Love the guy, but the "Ryan Anderson Problem" is real?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DefensiveMind

It's not. You just aren't listening. When you have a bunch rookie deals expiring at the same time you have to assign value to what you think they will be as well as what they are. You tend to overpay young players based on what they could become and what the market would probably earn them. The young veteran route gives you a chance to control uncertainty, especially since you already know that Davis will be receiving his version of the max. You are fixing your costs and giving yourself a better understanding of your bottom line.

---

This makes no sense as we traded and S&T'ed for Anderson, Holiday, and Evans after or to a contract after their rookie deals. So if we could sign 2 player to "reasonable" contract during their RFA year and trade for another already on a reasonable contract right after his rookie contract. What logic says we couldn't sign or match any offer for a player already on the team to something "reasonable"? Sacramento, Philly, and Orlando all let those players go because they were going in different directions not because they couldn't afford to keep them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

This makes no sense as we traded and S&T'ed for Anderson, Holiday, and Evans after or to a contract after their rookie deals. So if we could sign 2 player to "reasonable" contract during their RFA year and trade for another already on a reasonable contract right after his rookie contract. What logic says we couldn't sign or match any offer for a player already on the team to something "reasonable"? Sacramento, Philly, and Orlando all let those players go because they were going in different directions not because they couldn't afford to keep them.

---

Show me a team that has drafted it's top 4 players and subsequently signed them to extensions to their rookie deal? We S&T'd then drafted, then traded, then sign and traded again. Fixed cost, less uncertainty.

Let other teams make emotional decisions about their guys coming off rookie deals, you sit back and poach the talent you can afford and weigh it vs. the team you are trying to build. You might pay a little more or a little less, but at least you aren't stuck paying guys like Roy Hibbert and Eric Gordon 60 million.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DefensiveMind

Show me a team that has drafted it's top 4 players and subsequently signed them to extensions to their rookie deal? We S&T'd then drafted, then traded, then sign and traded again. Fixed cost, less uncertainty.

---

What does this have to do with anything we are talking about. MM is making a point that drafting players aren't beneficial because they don't contribute early on and then commands a boat load of money when they are RFA. I just pointed out that 3 guys that we consider our core were all guys who contributed to their teams (one was an all-star) and we got them all at a price a lot of people here consider a steal. So if that's the case why would anyone think that a rookie who did little for his team would then command an inflated contract?

Can't be the new cap increase because the young vets would be completely free agents around the same time our rookies would be going into RFA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

What does this have to do with anything we are talking about. MM is making a point that drafting players aren't beneficial because they don't contribute early on and then commands a boat load of money when they are RFA. I just pointed out that 3 guys that we consider our core were all guys who contributed to their teams (one was an all-star) and we got them all at a price a lot of people here consider a steal. So if that's the case why would anyone think that a rookie who did little for his team would then command an inflated contract?

Can't be the new cap increase because the young vets would be completely free agents around the same time our rookies would be going into RFA.

---

DaThrone, my man, its all relative. Tyreke did relatively little for Sacramento, but we had the luxury of ignoring that and looking at his skill set vs. what we could do with him. If we had drafted Tyreke and he doesn't go through purgatory in Sacramento we don't get him for 44 mill!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DefensiveMind

Let other teams make emotional decisions about their guys coming off rookie deals, you sit back and poach the talent you can afford and weigh it vs. the team you are trying to build. You might pay a little more or a little less, but at least you aren't stuck paying guys like Roy Hibbert and Eric Gordon 60 million.

---

Well Hibbert (when engaged) has been one of the better centers this season. And Eric Gordon was an awful decision that should have never happened. We had a chance to trade Gordon when he 1st refused the contract we offered.

Your strategy seems to be wait and see what scraps fall to us after all the big names are signed and hope they pan out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

It also doesn't prevent people from making mistakes in those decisions, case and point 1776 Ronald Wayne sold a 10% stake in Apple products for $800. Today it'd be worth 58 Billion. Selling assets before maturity is dangerous unless someone or something is forcing you to.

---

I absolutely agree with this very selective anecdote. I'm sure you could find me a thousand like this one of people who held on to a stock for too long and either took a loss or didn't maximize value.

The point of my post isn't that we should immediately trade Ryan Anderson. I think we do however need to figure out Ryan's role and value to the franchise within the next 9 months. That's my only point. If Ryan Anderson is healthy and back to his normal self, his peak value on the market will be in 9 months at the trade deadline. Maybe Pelicans will decide that Ryan Anderson is worth to the Franchise whatever salary his agent tells us he thinks he would command when he becomes a free agent.

I'm not sure why there really is any disagreement with understanding Ryan Anderson's value a year and a half before he becomes an unrestricted free agent and enacting a plan to respond accordingly. How is that any different than what any other responsible team would do with a player that is an asset to their club?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

Well Hibbert (when engaged) has been one of the better centers this season. And Eric Gordon was an awful decision that should have never happened. We had a chance to trade Gordon when he 1st refused the contract we offered.

Your strategy seems to be wait and see what scraps fall to us after all the big names are signed and hope they pan out.

---

I don't consider Jrue and Tyreke scraps, but to each there own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

What does this have to do with anything we are talking about. MM is making a point that drafting players aren't beneficial because they don't contribute early on and then commands a boat load of money when they are RFA. I just pointed out that 3 guys that we consider our core were all guys who contributed to their teams (one was an all-star) and we got them all at a price a lot of people here consider a steal. So if that's the case why would anyone think that a rookie who did little for his team would then command an inflated contract?

Can't be the new cap increase because the young vets would be completely free agents around the same time our rookies would be going into RFA.

---

Wait. In what world was Jrue or Tyreke's deal a steal? Jrue is fair market value, certainly not a steal but a great deal for a great player. Tyreke is considered by some who don't know better a top 10 worse contract in the league, and by those of us realistic as fair value for what he gives with the possibility of being a steal if he gives you 20-6-6 every game. Even at the time of Tyreke's signing it was said we would have to overpay to get him from Sac. Heck just last week someone on this very forum said he was overpaid by 5M/yr.

The only contract that could be considered a steal is possibly Ryno's because we were able to take advantage of a team in flux with a player that people had questions about (though if you looked at the numbers Howard got worse with him off the court, not the other way around).

Stop trying to change things to make your argument.

Has Da ThRONe really hijacked this thread to discuss the same subject he was too lazy to prove in the other thread...

And y'all let him.

I don't know who I'm more disgusted with. :hot:

http://media.giphy.com/media/b8kHKZq3YFfnq/giphy.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Has Da ThRONe really hijacked this thread to discuss the same subject he was too lazy to prove in the other thread...

And y'all let him.

I don't know who I'm more disgusted with. :hot:

---

More like pointing out the inconsistencies in another person's logic.