Welpee wrote:His ppg, assists, rebs, steals, and minutes were virtually identical to his rookie season. I'm sure the next post will be some advanced stat showing his productivity is similar to Westbrook's.
Whether or not Jerian Grant pans out, is, IMHO, irrelevant to the "principle" of the issue in any NBA rebuild.
You take the high percentage decision based on current market forces. You assess what league trends are and you adjust for current market expectations and realities.
As a matter of "principle", even if you draft five guys like Grant who never pan out, the base methodology is still the "correct" market based decision. Grant had the potential to enter into his prime on a cost controlled deal. If he could provide value exponential to his rookie contract, this is a boon to the roster and franchise. Rose was being paid over market to his current production, with a hope he'd rebound. He was aging, in decline, had injury history, had off the court history and didn't provide a basic level of defense needed by the roster.
Don Nelson went over this years and years ago, in his RUN TMC days, in an interview, and much of this was from Red Auerbach's philosophy on team building
- Never trade big for small.
- Never trade injury prone for healthy
- Never trade a player in decline for a player with a chance to enter his prime ( i.e. the Bill Walsh Maxim - Better to cut loose of a guy a year too soon than a year too late)
- Never trade a good locker room guy for a bad locker room guy ( which applies also to off the court, never push out a solid citizen for a guy with a shaky past or character or history of off the court problems)
- Never trade young for old, unless you are paying 3 quarters for a dollar in value ( i.e. Hornacek, Tim Perry and Andrew Lang for Charles Barkley)
The discussion was really about making the best market based decision, even if it doesn't pan out, because staying true to this course will eventually create a net positive for your franchise.
You build and rebuild through the draft in the NBA. You have to give times for your guys to possibly develop. You have to accept there will be some misses as well as some hits in the process.
Signing Robin Lopez was an EXCELLENT market based decision. ( Wanted to be here, had positional value, had no real horrible weakness though he didn't do anything elite either, contract would not carry deeply into his decline phase, he'd hold near term retrade value, he'd hold longer term retrade value, he'd help the team now, he'd possibly help the team in the future, the contract would represent a value to market shifts in the near future)
Trading him for an aging injury prone PG who didn't play defense nor had a three point shot with off the court woes was a HORRIBLE market based decision.
Taking in Noah and not letting Grant have enough room to possibly develop, if at all, only doubled and tripled down on the madness in place.
Again, I've said this all before - An early stage NBA rebuild literally writes its own script. There are literally no other mechanisms for teams to get better. And that the Knicks still screw it up is mind boggling. You could literally get an executive from ANOTHER SPORT, and the NBA current structure is so simple in nature, even they wouldn't screw it up.
Jerian Grant should be on this roster right now. Whether he pans or panned out or not doesn't change that his being on the roster signifies a METHODOLOGY IN PLACE that shows awareness of the current market structure around the Knicks.
