Author Topic: a ranking of 76ers assets  (Read 11705 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #45 on: July 24, 2015, 06:42:53 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
I think Dallas is going to get off to a disappointing start and end up tanking around mid-season to ensure they keep that top 7 protected pick.

That's fine if they do.  It will be really hard for them to turn it around in 2017 in that scenario, with Nowitzki retiring and Parsons opting out.  A late lottery pick in 2017 could be just as useful in 2017 as in 2016, possibly moreso to space out our picks an extra year.  Jumping from the top half of the lottery into the playoffs in a single season is pretty hard, especially in the western conference.  2008-2010 OKC did it, with 3rd year KD and 2nd year Westbrook blossoming, but that wouldn't be Dallas' situation.  It's tough to see Dallas stumbling out of the gate, tanking hard at the end, and then rebounding the following year when their two best players could be gone.  They'd really need to win the lottery, and not just get a top 4-7 pick, to have that opportunity (and that would be because they traded the pick).

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #46 on: July 24, 2015, 06:45:50 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7840
  • Tommy Points: 770
I think Dallas is going to get off to a disappointing start and end up tanking around mid-season to ensure they keep that top 7 protected pick.

That's fine if they do.  It will be really hard for them to turn it around in 2017 in that scenario, with Nowitzki retiring and Parsons opting out.  A late lottery pick in 2017 could be just as useful in 2017 as in 2016, possibly moreso to space out our picks an extra year.  Jumping from the top half of the lottery into the playoffs in a single season is pretty hard, especially in the western conference.  2008-2010 OKC did it, with 3rd year KD and 2nd year Westbrook blossoming, but that wouldn't be Dallas' situation.  It's tough to see Dallas stumbling out of the gate, tanking hard at the end, and then rebounding the following year when their two best players could be gone.  They'd really need to win the lottery, and not just get a top 4-7 pick, to have that opportunity (and that would be because they traded the pick).
And if my memory is correct, the pick goes from top 7 protected in 2016 to top 3 protected in 2017, so if it rolls over, we could possibly wind up with a better pick in the 4-7 range. Possibly.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008, 2024

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #47 on: July 24, 2015, 06:48:28 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
I think Dallas is going to get off to a disappointing start and end up tanking around mid-season to ensure they keep that top 7 protected pick.

That's fine if they do.  It will be really hard for them to turn it around in 2017 in that scenario, with Nowitzki retiring and Parsons opting out.  A late lottery pick in 2017 could be just as useful in 2017 as in 2016, possibly moreso to space out our picks an extra year.  Jumping from the top half of the lottery into the playoffs in a single season is pretty hard, especially in the western conference.  2008-2010 OKC did it, with 3rd year KD and 2nd year Westbrook blossoming, but that wouldn't be Dallas' situation.  It's tough to see Dallas stumbling out of the gate, tanking hard at the end, and then rebounding the following year when their two best players could be gone.  They'd really need to win the lottery, and not just get a top 4-7 pick, to have that opportunity (and that would be because they traded the pick).
And if my memory is correct, the pick goes from top 7 protected in 2016 to top 3 protected in 2017, so if it rolls over, we could possibly wind up with a better pick in the 4-7 range. Possibly.

Your memory is not correct.  It stays top 20 until I believe 2021, when it becomes unprotected.  But my point remains, it would be extremely unusual for them to finish with a bad enough record to earn a top 7 pick and rebound to the playoffs in the following year, even with a string of top 7 picks.

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #48 on: July 24, 2015, 06:50:19 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16178
  • Tommy Points: 1407
@ Clay: Ok so, full disclosure, I am drinking (happy Friday to all) and I could be totally missing something obvious, but the salary cap going up would give them some respite, the problem is the timing window -- so if you get into a position like OKC did, where Harden and Ibaka were both drafted the same year and are up for max deals at the same time after you've already paid two out to players drafted slightly before, you're still screwed.

Now, in fairness, I think OKC balked because their ownership are a bunch of greedy jerks who hate paying taxes on anything and also didn't see Harden exploding the way he did because they're mostly shortsighted morons, and I don't see the Celtics making that mistake.

Happy Friday! I can't in good faith engage you with a salary cap discussion that has to be painfully more boring than whatever else you are doing at the moment. Live it up!

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #49 on: July 24, 2015, 07:02:09 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7840
  • Tommy Points: 770
I think Dallas is going to get off to a disappointing start and end up tanking around mid-season to ensure they keep that top 7 protected pick.

That's fine if they do.  It will be really hard for them to turn it around in 2017 in that scenario, with Nowitzki retiring and Parsons opting out.  A late lottery pick in 2017 could be just as useful in 2017 as in 2016, possibly moreso to space out our picks an extra year.  Jumping from the top half of the lottery into the playoffs in a single season is pretty hard, especially in the western conference.  2008-2010 OKC did it, with 3rd year KD and 2nd year Westbrook blossoming, but that wouldn't be Dallas' situation.  It's tough to see Dallas stumbling out of the gate, tanking hard at the end, and then rebounding the following year when their two best players could be gone.  They'd really need to win the lottery, and not just get a top 4-7 pick, to have that opportunity (and that would be because they traded the pick).
And if my memory is correct, the pick goes from top 7 protected in 2016 to top 3 protected in 2017, so if it rolls over, we could possibly wind up with a better pick in the 4-7 range. Possibly.

Your memory is not correct.  It stays top 20 until I believe 2021, when it becomes unprotected.  But my point remains, it would be extremely unusual for them to finish with a bad enough record to earn a top 7 pick and rebound to the playoffs in the following year, even with a string of top 7 picks.
You're right, it's top 7 protected until 2020. I don't know where I came up with that.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008, 2024

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #50 on: July 24, 2015, 07:29:11 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
@ Clay: Ok so, full disclosure, I am drinking (happy Friday to all) and I could be totally missing something obvious, but the salary cap going up would give them some respite, the problem is the timing window -- so if you get into a position like OKC did, where Harden and Ibaka were both drafted the same year and are up for max deals at the same time after you've already paid two out to players drafted slightly before, you're still screwed.

Now, in fairness, I think OKC balked because their ownership are a bunch of greedy jerks who hate paying taxes on anything and also didn't see Harden exploding the way he did because they're mostly shortsighted morons, and I don't see the Celtics making that mistake.

Happy Friday! I can't in good faith engage you with a salary cap discussion that has to be painfully more boring than whatever else you are doing at the moment. Live it up!

As a total salary cap nerd, I have no problem with this!  Yes you can totally have this problem.  The teams that are lucky are the ones who's young stars got paid last year or this year, like Wizards with Wall, Golden State with Klay and Green, and Cleveland with Kyrie and to a lesser extent Love.  Because their percentage deals will be based on smaller caps, it will give them extra space in the future.  However, for picks in the more recent seasons (2012-2016), teams also have a one-time boost when signing restricted free agents if they're willing to splurge.   That's because rookie salaries are so low relative to the cap, that even their cap holds don't take up much space before year 5.  I thoroughly expect the rookie scale to be revamped in a new CBA, as the cap will have gone up 80-100%, but the draft slots only 15% over that same period.

For example, suppose Marcus Smart plays well enough to earn a max contract after his rookie deal (just a thought experiment here, please don't debate me).  If he'd been the 6th pick in 2011 and played well, he would have earned a deal this summer worth $16.4 million.  Before he signed that deal, he would have had a cap hold of $10.6 million, meaning the C's could create an extra $5.8 million in cap room while waiting to sign him (what they're doing with Jae Crowder).  However, as a 2014 pick, Smart will have an $11.3 million cap hold.  However, the max deal for that season projects to be $25 million coming off a rookie deal, meaning the Celtics would have an extra $13.7 million of cap room while they wait to sign Smart.  So if you hit big-time on a pick, you'll have the ability for a season (although probably not every season if you hit on a lot of picks) to re-sign that player to a big contract while also signing a major free agent.  Of course, if you hit on four picks in a row, that's $100 million to four players, and not sustainable.

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #51 on: July 24, 2015, 07:30:24 PM »

Offline colincb

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Tommy Points: 501

So much wrong, and factually inaccurate with just about everything you wrote, but I'll try to keep it as brief as possible.

How on Earth do Rondo, Bennelli and a guy who isn't on their team improve their defense? The first two are not good defenders, the last isn't on the roster and that's not even touching on the fact Rajon Rondo is one of the worst offensive players PGs in the NBA.

2nd, Sac is the most dysfunctional organization on the NBA. They've been in the top 10 for years, their coach and best player openly don't like each other, they

What exactly is the risk Philly took? They expended cap space they weren't going to use anyway. That's it.

Your bias is seeping through pretty heavily here.

The best case scenario for the Kings is they make the playoffs as cannon fodder. The Worst case is that they lose the #1 pick.

The absolute worst case scenario for the Sixers is that they get a late lottery/mid teens 1st in 2019 and a free look at Stauskas. That's it, there's no downside.

My apologies to all. I screwed the post up royally cutting and pasting and it is a POS as is and DOA. Somehow I managed to leave the major part of the post out on the clipboard comparing the trade to similar large dump trades. Don’t know how I did it, but it’s lost to posterity and given the time it took, it’s staying that way.

Broke down the  SAC/PHI trade component by component by the amount of cap used, the relative talents transferred, the flippability of the filler, the timing of the receipt of the picks, the quality of the picks, the value of the swaps (which survived), etc.  Basic gist was that the deal was overall comparable in value to other large dumps like Zeller trade with the Cav, the Jefferson dump GSW-UTA etc.  Generally, Hinkie got less than the other deals in exchange for the potentially significant payoff of the 2019 unprotected pick. If he ends up with the 2018 pick, he clearly got less than the value of the other deals. Hence the summary sentences:

Quote
Doesn’t look anything like a fleecing to me. PHI took on more risk for a better return and bet against the trend (SAC on paper is getting better).

As to your points on what remained.

- 2014-15 Defensive Box +/- rankings out of 492 records in parentheses per basketball-reference.com. Rondo (105) is a big defensive upgrade over Collison (339), McCallum (349),  and Sessions (377). Bellinelli (317) is below average defensively, but he’s  an upgrade over Stauskas (403) who is brutal. A Moute got rejected, but last I heard they were trying to work it out. They know him and he is a defensive guy.  Think Divac did very well overall in his acquisitions on the defensive end, but whether they got enough to compete for the playoff, which is their goal, time will tell.

- Agree on SAC’s FO, however Divac was not part of the problem. He won the battle with Karl who caused the most recent bumbling and the owner who is a Jerry Jones/Dan Gilbert meddling neophyte finally did one thing right and backed Divac. Should have hired him before Karl, but that’s been the type of idiocy that’s been going on with him and the prior owners. The dump deal took a lot of flack because of the nonsense that’s been going on there for a long time, but Divac seems to actually have a clue and is handling the situation with the players very well and getting their buy- in. Divac’s FA acquisitions, his handling of his players and what he’s telling them have been very good. The pick of WCS also looks to be a good fit to me.


- Not sure what bias you’re referring to. Actually follow both SAC and PHI and about half a dozen other teams because they are either candidates for fleecing, I’ve lived and worked there, and in the case of PHI, I have a very similar background to Hinkie. Hinkie’s a smart guy who executes well and consistently. I think the plan is flawed for various reasons, but the NBA is not completely comparable to the real world from a management perspective. Otherwise, think he’s mishandled his dealing with other parties in the NBA and the press. Have heard things about his personality both ways.

Like most of his major picks except Saric, though Hinkie did well in fleecing ORL on the deal. Loved Embiid early and got off the bandwagon when the injury issue became known. He did have the potential to be transcendent though he had proved little on the floor. Still has a chance to be Big Z 2.0. Would have picked him at 3 or 6 given the alternatives since Smart was the only other guy I liked in that range.

Noel was another good value and he is going to be elite defensively. Okafor is the mirror image. Do not see the combo working together on the floor. If forced to pick, it would be Okafor>Smart>Noel. Would like any of them on the Cs. Have a lot of respect for the Sixers who along with the Lakers have been our biggest rivals. Back during the 60s, getting by the Sixers was more difficult than getting by the Lakers and the weaker Western Conference. That’s the extent of my biases and feeling about the Sixers.

- Worse case for the Sixers is the opportunity cost. You don’t value the cap they used, so it’s a big win in your mind. I was comparing the deal to others and found it on par overall and not a fleecing of Divac. As for Stauskas, he was in bottom 30% on TS% and bottom 5% on defensive rating. Smart had the same TS%. Bargnani the same defensive rating. Think Stauskas can improve, but likely a role player and has a pretty high bust potential. Much preferred Zeller in the deal matchup and Thornton as flippable filler.

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #52 on: July 24, 2015, 07:37:59 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7840
  • Tommy Points: 770
@ Clay: Ok so, full disclosure, I am drinking (happy Friday to all) and I could be totally missing something obvious, but the salary cap going up would give them some respite, the problem is the timing window -- so if you get into a position like OKC did, where Harden and Ibaka were both drafted the same year and are up for max deals at the same time after you've already paid two out to players drafted slightly before, you're still screwed.

Now, in fairness, I think OKC balked because their ownership are a bunch of greedy jerks who hate paying taxes on anything and also didn't see Harden exploding the way he did because they're mostly shortsighted morons, and I don't see the Celtics making that mistake.

Happy Friday! I can't in good faith engage you with a salary cap discussion that has to be painfully more boring than whatever else you are doing at the moment. Live it up!

As a total salary cap nerd, I have no problem with this!  Yes you can totally have this problem.  The teams that are lucky are the ones who's young stars got paid last year or this year, like Wizards with Wall, Golden State with Klay and Green, and Cleveland with Kyrie and to a lesser extent Love.  Because their percentage deals will be based on smaller caps, it will give them extra space in the future.  However, for picks in the more recent seasons (2012-2016), teams also have a one-time boost when signing restricted free agents if they're willing to splurge.   That's because rookie salaries are so low relative to the cap, that even their cap holds don't take up much space before year 5.  I thoroughly expect the rookie scale to be revamped in a new CBA, as the cap will have gone up 80-100%, but the draft slots only 15% over that same period.

For example, suppose Marcus Smart plays well enough to earn a max contract after his rookie deal (just a thought experiment here, please don't debate me).  If he'd been the 6th pick in 2011 and played well, he would have earned a deal this summer worth $16.4 million.  Before he signed that deal, he would have had a cap hold of $10.6 million, meaning the C's could create an extra $5.8 million in cap room while waiting to sign him (what they're doing with Jae Crowder).  However, as a 2014 pick, Smart will have an $11.3 million cap hold.  However, the max deal for that season projects to be $25 million coming off a rookie deal, meaning the Celtics would have an extra $13.7 million of cap room while they wait to sign Smart.  So if you hit big-time on a pick, you'll have the ability for a season (although probably not every season if you hit on a lot of picks) to re-sign that player to a big contract while also signing a major free agent.  Of course, if you hit on four picks in a row, that's $100 million to four players, and not sustainable.
Of course, I'd love to have the problem that we hit on too many picks in a row.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008, 2024

Re: a ranking of 76ers assets
« Reply #53 on: July 24, 2015, 07:44:49 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16178
  • Tommy Points: 1407

So much wrong, and factually inaccurate with just about everything you wrote, but I'll try to keep it as brief as possible.

How on Earth do Rondo, Bennelli and a guy who isn't on their team improve their defense? The first two are not good defenders, the last isn't on the roster and that's not even touching on the fact Rajon Rondo is one of the worst offensive players PGs in the NBA.

2nd, Sac is the most dysfunctional organization on the NBA. They've been in the top 10 for years, their coach and best player openly don't like each other, they

What exactly is the risk Philly took? They expended cap space they weren't going to use anyway. That's it.

Your bias is seeping through pretty heavily here.

The best case scenario for the Kings is they make the playoffs as cannon fodder. The Worst case is that they lose the #1 pick.

The absolute worst case scenario for the Sixers is that they get a late lottery/mid teens 1st in 2019 and a free look at Stauskas. That's it, there's no downside.

My apologies to all. I screwed the post up royally cutting and pasting and it is a POS as is and DOA. Somehow I managed to leave the major part of the post out on the clipboard comparing the trade to similar large dump trades. Don’t know how I did it, but it’s lost to posterity and given the time it took, it’s staying that way.

Broke down the  SAC/PHI trade component by component by the amount of cap used, the relative talents transferred, the flippability of the filler, the timing of the receipt of the picks, the quality of the picks, the value of the swaps (which survived), etc.  Basic gist was that the deal was overall comparable in value to other large dumps like Zeller trade with the Cav, the Jefferson dump GSW-UTA etc.  Generally, Hinkie got less than the other deals in exchange for the potentially significant payoff of the 2019 unprotected pick. If he ends up with the 2018 pick, he clearly got less than the value of the other deals. Hence the summary sentences:

Quote
Doesn’t look anything like a fleecing to me. PHI took on more risk for a better return and bet against the trend (SAC on paper is getting better).

As to your points on what remained.

- 2014-15 Defensive Box +/- rankings out of 492 records in parentheses per basketball-reference.com. Rondo (105) is a big defensive upgrade over Collison (339), McCallum (349),  and Sessions (377). Bellinelli (317) is below average defensively, but he’s  an upgrade over Stauskas (403) who is brutal. A Moute got rejected, but last I heard they were trying to work it out. They know him and he is a defensive guy.  Think Divac did very well overall in his acquisitions on the defensive end, but whether they got enough to compete for the playoff, which is their goal, time will tell.

- Agree on SAC’s FO, however Divac was not part of the problem. He won the battle with Karl who caused the most recent bumbling and the owner who is a Jerry Jones/Dan Gilbert meddling neophyte finally did one thing right and backed Divac. Should have hired him before Karl, but that’s been the type of idiocy that’s been going on with him and the prior owners. The dump deal took a lot of flack because of the nonsense that’s been going on there for a long time, but Divac seems to actually have a clue and is handling the situation with the players very well and getting their buy- in. Divac’s FA acquisitions, his handling of his players and what he’s telling them have been very good. The pick of WCS also looks to be a good fit to me.


- Not sure what bias you’re referring to. Actually follow both SAC and PHI and about half a dozen other teams because they are either candidates for fleecing, I’ve lived and worked there, and in the case of PHI, I have a very similar background to Hinkie. Hinkie’s a smart guy who executes well and consistently. I think the plan is flawed for various reasons, but the NBA is not completely comparable to the real world from a management perspective. Otherwise, think he’s mishandled his dealing with other parties in the NBA and the press. Have heard things about his personality both ways.

Like most of his major picks except Saric, though Hinkie did well in fleecing ORL on the deal. Loved Embiid early and got off the bandwagon when the injury issue became known. He did have the potential to be transcendent though he had proved little on the floor. Still has a chance to be Big Z 2.0. Would have picked him at 3 or 6 given the alternatives since Smart was the only other guy I liked in that range.

Noel was another good value and he is going to be elite defensively. Okafor is the mirror image. Do not see the combo working together on the floor. If forced to pick, it would be Okafor>Smart>Noel. Would like any of them on the Cs. Have a lot of respect for the Sixers who along with the Lakers have been our biggest rivals. Back during the 60s, getting by the Sixers was more difficult than getting by the Lakers and the weaker Western Conference. That’s the extent of my biases and feeling about the Sixers.

- Worse case for the Sixers is the opportunity cost. You don’t value the cap they used, so it’s a big win in your mind. I was comparing the deal to others and found it on par overall and not a fleecing of Divac. As for Stauskas, he was in bottom 30% on TS% and bottom 5% on defensive rating. Smart had the same TS%. Bargnani the same defensive rating. Think Stauskas can improve, but likely a role player and has a pretty high bust potential. Much preferred Zeller in the deal matchup and Thornton as flippable filler.

Really informative post. I don't really have a strong opinion on the subject, but it is hard to not feel like people easily buy into the idea that the Kings were fleeced because

a) it is the kings and it is easy to laugh at them and call them a joke
b) a prominent writer at grantland called the trade a fleece (I think it was lowe)

I applaud you for having statistics and reasoning for taking an unpopular view on this point, and based on what you have posed, it seems like at the very least the trade isn't the straight
home run for philly that some have posted.