What’s next for the Sixers after De’Anthony Melton? That depends on the trade market for Tobias Harris and Matisse Thybulle

The longer you look at the Sixers’ personnel and payroll situation with De’Anthony Melton in the fold, the harder it is to envision a path through the rest of the offseason that does not involve trading Tobias Harris. There may well be one, and Daryl Morey may well decide that it is the path best followed. But the going would look a lot less tough if the Sixers could find a team that was open to acquiring the final two years and $79 million dollars on Harris deal.

To be clear, this is my conclusion. The people I’ve talked to who are familiar with the Sixers’ thinking say that Morey is not in the business of shedding salary for salary’s sake. Nor should he be. The Sixers are willing to spend money. They understand that every luxury tax dollar they spend can be written off as a capital investment in the championship brand they are trying to build. The only question that matters in the trade market is whether they are a better team in Scenario A or Scenario B. That’s the whole reason Harris is such a conundrum: they are better with him than without him, all else being equal.

Call it the Tobias Paradox. The Sixers have not been a championship contender with him. But they would be worse than they are now without him. Sometimes, not quite good enough is still the best team you can be. Change for the sake of change leaves the whole world shopping with pennies instead of dollars. I would argue that the only way it makes sense for the Sixers to trade Harris is if it returns them two rotation players, one of them a bona fide starter. That return does not need to be a direct apples-for-apples swap. If trading Harris allows them to sign two players that they would not otherwise be able to sign, that counts too.

The reasoning behind this lies in the Tobias Paradox. The Sixers are unlikely to find a single player who makes the Sixers better all by himself. That’s the way markets tend to work. Let’s not forget that Harris is a very good player. He’s one of those guys who is easy to dismiss until you spend an equivalent amount of time watching the guy who replaces him and become familiar with a new set of flaws. Take P.J. Tucker, whom the Sixers reportedly would love to sign. There’s an argument to make that the Sixers are a better — or at least more sensible — team on paper with Tucker at the four versus Harris. But that’s different from saying that Harris-for-Tucker is a fair trade. Keep in mind, Tucker will be 37 years old this season. He averaged less than 30 minutes per game in both the regular season and the playoffs. Harris, conversely, will be 30 next year. He has missed 20 games over the last four seasons while averaging more than 34 minutes per outing. Unlike Tucker, he becomes a lot more valuable if another scorer gets hurt.

The scenario in which the Sixers can make themselves materially better without Harris is the one in which they essentially turn him into multiple players. Take Eric Gordon, the Rockets guard/wing whom the Sixers are reportedly interested in trading for. Together, he and Tucker made somewhere in the neighborhood of $26 million last season. That’s $10 million less than the Sixers paid Harris. Would the Sixers have been better positioned to beat the Heat with Tucker and Gordon than they were with Harris? Probably, given what we saw.

The Gordon/Tucker hypothetical is a good illustration of why all roads to the optimal roster seem to hinge on Harris.

Think about what we know:

1) With or without Harris, the Sixers need a starting-caliber wing to replace Danny Green. That’s non-negotiable.

2) At the moment, the Sixers only have two ways to acquire a starting-caliber wing: trade for one, or sign a free agent who costs no more than $6.4 million, which is the most a team with the Sixers’ current payroll can spend in free agency (this, thanks to the Mid-Level Exception that the NBA offers to teams who are over the salary cap). The Sixers do have the option of spending up to $10.4 million on a free agent(s), but they would need to trim significant payroll in order to exercise that option (the NBA gives all over-the-cap teams some ability to sign free agents, but teams who project to exceed a total payroll threshold of about $155 million can only spend up to $6.4 million on free agents; the rest can go up to $10.4 million).

3) In recent years’ free-agent markets, starting caliber free agents have cost more than $6.4 million. Quick refresher: the NBA free-agent market essentially stratifies into tiers that coalesce around different salary benchmarks laid out in the CBA. The most significant of those numbers are the Mid-Level Exceptions, which enable all over-the-cap teams to spend at least a little bit of money in the market. Teams that project to exceed a threshold of about $155 million must limit their free agent spending to $6.4 million, plus whatever veterans they can sign to minimum-level contracts (between $1 million and $3 million, roughly). Everybody else can spend up to $10.4 million, plus minimum-level free agents, but they must remain below that $155 million hard cap on total salary.

A quick look at this year’s playoff rosters gives us a good indication of the quality of player available at the two different MLEs. Players who signed for the $6.4 million taxpayer MLE include George Hill (Bucks), Dennis Schroder (Celtics), Trey Burke (Mavs), JaVale McGee (Suns), Jeff Green (Nuggets), Patty Mills (Nets), and Rudy Gay (Jazz). Of that group, only Green averaged more than 20 minutes per night in the playoffs. It’s the next tier — the full non-taxpayer MLE, which this year starts at around $10.3 million — where starters can generally be found. That’s how the Heat signed Tucker. It’s how the Mavericks signed Reggie Bullock. Two years ago, full MLE starters included Tristan Thompson (Celtics) and Jae Crowder (Suns).

4) In order to use the full non-taxpayer MLE of $10.4 million, the Sixers would need to trade away salary. Right now, their payroll sits at about $151 million for 13 players. Assuming they plan on filling the last two roster spots, they are looking at close to $154 million in total salary. Essentially, that means they’d need to clear around $10 million in order to offer the full MLE to Tucker, who declined a $7.4 million player option with the thought that he would earn more on the open market.

In theory, there are ways for the Sixers to pay Tucker (or another free agent) more than $7.4 million without trading Harris. They could trade Furkan Korkmaz, Matisse Thybulle and Georges Niang and replace them with two rookie minimum salaries, which would net them around $11 million (plus a roster spot for Tucker). But that means they’d be trading Thybulle for nothing, which means the Sixers’ depth would remain the same. That doesn’t make sense.

The Sixers could trade Korkmaz, Niang, Jaden Springer, and Shake Milton and replace them with three rookie minimum players and net around the same money as the last scenario. But they’d have a rotation where Thybulle is the second guy off the bench, followed by a bunch of first- and second-year players who couldn’t crack last year’s rotation. And they’d still be hard-capped at $155 million with little room to maneuver. Either of those two scenarios are virtually untenable.

5) The Sixers could forget about Tucker and cobble together a trade package for Gordon or an equivalent veteran under contract with another team. But if that package did not include Harris or Melton, the outgoing salary requirements would probably mean the inclusion of Korkmaz, Thybulle, Niang, Milton, and Jaden Springer. They’d still have the $6.4 million MLE, so they could theoretically have a rotation that has Gordon starting on the wing, Melton as the first guy off the bench, plus a second veteran bench player behind Melton. They’d also have the option of signing veteran free agents for the minimum salary.

But they’d be relying on the veteran minimum market and the young guys to go more than seven deep. It could be feasible if they find a couple of veterans on the minimum who can contribute. Alas, that’s a big IF.

6) The Sixers could forget about Tucker and Gordon and try to trade for a starting wing that makes less than Gordon’s $19.5 million. This would seem to be the most realistic scenario in which Harris remains with the team. Trading Thybulle and Niang for a Bullock-type player would make some sense. You’d have a solid starting five, a good bench player in Melton, and the $6.4 million MLE to add a seventh veteran rotation player. Plus, you’d have some minutes to offer a veteran who is in the market for a minimum deal. Possible, except Bullock-type players tend to be on playoff teams who would have little incentive to trade them.

Long story short, a Harris trade isn’t a necessity. But there sure are a lot of worlds in which it would make a lot of sense. Like, say, strike a trade that replaces Harris’ $37.7 million cap number with Gordon at $19.5 million, sign Tucker for $10.3 million, give yourself $8 million of breathing room and the potential to still move Korkmaz, Milton, et al. Such a move would presumably involve the inclusion of Thybulle as the value return for one of the teams involved. Question is, does Harris’ contract have enough trade value to get it done?

Feel free to replace Gordon and Tucker with any other equivalent veterans. The free-agent market has several options that would fit the Sixers’ profile: Bruce Brown, Delon Wright, Kyle Anderson, Bobby Portis, Donte DiVincenzo, and Cody Martin. But John Hollinger’s free-agent formula pegs all of them at or above the $10.3 million MLE. Caleb Martin, Tucker’s understudy with the Heat, could make some sense, but Miami has the right to match anything up to the $6.4 million MLE.

The executive summary: the Sixers need a starter and free-agent starters usually cost more than they have to spend, which means they either need to give themselves more money to spend on free agents or they need to acquire a starter who is not a free agent. Both of those scenarios require a trade. Any trade would seem likely to include one of two players. If the trade involves Harris, it would need to lead to the acquisition of two starter-quality players (to replace Green and Harris). It could also need to include Thybulle, who would need to return a legitimate rotation piece in order to be included.

That’s a lot of dots to connect. It may turn out that there is no way to connect them. Either way, the Sixers’ needs are clear, as are their options. The big question is whether they equal out.