A guide to trade speculation

[Alex Wang <awang@mit.edu>]

Here are a few guidelines to think about before you propose that the
Celtics trade Kenny Anderson for Grant Hill. 

1) Why do they want our players if we don't want our players?
You have to remember that the other team is not managed by utterly 
clueless idiots who are just dying to give us their good talent for
our bad talent. When you propose trades, a good idea is to put 
yourself in the other team's shoes and honestly think if you would
do that trade. 

2) Here is my evaluation of the trade values of our players. Note that
players can have negative trade value if their contract exceeds their
ability. There are proposals to get into the top 5 of the lottery.
The only guy who does that for you is Pierce. Walker has that kind
of talent but his contract would scare away the teams in the top 5.
In a draft with a lot of power forward talent up top, they would rather 
have a talented rookie on a cheap contract and save their cap space
for free agents.

GREAT VALUE: Pierce. He has a small rookie contract and the team that
gets him has right of first refusal. He's young and majorly talented.
The reason that some people on this list talk about trading Pierce is
because he will get you a ton in return. 

GOOD VALUE: Walker. He's got major talent but is inconsistent. His 
large contract and base-year compensation restrictions make him less
valuable than Pierce, but you could get value back in a trade. 

SOME VALUE: Potapenko. Guys who can actually play the center position
with any competence are rare in this league. His contract is not
outlandish when you look at the contracts of various second-rate
centers. He's young, has offensive skills, decent size. 

The first round picks we own also have decent value, because they are
equivalent to young players with great contract situations.

Battie got a large contract and played poorly. Still, he's young, has
athleticism, some talent, and there is a shortage of shotblockers in
this league. He could be moved if necessary, but not for much.

Fortson is in this category because at worst he has zero value and he
might raise interest in a sign-and-trade, depending on his contract
demands. Not as good as Potapenko or a lottery pick.

ZERO VALUE: Anderson. He's actually a marginal case of possibly having
negative value due to his contract. Still, he's a starting quality 
point guard in this league which quite a few teams don't have. You 
could probably package him with a better asset (Pierce) in a megadeal.
He's not going to get you anything good on his own. 

Barros fits in here because he's on the last year of his contract. You
could trade him to get a slightly better player with a worse contract
from a team that is looking to rebuild in 2001.

NEGATIVE VALUE: Everyone else on this team. Cheaney, McCarty, Williams,
Minor. The worst part is that they all play essentially the same position.

The only players that I could imagine another team asking for in a trade
would be Pierce, Walker, Potapenko, Fortson and Battie, with us not 
getting much in return for the last three.

3) The Clippers. These guys get their own section because they're the
perfect target for ridiculous trade rumors. They have some talent, lots
of cap room, a high draft pick, and a reputation of being dumb. But 
something to remember is that first and foremost, they are cheap.
They are not going to take a huge contract like Anderson or Walker and
give up cheap draft picks and young players like Odom, or even Olowokandi.
They're probably not even interested in Battie before - remember that
the Battie/Rogers trade was before Battie got his contract. They probably
just wanted to get him for a year while he was still cheap, for someone
they couldn't keep anyway - similar to the Lamond Murray/Derek Anderson
trade. Pierce is the only guy who interests them, plus draft picks.

Alex