Date: Wed Mar 5 14:35:59 2008
Sender: Jeff Luddingsmash
What do you guys think of this deal?
C.Burke PG 33 9 9 6 7 3 5 10 24 6' 7" A A
C.Burke PG 8.11 4.85PR 16.19 6
for...
O.Giesler PF 23r 3 7 5 6 7 3 1 18 6' 8" B B
.04 rookie contract
C.Johnson SF 27 5 8 7 6 5 2 11 22 6' 7" B B
C.Johnson SF 2.01 1.19PR 3.99 1
S.Isaacowitz PG 27 9 10 1 4 4 4 3 21 6' 0" A A
S.Isaacowitz PG 3.26 1.95PR 6.51 3
Date: Wed Mar 5 14:46:59 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
I was giving Jeff a hard time about this deal but in my opinion it is legit if
Team 2 was just looking to dump the contract.
The 3 players in the deal are players that can be picked up in the free agent
pool for the league minimum. The letter grades are great on those players, but
they are not quality players. They are 3 role players at best.
Burke is one of the 5 best players in the league.
But if a team is not going to win this season, I can understand dumping the big
contract on an aging player.
Date: Wed Mar 5 15:02:29 2008
Sender: Bill Edwards
I don't like Burke's contract at this point in his career, although he is a
great Point Guard. I think it is a very good deal for both teams, although I
think Jeff gave up a lot considering the injury bug could hit Burke and Jeff is
screwed if it is a long term one. But that is the chance we take. I always
did like Johnson and the other players are solid in their own roles. Jeff had
a lot of depth on his roster going innto the deal, so I think that was what he
was thinking. Good deal for both squads...! as it should be.
Date: Thu Mar 6 08:20:07 2008
Sender: Jian Lan
I think Jeff wins in this deal. Burke is one of the elite point guards in the
league while Johnson and Isaacowitz are average to slightly better than average
at their position. Johnson is a one-dimensional player that gives you defense
and rebounding. For that you can get for the league min. Just look at Loper
on the FA. He's 6'9" with a 9 def and 7 ag. He doesn't score but its not like
Johnson is lighting it up. I think he was probably added for cap reason. The
real meat of the deal is Isaacowitz and Giesler for Burke. Isaacowitz is not a
good point guard. His ratings look good but he is turnover proned. He is more
of a SG. Giesler is a decent prospect but nothing special. He's undersized
for a big man and doesn't have good enough hands for a SF. His one saving
grace is his scoring ability but at a 7 its not enough. I would rather have a
6'9 or 6'10 with a 5 scoring and everything else the same.
Detriot did not need to dump salary. With the deal Detroit saved $5mil which
is lost by the low-salary tax of $7mil. Detroit losses an additional $2mil.
Yes Burke is signed to 6yrs but Isaacowitz has a 3yr contract. Almost the
entire Detriot team is on 1 to 3yr contracts so in the long run it won't have
matter as much. I think Detriot should have kept Burke and tried to win now
and build up the budget. I also think he could have gotten more for Burke if
he had placed him on the trading block.
Date: Thu Mar 6 09:49:59 2008
Sender: Jeff Luddingsmash
Personally I see the deal much like Bill described.
I've always loved Burke, but his contract detracts from his value, especially
considering he's 33 with a 24 training and his numbers fell in the offseason. A
dangerous combo.
Nonetheless, he's one of the better point in the league, and I really needed a
legit point guard, which is why I made the deal. However, if I didn't have the
luxury of depth I never would have made this deal.
IMHO, Johnson and Issacowitz are above average player, though far from
outstanding. However, in terms of value/dollar they are quite good as both
players are on very good contracts.
As for Giesler, I really hated giving him up. I love guys with high D-A-I-Sc.
He reminds me of another prospect I foolishly trade in the past- Wade- who is
now a very good A-A forward.
I can think of about 4 prospects with similar value as Geilser that I have
traded in the past (one to the Hatchets, one to Plainville, one to the Blockers
and one to Minden) all of which went on to be productive A-A players. I think
the same will happen with Giesler.
As for the question of Detroit's salary, I think Andrew made a mistake by not
signing Giesler to a 5 year deal. He probably could have inked him for about
5-6 million per season, which is a great value. Plus that would have eliminated
the low-level salary tax.
With that signing Andrew would have saved a million or two this season, roughly
6 million next season, and probably about 50 million in future salary.
In other words, the deal would have enabled him to ink one more borderline star
player in the future.
In a nutshell, I think andrew made out better than I did, but it's win-win
cause I needed a strong point guard.
P.S. Ironically, Anthony sent me an email today saying that his A-A point guard
is available. I wish I knew that yesterday!
Date: Thu Mar 6 10:31:59 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
I agree with everything Jian said.
I don't see how Isaacowitz has a "bargain contract" when there are players of
his caliber that can be found in the free agent pool for the league minimum.
Giesler is nothing special at all. He is the 7th best power forward in the
training squad. LOL He is another guy that can be picked up in the free agent
pool.
Letter grades mean very little which is evident by the A/A rating Isaacovitz
has. I have C/C players that are much better PGs than him and I get them for
the league minimum every year in the free agent pool. Why give up one of the
elite players in the league?
I just don't understand why someone would trade the 2nd rated point guard in
the entire league (and top 5 overall players) for scraps. It didn't make sense
to me since others would have offered so much more for Burke.
Date: Thu Mar 6 15:00:50 2008
Sender: Bill Edwards
Just out of curiosity what was the computer breakdown of the deal in terms of
how the teams faired?
Date: Thu Mar 6 17:22:47 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
The computer analysis will not be accurate because it was a 3-for-1 trade. If
you throw in 2 scabs from Seoul it would give you a true analysis and I am
guessing it would have been in the 60's for Seoul.
Date: Sat Mar 8 12:55:55 2008
Sender: Jeff Luddingsmash
i would happily reverse the deal as both Hank and Anthony have approached me
with other workable deals for players on much better contracts than Burke.
In any case, Ryan, you and I see these players very differently.
And I don't see how you can look past the money factor... Burke has the 7th
biggest contract in the IBA and he's signed for the next 6 years. At 33 and
with a training of 24, that's not good news.
Anyhow, if you guys really feel it's so unfair we can always reverse it. Seeing
as Andrew hardly ever goes to the chat you can also email him to see what he
thinks.
Date: Sat Mar 8 13:07:04 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
I view talent as the sim does. There is a reason your team talent went from 68
to 70 (unheard of to have a 2 point jump in 1 trade) when you dumped 3 players
and picked up 1.
I am not big on reversing trades. I think each veteran coach should be allowed
to run his team however he sees fit. There are good owners and there are bad
owners.
The only reason this trade was a little shady was that it involved a star
player that everyone would have been interested in. No one could have obtained
him but you because you made a phone call to your brother. If he puts him on
the trading block, he gets a lot more than 3 back up players. ;-)
It was a bad deal...but that doesn't mean it should get reversed. It happens
in real life as well.
Date: Sat Mar 8 13:24:15 2008
Sender: Jeff Luddingsmash
Ryan, my team talent jumped because I didn't have a starting quality point
guard. If you look at my ranking I've always been high at every position but
point guard. with Burke, the pg rating improved a lot.
And as it should. After all I took on an aging player on a bad contract and
gave up a very good rookie and two solid players. In other words, I banked on
this season, with the risk being my team being locked into a bad contract in
the future.
Meanwhile Andrew gained cap space to sign players next year and a very good
rookie. If he wanted he could probably move Johnson and Issacowitz for 2nd
rounders (that's what I would do). That way he'd basically be getting the
equivalent of a lottery pick (Giesler), two second round picks, and
16mil*6years of cap space.
Anyhow, I would probably prefer to just reverse the deal if you and Jian think
it's so bad. Or better yet, someone make Andrew an offer. If he likes it we'll
find a way to make a three-way deal where I get my players back or equivalent
value.
Date: Sat Mar 8 13:43:34 2008
Sender: Jeff Luddingsmash
Ryan, I have a deal for you.
You get Burke, a player that you've called top five in the league.
I get Turner and I give up an extra first rounder.
Andrew gets the first rounder plus the players he got from me in the deal.
Everybody wins. Andrew gets an extra first. You get a top five players in the
league (play him at his natural SF and move Pitts to PF). I get Turner, and get
out of a contract that ties me up in the future.
Date: Sat Mar 8 13:45:43 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
I am pretty against reversing deals unless they involve new coaches that just
get hosed.
Like I said, bad deals happen in real life also.
The only problem with this one was the way it went down.
And if you think a 2nd rounder and Giesler for Burke is a fair deal, you are
nuts. ;-P
Date: Sat Mar 8 13:50:03 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
I forgot to mention the team talent...
You jumped 2 points even though you sent 3 players and picked up 1. If Giesler
was any good, the talent should be close to equal when sending 3 players for 1.
You traded a PG and picked up a PG. That should tell you how much "talent"
Issacowitz has in the sim's eyes.
Talent wise, the deal wasn't even remotely close.
Date: Sat Mar 8 14:04:09 2008
Sender: Jeff Luddingsmash
Ryan, i am for a deal getting reversed if it is made by the commish and his
brother and several key coaches think it's one sided. The health of the IBA is
way more imporatant to me than having Burke on my roster.
The question of talent...
Talent rating is on a position-by-position basis, and tends to favor starters
more than backups. Giesler was listed as a PF on my roster. A position that was
also played by Gorham, Baker, and Berry. As such, he would have had no impact
on the team talent for me, as he would have been about 3rd on the depth chart.
And yes I do think a lottery pick and two second rounders is worth Burke. Why?
Cause you can turn around and spend the 16 million saved on an elite player in
the waiver wire. As you know, there are good players in the wire every season.
16 million would ink you one of the top guys in the league.
In other words, the deal would really be:
Elite player + lottery pick + two second rounders for Burke.
That is a no brainer.
In the past I've made lots of deals like this. In fact, it's been the secret
behind all of my best teams. I believe all of these deals are examples:
Ruminer
A-A stud with a 16 million dollar contract, around 33 years that was moved for
a first rounder.
Hanes
A-A stud MVP player that was moved for a solid power forward (forget his name)
and the last pick of the first round.
Turpack, Valdez, etc. The lost goes on.
Date: Sat Mar 8 14:11:39 2008
Sender: Jeff Luddingsmash
A quick side note...
i usually view players as having positive or negative value, which is
determined using talent/dollar.
Take your roster for example. The value of your players to me would be
something like this:
1) Allen- probably worth about 18-20 million per season. You're paying him less
than 13.
2) Turner- probably worth about 13-15 million and your paying him less than 12.
The players with the least value is probably Pitts. No way I'd give you a 1st
rounder for him. Probably not even a second.
Date: Sat Mar 8 14:14:39 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
Wow...we definitely view talent differently. Pitts is amongst the top 10 in
the league.
Turner I would be open to dealing even though he is a great player on a great
contract. There is no way I would trade Pitts.
Again, I am just going off the way the sim views the talent.
Date: Sat Mar 8 14:42:38 2008
Sender: Bill Edwards
I don't have a dog in this race but do have an observation or two. I think way
more is being made of this than should be. I have seen a hell of lot more one
sided trades in the past than this one that is alleged to be. As for
"talent"... personally I have NEVER put much stock in DEL's way of grading
players. I very seldom have more than 1 or 2 "A" rated players on my teams and
usually at least 3 or 4 "C" players, yet I have been pretty competitive in most
seasons. We all have our way of judging talent predicated on the way we play
the sim. As I have said many times, I just don't think there is a right or
wrong way. That is the beauty of the sim albeit it is not perfect.
I have made my fair share of trades over the seasons. Some coaches are easier
to deal with than others, but that's just the way it is. If I can't deal with
someone I just chalk it up and move on to someone I can. But I have never
tried to "stiff" anyone in a deal. That is a sure fire way to cause problems.
Move on guys. The trade is done. No one got stiffed.
Date: Sat Mar 8 15:39:10 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
I thought this was just a discussion about the trade...I moved on a long time
ago. There are no complaints here on my end.
As for the sims evaluation of talent, I don't think you can win in this sim
without talent. The letter grades are meaningless, but the talent evaluator is
not.
Just my 2 cents.
Date: Sat Mar 8 15:46:47 2008
Sender: Jian Lan
Ok, I think this is going a totally different route. The post was a question
on the trade. I viewed that as to mean who won and who lost. I viewed it as
Jeff getting the better end of the deal as it currently stands. The reason for
this is because he gets an All Star player while Andrew gets some cap space, a
rookie, and two decent veterans. Now if the rookie turns out to be great and
Andrew does something with the money then fine he got the better end of it. My
view is the deal as it currently stands. Jeff is aiming to win now while
Andrew is looking towards the future.
In NO way am I advocating for a reversal of the deal. That won't make any
sense to me. Both GMs did the trade with their own plans in mind. There's
been times where I have made trades just so I can dump some salary to pursue a
FA. So I think the trade should stand as is but we can continue to discuss who
won the trade and does it make Seoul the favorite, the sim's talent evaluator,
etc. Thats fun :)
My view on talent is that the sim tends to discount defensive ability for
offensive ability. So if I was looking for offensive skills I would pay more
attention to the SIM's ranking. If I was looking for defensive help I would go
with my evaluation.
Date: Sat Mar 8 15:51:06 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
It would be interesting to see what the lowest talent level was for a champion
in the pro sim. I don't think I have ever seen anyone win outside of the top
5.
I am sure it has happened, but I don't think it has happened in any league I
have ever been in.
Date: Sat Mar 8 16:04:50 2008
Sender: Bill Edwards
I won one season rated 12th.....another season rated 9th. I am 15th this
season and I think I will be competitive. Sure you ahve to have some talent,
but you do not have to have all stars at every position.
Date: Sat Mar 8 16:21:35 2008
Sender: Jeff Luddingsmash
I won the CBA once with 11th ranked talent. And I've lost a few times when i
had the highest rank talent.
Personally I think team talent needs to be taken with a grain of salt. It's
value is that it gives you a general indication of the talent you have in each
position. However, it really doesn't account for the combined
strength/weaknesses of all players combined, and it completely ignores
salary... I think it ignores age as well.
Anyhow, I won't discuss this deal any more, since everyone seems to be
relatively okay with it.
To those coaches that think Burke is top notch, please feel free to make me an
offer. You might be surprised what I'd be willing to move him for.
Ryan, Burke for Turner? I'd do it in a heartbeat.
Date: Sat Mar 8 16:30:10 2008
Sender: Ryan Hawkins
I would take Burke for Turner in a heartbeat...but I don't have any front court
players. I am loaded at PG, SG, and SF. If I had anyone that could move to
PF, I would take that without hesitation.
Let me shop a couple back court players around to see what I can get in return
as far as a C or PF and I will take you up on that.
The problem in IBA is that there are only about 4 teams that actually trade, so
the options are limited.
Date: Sat Mar 8 19:07:06 2008
Sender: Laurent Boudias
I have personally stopped accumulating talent for a long time as it has been
obvious that if you don't have the top talent, it's difficult to win a title.
That has been my goal to get mid-level or bottom talent and do the best I can.
That's more fun in my opinion than having one of the best teams and win it all
year in and year out.
Dolphin Simulation Games is not responsible for the content of posts.
Please report any offensive messages to help@dolphinsim.com.
