Let's frame our discussions in a new way.... Long term, who are the young guys that we have currently that provide the most flexibility?
Of the guys we have:
Russell & Ingram provide us with the most flexibility of play. Therefore give us the best opportunity to be a long term winner. Ingram gets the nod because the hope is that he'll be able to slide down to the 2, and slide up to the 4 in his prime, as well as being a natural 3. Hasn't been able to do it yet, but there's hope there when he develops the bulk to be a 4, and the IQ / experience to handle the 2.. Where Russell is very capable of being able to be on and off ball between the 1 & 2. (You need a guy who can be an actual PG to justify Russell being off ball).
As much as we like specific players.... Clarkson is more a 1 position guy. Nance & Randle the same as well (Can't shoot well enough to be a 3, not big enough or have a lineup good enough yet to play the 5 against starters at least). Zubac is a 1 position guy, but that's also not really his fault, just what happens at 7 feet. Black is an undersized 5, not quick enough or the ability to play out on the perimeter to be a 4.
So a Top 3 pick goes in the back court with Russell & Ingram..... Still doesn't keep us from going Paul George in 2018 either because whether it is Fultz, Ball or Jackson in Top 3. You can carve out 30+ mpg for our 3 homegrown players (Russell, Ingram & Top 3) & PG.
While I would put 5 guys ahead of Clarkson (Ingram, Russell, Randle, Zu, Nance) in terms of guys who could make us a winner, he actually may hold the best value because of his contract.
At $11.562mil next season, he allows us to match a salary for a quality player or disgruntled superstar or a better prospect + 1 year salary dump than say our better prospects do. There's very little chance we'll be able to get Deng of Mozgov out to make a deal happen that helps us long term.
So to get a name in a trade, if you don't include Clarkson, Russell + Randle + Nance or Zubac are needed just to reach what Clarkson's salary is, and really puts us in such a bad place that it's not justifiable.
Also for all the stuff of people saying Russell is a bust, or he stinks, he's no good. The way we've handled him has been less than optimal, and you can't deny that. Even if your end game is to trade him, we've badly screwed that up. The value on a car driven out the lot is so much worse than a car that hasn't. So if you think you can get anywhere close to equal value even on just Russell's potential alone, you won't get it. Making any trade you make on him a bad idea.
-Russell, Ingram are your guys that have to stay whether you like it or not because they give the team the best chance of making it back to contention.
-Zubac is the intriguing guy that you have no idea what you got yet. Looks good on offense. But is bad on defense, and needs to develop physically.
-Randle if he can put it all together may give you the most unique skill set out of any of our prospects. Bad on defense though, and shrinks the court if he can't develop a shot. Has improved his midrange shot, and at the rim. But needs to stretch it out to 3.
-Nance is a great glue guy. Besides jumping out the gym exceptionally. Does a lot of things decently, but nothing great. Those guys though fit perfectly on a bench. But there's the issue of injury history + he's a liability on offense, due to lack of confidence, and lack of shot to space the floor.
Leaves Clarkson & Black.... Both would have and do have great value off the bench. But may be the odd guys out because of amount of young players we currently have that are either already better by a large margain, or projected to be significantly better with a few years to do so.
