Trading a Franchise level player... fair return

[iowamcnabb]

We are beating a dead horse here, but let's face it, we will be doing so for a long time.

A lot of folks are outraged at the return we received for the big man and I've seen some pretty hefty hauls fans were expecting to get. What is the precedent for that? Can we examine other trades that are comparable?

I mentioned in another thread Love was traded for the number 1 pick.

Garnett was traded for Jefferson and two first rounders but also signed an extension with Boston.

What other examples are out there?

So far we have:
*Cuz-young player, first rounder and a second rounder, backup players
*Deron Williams- Derrick Favors, solid starter and 2 first rounders
*Love - 1st pick in draft
*Garnett- Jefferson and 2 first round picks
*Melo- 2 starters, 2 solid backups, a first rounder and 2 second rounders
*CP3-2 starters, one young player, one unprotected pic and 2 second rounders

 

[andjel]

We are beating a dead horse here, but let's face it, we will be doing so for a long time.

A lot of folks are outraged at the return we received for the big man and I've seen some pretty hefty hauls fans were expecting to get. What is the precedent for that? Can we examine other trades that are comparable?

I mentioned in anothe thread Love was traded for the number 1 pick.

Garnett was traded for Jefferson and two first rounders but also signed an extension with Boston.

What other examples are out there?

The trade that Vlade turned down that was including the additional first round pick two days before accepting this one.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I believe @hrdboild made the most important and compelling point about this: http://www.kingsfans.com/threads/kings-suns-3-15-17-7pt-10et.67315/page-5#post-1314856


Specifically this:

I don't think the trade we got proves that DeMarcus' value was in the tank either. That's a storyline we were sold to make the trade look better but really it came down to teams just weren't given time to put together competitive offers. Vlade wanted a deal over the weekend, he had a short list of potential targets, and the perennial trade-suckers in the New Orleans front-office got wise to it and lowered their offer to see who blinked first. If there's one valid criticism I would level at Vlade its that in his tenure to date he's made a habit of blinking first and it's not a reputation he should be courting if he wants to keep this job for awhile.

 

[iowamcnabb]

That may be true or it may not be. I was hoping this thread could discuss other trades of superstars and the return for them.

 

[KingsFanGER]

One problem is trading your superstar mid season, when you have no idea how the lottery balls actually fall. It's far better to know in advance, which draft position you get.
I also think teams are willing to give up more during the offseason, when they have more cap space and have a training camp to work with the new superstar and to incorporate him into their system.
Making a mid season trade for a superstar, when you try to get the best possible result in the upcoming Playoffs is difficult. Working someone as dominant as DMC into your team concept is not a small task.

 

[dude12]

The timing on this was moronic, giving us a 40 cents on the dollar return. But to the original question, Melo in his trade from Denver.

 

[pshn80]

Do you compare with other "similar" trades or do you take the amount received as a good ndcation of the "superstar's" value at that time. If you decide to remove such a star from your lineup you consider, are there any teams y ou don't want to trade him to, and who is nterested, and what the best offer is, and you trade. I would say the Kings get an "A" losng Cuz when they wanted to and getting decent return for him, not necessarily getting what sone of us think his value might be. Comparing to "similar" trades is interesting but not necessarily the primary basis for evaluation. I'll stick with the "A".

 

[roasthawg]

DeMarcus isn't and has never been a super star. He's an all star... An all star on a perennial losing team. An all star on a perennial losing team that didn't want to be traded because he wanted his max money and was therefore actively attempting to sabotage deals.

All things considered I'm stoked on buddy and the first in retrospect.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

DeMarcus isn't and has never been a super star. He's an all star... An all star on a perennial losing team.

According to you. I suppose players that can average 28/11/5 grow on trees in your universe. You won't find many mere all-stars that can do that.

I know, I know, the Kings didn't win with him and the inability to draft capable 1st round talent since 2010 or sign any inpactful FA's or settle in on a good head coach in all that time doesn't at all matter. He just isn't a superstar because he complained too much for your liking and because you say so. Got it.

 

[roasthawg]

According to you. I suppose players that can average 28/11/5 grow on trees in your universe. You won't find many mere all-stars that can do that.

I know, I know, the Kings didn't win with him and the inability to draft capable 1st round talent since 2010 or sign any inpactful FA's or settle in on a good head coach in all that time doesn't at all matter. He just isn't a superstar because he complained too much for your liking and because you say so. Got it.

He isn't a superstar because that's just the reality of it. Like it or not you put together any panel of people... NBA guys, fans, players, whatever and ask them to list the superstars in today's league your getting a list that doesn't include DeMarcus.

It won't include Anthony Davis either so your point about DeMarcus complaining too much is not valid.

You can check my posts, I was on this site back when DeMarcus was at Kentucky early in the season before there was any inkling we'd actually get a chance to draft him and I was begging for us to find a way. I was a fan of his then and remained a fan until he got traded. It's not personal, just reality... He is not and has not been a super star in the NBA.

 

[kingsboi]

Love & Melo are not superstars...they were putting up superstar like numbers because they had no one else on the team. I don't want to make the same assumption about Boogie but that's the road he may end up on as well, or not. We won't know until a season or two or three.

 

[iowamcnabb]

Love & Melo are not superstars...they were putting up superstar like numbers because they had no one else on the team. I don't want to make the same assumption about Boogie but that's the road he may end up on as well, or not. We won't know until a season or two or three.

Superstar seems to be a controversial word here with many folks having different opinions of what it means. I guess I should have just said franchise level player. However, Melo has averaged 24 points a game for his career and the Nuggets were 24 games over 500 his last year before the trade.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Deron Wiliams fetched the Jazz Derrick Favors (in his rookie year), Devin Harris, and two firsts (one unprotected, the other partially protected). He was 26 had a year and a half left on his contract (details I'd add to the OP), from what I recall.

 

[206Fan]

I think fans just set themselves up for failure. Everyone assumed Cousins had an extremely high value around the league. Kings fans thought we could get 2 Nets pick+Brown+Smart for Cousins. Turns out... Celtics didn't want ANYTHING to do with him.

I believe @hrdboild made the most important and compelling point about this: http://www.kingsfans.com/threads/kings-suns-3-15-17-7pt-10et.67315/page-5#post-1314856
http://www.kingsfans.com/threads/kings-suns-3-15-17-7pt-10et.67315/page-5#post-1314856
Specifically this:

That's all speculation. Cousins' value was in the tank. How do we know this? Look at what we got for him. If there was a truly better offer on the table, we'd already hear about it. Well, there was one..except Cousins' agent screwed it up. This was the best offer out there..unless you'd take Drummond instead. The other Suns offer was rumored to be Knight+Len+Warren+ future 1st.

 

[206Fan]

You have to keep in mind that Cousins is 26yearsold, and he still has maturity problems. He's a special case of trading a star. None of those guys, K-Love, Melo, Garrnett, or D-Will has ever behaved the way Cousins has.

 

[steelevt]

clippers sent eric gordon, chris kaman, aminu ( i believe that years #8 pick) and an uprotected 1st round pick for cp3

 

[Npliam]

Deron Wiliams fetched the Jazz Derrick Favors (in his rookie year), Devin Harris, and two firsts (one unprotected, the other partially protected). He was 26 had a year and a half left on his contract (details I'd add to the OP), from what I recall.

Man I love the way my team operates.

 

[Cecil]

The problem with the comparisons is that the other teams wanted their star player.

 

[funkykingston]

Here's the thing - the Kings didn't trade a franchise level player, they traded DeMarcus Cousins.

I'm not saying Cousins is or isn't a franchise level player, I'm simply saying you can make an apples to apples comparison with Boogie and some of these other guys. The circumstances matter.

With Carmelo, it was clear that the Nuggets had to trade him or lose him for nothing. Their hand was forced.

With Kevin Love the T'Wolves may have feared him leaving, but they had him under contract for the next season and he held a player option after that. There was pressure, but they weren't backed into a corner yet. And in that circumstance they actually had a bit more leverage because LeBron clearly wanted an established veteran vs waiting for Wiggins to mature. Which is why the Cavs offered the Wolves Wiggins, Bennett (who is now clearly a bust and struggled mightily his rookie year but was also the #1 pick just a year back) as well as a protected 2015 pick from Miami. That pick helped them pull in Philly who sent them Thaddeus Young and took back the pick and some unwanted salary.

I don't know how many people would argue that Kevin Love is a more talented player than DeMarcus Cousins.

But that's not the beginning and end of establishing value. Ignoring salary cap issues, how many teams wouldn't want Love on their roster? But I guarantee there are teams that flat out didn't want Cousins, regardless of asking price. The Spurs would be one, but I'm sure there were others. So immediately the trade pool shrinks, possibly a lot.

This was always the issue with potentially dealing Boogie. His baggage (real and perceived) was always going to remove some trade value and the Kings would get pennies on the dollar relative to his talent and production. Now, saying that I'm still (after weeks to process it) almost shocked at how little they actually got, but I can understand why that was the case.

 

[macadocious]

Here is how I am justifying it in my head now. (not sure what stage of grief this is)

We traded Boogie for 3 first round draft picks, a second pick and salary relief.

1. BuddyHield 2016 - 6th overall pick and would still be a lottery pick even in a re-draft
2. NOP pick this year (assuming it's not top 3)
3. NOP 2nd rd pick from Sixers
4. Kings top 10 protected pick (had we played the season out we would have either made the playoffs or just missed them) completely losing that pick. THIS WAS 100% PART OF THE DECISION AND WHY IT WAS DONE WHEN IT WAS DONE.

 

[iowamcnabb]

But that's not the beginning and end of establishing value. Ignoring salary cap issues, how many teams wouldn't want Love on their roster? But I guarantee there are teams that flat out didn't want Cousins, regardless of asking price. The Spurs would be one, but I'm sure there were others. So immediately the trade pool shrinks, possibly a lot.

The point of the thread was not to make an apples to apples comparison, but to get a general idea of what a player of Boogie's caliber has gotten other teams. Obviously the circumstances are completely different for each trade and the compensation has been very different as well.

The overall consensus on the board was we should have received at least 1 up and coming player and 2 first rounders at the very minimum. Boogie's trade value was hurt by character issues, re-signability and having never played on a winning team. (We have seen players on winning rosters get bigger than expected or deserved contracts) Based on that, I feel we got pretty close to fair market value.