Pleiss Traded to Philly!!!

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Just woke up to this... sorry but it's definitely the case of egg on the face for DL .. he traded for Pleiss, went and see him in Europe, brought him over to the States, signed him up to a long term contract, he barely played in the NBA, and now we have to pay to get rid of him.


It's OK though if this is his only miss-step amongst all of the good things DL has done... (drafting Gobert, Hood, Lyles, getting Quin Snyder, trading for Hill, getting Joe Johnson, changing our culture).


It's a blemish for sure on his resume, but he's still wayyy better than 80% of all the GMs in the league.

I like the fact that DL is willing to cut his losses. Unlike some people on this board he understands that sunk costs play no role whatsoever in determining value going forward.

 

[silesian]

It's OK though if this is his only miss-step amongst all of the good things DL has done... (drafting Gobert, Hood, Lyles, getting Quin Snyder, trading for Hill, getting Joe Johnson, changing our culture).

His biggest misstep was not offering Hayward a 5 year max. We'd have him locked up for next 2 years on "old mini-max" contract, and now year 5 will be much more expensive and Hayward could walk. This dwarfs the Pleiss bungle.

Full disclosure: (1) this is hindsight 20/20, I mistakenly supported DL's move with Hayward at the time. (2) I'm a total DL homer, but no one is perfect

 

[silesian]

I like the fact that DL is willing to cut his losses. Unlike some people on this board he understands that sunk costs play no role whatsoever in determining value going forward.

This. Learn and adjust.

 

[The Midnight]

I like the fact that DL is willing to cut his losses. Unlike some people on this board he understands that sunk costs play no role whatsoever in determining value going forward.

And also that he COVERED his losses by trading down for $3m to grab Bolomboy, ... I now firmly believe that the move was made to use that $3m to cut Pleiss.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

And also that he COVERED his losses by trading down for $3m to grab Bolomboy, ... I now firmly believe that the move was made to use that $3m to cut Pleiss.

I don't. The ability to use the money for Pleiss was totally irrelevant to doing the trade. He did the trade because $3million to trade down in the second round (and potentially end up getting the guy we wanted in the first place anyway) is an awesome deal for us. He would have taken the trade even if he had never heard the name Tibor Pleiss in his life, because Tibor had nothing whatsoever to do with this trade.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Well yes, Favors would want this structure for sure. But I don't see why the Jazz are going to be willing to shell out an extra $20MM++ over the next 2 years in exchange for only one extra year.

Yeah obviously we'd save in that third year but it would not equal the $20 we handed out. Would buy us some time, give us flexibility, and increase his trade value if we went that route. It's not a complete homerun financially though. Maybe they would need to tack on one more year... or flip it from a PO to a TO.

 

[The Midnight]

I don't. The ability to use the money for Pleiss was totally irrelevant to doing the trade. He did the trade because $3million to trade down in the second round (and potentially end up getting the guy we wanted in the first place anyway) is an awesome deal for us. He would have taken the trade even if he had never heard the name Tibor Pleiss in his life, because Tibor had nothing whatsoever to do with this trade.

Well what if there were no takers and we had to cut our losses with Pleiss (i.e., buy him out)? I mean in SL he doesn't even look like he belong there let alone the NBA.


So the $3m would have come in handy if we had to buy out his contracts.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Well what if there were no takers and we had to cut our losses with Pleiss (i.e., buy him out)? I mean in SL he doesn't even look like he belong there let alone the NBA.


So the $3m would have come in handy if we had to buy out his contracts.

They are two different deals. Do you honestly think that DL would have passed on the 2nd round pick trade because he didn't need money to buy out Pleiss?

 

[The Midnight]

They are two different deals. Do you honestly think that DL would have passed on the 2nd round pick trade because he didn't need money to buy out Pleiss?

The trade was a risk DL had to take.. no guarantee Bolomboy would still be available with the 55th pick.


Had he not needed the money and really liked Bolomboy, he would have just taken him, no?

 

[silesian]

Sixers still deciding whether to waive Pleiss or keep him. Awesome trade if both players are waived.

Loaded with young developing bigs, Embiid, Okafor, Noel. Pleiss will be waived, book it. Sixers did the deal to utilize their cap space to add assets (cash and picks). Costs them nothing to pay Pleiss since they will be below the floor. Smart asset management.


Looks like the ghost of Sam Henke is alive and well and living in Bryan Colangelo's closet.

 

[silesian]

Yeah obviously we'd save in that third year but it would not equal the $20 we handed out. Would buy us some time, give us flexibility, and increase his trade value if we went that route. It's not a complete homerun financially though. Maybe they would need to tack on one more year... or flip it from a PO to a TO.

Understood, I just don't think the "time you buy" is worth the cost. If an extension gets done (I'm doubtful, but who knows?), I believe it will be 4 years.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

The trade was a risk DL had to take.. no guarantee Bolomboy would still be available with the 55th pick.


Had he not needed the money and really liked Bolomboy, he would have just taken him, no?

Yes. But how this proves that he made the trade because of the Pleiss situation is beyond me. He made the trade because he thought $3 million and trading down was worth more than picking now. End of story.