View Full Version : Is it easier to acquire a player via free agency or trade?

King P
12-09-2009, 01:44 AM
So I was talking basketball with my friend, and he was teasing me saying that nobody is going to come to the Nets in 2010 with the way they are playing. I told him that the Boston was one of the worst teams in the NBA. Then they got Ray Allen & KG and won a championship. That could easily be the Nets. He said that you can't compare the 2 because Boston traded for those Allen & KG, they didnt go out and sign them. I told him that it's easier to acquire a player via free agency then it is via trade, and that would give us a better chance to acquire a big player. He disagreed and said its easier to trade for a player than it is to sign a player.

So my question to you guys: is it easier to acquire a player by free agency or trading for them? Explain why

12-09-2009, 01:48 AM

It is easier to get the right numbers and offer teams what they might need.

I go back to the Pau trade. Memphis needed picks, cap space, a prospect(they saw Marc as a kid which is what Pau admits) and quick cash.

If Pau was a free agent other teams could up the anty or Memphis could just outbid everyone thanks to their bird rights

Kobe, Shaq, Kareem, Magic, Odom, and so on have all come thanks to trades.

12-09-2009, 01:58 AM
Draft is generally the easiest.

12-09-2009, 02:30 AM
Free Agency

12-09-2009, 09:44 AM
An Elite top tier player it is easier by free agency in my opinion.

12-09-2009, 11:35 AM
Well Id say trade. You have the power to give up whoever the other teams asking for.

12-09-2009, 12:16 PM
Both are the same just alittle more leverage for the home team in free agency. Remember KG was like a free agent when he got traded to Boston. At first he said no, then you got Ray Allen and he said yes. No different than being a free agent, you just have to get the salaries to match.

12-09-2009, 12:27 PM
I'd say trade. Especially with the Nets, if you packaged like Harris and a 1st round pick you could get a star thats on his way out IMO and then if you packaged like Lopez and CDR you could also get another low post star, same sort of thing the Celtics did with Al Jefferson.

12-09-2009, 12:33 PM
equal since you can make sign and trades once a player says he is not coming back to former team,

is cheaper too to do so.

but the easiest way is tank and then draft

12-09-2009, 12:36 PM
Trade... FA is much more of a bidding war.

12-09-2009, 01:15 PM
The Best way to get a player is by trade. The next best way is the Draft. The Lakers and Celtics won titles becuase they traded for guys like Gasol, Garnett, and Allen. Even the 2006 Heat traded for Shaq. The Cavs traded for Maurice Williams. The Magic traded for Vince Carter and Rafer Alston.

How are signings like Elton Brand, Baron Davis, Sasha Vujacic, James Jones, Peja Stojackovic, and Andre Miller working out.

12-09-2009, 02:23 PM
Depends on the player and the team's options.

12-09-2009, 02:28 PM
Depends on the player and the team's options.

Agreed. Depends on what player we're talking about, and what team we're talking about.

Big market teams probably have an advantage in FA. If you're a small market team, probably easier to get stars via trade.

Also depends on the team situation. Like if you came off a good year and lost a big and bad contract like say, and now have cap room to add a good player to a good team, will be more attractive than a bad team with cap space.

It's completely situational to me.