Unfortunately having to work most of today, so not able to join in a lot of the draft fun, but taking a quick break to share a quick story with you guys that might help explain the thinking if we really do just draft players tonight and/or don't end up shipping guys out for free like some of you are wanting...
Some of you know that, on occasion, I have the chance to talk to a couple different NBA GMs in a setting where they have absolutely no reason to lie, BS, or generally do anything other than shoot me straight... Was talking to another team's GM (a very successful one, at that) a few weeks back, and I specifically asked him about the trade value of guys like Crabbe and Leonard, given their less-than expected output last year and their high price tags. His response, paraphrased, was this:
"Everybody talks about how hard guys like those are to move, and everyone assumes that's because of their contract, it's not that at all. If Neil wanted to take cents on the dollar for Crabbe or Meyers, he'd have plenty of offers to choose from. The reason guys like that are hard to move is because they underperformed. If you look at young guys like that in that situation -- where they go from a rookie deal to a big 2nd contract, a ton of them underperform that first year -- and we all know that, we all expect that. But typically, their worlds slow down after that and they go back to being the player they were when they signed that deal. Those are the types of guys that can be difference makers on your roster if you can acquire them cheaply, but again, we're all low-balling each other for guys like that. THAT'S why those guys are tough to trade -- in the NBA, it's better to overpay for an asset like those guys and hold onto them in hopes that you can at least get fair value for them later, than compound your problem by taking table scraps for them."
I've been alluding to this the past few days in my few posts, but here's my read on the situation -- OBVIOUSLY Porzingas, Butler, or even a Paul George rental, at a decent value would be beneficial to this team, but realistically that's not going to happen. As much as it will pain the masses, the ideal path forward -- if a bankable NBA vet isn't available -- is to continue to amass assets. That means getting good talent/value with our draft picks, but it also means trying to regain some trade value for Meyers and Crabbe (possibly Turner too, but my gut tells me Neil sees Turner as an important part of the team's core). Yes, they'll eventually have to be dealt, but if they can rebound like this GM was suggesting they will, the difference -- in just a few months -- between having to pay to unload them and getting paid for them, could have a significant impact on the future of this franchise.
I asked the GM, "what if they don't bounce back"... He chuckled and said (again, paraphrasing) "there will always be a market for shooters and young, reasonably athletic 7-footers who can stick the 3, Neil will be okay".
So take all of that for whatever its worth, I guess. Neil's goal for this team isn't to get back to being relevant or even very good; it's to win a championship, and that takes nuance, patience, luck, and perhaps more importantly, vision.
Some of you know that, on occasion, I have the chance to talk to a couple different NBA GMs in a setting where they have absolutely no reason to lie, BS, or generally do anything other than shoot me straight... Was talking to another team's GM (a very successful one, at that) a few weeks back, and I specifically asked him about the trade value of guys like Crabbe and Leonard, given their less-than expected output last year and their high price tags. His response, paraphrased, was this:
"Everybody talks about how hard guys like those are to move, and everyone assumes that's because of their contract, it's not that at all. If Neil wanted to take cents on the dollar for Crabbe or Meyers, he'd have plenty of offers to choose from. The reason guys like that are hard to move is because they underperformed. If you look at young guys like that in that situation -- where they go from a rookie deal to a big 2nd contract, a ton of them underperform that first year -- and we all know that, we all expect that. But typically, their worlds slow down after that and they go back to being the player they were when they signed that deal. Those are the types of guys that can be difference makers on your roster if you can acquire them cheaply, but again, we're all low-balling each other for guys like that. THAT'S why those guys are tough to trade -- in the NBA, it's better to overpay for an asset like those guys and hold onto them in hopes that you can at least get fair value for them later, than compound your problem by taking table scraps for them."
I've been alluding to this the past few days in my few posts, but here's my read on the situation -- OBVIOUSLY Porzingas, Butler, or even a Paul George rental, at a decent value would be beneficial to this team, but realistically that's not going to happen. As much as it will pain the masses, the ideal path forward -- if a bankable NBA vet isn't available -- is to continue to amass assets. That means getting good talent/value with our draft picks, but it also means trying to regain some trade value for Meyers and Crabbe (possibly Turner too, but my gut tells me Neil sees Turner as an important part of the team's core). Yes, they'll eventually have to be dealt, but if they can rebound like this GM was suggesting they will, the difference -- in just a few months -- between having to pay to unload them and getting paid for them, could have a significant impact on the future of this franchise.
I asked the GM, "what if they don't bounce back"... He chuckled and said (again, paraphrasing) "there will always be a market for shooters and young, reasonably athletic 7-footers who can stick the 3, Neil will be okay".
So take all of that for whatever its worth, I guess. Neil's goal for this team isn't to get back to being relevant or even very good; it's to win a championship, and that takes nuance, patience, luck, and perhaps more importantly, vision.
