The Rationale Behind the Trade Presented

A couple of days ago I presented a trade possibility of Marcus Banks + Patrick O'Bryant + a second round draft pick for Morris Peterson. (see post below) There was a lot of reaction from the trade and most of it was negative, however reading through the comments there may of been people who may have misunderstood what I had presented. As such, I feel responsible for addressing some of the comments being made and bring some rationale for why I feel the trade might work. Ill list each subtopic by argument and try to answer it.

1. Trading Second Round Draft Picks are not the way to go, considering how many we have dealt away

I agree that trading away draft picks is not an effective way to build your team roster. In general, first round draft picks are set on the rookie scale and second round picks do not earn significantly more than the minimum which means that you usually get under-paid talent. However with respect to the Raptors situation, they are built to compete in the short-term (however flawed that strategy is) and need to compile enough depth for in-squad competition and in case of injury. Second round draft picks only sometimes evolve into rotation quality players and almost never contribute in their first season. For a team built like the Raptors, Peterson would derive more utility in the short (and probably long) term than a future second round draft pick.

2. Morris Peterson has two years left so bad trade idea

Because Marcus Banks is on a two year deal and is not even a rotation quality player, no GM would trade him for a shorter (expiring) contract. This is especially true with the 2010 off season coming up and GMs do not want to have contractual obligations going into the 2011 season. As such, the only way to move him would be for another player who has a two year or longer contract. Peterson has been marginalized in NO due to the signing of James Posey, and Peja and the drafting of Julian Wright. The team is over the luxury tax and needs to reduce salary to minimize the impact so they may consider trading Peterson for a smaller contract especially if there are enough incentives to make it worthwhile (second round draft pick, cash etc.).

3. Morris Peterson is a backing SG, not a SF

Morris Peterson has played both as a SG and SF in his career. He is 6'7 and 220 pounds, and has been in the league long enough to understand how to guard both position. Also, in the NBA the two wing positions are pretty homogeneous now with the rise of small-ball lineups.

4. Why trade for a "worse" contract?

As I stated before, the Raptors are designed to win now. They need all the depth they can get to sustain them in the long season and for insurance purposes. In addition, because the Raptors are under the luxury cap, this deal only adds roughly 500k this year and about 1.5 million next year. They will not fall into luxury tax concerns if they make the deal because they are shipping salary out. One person mentioned that the luxury tax figure might fall next year and this may pose some questions for the raptors. However, the difference would be 1.5 million (doubled up to 3 year) only for a 1 year period. I think the Raptors would consider having an asset like backup sg/sf like Peterson is worth that. In addition if the Raptors are really concerned about the luxury tax implications, the Raptors can trade the contract next season + an asset to a team under the salary cap for a draft pick or an salary exception (note: the same thing would have to be done with bank's contract).

5. There's no point wasting assets for the 15th roster spot

This deal is not so focused on filling the 15th roster spot as it is on creating a more balanced rotation. Currently, the Raptors' rotation is:

starters:
pg: jose calderon
sg: demar derozan
sf: hedo turkolu
pf: chris bosh
c: andrea bargnani

key reserves:
pg/sg: jarrett jack
sg: antoine wright
pf: reggie evans
c: rasho

deep reserves (probable DNP-CDs or getting no playing time)
pg: roko ukic
pg: quincy douby
pg: marcus banks
pf: patrick o'bryant

It is clearly obvious that we have too many dead weight point guards and too many inactive players in general. If this deal were to happen the rotation would change to:

starters:
pg: jose calderon
sg: demar derozan
sf: hedo turkolu
pf: chris bosh
c: andrea bargnani

key reserves:
pg/sg: jarrett jack
sg: antoine wright
sf: morris peterson
pf: reggie evans
c: rasho

deep reserves (probable DNP-CDs or getting no playing time)
pg: roko ukic
pg: quincy douby


Now the Raptors could now play douby (who is superior to banks) as their first option in their deep reserves. There would be 13 players on the roster so the team would not need to add any more players. But if they want to, they can now add players in other positions like: joey graham, pops or leon powe to really round out the roster.

6. Why trade another team's dead weight for our own?

When you consider this trade, please think back to the Rafeal Araujo / Kris Humphries trade. Both of these players were not contributing to their respective teams, so both GMs took a chance on a player to help them. The beauty of these deals are that they have little risk but the new addition could turn into a serviceable player. We can all agree that Aruarjo was not a rotation worthy player but he turned into Kris Humphries, an efficient player with rotation potential. This Morris Peterson deal is to trade two players who do not figure to be in our rotation for a 15-18 mpg guy who could provide significant value to the Raptors.

Conclusions

In all likelihood this trade is not going to happen, and I have probably spent way too much time on the topic, but I want to be sure that what I present is clear and understandable and the debate is focused on the issue.