Discussion in 'Pistons and NBA' started by mikhail1973, Jun 24, 2013.
The Low is still bitter about Ben Wallace going to Chicago.
Like this, and that the article was written March 2013
I'm really not mistaken. Surely you can estimate what someone is 'worth', but the point is that any value estimated by this method will be arbitrary, and as a result meaningless. I might consider each PPG to be worth 100,000. So I might think player X is worth 1.6 million. But another might consider each ppg to be worth 1,000,000. By this, one could argue that the player is worth (1.6m + 16m)/2. But in reality, with only two bidders, the value is just going to be 1.6m + ϵ because that is the contract value which will be able to sign the guy, assuming the actors won't pay over what they value the player at. Generally people use stats like WARP to estimate how much a player will be paid. But if you gathered every contract and measured it against this method there would be significant deviation.
for the Austrian, market value is the price two sides agree upon. So, basically, his market value is what the Pistons paid him. Question is whether anyone else would have paid as much.
What is better - no risk at bidding wars and hopefully to save a million or more per year - but probably won't get desired player or to pay million more and to risk with exceeded expectations?
Granted I was often sleeping during the games, but the Pistons seemed to have more problems than just 3 pt shooting. They couldn't guard the perimeter with a machine gun and outside of C-Mart they haven't addressed that at all. They've made a long term commitment to someone who has to play off of other people when they don't have the other people to play off of. It is a move that doesn't seem to give them much versatility in terms of style of play because he can only play one position (that he can't cover). How many more games would the Pistons have won last year with Meeks on the team, 1? (You can simply add him to the team or replace someone like Stuckey but no replacing "core" parts even though Hot Rod fits.)
well, that's the question here! On the one hand, GMs and all the others involved know more than us; equally, sometimes you see things better from the outside. I don't know about the situation with Meeks (whether there was a reasonable chance that another team would pay him even more), but I remember that Stuckey received more money from Detroit than any other team was ready to offer. And he was definetely not the only example.
Ben Gordon's market value is 4.5 million per year.
Lousy investments in hindsight: CV, BG (he cost us twice), and Hot Rod. No ROIC whatsoever. As Warren Buffett would say this was definitely an error of commission on JD's part-falling in love with your own investments. Meeks we will just have to wait and see how this plays out. This will reflect on SVG's first forays into the marketplace, his objective analysis as a security analyst-value investor, and whether he (Meeks) meets a need in our portfolio. "Price is what you pay. Value is what you get" Warren Buffett.
overpaid is a funny comment. relative to what other offers? compared to what other players? Yes, better than I put it but I think (dangerous!) we're saying the same thing. woulda coulda shoulda is just conjecture, not objective fact, irregardless of how convicted the conjecture is.
It's impossible to know how an alternate reality would have played out. yes we had more problems than 3p shooting, but we were very bad at it, presumably f0r many reasons, system , personnel, opportunity. if meeks can be a credible 3p threat that opens up the paint for everyone else, which i think is a good thing. ymmv
I agree. ymmv
That's cold. I was more bitter about hiring Saunders.
I love how everyone understood what "overpaid" meant when Stuckey and CV were on the roster. Now? Not so much... Apparently, an entire thread on etymology needs to exist to explain how we probably should have gotten Meeks for less.
That's because the general consensus was that cv and stuck rod were actually very bad players. Although I suppose a case could be made that if we got rid of one or both, we would have had to spend *some* money to fill the position. overpaid is a relative term not an absolute value.
I think Meeks is overpaid. However it is not a killer contract as it only lasts 3 years and is only 7 figures. After 1.5 years it is a good number to fill in for trades. If KCP overtakes him the 6 million not killer amount for backup.
Charlie Villlenueva literally did not play minutes. We were paying him to contribute nothing. Also, I think the ire directed at Ben Gordon and CV was less about their contracts, and more about their poor attitude and lack of basketball skills
Meeks is an MLE player. I think the MLE this year is $6M. We paid $6.5M. What's the problem? We got what we needed, I doubt any big name guys were coming here and SVG was actually able to get a deal DONE! We didn't get left hanging at the end of the summer looking for the Datome's of the world.
Isn't the MLE $5.15 million for non-taxpaying over the cap teams and there was a thought that a contender might (as in it was possible but not necessarily probable) use the full thing on Meeks? The Pistons went well above that (based upon their poor self-esteem and what else), for 3-pt shooting and little else? Just because I can spend thousands on an end table doesn't mean I should.
And if you are in absolute-desperation of an end table........
Separate names with a comma.