or having to potentially overpay them.

Why are you asking anyway? You feel Sullinger or Olynyk should be traded for picks in this year's draft? If that's the case, you must think they are overrated somehow, or at least not as talented as players in this draft class. If you do feel that way, consider the possibility that a lot of GMs feel exactly the same.

[Alleyoopster]

If one of your picks hits, why would you deal that player away? And if the pick doesn't hit, how are you going to get the same value for that player if you start shopping him while he's still on his rookie deal? This is also after the rest of the league has gotten a good look at the player after his first 1-3 seasons in the league, meaning his value has been more accurately defined by each team's scouting department.

Also, if you draft a guy and then trade him too soon, it sends a bad message to prospects. It also looks bad because it suggests your organization made a mistake in that someone you trumpeted as being a good pick is now sent packing so soon. Fans don't want to be in perpetual rebuilding mode, and trading a recently drafted player for a future pick who will require another year or two to equal the same amount of experience is damaging to fan morale.

In the case of Sullinger or Olynyk and this year's draft, you're right in that it won't happen. One, the Celtics would not want to cut bait on players they've spent 1-2 years developing only to deal them away and start the process again with a rookie. Second, every draft is different. This draft is considered deeper than those previous drafts so saying "Sullinger would be 4th in a redraft!" does not equate him to a 4th overall pick this year. Third, the more years each player plays and is not a breakthrough hit, the more his ceiling is defined and GMs would rather take a new player who may have greater "upside."

Finally the years do matter. A good player on a rookie deal gives your team lots of value for the dollar, for 4 years. Sullinger's deal will be up in two years, compared to 4 for this year's class. That's 2 extra years you have cheap labor as opposed to losing a player entirely or having to potentially overpay them.

Why are you asking anyway? You feel Sullinger or Olynyk should be traded for picks in this year's draft? If that's the case, you must think they are overrated somehow, or at least not as talented as players in this draft class. If you do feel that way, consider the possibility that a lot of GMs feel exactly the same.

Great analysis/response!!!

"Why are you asking anyway?"  I asked not so much as to make a point about Olynyk or Sullinger, rather that it always perplexed me why trades almost never occur with (recent) previous selections and current year picks.  Your analysis and that of others makes me understand better.