Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

    http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...e-value-part-1

    Worth a read every year. His words on Paul George are exactly right. People won't like his thoughts on Danny Granger.

    Originally posted by Bill Simmons
    29. Paul George

    The best stage for a rising young star: That "new car smell" phase when you haven't been paid big money yet (but it's coming), you go for too much in every fantasy auction, your rookie cards are worth twice as much as they should be, you're measured by your potential (not the actual results), everyone remembers your good games/moments (and not your bad games/moments), you're playing in the right situation for the right team, you're undeniably overvalued … only nobody cares, because you'll have these moments/sequences/games that make people say, "That dude is GOING places."
    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

    -Lance Stephenson

  • #2
    Simmons' Annual Trade Value Article

    http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...e-value-part-1

    Part 2's up later today:

    Bill Simmons

    I just spent two solid weeks figuring out where Jeremy Lin should be ranked in the annual "Who has the highest NBA trade value?" column. I asked my friends, coworkers and bosses. I asked NBA employees. I asked Knicks fans. I asked my Asian American friends, people dating Asian Americans, and anyone I knew named Jeremy. Heck, I even asked Jeremy Lin himself. Here was Jeremy's actual take.

    "I'm hoping that I'm more valuable than the 467th best player in the league, and thankful if it happens because my trainer kept yelling '467!' every time I got tired during workouts!"

    See? Even Jeremy doesn't really know. How can you assess the trade value of a rising star/walking sports movie/nine-figure cash cow/cultural icon? How can you ask, "What would it take for the Knicks to trade Jeremy Lin?" when the answer is, "Sorry, there's no f-ing way the Knicks would trade Jeremy Lin." And even then … would they ever in a million years trade Jeremy Lin? Would Jimmy Chitwood get traded? Would Rudy Ruettinger get traded? Would Roy Hobbs get traded? When you catch lightning in a bottle, you don't shake the bottle, take the cap off and hope it happens again.


    And so Jeremy Lin became the first player to defy the spirit of this column. I wrote it, anyway, only needing 12 viewings of John Tesh's "Roundball Rock" (the official Trade Value anthem) to get my confidence back. You rattled me, Jeremy Lin, but you didn't break me. As always, I spent three weeks crafting dozens of different lists, getting input from The Committee Who Shall Not Be Named, repeatedly getting into e-mail fights about things like, "You can't tell me that the Lakers wouldn't trade Andrew Bynum for Marc Gasol, you just can't!!!!!!!!" and "I would rather marinate my testicles in sulfuric acid than put Tyreke Evans on this list."

    Here's who got bumped from last year's top 50 list: DeJuan Blair (no. 50 last year) had a spirited "who knows, maybe he can play 15 years with no ACLs!" campaign lose luster when Brandon Roy's no-cartilege bid disintegrated … Danny Granger (44) is the captain of the "Guys Paid Like Franchise Players Who Aren't Franchise Players" All-Stars … Kevin Martin (43) is like a bottle of scotch: It's more fun to regift him than to keep him … there are 65 million reasons why Nene (42) didn't make it … Luis Scola (41) hasn't been the same post-Veto (couldn't you say that about all of us?) … we might need to introduce Andrew Bogut (40) to Phoenix's training staff soon … David West (33) lost an ACL and Chris Paul … Lamar Odom (31) proved he wasn't kidding when he turned down Portland's lucrative free agent offer in 2010 by saying, "You don't understand, I need to live near the beach" … Carlos Boozer (29) spray-paints his own hairline … Kevin Garnett (28) looks like "The Ageless KG" some nights and "The Washed-Up KG" other nights … and Amar'e Stoudemire (20) is 27 months away from legally changing his name to "Amar'e's Expiring Contract."

    One note before we get to this year's toughest omissions:1 Once upon a time, I could barely scrape together 40 good players for this column, as we found out when the 2006 edition pegged Shawn Livingston at no. 27. This year? I easily could have slapped together a top 60. The league hasn't been this loaded for 19 solid years. We're in a good place. Here are my toughest omissions from "least tough" to "toughest":

    Taj Gibson: Making one-seventh as much as Boozer, only every time he comes in for Boozer, it's like subbing an ISDN line for a dial-up. How would Gibson fare playing 35 minutes a night? It's unclear. Stay tuned for "More Things That Will Be Answered When Chicago Amnesthizes Boozer This Summer" right after this.

    Trevor Booker: Sorry, I have a weakness for him.

    Kenneth Faried: My favorite sneaky-good rookie from a likably eclectic rookie class, narrowly edging Enes Kanter, Jan Vesely, Nik Vucevic and Isaiah "Jimmer This!" Thomas.2 Remember when Faried was advertised pre-draft as an energy rebounder/defender who gave you young legs off the bench, nothing more, nothing less? That's EXACTLY what he is. He's like Safe House — you saw the trailer, you knew what to expect, then you saw the movie and came out of it thinking, That's exactly 100 percent what I expected!

    Brook Lopez: His rebounds-per-game dwindled from 8.7 (2010) to 5.9 (last year) to 3.6 (this year). I wouldn't care except for the part that, you know, he plays center. Dwight Howard averages more rebounds per quarter. Let's all stop pretending those two names can exist in the same trade. Thanks.3

    JaVale McGee: My wife rescued a sweet (and historically ugly) dog named Olivia who always slinks around our house like she did something wrong. If you say her name in a mean way, she'll immediately collapse to the ground in a puddle. There's just too much residual damage from her pre-rescue days. I feel like we're getting close to that point with JaVale: He's been stuck on a rudderless lottery team for years, with damaging results — a shame because the league isn't exactly overflowing with big guys who protect the rim. JaVale could have easily been "The Rich Man's DeAndre Jordan" on the right team. Instead, he's destined to be "The Underappreciated Leaper With Raw Tools Who Can't Help Doing Two Supernaturally Dumb Things Per Month and Has Been a Godsend for Sports Blogs." Too bad.4

    Nicolas Batum: The geek-friendly teams (San Antonio, Houston, Dallas, Oklahoma City, etc.) have circled him for years, fully expecting him to become Battier 2.0 on the right contender. He's getting an offer sheet next July that will make you say, "Wait … WHAT?????" Be prepared.

    Monta Ellis: He's underqualified to be one of the best two guys on a contender and overqualified to become a more polished version of Jason Terry in Dallas (an Irrational Confidence Guy Deluxe). Where does that leave us for someone making $11 million a year? I don't know.5

    Tyreke Evans: When somebody makes a documentary about the 2011-12 Kings, it's either going to be called The Sacramento Black Holes, Tyreke Takes It Himself or Wide Open: The Chuck Hayes Story. And the trailer is definitely going to have Paul Westphal or Keith Smart screaming Norman Dale-style, "What did I tell you guys? I want no passes before every shot! You hear me? NO PASSES!"

    Al Jefferson: Can't decide if Al's recent revelation, "Hey, it's taken me eight years to realize that if I pass the ball outside and guys hit open shots, it helps free me up, I guess better late than never" should move him higher or lower.

    Andre Iguodala, Luol Deng, Rudy Gay: Quality starters getting paid like franchise guys. Deng was the toughest omission — not only is he playing splendidly, I can't remember the last time a radical haircut transformed my opinion of someone this dramatically. You might have to go back to Demi Moore in Ghost.

    Joakim Noah: The bad news: Making $60 million through 2016 … and we have no idea if the Bulls can survive offensively playing Noah in crunch time in June. The good news: He's played better after a botched attempt to sabotage his own trade value in the Dwight Howard talks. The great news: It's really fun to Photoshop his hair on other NBA players. As we're going to prove in Part 2 of this column.

    Ersan Ilyasova: We're omitting this kooky DNA hybrid of Ivan Drago, James Franco, Josh Hartnett, Kevin McHale, Lurch and That Guy From Boardwalk Empire only because he's an unrestricted free agent this summer, making him impossible to assess for trade value purposes (especially when he's making just $2.541 million this year). Ilsh6 will have to settle for running away with 2012's "Random Free Agent Pickup Who Single-handedly Swung Your Fantasy League's Title," "What the Hell Just Happened in This Box Score????" and "Seriously, WHAT THE $%#@ IS GOING ON HERE!!!!!!!!!" awards.

    Tony Allen: The league's best perimeter defender (it's true) and contract bargain (two years, $6.3 million), as well as someone who improbably shed "Trick or Treat Tony" status (he's just Tony now) and made Celtics fans say things like, "I wish we had Tony Allen" (also true). Why I love the conceit of this column — there's no way Memphis would rather pay Iguodala or Deng $14 million a year than Tony Allen $3 million a year. None.

    Nikola Pekovic: This year's toughest omission. I didn't want to go overboard about six legitimately inspired weeks … but jeez, when he's giving us 17 points, 10 rebounds every night, thriving on high screens and banging bodies while carrying himself with the same nasty, Eastern Euro intensity of one of the bad guys in Taken, and he's doing it for just $4.5 million this year and $4.8 million next year, what more do you need?7

    On to the top 50 …

    GROUP N: "I Wouldn't Take This Call If I Knew He Was Definitely Sticking Around"

    50. Ryan Anderson
    Remember my December column about the Salary Cap Fantasy League? Would you enjoy paying $2.24 million this season for a guy who plays 31 minutes a game, averages 16.5 points and 7.5 rebounds, makes 43 percent of his 3s (and takes 6.7 per game!) and 86 percent of his free throws and plays with the effectiveness of an obscenely rich man's Steve Novak? I thought so.8

    49. Roy Hibbert
    Like Anderson, a restricted free agent next summer. I love paying Roy Hibbert $2.59 million this year. I would not love paying Roy Hibbert $13 million next year.


    48. Josh Smith
    The original JWOWW needs a new team, new fans and a creative point guard who understands his fundamental need to slam home alley-oops with the sustained fury of a pregnant Jessica Simpson housing a box of doughnuts. Did you know the Hawks are paying $46 million to three guys next year (Smith, Al Horford and Joe Johnson)? See where I'm going with this? TRADE!!!!!!!!!

    Only one problem: Josh Smith trades never seem to work. Who says no to Smith for Brook Lopez and Memo Okur's Expiring Deal? (Answer: The Hawks.) Who says no to Pau Gasol for Josh Smith, Tracy McGrady and Kirk Hinrich? (Answer: The Lakers.) Who says no to Atlanta saving $20 million next season by dealing Smith and Marvin Williams to Cleveland for Antawn Jamison's expiring contract? (Answer: The Hawks. But they definitely had a two-hour meeting about it.) What about the same Smith/Williams package for KG's expiring deal? (Answer: Probably Boston … if only because Danny Ainge took a designer drug that makes him think he can sign Dwight Howard this summer.) Who says no to a "Derrick Williams and the Anthony Randolph/Anthony Tolliver expirings for Josh Smith" swap? (Answer: Minnesota. But you know who says yes? YouTube!!! Rubio teamed up with Josh Smith????) There's never been a player thrown into more failed Trade Machine deals than Josh Smith.

    GROUP M: "Sorry We're Being Irrational, It's Just That We Don't Want Him to Come Back and Haunt Us"

    47. Derrick Favors
    46. Evan Turner
    Let's see … Philly needs to get bigger … Utah needs to get better on the perimeter … both teams have talented no. 2 overall picks who aren't playing enough … both teams are a little too attached to those guys … the Trade Machine approves … (can't we just call this one in????)

    45. Eric Gordon
    Would you trade Luis Scola, Kevin Martin, Goran Dragic, Lamar Odom and New York's 2012 no. 1 pick (probably 21st overall) for Gordon, Al Farouq Aminu and Minnesota's 2012 no. 1 pick (probably 19th overall)? Sure … if you were intentionally trying to suck all kinds of suck. Stay classy, David Stern.9

    GROUP L: "Unsung Heroes With Favorable Contracts"

    44. Ty Lawson
    43. Paul Millsap
    Everyone pounded the "Lawson is underrated!!!!" angle so violently that he became slightly overrated for someone who gives a fringe playoff team a 16-7 with 47/32/81 shooting splits and a couple of look-how-freaking-fast-he-is highlights per game. Just don't expect Millsap to give up that "So Underrated He's Slightly Overrated" belt anytime soon — not when he's averaging a 15-9 every game, making big shots for an overachieving team, and wielding a favorable contract ($16.4 million total through next season) and even more favorable PER ranking (this year: 16th overall). He's called "The Underrated Paul Millsap" pretty much as a rule at this point. All of this worries me — once you become overrated for being underrated, bad things ensue. Just ask Ben Wallace (overpaid by Chicago, never the same) and David West (blew out his knee). Tread carefully, Paul Millsap.

    42. Danilo Gallinari
    Every Knicks fan just grunted out loud, stared sadly at the screen for a few seconds, then thought back fondly to the MSG announcer yelling "Danilo Gallinarrrrrrrrrri!" with his fake Italian accent after a Gallinari 3. They had a weakness for Gallo, the same way I have a weakness for any news stories about serial killers or point shaving scandals. If a serial killer ever shaved points, it would be all over — I wouldn't be able to function. Wait, where were we?

    41. Tyson Chandler10
    40. Anderson Varejao
    I'd rather have Chandler, but his contract (four years, $55.4 million) and facial hair (that goofy Fidel Castro look) isn't nearly as favorable as Varejao's contract (four years, $34.8 million) and haircut (the throwback Sideshow Bob look). Of course …

    39. Marcin Gortat
    Paying just $21.7 million through 2014 for a true center averaging a 16-11 with 56 percent shooting? Sign me up.11 This had a chance to become Otis Smith's shrewdest signing ever, only he messed it up by flipping Gortat into $58.8 million of Hedo Turkoglu and Jason Richardson. Otis Smith, everybody! He's the Reverse Black Friday — instead of everything being 50 percent off, it's 220 percent on.

    38. Kyle Lowry
    Killer value ($17.5 million total through 2014) for a quality point guard (16-7-5, 39 percent 3FG, elite defense). Let's have a round of applause for Dork Elvis — he basically traded Carl Landry, Rafer Alston, Aaron Brooks, a washed-up Tracy McGrady and Vassilis Spanoulis12 for Lowry, Martin, Scola, Dragic, Jordan Hill, the no. 23 pick in 2011 and New York's 2012 no. 1 pick. Also, did you know Houston is the only above-.500 team without a lottery pick in its nine-man rotation (much less starting for it)? Bill lemme know what else you need or if this paragraph will suffice. Good seeing you in Boston. Thanks, Daryl.

    (Whoops, I forgot to take that last part out. Sorry about that.)

    GROUP K: "Sorry, It's Been Crazy Around Here … Actually, Can I Call You Back?"

    37. Zach Randolph
    Let's go inside the Grizzlies' war room …

    Chris Wallace: "Should we quietly shop Z-Bo when he comes back from his knee injury?"

    Assistant GM no. 1 [nodding]: "We're 22-12 without him."

    Wallace: "And we don't want to pay Z-Bo, Gay, Conley and Gasol a combined $224.2 million through 2015 — "

    Assistant GM no. 2: "Hold on, hold on … are you crazy? The five best players in last year's playoffs were LeBron, Dirk, Wade, Durant and Z-Bo! If he's even 80 percent back this spring, we can beat anyone in the West. We're a matchup nightmare! NOBODY WANTS TO PLAY US!13

    [Everyone falls silent.]

    Wallace: "You're right, let's ride him this spring, make a run at the title and shop him this summer. Anything else?"

    Assistant GM no. 2: "Yeah, the league office called — they said that, no matter what happens this season, you're still ineligible to win 'Executive of the Year' because you picked Hasheem Thabeet over James Harden and Ricky Rubio."

    36. Steve Nash
    I don't blame the Suns anymore. I blame Nash. I think he's afraid to get traded. I think he likes toiling away on mediocre teams, playing that martyr role and having everyone feel sorry for him. Poor Steve Nash! Look what the Suns did to him! We have to get Nash out of there! #freestevenash Maybe he doesn't want the pressure of playing in the playoffs anymore. Maybe he'd rather bang out meaningless regular seasons, go traveling during the playoffs and save himself two months of wear and tear. Maybe he's hiding behind this whole "leaders don't sell out their teammates by asking for a trade" thing. Maybe he's just being a coward.

    (By the way, I don't believe any of this — I just wanted to use a little reverse psychology to get Nash to ask for a trade because Phoenix is obviously too cowardly to accommodate him. I'm at wit's end. Don't you want him in the playoffs?)

    35. Stephen Curry
    Fell 15 spots from last year's list purely for "All right, what's really going on with Curry's right ankle?" reasons. That's one of the top-five conversation topics in NBA circles right now, along with "Why do the players hate Rondo so much?," "What are you hearing about Dwight?," "What are the Lakers going to do?" and "Did we ever figure out why Al Jefferson has a 38-year-old girlfriend????" So what's the answer? Is this a potential Grant Hill situation? Do the Warriors have the worst trainer/medical situation on the planet? Is Nike slipping? Are Curry's ankles made of papier-mâché? If there was a pay-per-view special of Curry getting an MRI on his right ankle, followed by Phoenix's medical staff breaking down the results, I think I'd pay $49.99 to watch it.

    The good news for Warriors fans: Their team made a $500 million mistake by choosing Charles Jenkins over Jeremy Lin on December 8 (it's true, look it up), then wasted its amnesty on $4 million of Charlie Bell so they could overpay DeAndre Jordan with an offer sheet (didn't work), leaving them stuck with Andris "Why Didn't You Amnesthize and Put Me Out of My Own Misery????" Biedrins (owed $9 million each of the next two years) and little cap flexibility this summer. Oh, wait, that's horrible news. Speaking of Linsanity …

    GROUP J: "We'll Consider It If You Throw in 500 Million Dollars"

    34. Jeremy Lin
    This feels about right. It's certainly better than being ranked between Sean Marks and Zabian Dowdell.

    GROUP I: "The Young Guns"

    33. James Harden
    Even if it's about eight spots too high, I'm using this year's "I Know This Is Weird, I Just Like Him" immunity idol on him.14 Just know that, as a Celtics fan, it's hard to watch Harden without thinking of the days before the Perkins/Green trade, when Sam Presti sucked Danny Ainge in with the old, "I know we were talking about Harden for Perkins all week, and I know you were banking on the deal happening, and I know you already cleared the deal from your end with Doc and everyone else, but the more I'm thinking about it, I just can't do it … what about Jeff Green?" move. A Boston buddy of mine described it perfectly: It was like Costco drawing you to the store with a "50 Percent Off All Televisions!" sign, then picking out a state-of-the-art TV and going to pay, only to have them tell you, "No, no, that deal only counts for last year's models." Only at that point, you're already in the store and ready to buy something. Only bad things can happen after that.

    (One silver lining: I pull this move on my wife all the time. Honey, I know we said we were getting dressed up and going to dinner on Sunday night, and I know you were banking on it, but I just can't do it … what about going to the Clippers-Warriors instead?")

    32. Mystery Player A
    Hold this thought until Part Two.


    31. Derrick Williams
    Remember when the Celtics panic-traded rookies Chauncey Billups and Joe Johnson for immediate help, then everyone collectively realized you shouldn't trade lottery picks after slow starts? That mind-set wavered when struggling top-six picks like Darko Milicic, Jonny Flynn, Wesley Johnson and Thabeet weren't traded in time and lost their value, causing some teams to simultaneously think last month, Maybe the Timberwolves will be dumb enough to give up on Derrick Williams! and KAHHHHHHHHHHHHHN!!!!!!! Nope. Not after this box score happened.15

    30. Hasheem Thabeet
    Just kidding.

    30. John Wall
    As you know, I'm the longtime chairman of the "Is He a Point Guard or Not?" committee. (It's kind of like how Tip O'Neill was the Speaker of the House for all those years — you never knew how it happened, just that it was.) My verdict on Wall: He's a breathtaking athlete who has little to no idea how to run a team, lead his guys, make teammates better, ride hot hands, control the tempo of a game or do anything else that, say, Chris Paul does on a nightly basis. It's also a terrible sign that, for two straight years, Wall hasn't affected Washington's win-loss record really at all.16 Then again, could there have been a worse situation for a young point guard than the post-Arenas Blatche/McGee/Saunders Wizards? I wouldn't trade him … but I wouldn't trade for him, either. To be continued.

    Hold on, it's time for a tangent: During Dorkapalooza 2012 in Boston last weekend, Seattle Sounders owner Drew Carey mentioned his favorite brainstorm, followed by me being practically paralyzed with idea envy. The idea? Carey wants to have Sounders fans vote for his team's president every four years. You know, like a presidential election. Is that brilliant or what? If there hadn't been 2,000 witnesses, I would have Zuckerberged the idea for myself. I just love it.

    Anyway, we know the Wizards are hiring a new GM this summer; we know owner Ted Leonsis loves thinking outside the box; and we know the Wizards have no chance of being relevant in a "getting Kornheiser and Wilbon talking about them in the first five minutes of 'PTI'" kind of way unless they have another gun incident or JaVale McGee enters a game without shorts (which might happen, don't rule it out). Can you think of a better NBA team to say, "Screw it, let's have our fans vote for our team's GM every four years"? Why not? How would this NOT become one of the biggest sports stories of the year? And should I hire a campaign manager right now to be safe?

    29. Paul George
    28. Sergeballu LaMu Sayonga Loom Walahas Jonas Hugo Ibaka
    The best stage for a rising young star: That "new car smell" phase when you haven't been paid big money yet (but it's coming), you go for too much in every fantasy auction, your rookie cards are worth twice as much as they should be, you're measured by your potential (not the actual results), everyone remembers your good games/moments (and not your bad games/moments), you're playing in the right situation for the right team, you're undeniably overvalued … only nobody cares, because you'll have these moments/sequences/games that make people say, "That dude is GOING places."


    27. Al Horford
    [Cut to Al Horford nodding wistfully.]

    FOR PART TWO OF BILL'S ANNUAL TRADE VALUE COLUMN, COME BACK TO GRANTLAND AT 4:30 P.M. EST

    FOOTNOTES

    Here's the honorable honorable mention: Mike Conley (what were the odds Conley would be a better pro career than Greg Oden in 2007?); Brandon Jennings and Jrue Holiday (both young and hungry); DeAndre Jordan and Omer Asik (you always need centers); and Granger and Andrea Bargnani (good starters getting paid like signature guys).

    The most eclectic rookie: New Jersey's MarShon Brooks, a two-guard who somehow has a complicated back-to-the-basket game already. He's right out of 1978. Yes, I would trade JaJuan Johnson straight up for him. Don't get me started.

    Random five-team fake trade: Portland gets Steve Nash and Johan Petro; Phoenix gets Monta Ellis and Andris Biedrins's sucky contract (expires 2014); Golden State gets three Stanford guys (Brook Lopez, Robin Lopez and Josh Childress's sucky contract, which expires 2015); New Jersey gets Portland's no. 1 pick and Ray Felton; Lakers get Jordan Farmar. [Waiting.] Fine, I'll keep tinkering.

    I wrote this section before Kevin Seraphin lit up the Lakers with JaVale watching from the bench.

    An Ellis/Dorrell Wright for Danny Granger/Dahntay Jones trade makes so much sense that the salaries even add up to within $108,000 of each other. I'm just sayin'.

    The Bucks announcers affectionately call him "Ilsh." I shouldn't know these things.

    David Kahn is becoming White Joe Dumars — either he's making a shrewd move (Rubio, Pekovic, J.J. Barea, Michael Beasley, Rick Adelman) or a lousy one (Johnny Flynn, Wes Johnson, Martell Webster, Darko's last contract, Kurt Rambis, only re-signing Love for three years instead of five) with no in-between.

    Otis Smith landed Ryan Anderson as a throw-in for the Vince Carter trade with New Jersey; he ended up being signficantly better for them than Vince. I can't wait until people in 2345 are studying Otis Smith's GM tenure and trying to decipher what happened.

    What's weird is that Gordon — by default — is still holding the "Best 2-Guard Under 29 Years Old" title even though he's only played two games this year. The state of NBA 2-guards is extremely grim. Check out my "Pay Afflalo" column from December.

    In last year's column, I wrote, "Where can I place my 'Mark Cuban will reward Chandler's career year by overpaying him with a $72 million extension, then Chandler will miss 200 games over the next five years' wager?" Looks like I lost that one.

    We have to acknowledge the Nash Factor here — guys have a tendency to peak with Nash and fall back when they are somewhere else. Isn't that right, Leandro, Quentin, Amar'e, Boris … ?

    What a shame that Vassilis Spanoulis never made it — we could have called him "The Vasectomy." I'm still disappointed.

    Sportsbook.com lists Memphis at 40-to-1 to win the title and 15-to-1 to win the West (six teams have better odds). Merry Christmas.

    The Committee Who Shall Not Be Named hated this ranking — everyone else had him in the 40s. What can I tell you? He's the perfect third banana for the Zombies and he's not afraid of big moments. I stand by the ranking. By the way, last year's idol went to Paul George.

    Quick Minnesota tangent: I don't blame Kahn for picking Wesley Johnson in 2010. (I would have taken DeMarcus Cousins, but whatever.) Nobody killed that pick at the time — it made sense. But when you look at what Minnesota built from a painful six-year stretch of chronic losing (Love, Rubio, Pekovic, Williams, etc), what jumps out is that Johnson pick, which really came down to luck of the draw. They needed a perimeter player; he was the best one available. Two years earlier, they could have snagged Russ Westbrook or Eric Gordon. One year earlier, Tyreke Evans, Rubio and Curry were sitting there. But that year? Wes Johnson was the best available … and he just doesn't have it. If Westbrook stayed ONE extra year at UCLA, he goes first or second and pushes Evan Turner to Minnesota. Alas.

    When you check out the records of the first three seasons for Derrick Rose (164-82), Deron Williams (146-100), Baron Davis (139-107), Chris Paul (133-113), Steve Francis (109-137), Mike Conley (86-160), Tyreke Evans (61-141) and Mike Bibby (53-161) — all point guards drafted in the top four like Wall was — it becomes pretty clear that the early sample size DOES matter. At least a little.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

      Gee, BRWD, good timing.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

        Looks like that could be for Ibaka.
        "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

          Originally posted by HC View Post
          Looks like that could be for Ibaka.
          It's for both of them. Makes sense too.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

            49. Roy Hibbert
            Like Anderson, a restricted free agent next summer. I love paying Roy Hibbert $2.59 million this year. I would not love paying Roy Hibbert $13 million next year.

            he reads my mind that is why I would be shopping Hibbert and DC for Rondo


            He also is dead on about Danny

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

              Dead on about Paul George too. If there's any time to trade him, it's now. As much as I like him, he could be the deciding part of a trade that will bring in a player that will be better than he'll ever be.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

                I'm so confused by what he's writing about George and Ibaka, it seems clear as mud to me. Does he like them or does he think they are overrated?


                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

                  I agree about everything he said. Even Granger. Especially Granger. It's pretty obvious to me that his trade value is low, I mean, the guy is known around the league as a scorer, that's pretty much what he does, he's not a consistently good rebounder or defender (At least not as a stopper. I actually think he's our best team defender), and well, when you shoot 38% from the field, how good are you as a scorer?

                  And for these reasons, when I make up trades, I usually ship out Hibbert (and rarely George) and not really Granger. Because Granger gives plenty of production for his trade value, while Hibbert and George do not.

                  This is probably the most unpopular opinion on the board, but I think we should pack Collison and Hibbert (not because of financial reasons; I just don't think Hibbert is really the quality center that people think he is) if that package can net us a young, quality point guard (like Rondo)

                  I just say, and keep saying, that while Hibbert can be a top 10 center, he isn't that far away from the guys who are below him... And he isn't a dominating center.

                  And about George. People here sometimes say Granger holds him back. This is exactly the opposite. Granger keeps being the spacegoat of this team (sometimes for the right reasons, most of the time not) while Paul George has all the room he needs to develop.

                  Next season is going to be important for George. He could make a Granger type of leap and have a legitimate shot of being a superstar. He could continue a slow development that would turn him into a legit starter/semi star (like Gay or Iggy). Or he could take a Brandon Rush decline. We'll have to wait and see what he turns out to be. I'd rather not trade him and see what happens.
                  Originally posted by Piston Prince
                  Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                  "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

                    Originally posted by yoadknux View Post

                    ...And about George. People here sometimes say Granger holds him back. This is exactly the opposite. Granger keeps being the spacegoat of this team (sometimes for the right reasons, most of the time not) while Paul George has all the room he needs to develop...
                    This?
                    I know "Sleeze" is spelled incorrectly. I spell it this way because it's based on a name.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

                      He only said like two sentences about Granger in passing. Part 2 is later on today. So I don't see how you all can say "I totally agree about Granger!"

                      Also how is 13 Million per year franchise money? When Rudy Gay is making 17 Million. Rishard Lewis made 20Mill on year. I call BS! on B.S.
                      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

                        Originally posted by The Sleeze View Post
                        This?
                        No. That's not how I imagine it. Needs to be darker. Colder. Deep space
                        Originally posted by Piston Prince
                        Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                        "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

                          Originally posted by Aw Heck View Post
                          Dead on about Paul George too. If there's any time to trade him, it's now. As much as I like him, he could be the deciding part of a trade that will bring in a player that will be better than he'll ever be.
                          Did Bill Simmons really just convince you that we should trade Paul George?

                          Aw heck no!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

                            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                            He only said like two sentences about Granger in passing. Part 2 is later on today. So I don't see how you all can say "I totally agree about Granger!"

                            Also how is 13 Million per year franchise money? When Rudy Gay is making 17 Million. Rishard Lewis made 20Mill on year. I call BS! on B.S.
                            Granger won't be in part 2, Granger was mentioned only because he was in this list last year but fell out of it this year.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Bill Simmons' NBA trade value column

                              Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                              Did Bill Simmons really just convince you that we should trade Paul George?

                              Aw heck no!
                              Naw, but I am starting to think we should trade Hibbert, just don't see him being consistent enough to give big money to.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X