Are There Any Centers Worth Trading For?

George O'Brien

ASFN Icon
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Posts
10,297
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
When it looked like the Sixers might sign Blount, there was a lot of discussion about whether the Suns could trade for Dalembert. Now that Blount is going back to the Boston, it seems unlikely that Dalemebert will get moved.

I started thinking about the problem and it is pretty discouraging. Here is my quick review of some of the guys.

ATLANTA - Joel Przybilla - Widely considered a total bust, he actually averaged 8.4 rpg once he joined the Hawks. He has zero offensive skills and is injury prone. He is actually an RFA, but $3.2 million is too much for this guy.

BOSTON- Raef LaFrentz played in only 17 games last season. He has four more years starting at $9 million. He is a good shot blocker, but not much overall as a defender. With his contract and injury problems, he is not an attractive trade prospect.

Chris Mihm - He is an RFA at $3.9 million. He is actually gotten better over the years, but he is still hard to figure. He is actually a pretty good rebounder at 5.1 rpg in only 17.4 minutes. My guess is that his defense is not adequate, which is why he gets so few minutes.

CHICAGO - The Bulls are actively pushing Chandler who gets $4.8 million. This alone is steep for a guy who played in only 35 games last season. When healthy, Chandler is an excellant rebounder 7.7 rpg and OK shot blocker with 1.2 in 22.3 minutes. If it was straight up, he might be worth considering, but the Bulls insist that along with him, they unload someone like Eddie Robinson who is grossly overpaid.

Eddie Curry is not currently being shopped, although he has had his ups and downs. He is out of shape, lazy, and doesn't play hard all the time. But right now, Chicago does not have an alternative and hope to finally motivate him.

CLEVELAND - Zydrunas Ilgauskas is entering the last year of a contract that pays him $14.6 million. With the likely loss of Boozer, the Cavs may be interested in trading Z for some players who better fit their needs. That being said, it is unlikely the Suns would be a particularlly good trading partner since they will want several players including a big. BTW, I would not be shocked if he was traded to the Wolves in a deal that included Wally Szczerbiak ($9 million) and perhaps Olowokandi. Silas has had success with big men and might feel he could do something with the Candy man.

DETROIT - After losing Okur, they are shopping for big men rather than selling. Their backups are Campbell (not attractive) and Darko who is less developed than Lampe.

INDIANA - In addition to the untouchable, their center position was played by committee. Jeff Foster started most games, but averaged only 23.9 minutes a game. Other guys like Austin Croshere 13.6 minutes, Scot Pollard 11.1 minutes, Jonathan Bender 12.9 minutes in 23 games, all played. None stood out. Foster with 7.4 rebounds in 23.9 minutes is clearly their main man and won't get traded unless it involves another center. Croshere had a good playoffs, but at $8.2 million is grossly overpaid. Pollard at $5.7 is grossly overpaid for what he produced.

Two years ago, Pollard was very productive, but declined his last year with the Kings and was not effective at all with the Pacers: 2.7 rpg, 1.7 ppg, etc. A straight of Eisley for Pollard deal would work out cap wise, but it is hard to see this worth more than that.

MIAMI - Brian Grant is currently being rumored to be part of a deal with the Lakers to get Shaq. Grant is a decent center, but is only 6'9". He is OK, but hardly worth the $13.3 million he gets this season with two more years after.

MILWAUKEE - They have apparently lost Skinner to the Sixers. They got Etan Thomas to sign an offer sheet, but he is a RFA with the Wizzards and may get matched. Dan Gadzuric operates under a three year minimum contract signed in 2002. He is a decent rebounder and shot blocker, but did not play much in spite of a team need for inside help.

NEW JERSEY - The Nets starting center is Jason Collins, who played 28.5 minutes, yet grabbed only 5.1 rpg. To give some perspective, Voskuhl averaged 5.2 rpg in 24.3 minutes. He is a better defender than Voskuhl, but overall their games are similar.

NEW YORK - They have a lot of big guys they'd love to move, but they are all overpriced and not very good: Kirt Thomas is their best inside guy and at $5.8 million actually reasonably priced, but at 6'9" 225 he is not really a center. Nazr Mohammed put up a respectable 7.7 rpg, At 5.2 million he is almost a bargain, but he is not a terribly dynamtic player and at 6'10" a bit undersized. There is not much chance of doing anything with either guy.

ORLANDO - They have Cato and DeClerq. Why bother?

PHILADELPHIA - They added Brian Skinner, who will play PF while Kenny Thomas moves to SF, while Dalembert continues at center. Marc Jackson and Derick Coleman are just not very good while coming off injury seasons.

TORONTO - This is a team that may end up starting rookie Rafael Araujo.

WASHINGTON - Etan Thomas signed an offer sheet with the Bucks, but the Wizzards are likely to match. Brendan Heywood is the Wizzards starting center, but averaged only 5 rpg in 19.3 minutes. He might be available, but is not good enough to make much difference.

I will review the West in another post.
 

Billythekid

All Star
Joined
Oct 11, 2002
Posts
693
Reaction score
0
I see people in here getting over excited about Q Richardson... I do like the nash pick up but one of the biggest arguments last season was the constant small ball game, and now i see articles saying with Q, the Suns will be quick and revolve around 'small ball', now last season small ball was dominated by outside shooters who couldnt really shoot. Granted we're getting better small players but i can see us falling into excatly the same patterns unless we get some bigs, ala dice and someone else.
 

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
Whoever proposed the Marion + Eisley for LaFrentz + Ricky Davis trade, I'm all for it. With Shaq gone to the Heat or even staying with Kobe leaving, there is only one center, Yao, that'd make our center rotation of LaF/Jake/Lampe any real trouble. With Davis, Q, and JJ vying for playing time, JJ may accept a reasonable extension of say 6 year 40 mil now instead of risking a bad season due to the pressure. When Amare develops his defensive skill up to about 7-80% of Ben Wallace in a year or two, we'll be better than Pistons and a real contender. Not to mention, we still have Lampe/Zarko/Barbosa/CJ with lot of potential.
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,563
Reaction score
9,861
Location
L.A. area
I like the Pollard idea. Moreover, I think it's somewhat realistic, since Indiana has question marks at point guard and a fairly healthy stock of competent big men. Pollard hasn't been the same since his big injury a couple of years ago, but the Suns already know that they have no use for Eisley, so I think it's worth the risk. The Suns could sweeten the deal by including cash or their own first-round pick next summer, and I'd still be in favor of that.
 

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
How many years left on Pollard's contract? It'd be indeed a risk free trade meeting both teams' needs if it's not too long on Pollard's left.
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,563
Reaction score
9,861
Location
L.A. area
Pollard's and Eisley's contracts are nearly identical, each having two years left. Eisley makes a little more: $13.3 million over the two years, versus $12.1 million for Pollard. A straight-up trade works under cap rules, but the Suns could also take on a tiny salary from Indiana if the Pacers insisted and had one they wanted to give up. Simplest, though, would be for the Suns to include extra cash to make up the difference.
 
Last edited:

Tank

Wifi Guru
Joined
Oct 22, 2002
Posts
329
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
elindholm said:
The Suns could sweeten the deal by including ... their own first-round pick next summer...

The Suns cant include their own first round pick next year since we already owe a future first to the Spurs.
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,563
Reaction score
9,861
Location
L.A. area
The Suns cant include their own first round pick next year since we already owe a future first to the Spurs.

The rule is that you cannot leave yourself without a first-round pick in two consecutive future drafts. The Suns have Chicago's pick next summer, so they can do whatever they want with their own pick.

In addition, teams are restricted from trading away future first round draft picks in consecutive years. This is called the "Ted Stepien Rule." Stepien owned the Cavs from 1980-83, and made a series of bad trades that cost the Cavs several years' first round picks. The trades, as columnist Chris Young put it, "amounted to giving up Manhattan for a bag of beads." As a result of Stepien's ineptitude, teams are now prevented from making trades which might leave them without a future first-round draft pick in consecutive years.

This rule applies only to future first round picks. For example, if this is the 99-00 season, then teams can trade their 2000 first round pick without regard to whether they had a 1999 pick, since their 1999 pick is no longer a future pick. But they can't trade away both their 2000 and 2001 picks, since both are future picks. Teams sometimes work around this rule by trading first round picks in alternate years.

In addition, teams are required to have only a first round pick, and not necessarily their first round pick. So teams may trade away their own future picks in consecutive years if they have another team's first round pick in one of those years.


http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#70
 
Last edited:

Joe Mama

Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
9,501
Reaction score
964
Location
Gilbert, AZ
elindholm said:
I like the Pollard idea. Moreover, I think it's somewhat realistic, since Indiana has question marks at point guard and a fairly healthy stock of competent big men. Pollard hasn't been the same since his big injury a couple of years ago, but the Suns already know that they have no use for Eisley, so I think it's worth the risk. The Suns could sweeten the deal by including cash or their own first-round pick next summer, and I'd still be in favor of that.

actually the Suns couldn't include their own first-round draft pick at this point because they owe the pick to San Antonio. Without the draft pick I don't see why Indiana would make the deal.

I wouldn't mind Haywood, but I wouldn't want the Suns to overpay. If he signed a reasonable offer sheet it would likely get matched by the Wizards. Andrew DeClercq would also be an upgrade IMO. I just don't see Orlando giving him away.

George, this is a rather depressing thread. :)

Joe Mama
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,563
Reaction score
9,861
Location
L.A. area
actually the Suns couldn't include their own first-round draft pick at this point because they owe the pick to San Antonio.

I thought the Suns owed "a future" pick to the Spurs, not necessarily the one in 2005. When does that debt come due?
 

Tank

Wifi Guru
Joined
Oct 22, 2002
Posts
329
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
elindholm said:
The rule is that you cannot leave yourself without a first-round pick in two consecutive future drafts. The Suns have Chicago's pick next summer, so they can do whatever they want with their own pick.

Actually the Suns do not own Chicago's pick next year until the lottery determines that the pick does not fall in the top 3. Until then, we only have our pick.

Also, the San Antonio pick is due whenever the the Suns get a high enough pick, I believe for the 05 draft it is something like top 25 protected. If the Suns have a break out year and finish with one of the top records, then the Spurs get that pick.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
22,115
Reaction score
6,551
The dismal lack of centers available through FA or trade is the best reason to retain these picks. It looks like the only way we are going to finish this roster is to draft a center.

In retrospect, we should not have traded down in this draft, we should have traded up to #2 and taken Okafor. Who knows what it would have taken. The Bobcats had the advantage of having the #4 pick to offer, which was much more attractive than the #7.

Ostertag is a stopgap option, but he is not worth significant money.

I say, sign Dice, hope everything works out with Q and let's play ball.
 

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
Pollard for Eisley can always be an option during the season when both teams realize how rarely used these players are and would prefer to have security in the other position. With Jake/Lampe and maybe Scott williams again, we can definitely survive for a while.
 

Joe Mama

Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
9,501
Reaction score
964
Location
Gilbert, AZ
elindholm said:
actually the Suns couldn't include their own first-round draft pick at this point because they owe the pick to San Antonio.

I thought the Suns owed "a future" pick to the Spurs, not necessarily the one in 2005. When does that debt come due?

this is the same reason the Phoenix Suns had to draft Deng and then trade him to Chicago. The Suns cannot trade a draft pick unless they will absolutely have one for themselves. The Chicago pick is protected, so there is no certainty with it.

Besides, we are all hoping that signing Steve Nash and possibly Q will put the Suns back in the playoffs, but that isn't a certainty either. At this point I know I wouldn't be happy with a Howard Eiseley and 2005 draft pick for Scot Pollard deal unless that pick is well protected. At that point it doesn't make sense for Indiana.

Joe
 

JS22

Say Vandelay!
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
5,791
Reaction score
211
cly2tw said:
Whoever proposed the Marion + Eisley for LaFrentz + Ricky Davis trade, I'm all for it. With Shaq gone to the Heat or even staying with Kobe leaving, there is only one center, Yao, that'd make our center rotation of LaF/Jake/Lampe any real trouble. With Davis, Q, and JJ vying for playing time, JJ may accept a reasonable extension of say 6 year 40 mil now instead of risking a bad season due to the pressure. When Amare develops his defensive skill up to about 7-80% of Ben Wallace in a year or two, we'll be better than Pistons and a real contender. Not to mention, we still have Lampe/Zarko/Barbosa/CJ with lot of potential.

Lafrentz is overrated, Davis is a freaking headcase. But we WOULD be able to dump Eisely. And if we get Q Marion is expendable (somewhat. I still think he is going to have a breakout year with Nash running the point.)
 

sunsfn

Registered User
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Posts
4,522
Reaction score
0
The suns could trade the chicago pick though.

I thought the suns pick owed to the Spurs is due by 2006?
It is top 20-25? protected until 2006, then goes to them no matter where it is.

Also, the first two picks the suns have next year, (chicago top 3 protected)
by themselves are probably worth more than Pollard. I realize that if we could get rid of Eisley and his contract that would be worth something, but not sure we should give up that pick unless there is someone else they want to sign with that money.

:shrug:
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,563
Reaction score
9,861
Location
L.A. area
Actually the Suns do not own Chicago's pick next year until the lottery determines that the pick does not fall in the top 3.

Ah, right, I forgot that.

Well, there has to be some other way to sweeten the pot. Eisley and Pollard should have comparable value to the Pacers, in my opinion.
 
OP
OP
George O'Brien

George O'Brien

ASFN Icon
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Posts
10,297
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
elindholm said:
Actually the Suns do not own Chicago's pick next year until the lottery determines that the pick does not fall in the top 3.

Ah, right, I forgot that.

Well, there has to be some other way to sweeten the pot. Eisley and Pollard should have comparable value to the Pacers, in my opinion.

Maybe a second round pick?

Realistically, if Pollard is that bad it may not make any difference. We'd need medical tests. Otherwise, we might as well sign Googs to a veteran minimum. :D
 

NJYAJ09

Hall of Famer
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Posts
1,426
Reaction score
0
Location
Scottsdale
Eisley for Pollard might be attractive to the Pacers, their PG's are weak...
 

Joe Mama

Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
9,501
Reaction score
964
Location
Gilbert, AZ
I'm going to go on record right now that Shawn Marion will not be traded a unless the Phoenix Suns get back a very good player. They are not going to trade him for crap like Raef LaFrentz. If I'm wrong you guys can call me on it, but I don't think I will be.

Joe Mama
 

Yuma

Suns are my Kryptonite!
Joined
Jan 3, 2003
Posts
22,929
Reaction score
12,680
Location
Laveen, AZ
Joe Mama said:
I'm going to go on record right now that Shawn Marion will not be traded a unless the Phoenix Suns get back a very good player. They are not going to trade him for crap like Raef LaFrentz. If I'm wrong you guys can call me on it, but I don't think I will be.

Joe Mama

I agree. Marion is the garbage man on our team. I know guys are worried about his contract, but the way the contacts keep going, Marion's salary keeps falling down the list of NBA salaries. When it's all said and done, draft picks and resigning our guys in the future, we will be over the cap eventually. Marion won't be dealt until later on in his career, I think. :)
 
Top