Considering dealing one of two very talented young centers likely is so rare that finding another young big in return could be problematic.  If a trade occurs, it might make sense to deal for a star at a different position.

btw, I regard Monroe being traded in the near future as extremely unlikely.  You’d need to make a high risk, all things considered, move, which could easily backfire publicly.  Can’t see Joe doing it anytime soon.

I saw the Monroe story concerning Drummond (but wasn’t thinking about it as I wrote).  I confess this may well be obstinate, but I don’t necessarily take that as signifying Monroe’s eager to move.   Let me try what may well be a far-fetched defense.  Studies show that while we demand less of ourselves than others, we freely place burdens on our future selves equal to what we expect from others.  What if last year’s Monroe keenly felt the need for more size, so encouraged the team to check out Drummond.  Drafting the guy who was once rumored to be going #2 may have seemed like a distant prospect.  Then AD’s drafted.  What if Monroe envisioned developing a strong shot and not needing to go up against the atheletic big guys who crush him on D?  He’d still want AD.  As the season started (and he struggled a bit), he may have become worried about losing part of the best part of his game, operating offensively beneath the basket.  He talks to Frank about this concern, but is assured it won’t be an issue this season (he can still defer the burden to his future self).  As the season progresses, it increasingly becomes an issue that AD should start at center.  But Frank — convinced AD should be brought along slowly, seeing that AD’s fitness provided a reason to avoid conflict with GM, and responding to GM’s concerns — holds offs on moving AD to starting center, or even to playing AD and GM together much.  There’s at least a little direct evidence for this speculative scenario in a comment made by GM earlier this year, which worried me, something about shooting not being his game.  Beyond that, the principal evidence is simply what actually happened: AD didn’t start, AD and GM didn’t play much together, even though so many pleaded for what seemed like the obvious thing to do.

I’ve enjoyed our exchange (even though I think it’s time to rejoin the present threads) which is restoring my confidence in the possibilities of online forums.  At times, a forum like this can encourage a level of discourtesy that you wouldn’t often encounter in real life.  But at its best, a forum like this provides a chance for enthusiastic and expert exchanges that aren’t possible elsewhere, certainly not for someone like myself who no longer lives in Michigan.

A point of difference between us seems to be that I think a Monroe trade could well be an upgrade without being a talent upgrade, namely an upgrade in roster fit.  Lateral trades often accomplish that (making the Monroe for Rondo suggestion interesting, except that I’m not keen on Rondo). 

Interesting contention about really good players being able to work well together.  Maybe so, if there’s space for both on the floor.  Plenty of cases of a player being blocked, like young Steve Nash being traded to Dallas.  Even when both are on the court, both might not flourish.  An example might be Jrue Holliday coming into his own with Igluadala leaving.  With the Pistons, I thought the great, but aging, Webber was a terrific facilitator in their 16-4 run, but evidently Billups wasn’t willing to co-exist in that role (and a still very productive Webber struggled earlier to co-exist with AI).  At a lower, lesser, level Rip and Gordon couldn’t make it work although I think they had initial good will, let alone Rip and AI.  Stuckey performing subpart alongside Bynum is a current example, although neither are great.  At the center position, I’d need to look back at the history of Wilt and Nate Thurmond with the Warriors prior to the trade of Wilt.  In soccer, it happens routinely that a really good player can’t find his sweet spot because someone else is camped there — the recent history of the Dutch national team provides illustrations of suboptimal performances among outstanding forwards. 

I do hope you’re right that Monroe emulating Aldridge’s shooting is a reasonable expectation.   It strikes me that certain skill sets are surprisingly resistant to significant upgrading.  Court vision’s the main example (see Stuck, BK), but even something as mechanical as free throw shooting rarely improves dramatically (with Karl Malone as a striking exception).  I agree that Monroe has a number of the attributes of an effective high post operator (passing), but the quickness and shooting concerns me. 

Finally, you mentioned earlier that AD’s never started (although supposedly he was going to just when he got hurt).  But does that tell us something about Monroe’s attitude towards shifting to PF?  Might the coach have been deferential towards his best player?  It’s great when a guy like Cabrera embraces a position shift that could make him look bad; I’m not sensing the same eagerness/ willingness from Monroe, which could be a factor.

I realize there are reasons for not trading which I haven’t discussed, which is why I wouldn’t regard trading Monroe as the obvious thing to do.  But it would be a serious option to consider.

My initial observation concerned a formal curiosity: A (Rake?) says X does not deserve a max contract; B (Oats?) says if X signs a max contract he deserves it.  There needn’t be a contradiction here (and both could be right, in one sense) because different things are meant.

That aside, what of Monroe’s future.  You request: “Explain to me how rolling with Monroe and Drummond for the next few years isn’t the best move.” 

On the whole, I don’t think I disagree; the difference may simply be that I don’t find it as obvious as you seem to.

It’s important to note the contrasts involved in various scenarios.

1) Sign Monroe to a max deal rather than let him walk.

That one’s obvious to me: sign him.

2) Sign Monroe to a max deal rather than making a good trade involving him before getting to the  point of signing.  

That one’s quite a bit more murky to me.

You seem to suggest that trading him in the near future or trading him after a max deal, perhaps after the experiment with AD has proven wobbly, are rough equivalents.  I’m not so sure.

I’m inclined to think there’s a pretty good chance that Monroe’s optimal value is now or in the near future.  If so, now may well be the optimal time for trading him for the piece who makes the whole roster come together.  You seem skeptical of such a trade being available, probably with good reason.  But if a trade involving Monroe and Aldridge were available, I’d have to give it serious thought over the option of signing him for a maz.

Why might his trade value diminish?  First, the NBA seems headed for a place where very good players who don’t fit the budget/ principal roster needs (Rudy Gay, Josh Smith) are losing value (but, yes, I do agree Memphis made quite a solid trade).
Secondly, Detroit’s now dealing from a position of strength, with no pressing budget worries and no compelling reason to jettison one of the big two.  That may not be the case moving forward, so that Monroe’s trade value may diminish for organizational reasons (I have the impression Atlanta experienced some of the discomfort of being under pressure of dealing Josh Smith at the deadline).
Thirdly (and related to #2), Monroe could be exposed in the role of complementary star to AD [I here not addressing the wisdom of treating AD as centerpiece, an issue you raised).  Briefly speculating on the AD-Monroe issue, the GS announcers made an unfair yet interesting comparison between Monroe at PF (IF he doesn’t develop a good shot) and Carlos Boozer.  My understanding of the comparison was that Monroe could evolve as a guy with strong post moves who doesn’t shoot well, a guy who rebounds (but maybe less with AD picking off a goodly number of the easy ones under the basket) but plays subpar D, especially against quicker PFs who shoot well.  A moderately enhanced Boozer with a long term max deal could be an albatross for a team attempting to rebuild around AD.

All in all, I’d want to keep Monroe (for whom I have great respect) and sign him to a max deal.  But I’d be all ears if it sounded like the trade that could make the roster function optimally were being offered, a possibility which I regard as more likely in the next year or so then four years down the line.