Larry Sanders on the block

[The X Man Cometh]

Per Sam Amico of Fox Sports:
 
Amico suggests that "no NBA player is as available as Milwaukee Bucks center Larry Sanders."
 
The man known as "Dr. Bloctopus" carries a 4/44 extension that kicks in next year, and doesn't really do anything on offense other than lobs and putbacks. Most alarmingly, he has maturity issues that, if Amico isn't blowing smoke here, are presumably making him available for trade.
 
But he's a damn good rim protector. According to Kirk Goldsberry's findings from the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference, Sanders leads the NBA in proximal field goal percentage (34.9%). Which doesn't sound like a bad deal at 11 million a year.
 
The C's have a boatload of picks, some expirings, and a 10 million TPE courtesy of Mother Russia. Do you like Sanders as a target? And at what cost?

 

[ifmanis5]

Love the guy, always have. With his value at a low point it's a good time to steal him.

 

[Devizier]

Now this is the kind of move that the Celtics stockpile assets for.

 

[Kliq]

LARRY SANDERS!!!
 
His offensive game is a work in progress, but it's rare to find a legit center that can protect the rim as good as anybody not named Roy Hibbert, who just turned 25.
 
His Per-36 numbers last season were 13-12.5-3.7 blocks. In addition he was 2nd in BPG, 1st in Block % and 6th in defensive rating.
 
His maturity issues are the big concern year, and we don't know how great his focus on basketball is. If he isn't focused and than you can throw his development as a player out the window and take him as he is currently.

 

[Blacken]

Larry Sanders has has his LARRY SANDERS revoked.

 

[ifmanis5]

I wonder if the Asik package of Bass, Lee and a pick would do it? If yes, do it ASAP and call 'no take-backsies.'. And I'd much rather have Sanders than Asik.

 

[Devizier]

Maturity issues aside, one major concern with Sanders has to be his durability. Yes, the games missed this year can be directly attributed to his maturity issues, but he's played in 60, 52, and 71 games over the past three years, primarily in reserve minutes. I'm sure a chunk of those games are the result of DNP-CDs, but it's worth investigating. 
 
Another thing is the guy's offensive game. It's Asik-level bad, isn't it?

 

[moly99]

Another thing is the guy's offensive game. It's Asik-level bad, isn't it?

 
Yes, but he is a bit younger than Asik and had been improving prior to this year.
 
I would rather have Sanders than Asik, but I don't know that I would want to give up much for him in a trade. Guys who are really good at one skill but are a complete void at the other end of the court can be found in the late lottery. (Sanders went 15th.)

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Klay Thompson straight up.   Get it done Myers.  

 

[ishmael]

 
Yes, but he is a bit younger than Asik and had been improving prior to this year.
 
I would rather have Sanders than Asik, but I don't know that I would want to give up much for him in a trade. Guys who are really good at one skill but are a complete void at the other end of the court can be found in the late lottery. (Sanders went 15th.)

 
For Sanders I would offer the lesser of the Celtics/Nets(Hawks) pick this year and throw in the Clippers pick next year. Two (likely) non-lottery picks, but Milwaukee gets a TPE in return.

 

[cardiacs]

Now this is the kind of move that the Celtics stockpile assets for.

 
Yes!
Larry Sanders was someone I was planning to mention if anyone ever started a godfather offer thread. 
 
Edit: 
I was just looking at his stats and I massively overrated him. There's better guys out there to offer our stockpile for but I'd still love to make a play for him.

 

[ALiveH]

Yes.  Would trade Jeff Green straight up for him if the salaries work.  Or some poopoo platter of players over 26 not named rondo and some combo of non-lottery / 2nd round picks.  Until this year (small sample size & chemistry issues) he had very impressive year-over-year improvement and looked like a very promising up-and-coming young center as early as last year.  He could be better than perkins in a similar role on a championship team if surrounded by good offensive players.

 

[bowiac]

 
Yes!
Larry Sanders was someone I was planning to mention if anyone ever started a godfather offer thread. 
 
Edit: 
I was just looking at his stats and I massively overrated him. There's better guys out there to offer our stockpile for but I'd still love to make a play for him.

What stats?

 

[cardiacs]

I was looking at his B-Ref page, nothing fancy...
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/sandela01.html
 
I thought he was scoring closer to 15 PPG but he's closer to 10. 
His closest comp was Cedric Ceballos, and while I do have a favorable memory of Cedric, I was imagining something a little grander - maybe a longer Ben Wallace?
 
Also, and I hope I don't get shunned too much for this, but IMO he is sometimes reminiscent of Russell at least on the defensive end. 

 

[Cellar-Door]

What stats?

All of them.
Sanders is basically the poor man's Asik. Why a team would pay significantly more for him is baffling to me. He's a significantly worse offensive player, worse rebounder and similar defender. Also 4/44 is starting to look like an overpay.

 

[bowiac]

We mostly disagree there about their defensive quality. Asik is an above average defensive guy, but I don't believe he's a game changing defensive talent. Sanders is right there with Hibbert as the best defensive big man in the NBA meanwhile. Or at least he was last year based on their respective rim protection stats, and from commentary from fans of the respective teams.

With respect to offensive stuff, I'd caution against a PPG analysis. Houston played extremely fast, and Asik played more minutes as well. Pace adjusted, Sanders was the better offensive player last year per minute.

That said, both offensively and defensively, Sanders can't play 35 minutes per game. His defensive approach is to foul out. I think he's a much better defender, and a push at worst offensively, but he's a 28 minutes guy at best. I'd still much rather him than Asik, but I may be undervaluing the minutes issue.

 

[nighthob]

All of them.
Sanders is basically the poor man's Asik. Why a team would pay significantly more for him is baffling to me. He's a significantly worse offensive player, worse rebounder and similar defender. Also 4/44 is starting to look like an overpay.

 
Not really, Asik is strictly a paint defender, he's much less effective at the perimeter chores. Sanders can play either defensive role for a team. I think he's a little better when you don't keep him chained to the paint because he tends to foul a lot down low and it limits his playing time. There's no need to overpay as Boston is one of the few teams that can trade for him this year (thanks to the TPE they got from the Nets deal). I might look to see if they can work out a three way deal that moves Monroe to Milwaukee, Green/whatever to Detroit and Sanders/whatever to Boston.

 

[ifmanis5]

Larry returns Friday night. Let the showcasing begin.

 

[BellhornIsGod]

Sanders signed an extension last summer that hasn't kicked in yet, meaning he's pretty tough to move financially. Basically, the Bucks trade him as a guy making $3.05 million (his salary this season), but whoever trades for him acquires him as a guy making $9.4 million (his total salary through the end of his contract - $47M divided by 5 years).
 
If you mess around with the trade machine, you'll see most deals get rejected because of this. One deal that does not: Humphries + a 1st rounder for Sanders + Pachulia. Hawks shed a bunch of salary, get one pick (The debate would be..which one). Celtics take on some salary but get their center.
 
http://www.celticslife.com/2013/12/larry-sanders-reportedly-available-why.html
 
Edit: Another possibility: Hump/Olynyk and a 1st for Sanders/Caron Butler. Celtics avoid paying Pachulia for 2 seasons after this one..but the price is KO.

 

[bowiac]

I would jump at either of those scenarios.

 

[nighthob]

Sanders signed an extension last summer that hasn't kicked in yet, meaning he's pretty tough to move financially. Basically, the Bucks trade him as a guy making $3.05 million (his salary this season), but whoever trades for him acquires him as a guy making $9.4 million (his total salary through the end of his contract - $47M divided by 5 years).
 
If you mess around with the trade machine, you'll see most deals get rejected because of this. One deal that does not: Humphries + a 1st rounder for Sanders + Pachulia. Hawks shed a bunch of salary, get one pick (The debate would be..which one). Celtics take on some salary but get their center.
 
http://www.celticslife.com/2013/12/larry-sanders-reportedly-available-why.html
 
Edit: Another possibility: Hump/Olynyk and a 1st for Sanders/Caron Butler. Celtics avoid paying Pachulia for 2 seasons after this one..but the price is KO.

 
Boston has a $10 million TPE, they can just take Sanders directly. The downside is that they would need to move commensurate salary (i.e. $3 million) to Milwaukee to avoid the luxury tax. Hence my mention of a three way deal with Monroe going to Milwaukee, Green and whatever to make the numbers work for Boston to Detroit and Sanders to Boston.

 

[nighthob]

That doesn't seem like much of a deal for the Pistons.

 
Unless they're willing to commit a lot of money to the "I'm still stuck in the 80s" approach they're going to have to do something.

 

[radsoxfan]

I was hoping someone was going to come up with a realistic Sanders trade scenario that involved Gerald Wallace.  That's something I could get behind.

 

[Devizier]

All of them.
Sanders is basically the poor man's Asik. Why a team would pay significantly more for him is baffling to me. He's a significantly worse offensive player, worse rebounder and similar defender. Also 4/44 is starting to look like an overpay.

 
I actually see Sanders as more of a Theo Ratlfif shotblocking presence, although Ratliff could at least shoot a little, which Sanders probably never will be able to do. Stylistic differences aside, Sanders is younger and controlled for a longer period than Asik is. Because of the inflation of midlevel contracts, $11M/season is not much more than what post-fight Sanders would get on the open market.
 

 
I was hoping someone was going to come up with a realistic Sanders trade scenario that involved Gerald Wallace.  That's something I could get behind.

 
Wallace and Lee for Sanders and Ilyasova?
 
You said realistic...

 

[Yore]

 
Not really, Asik is strictly a paint defender, he's much less effective at the perimeter chores. Sanders can play either defensive role for a team. I think he's a little better when you don't keep him chained to the paint because he tends to foul a lot down low and it limits his playing time. There's no need to overpay as Boston is one of the few teams that can trade for him this year (thanks to the TPE they got from the Nets deal). I might look to see if they can work out a three way deal that moves Monroe to Milwaukee, Green/whatever to Detroit and Sanders/whatever to Boston.

 
Here's something that works in the trade machine:
 
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=kk5vedd
 
Edit: Monroe is a free agent at the end of the year. Milwaukee would want him to sign a contract extension before making that trade.

 

[The X Man Cometh]

I was hoping someone was going to come up with a realistic Sanders trade scenario that involved Gerald Wallace.  That's something I could get behind.

 
Sounds paradoxical 

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Here's something that works in the trade machine:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=kk5vedd

Edit: Monroe is a free agent at the end of the year. Milwaukee would want him to sign a contract extension before making that trade.


He's restricted. They'd be able to match any offer.

That said, I think Detroit can top Green for Monroe. For instance, wouldn't a deal centered around Deng & Monroe make sense for Detroit and Chicago? Monroe + Villanueva's expiring deal for Deng helps both teams. Detroit gets a 3 who defends, rebounds, and is a solid scoring option, and moves Smith to the 4 alongside Drummond. That's a potentially great defensive front 3, and doesn't sacrifice offense to accomplish it. Meanwhile, Chicago gets an offensive minded big to play alongside either of their defense first bigs in Noah and Gibson. Maybe neither team makes a deal in their division, but it would seem to make sense.

 

[nighthob]

On the other hand they would enter a bidding war for Deng this summer when he hits free agency. However, Boston needs to lose salary to make any deal work, so someone else has to be on the outbound to Motown to make it work anyway.

 

[Jer]

I'm surprised that nobody has asked why you want to trade Rajon Rondo for Larry Sanders. A month ago, there was honest debate here as to whether or not it was worth giving up Jeff Green for Omer Asik (and I'm pretty sure you were opposed to the idea) and now Larry Sanders is worth Rondo? That seems odd to me.

 
 

These seem unrelated to me. I might not trade Jeff Green for Asik, but I'd jump at Sanders for Rondo.
 
Put another way, I think Larry Sanders is much better than Omer Asik.

 
 

 
I'm not sure I understand why. Both are very good defensive centers that offer very little on the offensive end. Sanders is locked in at 11 million a year for 4 years, Asik has his weird contract (8 million cap figure, 15 million salary) that's expiring. I guess I just don't see what value Sanders brings to the table that makes him worth Rondo, while Asik isn't worth Green. Is the gap between Asik and Sanders that substantial?

 
 

I think Asik is a good, but overrated defensive center, who built his reputation as a top rim protector mostly through tremendous rebound numbers, which people conflated with rim protection. This is supported in some of the rim protection numbers available these days, as well as by the fact that the Rockets weren't able to trade him. Ask Rockets fans, and they'll largely tell you the same thing. Not quite as good around the rim as they hoped.
 
I think Sanders really is a Roy Hibbert-esque presence around the rim meanwhile, albeit incapable of playing as many minutes effectively due to foul issues.
 
I think the gap between being a top 2-3 guy at that skill and being a top 15 guy is large.

 
 

Sanders definitely has a bit more upside than Asik, as his season last year proved. But he's a much bigger risk, both in terms of his durability and contract. There are obvious off-court issues, too, which is why he's even being discussed. Kirk Goldsberry (Grantland, SportsVU) loves him, and so did I, initially, but there are a lot of caveats associated with the guy.
 
That said, I would consider the Rondo-Sanders deal ahead of Green-Asik if only for the fact that I don't see Rondo with the Celtics past his current contract, and I see noway for the Celtics to contend next season, either.

 
 

 
I see what you're saying, and agree completely that Larry Sanders is a better rim protector than Asik. I think Sanders and Hibbert are basically in a class of their own when it comes to pure rim protection, and on their own merits, I'd take Sanders over Asik, as well.
 
But Jeff Green looks pretty lost to me and if I'm the Celtics and can get a very good defensive center and rid myself of his contract, I prefer that option to giving up my best player for an excellent defensive center. Admittedly, I also have no idea how consistent rim protection numbers stay from year to year. Basically, I've read the same Goldsberry analysis as everybody else (which I think included 2 years of data?), but would want to see several seasons of that data and see some consistency in it before I felt comfortable enough about what it means to give up Rondo for Sanders.

 
 

 
He's built his defensive reputation partly on his tremendous on/off court statistics.
 
2013-14: Net -7.3 pts. per 100 opponent possessions (in 17% of the available minutes)
2012-13: -6.5 (62% minutes)
2011-12: -7.6 (30% minutes)
2010-11: -9.7 (25% minutes)
 
Sanders:
 
2013-14: -4.2 (15% minutes)
2012-13: -6.1 (49% minutes)
2011-12: -11.6 (20% minutes)
2010-11: +2.0 (22% minutes)
 
Some small sample sizes there, on/off has its flaws, and besides 2012-13 Asik has had horrible on/off offensive numbers.  But all that said, those numbers seem to indicate a great defensive player.  Maybe not a great "rim protector", but there's more to defense than rim protection.

 
 

Unadjusted on/off stuff doesn't do much for me. Once you do adjust, Asik's defense rep doesn't really hold up. 

 
This prompted me to go check out Larry Sanders 2012/13 on 82games. I was surprised at his "Opponent Counterpart 48-Minute Production". It looks like opposing centers averaged a 20.4 PER on him. This is significantly below average. I expected the opposite.
 
His work against PFs was slightly above average, but represents a much smaller sample.
 
Is this a limitation of the 82games approach or does this mean his defense is overrated?
 
I'll admit I had assumed he was spectacular defensively based on the accounts I've seen here, but now I'm 2nd guessing myself.

 

[moly99]

This prompted me to go check out Larry Sanders 2012/13 on 82games. I was surprised at his "Opponent Counterpart 48-Minute Production". It looks like opposing centers averaged a 20.4 PER on him. This is significantly below average. I expected the opposite.
 
His work against PFs was slightly above average, but represents a much smaller sample.
 
Is this a limitation of the 82games approach or does this mean his defense is overrated?
 
I'll admit I had assumed he was spectacular defensively based on the accounts I've seen here, but now I'm 2nd guessing myself.

 
Help defense vs on-ball defense. He is one of the best help defenders in the league, but fouls a ton when playing post defense.

 

[bowiac]

I'll admit I had assumed he was spectacular defensively based on the accounts I've seen here, but now I'm 2nd guessing myself.

That is definitely interesting. I was mostly looking at stuff like 2012-2013 opposing FG% within 5 feet, and the Kirk Goldsberry thing, but it's possible Sanders gives back a ton with the other elements of his defensive game even (to say nothing of his offensive game).

 

[Jer]

That is definitely interesting. I was mostly looking at stuff like 2012-2013 opposing FG% within 5 feet, and the Kirk Goldsberry thing, but it's possible Sanders gives back a ton with the other elements of his defensive game even (to say nothing of his offensive game).

 
Well... the data sources seem at odds to me. I'm inclined to trust your NBA stats more. They're using SportVU for that right?
 
I wish they'd add a view where you could see the differential between the players defensive FG% and the league average for the position/zone.

 

[bowiac]

I don't think the stats conflict per se. They're just measuring different things.
 
What I linked includes all opponent shots for instance (giving Sanders credit/debit for help defense), while the 82 Games numbers don't. Further, there's more to PER than opposing FG%. Sanders fouls an awful lot for instance - many of those fouls turn into points. PER is "catching" that, while the NBA.com stats aren't.

 

[nighthob]

Sanders is more primary help defender than post defender. Put him on a team like the Nets (where Garnett guards the post on defense and stretches the floor on offense) and he'd look really good. On a team like the Bucks where all they have are primary help defenders and he looks worse.