07-25-2023, 03:41 PM
(07-25-2023, 01:55 PM)F Gump Wrote: I don't think your comps hold up. It's cherry-picking one aspect of the values in a trade, without including the rest.
For example, re the value of Holmes ---in taking Holmes, the pick being paid wasn't about the value of Holmes the player per se, but rather the value of the Mavs eating $12M of cap room for SAC this summer (and next summer too), since no player being sent in return. That swap tells us more about the value of cap room, and less about the value being placed on Holmes as a player.
These ideas don't have ATL taking on Holmes contract to create cap room for DAL, but rather a swap of cap obligations. In fact, ATL is the one getting payroll reduction (about 3M this season, and about 6M overall).
Re the value of Capela himself related to ANY trade -- in the draft day proposals, ATL's ask of Green (and also a pick swap) was not necessarily about the value of Capela at all, but rather the perceived diff in usefulness between Bertans and Capella.
CAPELA for BERTANS, with Green/swap being the tip they asked.
That doesn't give us any indication of what Capela himself is worth to ATL overall, but only in relation to Bertans (who is not part of this trade idea). If they get back 2 lesser paid centers with differing styles and strengths, who they can use to back up Okongwu, and free up minutes for Okongwu by being rid of Capela, without having to pay someone to take Capela's contract off their payroll, and also reduce their overall payroll in the process, maybe it's enough.
I would add that I don't think Capela's price tag, whatever it is, is way far from what the Mavs have to offer. These talks would have put buried long ago if that was not the case imo. And I have to wonder if the issue at this point is more about getting past the Holmes trade restriction than anything else. They don't need Siakam to be incoming to want to move off of Capela and free up minutes for Okongwu and his smaller contract.
These are some good points. I will try to better clarify my asset assessment:
Holmes was dumped for a first. That may be more about cap space than the player, but the fact they had to pay a first to dump his salary says something about the value of that asset. Nobody is going to want to take on Holmes 24 mil remaining. It might not cost a first to trade him if salary is coming back, but it would cost something. Either sending something else out or taking on an equally bad contract. There is a question to what degree, but that contract is surely a negative asset.
So the proposed Capela trade did involve sending out one year of Bertans. I would argue that value is less than either the pick swap or Green. I know this board would go postal if we did either just to get off Bertans. That means the ask for Capela was less than pick swap + Green but more than either one by themselves. The pick swap is no longer available, so my math says the ask was for more than just Green (but less than Green + swap).
I realize in the interest of making a big trade, Atlanta might be willing to go down on their price, but I doubt they would be willing to go from Green+ to taking on (at least mildly) negative asset. That means it is going to cost something. I never suggested it was something we don't have, just that based on the evidence my assessment is that it will cost us something to make it happen.
As to Dan's point, I was not suggesting we should not do something like this. Simply that it will cost something. My guess would be a protected first, and I would need to know the details before I had a strong opinion about it.