MattMcCready

Hey guys.

Toronto born (and Whitby bred, K-OS what what) columnist for 411mania.com. I occasionally post links to my articles here to get feedback from the die-hard b-ball junkies (typically the 411 crowd are cool, but dont follow it to the near obsessive degree that people on here tend to).

http://www.411mania.com/sports/nba/48858

I'm probably not the first one to point this out, but when I heard that Iverson was dealt and the principal thing received were two first rounders, I immediately flashed back to the Carter deal.

Anyhoo, in teh article I compare the two deals, pretty much coming to the conclusion that Philly got a lot more, but also that Iverson's value was much higher.

Thanks guys

Matt McCready

Oh, also I didn't name the article, that was the editor.

ozzzymandius

Thanks for this!! I was wondering all teh same things myself in terms of who got more for their stars, which deal was better or worse and why. I came to a lot of the same conclusions myself. The big one being that Allen was still putting it on the floor and had a much higher value that VC did when it came time to pull the trigger. So all in all glad you started the thread on it becuase I know lots of other people were wondering the same thing.

Cheers

__________________
"My name is Ozymandius, King of Kings:
Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

P. Shelley

ballocks

as a raptor fan, i noticed this the day of the trade. and i was puzzled by the reaction to the deal- philly appears to be getting the benefit of the doubt for making it, toronto never did. very odd. but it wasn't just carter and iverson- there have been other similar deals in this league that got raped in a way that the sixers seem to have avoided. i can't explain it.

in terms of the sixers getting more than the raptors, specifically, i could never make that argument. what exactly did they get? is andre miller seriously the piece that would've justified the raptors' decision to deal vince? andre miller? i mean, he's a good player and all, but i don't think you build around him, he has yet to experience major success in the league (with decent teams around him of late), and you'd be hard-pressed to find fans/teams who see this guy as a championship-calibre asset. what's more, the man's contract lasts for another 3- and with a hefty tag. if rebuilding is the objective here, andre miller doesn't appear to fit the sixers' plan very well (imo).

and again, is andre miller the kind of player who would've spared the raptors from massive ridicule in the wake of the vince carter trade? i'd find it hard to believe. but if it's not andre miller, then what could it be? very strange.

in terms of the draft picks, i mean, i've gone over this so many times already. but while the sixers now have three firsts, the two they acquired in this transaction were denver's and dallas'. i don't know how many would be surprised to see those picks fall below 25. i don't care how interesting the 2007 draft class appears to be, you won't easily find many gamebreakers that far down the ladder (imo) in any year. i think that's pretty obvious. and now i'm confused.

so i'm not sure what the iverson return has on the carter return. miller's a pro player, but is he the kind of guy a team would want to have while trying to rebuild? i don't know. winning games isn't the priority in philadelphia for the moment- and miller probably won't even be much help for them as soon as that changes (in 2 to 3 years?).

the reaction to the iverson trade has had my mind in knots all week. i think this is my third post on the topic. i see the reaction as being an important thing to note right now- i think it reveals quite a bit about the landscape of the typical nba fan's mind.

(btw, thanks for the link.)

peace

seifer0406

Well, to be fair, picks in the late teens have not been sure things in past years either. Without argument you will have a better chance to acquire a good player at the 16th pick than say the 24th pick, but the different isn't night and day.

Just to illustrate this, let's look at some key players that were taken in the 15-20th range vs. 21-30th range in the past 5 years not counting this year.

2001
Zach Randolph (19)
Brendan Haywood (20)
Gerald Wallace (25)
Samuel Dalembert (26)
Jammal Tinsley (27)
Tony Parker (28)
Gilbert Arenas (30)

2002
Juan Dixon (17, only worthawhile mention in this range)
Tayshaun Prince (23)
Nened Krystic (24)

2003
David West (18)
Boris Diaw (21)
Travis Outlaw (23)
Kendrick Perkins (27)
Leandrinho Barbosa (28)
Josh Howard (29)

2004
Kirk Snyder (16)
Josh Smith (17)
JR Smith (18)
Dorell Wright (19)
Jameer Nelson (20)
Kevin Martin (26)

2005
Joey Graham (16)
Danny Granger (17)
Gerald Green (18)
Hakim Warrick (19)
Nate Robinson (21)
Jarrett Jack (22)
David Lee (30)

Besides 2004, almost every year you can find good talent late of the first round. Therefore if we compare the AI trade with VC trade solely from the draft pick side, it would only be a slight(very slight) edge towards the Raptors. Besides the picks, the AI trade is better in almost every other aspect than the VC trade. Andre Miller and Joe Smith brings more immediate help than Eric Williams and Aaron Williams. From the salary cap standpoint, the Sixers will be saving 7 mil starting next season and Andre Miller's contract will be up in 2 more years. Raptors meanwhile got stuck with a centre that wouldn't play in TO.