rockyBeli wrote:1 year later, Warriors won this trade in a landslide. If you're just looking at a talent for talent trade evaluation, the jury is still out on that because Bogut has hardly played. So 1 yr later, it's undetermined. But even if Bogut never steps foot on a court again, the Warriors won the trade. The trade wasn't only about talent for talent, it was multiple factors. Only the Bucks offer (with no upgrade in talent cuz Bogut was out for the year) enables a tank to get the #7 pick Harrion Barnes, enables Klay Thompson to get heavy minutes and develop, enables the trade to get #30 pick Ezeli, and enables us to unload Ellis on another team. Bucks offer was the best out there and the trade HAD to be made, so they win the trade. How much they win the trade is yet to be determined. Bogut playing and becoming a factor, and it'd be just ridiculous how great a move this was for the FO.
But the only thing that matters about this trade is in the W-L category. Basically, trading Monta Ellis for a bag of chips was a good move because of addition by subtraction. This so happened to be the best tasting bag of chips out there because of all of the surrounding factors (injured Bogut enabling tank, Bogut being a top 5 center, etc) . And it could pay off, as many trades in the past have, not in the 1 yr scope but in the following years.
Yep, expanding on my Texas Ranger analogy, they lost Hamilton, Young, and Napoli.
Napoli had a WAR of 2
Young had a WAR of -1.2
Josh Hamilton had a WAR of 4.4
WAR: 5.2 over three players. Essentially three Cody Roses.
Lance Berkman's Projected WAR is 2.4
Geovany Soto/AJ Perzynski's Projected WAR is 2.9 (probably a platoon here because one hits righties well and one hits lefties well, but I could see Ron ****ing that up.)
That's a combined WAR of 5.3.
This is the definition of addition by subtraction and we did the same exact thing by getting rid of Ellis.
My point being, is the Rangers won their trade despite not getting anything back for Michael Young.