CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: rondohondo on February 19, 2013, 12:27:16 PM
-
Not sure who the guy is, but they have had him on sports center before, and he is a former memphis GM I believe.
He was saying a trade of
Bos sends: KG
LAC send : Bledsoe, Odom ( exiring) and a 1st
makes more sense because Bledsoe is the key guy that Boston wants, and they don't get Jordans big contract, instead an expiring and a pick.
I was thinking what if you expanded it to do a 3 way where the c's would get Josh Smith
Bos sends: KG and 1st rd pick
Bos gets : Josh Smith and Bledsoe
Lac sends: Bledsoe, Odom and 1st rd pick
Lac gets : KG
Atlanta sends: Josh Smith
Atlanta gets : Odom(expiring), bos 1st rd pick, clipers 1st rd pick
Bos gets two young building blocks
Clippers get kg and keep Jordan
Atlanta clears cap space and picks up two first round picks
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
-
Not sure who the guy is, but they have had him on sports center before, and he is a former memphis GM I believe.
He was saying a trade of
Bos sends: KG
LAC send : Bledsoe, Odom ( exiring) and a 1st
makes more sense because Bledsoe is the key guy that Boston wants, and they don't get Jordans big contract, instead an expiring and a pick.
I was thinking what if you expanded it to do a 3 way where the c's would get Josh Smith
Bos sends: KG and 1st rd pick
Bos gets : Josh Smith and Bledsoe
Lac sends: Bledsoe, Odom and 1st rd pick
Lac gets : KG
Atlanta sends: Josh Smith
Atlanta gets : Odom(expiring), bos 1st rd pick, clipers 1st rd pick
Bos gets two young building blocks
Clippers get kg and keep Jordan
Atlanta clears cap space and picks up two first round picks
I'm almost 100% certain this deal as constructed would put us over the hard cap. I don't think including an injured Barbosa would help enough, either, but it would get us closer.
Also, KG's contract can only bring back 14,557,831 in salary. Bledsoe+Smith is $14.9 mil. That could, however, be fixed by including Barbosa.
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
A deal including Jordan was bad (mostly because of Jordan's contract). A deal including Odom is worse.
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
Only reason to do that instead of Jordan is if Danny is convinced he can get enough cap room to get an impact FA this coming offseason. Otherwise why not take Jordan?
-
Would this work?
http://espn.go.com/nba/trademachine?tradeId=av8m6ew
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
Only reason to do that instead of Jordan is if Danny is convinced he can get enough cap room to get an impact FA this coming offseason. Otherwise why not take Jordan?
Maybe the Clips won't give them both up....
-
Really don't want to trade KG just for an expiring. I think Danny knows its harder to sell players on us rather than getting talent from a trade. There is no guarantee that we sign good FA's with the cap space. So no thanks. Rather ride it out or get Deandre and get Bledsoe.
-
Would this work?
http://espn.go.com/nba/trademachine?tradeId=av8m6ew
link doesn't work
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
A deal including Jordan was bad (mostly because of Jordan's contract). A deal including Odom is worse.
I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that trading KG for Bledsoe/Odom is a non-starter, even with a 1st thrown in.
Mike
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
A deal including Jordan was bad (mostly because of Jordan's contract). A deal including Odom is worse.
I don't know. To me it would depend on how many picks the Clippers are willing to send along if Odom was included instead of Jordan, especially if a first rounder was for 2014. Also, it could depend what else you're trading. If Pierce is also heading out (which seems likely in a universe where KG is traded), and you're also able to clear out Bass and Terry, for primarily players on rookie deals, expirings, and draft picks, you could create enough flexibility next off-season to make a run at a major free agent. In that case, Jordan's contract would definitely be a drag, because then you have to get involved with sign-and-trades, instead of just getting the player directly from free agency. That first bit of expiring contract isn't very valuable at all from the Celtics vantage point, but if combined with other deals, could become quite valuable indeed.
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
Only reason to do that instead of Jordan is if Danny is convinced he can get enough cap room to get an impact FA this coming offseason. Otherwise why not take Jordan?
Maybe the Clips won't give them both up....
Then you hang up on them. We're not getting a high enough lottery pick to be worth tanking at this point.
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
That's what She said Roy!! ;)
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
A deal including Jordan was bad (mostly because of Jordan's contract). A deal including Odom is worse.
I don't know. To me it would depend on how many picks the Clippers are willing to send along if Odom was included instead of Jordan, especially if a first rounder was for 2014. Also, it could depend what else you're trading. If Pierce is also heading out (which seems likely in a universe where KG is traded), and you're also able to clear out Bass and Terry, for primarily players on rookie deals, expirings, and draft picks, you could create enough flexibility next off-season to make a run at a major free agent. In that case, Jordan's contract would definitely be a drag, because then you have to get involved with sign-and-trades, instead of just getting the player directly from free agency. That first bit of expiring contract isn't very valuable at all from the Celtics vantage point, but if combined with other deals, could become quite valuable indeed.
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Also, I'm not sure where you're going with 30+ million committed to Rondo, Green and Jordan. You can't just "clear everyone off the books", you have cap holds, and someone has to actually suit up for the games.
It's just not going to work this way.
-
Why would Danny move KG for Avery Bradley's stunt double?
Bledsoe is a world class athlete, but unfortunetly has the same issue as Avery, being a SG in a PG's body. Great defender, but his ceiling on a great team is 'energy guy off the bench'
What I'd really like to see is LA move Bledsoe & Odom for Millsap, and Odom get bought out. LO would be a nice vet min add post deadline if available.
-
Taking on Odom's expiring makes no sense. With KG gone and everyone else here we still have 10 players, 1 draft slot, and 1 minimum slot plus a bunch of cap holds that put us over the cap.
So what good is an expiring contract?
-
Would this work?
http://espn.go.com/nba/trademachine?tradeId=av8m6ew
link doesn't work
That is bizarre. I even still have the saved trade up with that link listed.
It has KG and Collins to LA
Jordan to Atlanta (allows Hortford to be the PF)
Bledsoe and Smith to Boston.
-
what's up with the Faker's logo, Nick?
-
what's up with the Faker's logo, Nick?
Some sort of a CB draft thing, I imagine.
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
Only reason to do that instead of Jordan is if Danny is convinced he can get enough cap room to get an impact FA this coming offseason. Otherwise why not take Jordan?
Maybe the Clips won't give them both up....
Then you hang up on them. We're not getting a high enough lottery pick to be worth tanking at this point.
I probably would, because I like Jordan. But that doesn't mean Ainge would. It sounds like he values Bledsoe much more highly than csbloggers do, and it could be that they'd prefer cap flexibility to Jordan.
If they can get Millsap for Bledsoe and Odom or even Butler, it could be that they'll stand firm on not giving up both Jordan and Bledsoe for KG, even if he's the superior (but far older) player.
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
A deal including Jordan was bad (mostly because of Jordan's contract). A deal including Odom is worse.
I don't know. To me it would depend on how many picks the Clippers are willing to send along if Odom was included instead of Jordan, especially if a first rounder was for 2014. Also, it could depend what else you're trading. If Pierce is also heading out (which seems likely in a universe where KG is traded), and you're also able to clear out Bass and Terry, for primarily players on rookie deals, expirings, and draft picks, you could create enough flexibility next off-season to make a run at a major free agent. In that case, Jordan's contract would definitely be a drag, because then you have to get involved with sign-and-trades, instead of just getting the player directly from free agency. That first bit of expiring contract isn't very valuable at all from the Celtics vantage point, but if combined with other deals, could become quite valuable indeed.
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Also, I'm not sure where you're going with 30+ million committed to Rondo, Green and Jordan. You can't just "clear everyone off the books", you have cap holds, and someone has to actually suit up for the games.
It's just not going to work this way.
I was advocating for Odom instead of Jordan, in the universe of also trading away Pierce, Bass, and JET. Cap holds are relatively meaningless, as the point of acquiring expiring contracts to clear future cap space is that you would renounce the players once you've got a free agent to sign. I mean, they exist, but if you're acquiring Lamar Odom because he's not under contract next year, then renouncing him should not be a hurdle at all.
Consider this deal:
Boston receives:
Eric Bledsoe
Harrison Barnes
Klay Thompson
Richard Jefferson
Lamar Odom
Beno Udrih
Clippers 2014 1st rounder
Golden State receives:
Paul Pierce
Matt Barnes
Boston 2013 1st rounder (top 10 protected)
Milwaukee 2014 2nd rounder
Clippers receive:
Kevin Garnett
Milwaukee receives:
Brandon Bass
Jason Terry
In this world, Boston waives Jefferson next summer using the stretch provision, and renounces all their cap holds. They'd have just under $43 million under contract assigned to nine players, could almost certainly sign a max player for the frontcourt, a room exception for depth, and/or could trade one of their four relatively inexpensive but useful guards for a similarly priced 4 or 5. They would also have 2 2014 first rounders, and would have been under the luxury tax two years in a row, which would help them avoid the repeater penalty in the long run.
Not saying this is remotely likely, because few message board designed trades are, but in this universe I'd rather have Odom in a trade instead of Jordan.
EDIT: Forgot Minimum roster size holds, which would bring the committed amount to just under $44 million at the beginning of free agency. Still, that should create room for a max contract unless the cap level is lower than expected the $60 mil (and I personally think it will be higher than the $60 million most are projecting. More like $63 mil.)
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
A deal including Jordan was bad (mostly because of Jordan's contract). A deal including Odom is worse.
I don't know. To me it would depend on how many picks the Clippers are willing to send along if Odom was included instead of Jordan, especially if a first rounder was for 2014. Also, it could depend what else you're trading. If Pierce is also heading out (which seems likely in a universe where KG is traded), and you're also able to clear out Bass and Terry, for primarily players on rookie deals, expirings, and draft picks, you could create enough flexibility next off-season to make a run at a major free agent. In that case, Jordan's contract would definitely be a drag, because then you have to get involved with sign-and-trades, instead of just getting the player directly from free agency. That first bit of expiring contract isn't very valuable at all from the Celtics vantage point, but if combined with other deals, could become quite valuable indeed.
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Also, I'm not sure where you're going with 30+ million committed to Rondo, Green and Jordan. You can't just "clear everyone off the books", you have cap holds, and someone has to actually suit up for the games.
It's just not going to work this way.
I was advocating for Odom instead of Jordan, in the universe of also trading away Pierce, Bass, and JET. Cap holds are relatively meaningless, as the point of acquiring expiring contracts to clear future cap space is that you would renounce the players once you've got a free agent to sign. I mean, they exist, but if you're acquiring Lamar Odom because he's not under contract next year, then renouncing him should not be a hurdle at all.
Consider this deal:
Boston receives:
Eric Bledsoe
Harrison Barnes
Klay Thompson
Richard Jefferson
Lamar Odom
Beno Udrih
Clippers 2014 1st rounder
Golden State receives:
Paul Pierce
Matt Barnes
Boston 2013 1st rounder (top 10 protected)
Milwaukee 2014 2nd rounder
Clippers receive:
Kevin Garnett
Milwaukee receives:
Brandon Bass
Jason Terry
In this world, Boston waives Jefferson next summer using the stretch provision, and renounces all their cap holds. They'd have just under $43 million under contract assigned to nine players, could almost certainly sign a max player for the frontcourt, a room exception for depth, and/or could trade one of their four relatively inexpensive but useful guards for a similarly priced 4 or 5. They would also have 2 2014 first rounders, and would have been under the luxury tax two years in a row, which would help them avoid the repeater penalty in the long run.
Not saying this is remotely likely, because few message board designed trades are, but in this universe I'd rather have Odom in a trade instead of Jordan.
Golden State has ZERO reason to be involved in that deal.
I think people are forgetting something. The only reason the Clippers would be interested in swapping Bledsoe/Jordan for KG in the first place is because Chris Paul isn't signed longterm.
If they get KG and win a title, the chances of resigning Paul almost certainly go up. And if they don't resign him, they gain salary flexibility from exchanging Jordan's deal for KG's.
If Paul were already under a long-term deal, the Clippers would have to be insane to trade two young talents for a guy who might only play 30 games for the Clips and then retire.
Mike
-
Odom worked out real well in Dallas..do not go near that knucklehead...we are better now than with all the possible trades put out on this board--just some really stupid stuff being discussed! See who retires after this run and what free agents will be available.
-
Boston can always trade D.Jordan for an expiring + additional assets in a subsequent move.
Take D.Jordan.
Yeah, I would think that Jordan has some value in a 3-way.
A deal including Jordan was bad (mostly because of Jordan's contract). A deal including Odom is worse.
I don't know. To me it would depend on how many picks the Clippers are willing to send along if Odom was included instead of Jordan, especially if a first rounder was for 2014. Also, it could depend what else you're trading. If Pierce is also heading out (which seems likely in a universe where KG is traded), and you're also able to clear out Bass and Terry, for primarily players on rookie deals, expirings, and draft picks, you could create enough flexibility next off-season to make a run at a major free agent. In that case, Jordan's contract would definitely be a drag, because then you have to get involved with sign-and-trades, instead of just getting the player directly from free agency. That first bit of expiring contract isn't very valuable at all from the Celtics vantage point, but if combined with other deals, could become quite valuable indeed.
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Also, I'm not sure where you're going with 30+ million committed to Rondo, Green and Jordan. You can't just "clear everyone off the books", you have cap holds, and someone has to actually suit up for the games.
It's just not going to work this way.
I was advocating for Odom instead of Jordan, in the universe of also trading away Pierce, Bass, and JET. Cap holds are relatively meaningless, as the point of acquiring expiring contracts to clear future cap space is that you would renounce the players once you've got a free agent to sign. I mean, they exist, but if you're acquiring Lamar Odom because he's not under contract next year, then renouncing him should not be a hurdle at all.
Consider this deal:
Boston receives:
Eric Bledsoe
Harrison Barnes
Klay Thompson
Richard Jefferson
Lamar Odom
Beno Udrih
Clippers 2014 1st rounder
Golden State receives:
Paul Pierce
Matt Barnes
Boston 2013 1st rounder (top 10 protected)
Milwaukee 2014 2nd rounder
Clippers receive:
Kevin Garnett
Milwaukee receives:
Brandon Bass
Jason Terry
In this world, Boston waives Jefferson next summer using the stretch provision, and renounces all their cap holds. They'd have just under $43 million under contract assigned to nine players, could almost certainly sign a max player for the frontcourt, a room exception for depth, and/or could trade one of their four relatively inexpensive but useful guards for a similarly priced 4 or 5. They would also have 2 2014 first rounders, and would have been under the luxury tax two years in a row, which would help them avoid the repeater penalty in the long run.
Not saying this is remotely likely, because few message board designed trades are, but in this universe I'd rather have Odom in a trade instead of Jordan.
Golden State has ZERO reason to be involved in that deal.
I think people are forgetting something. The only reason the Clippers would be interested in swapping Bledsoe/Jordan for KG in the first place is because Chris Paul isn't signed longterm.
If they get KG and win a title, the chances of resigning Paul almost certainly go up. And if they don't resign him, they gain salary flexibility from exchanging Jordan's deal for KG's.
If Paul were already under a long-term deal, the Clippers would have to be insane to trade two young talents for a guy who might only play 30 games for the Clips and then retire.
Mike
I would say Golden State has some reason to be involved in that deal. Firstly, the rumors of Golden State being interested in Pierce had to come from somewhere. Golden State has about as much salary flexibility as we do to take on Pierce, so in order to acquire him, the salaries would need to closely match. Furthermore, if you put that trade into trade machine, it has Golden State coming ahead by 8 wins. Obviously one should take the trade machine with a grain of salt, but coming out +8 means that a rationale can be made.
-
In this world, Boston waives Jefferson next summer using the stretch provision, and renounces all their cap holds. They'd have just under $43 million under contract assigned to nine players, could almost certainly sign a max player for the frontcourt, a room exception for depth, and/or could trade one of their four relatively inexpensive but useful guards for a similarly priced 4 or 5. They would also have 2 2014 first rounders, and would have been under the luxury tax two years in a row, which would help them avoid the repeater penalty in the long run.
Not saying this is remotely likely, because few message board designed trades are, but in this universe I'd rather have Odom in a trade instead of Jordan.
EDIT: Forgot Minimum roster size holds, which would bring the committed amount to just under $44 million at the beginning of free agency. Still, that should create room for a max contract unless the cap level is lower than expected the $60 mil (and I personally think it will be higher than the $60 million most are projecting. More like $63 mil.)
If and when Garnett and Pierce retire, you're going to be exactly at the same spot cap-wise.
And the type of young, cheap talent you could add in to justify a wholesale of this magnitude simply isn't on the table.
-
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Simply untrue, particularly considering the new CBA.
-
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Simply untrue, particularly considering the new CBA.
Care to explain?
-
In this world, Boston waives Jefferson next summer using the stretch provision, and renounces all their cap holds. They'd have just under $43 million under contract assigned to nine players, could almost certainly sign a max player for the frontcourt, a room exception for depth, and/or could trade one of their four relatively inexpensive but useful guards for a similarly priced 4 or 5. They would also have 2 2014 first rounders, and would have been under the luxury tax two years in a row, which would help them avoid the repeater penalty in the long run.
Not saying this is remotely likely, because few message board designed trades are, but in this universe I'd rather have Odom in a trade instead of Jordan.
EDIT: Forgot Minimum roster size holds, which would bring the committed amount to just under $44 million at the beginning of free agency. Still, that should create room for a max contract unless the cap level is lower than expected the $60 mil (and I personally think it will be higher than the $60 million most are projecting. More like $63 mil.)
If and when Garnett and Pierce retire, you're going to be exactly at the same spot cap-wise.
And the type of young, cheap talent you could add in to justify a wholesale of this magnitude simply isn't on the table.
I'm not making a rationale to trade. I'm saying that in certain situations it makes sense to prefer Odom to Jordan. Clearly, the Celtics are strongly considering trading both KG and Pierce, and are specifically considering trading to KG to the Clippers. The premise was to get back Odom instead of Jordan. My argument is that if you also are able to trade Bass and Terry, and get back mostly expiring contracts, you could potentially create enough room to pursue a max free agent, in which case maybe it would make sense to pass on Deandre Jordan. I'm frankly not in love with the Clippers deal at all, because most of the value comes in the form of Eric Bledsoe, who is superfluous on next year's roster with a healthy Rondo. But that seems to be the main option on the table for the Celtics.
-
Odom, Jordan, Bledsoe
for
Garnett, Bass, Terry
OR
ATL - Jordan, Odom, Lee, Bos 1st
BOS - Smith, Stevenson, Morrow, Bledsoe
LAC - Garnett, Bass, Terry
-
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Simply untrue, particularly considering the new CBA.
Care to explain?
Sure.
The part about late 1st being worthless is a poor generalization. Sully was taken past the lottery. Rondo was taken past the lottery. Bledsoe was taken past the lottery. Jordan was taken in the 2nd round. Perk and Barbosa were taken back-to-back at 27 and 28. All picks are valuable to teams, particularly ones rebuilding. Ainge has commented this year that it's become more difficult to get picks in trade or sale. IMO, this in part due to situations like Rondo from Phoenix where the selling team looks utterly stupid for doing so, but also based on the value of low salaried players vis-a-vis the CBA.
My comment about the new CBA stems from less financial flexibility. Rookie contracts allow teams to fill the back end of their roster with solid role players -- in many cases experienced 4-year college or international guys, either when they're ready or beforehand to stash for a couple of years. San Antonio in particular has mastered this, though other very good organizations like the Celtics have done pretty well late in the 1st (save Giddens). Basically, it's hard to find any quality player for around $1mil a year, and every team needs them.
If late 1st were worth next to nothing, a valuable guy like Redick would have been traded weeks ago. We'll see whether the Magic can pry one away for him before the deadline.
-
Taking on Odom's expiring makes no sense. With KG gone and everyone else here we still have 10 players, 1 draft slot, and 1 minimum slot plus a bunch of cap holds that put us over the cap.
So what good is an expiring contract?
It makes perfect sense. Trading KG signals an intent to not put a contender on the floor next season. So the idea would be to only trade for players who would be under contract beyond next season if they are being paid according to the rookie scale. And if you are not going to contend, then why not save on payroll so you are more willing to dip into the luxury tax if necessary in a future season?
-
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Simply untrue, particularly considering the new CBA.
Care to explain?
Sure.
The part about late 1st being worthless is a poor generalization. Sully was taken past the lottery. Rondo was taken past the lottery. Bledsoe was taken past the lottery. Jordan was taken in the 2nd round. All picks are valuable to teams, particularly ones rebuilding. Ainge has commented this year that it's become more difficult to get picks in trade or sale. IMO, this in part due to situations like Rondo from Phoenix where the selling team looks utterly stupid for doing so, but also based on the value of low salaried players vis-a-vis the CBA.
My comment about the new CBA stems from less financial flexibility. Rookie contracts allow teams to fill the back end of their roster with solid role players -- in many cases experienced 4-year college or international guys, either when they're ready or beforehand to stash for a couple of years. San Antonio in particular has mastered this, though other very good organizations like the Celtics have done pretty well late in the 1st (save Giddens). Basically, it's hard to find any quality player for around $1mil a year, and every team needs them.
If late 1st were worth next to nothing, a valuable guy like Redick would have been traded weeks ago. We'll see whether the Magic can pry one away for him before the deadline.
I didn't say it's "worthless". I said it's "worth next to nothing". I'm a little baffled by your argument, since it's logical continuation is to say that we should trade out of the draft every season because guys like Gilbert Arenas and Ben Wallace went undrafted.
You surely _can_ get a good player in the end of the first or even the second round -- that's the nature of the draft. But the chance you'd get anything more than a solid role player is low, not to mention you're almost guaranteed not to have a shot at what's perceived as top talent in the draft. And there's also the issue about when they'll be ready to contribute, even if they have considerable college pedigree.
I understand the ability of a team to lock serviceable players into long and cheap contract, but are you really saying that the ability to have the next Courtney Lee for $2m instead of $5m a year is that important? Sure, it's nice to have, but...
-
A Clippers pick is worth next to nothing, given that it's unlikely to be better than the mid 20s.
Simply untrue, particularly considering the new CBA.
Care to explain?
Sure.
The part about late 1st being worthless is a poor generalization. Sully was taken past the lottery. Rondo was taken past the lottery. Bledsoe was taken past the lottery. Jordan was taken in the 2nd round. All picks are valuable to teams, particularly ones rebuilding. Ainge has commented this year that it's become more difficult to get picks in trade or sale. IMO, this in part due to situations like Rondo from Phoenix where the selling team looks utterly stupid for doing so, but also based on the value of low salaried players vis-a-vis the CBA.
My comment about the new CBA stems from less financial flexibility. Rookie contracts allow teams to fill the back end of their roster with solid role players -- in many cases experienced 4-year college or international guys, either when they're ready or beforehand to stash for a couple of years. San Antonio in particular has mastered this, though other very good organizations like the Celtics have done pretty well late in the 1st (save Giddens). Basically, it's hard to find any quality player for around $1mil a year, and every team needs them.
If late 1st were worth next to nothing, a valuable guy like Redick would have been traded weeks ago. We'll see whether the Magic can pry one away for him before the deadline.
I didn't say it's "worthless". I said it's "worth next to nothing". I'm a little baffled by your argument, since it's logical continuation is to say that we should trade out of the draft every season because guys like Gilbert Arenas and Ben Wallace went undrafted.
You surely _can_ get a good player in the end of the first or even the second round -- that's the nature of the draft. But the chance you'd get anything more than a solid role player is low, not to mention you're almost guaranteed not to have a shot at what's perceived as top talent in the draft. And there's also the issue about when they'll be ready to contribute, even if they have considerable college pedigree.
I understand the ability of a team to lock serviceable players into long and cheap contract, but are you really saying that the ability to have the next Courtney Lee for $2m instead of $5m a year is that important? Sure, it's nice to have, but...
Arenas was drafted early in the 2nd round.
I don't buy an argument that's based around a team's lack of confidence in its ability to draft. Surely the Cs believe they can find talent in the draft, or instead of drafting Bradley or Sullinger or Perk they'd just sell or trade their picks every year.
And yes, finding a Courtney Lee for $1mil per instead of $5mil per is very valuable to teams. Just ask the Spurs -- outside of Tim Duncan and Kahwi Leonard (taken 15th), their rotation is built exclusively on players taken in the late first and second rounds. And they have the best record in the NBA.
-
Taking on Odom's expiring makes no sense. With KG gone and everyone else here we still have 10 players, 1 draft slot, and 1 minimum slot plus a bunch of cap holds that put us over the cap.
So what good is an expiring contract?
It makes perfect sense. Trading KG signals an intent to not put a contender on the floor next season. So the idea would be to only trade for players who would be under contract beyond next season if they are being paid according to the rookie scale. And if you are not going to contend, then why not save on payroll so you are more willing to dip into the luxury tax if necessary in a future season?
They are not in the luxury tax. And just dumping KG's salary doesn't do anything to help you rebuild it just lessens your payroll.
It makes zero sense to trade KG for an expiring. Danny will try to use the salary he has to rebuild on the fly keeping the team just under the luxury line. He won't scale everything down to get cap room.
-
Taking on Odom's expiring makes no sense. With KG gone and everyone else here we still have 10 players, 1 draft slot, and 1 minimum slot plus a bunch of cap holds that put us over the cap.
So what good is an expiring contract?
It makes perfect sense. Trading KG signals an intent to not put a contender on the floor next season. So the idea would be to only trade for players who would be under contract beyond next season if they are being paid according to the rookie scale. And if you are not going to contend, then why not save on payroll so you are more willing to dip into the luxury tax if necessary in a future season?
They are not in the luxury tax. And just dumping KG's salary doesn't do anything to help you rebuild it just lessens your payroll.
It makes zero sense to trade KG for an expiring. Danny will try to use the salary he has to rebuild on the fly keeping the team just under the luxury line. He won't scale everything down to get cap room.
The Celtics are currently in the luxury tax. It is a small amount for the Celtics this year, but the issue is in future years. Beginning in 2014, there is a repeater rate, which is applied if you paid the luxury tax in the previous 3 seasons. In 2015, it is if you paid the tax in 3 of the previous 4 seasons. That tax is 2.5 to 1 for every dollar you're over, and the rate increases every $5 million you're over. While this year the tax is no obstacle, in future years it may be, so dropping below the tax line this year could save the team millions in tax dollars in the future, and that obviously would have real value. In the new CBA, a well-run team should only pay the luxury tax when they're winning, and not go very far into it unless they're a legit championship contender, unless they're the Lakers, who have a huge media deal (and even then, paying a $60 million tax bill, as they might do next season, should be avoid when possible.)
-
Would this work?
http://espn.go.com/nba/trademachine?tradeId=av8m6ew
link doesn't work
That is bizarre. I even still have the saved trade up with that link listed.
It has KG and Collins to LA
Jordan to Atlanta (allows Hortford to be the PF)
Bledsoe and Smith to Boston.
The trade checker direct links havent been working for me today either.
I'd do that trade, and follow it up with the Rondo for Dwight trade.
-
Taking on Odom's expiring makes no sense. With KG gone and everyone else here we still have 10 players, 1 draft slot, and 1 minimum slot plus a bunch of cap holds that put us over the cap.
So what good is an expiring contract?
It makes perfect sense. Trading KG signals an intent to not put a contender on the floor next season. So the idea would be to only trade for players who would be under contract beyond next season if they are being paid according to the rookie scale. And if you are not going to contend, then why not save on payroll so you are more willing to dip into the luxury tax if necessary in a future season?
They are not in the luxury tax. And just dumping KG's salary doesn't do anything to help you rebuild it just lessens your payroll.
It makes zero sense to trade KG for an expiring. Danny will try to use the salary he has to rebuild on the fly keeping the team just under the luxury line. He won't scale everything down to get cap room.
The Celtics are currently in the luxury tax. It is a small amount for the Celtics this year, but the issue is in future years. Beginning in 2014, there is a repeater rate, which is applied if you paid the luxury tax in the previous 3 seasons. In 2015, it is if you paid the tax in 3 of the previous 4 seasons. That tax is 2.5 to 1 for every dollar you're over, and the rate increases every $5 million you're over. While this year the tax is no obstacle, in future years it may be, so dropping below the tax line this year could save the team millions in tax dollars in the future, and that obviously would have real value. In the new CBA, a well-run team should only pay the luxury tax when they're winning, and not go very far into it unless they're a legit championship contender, unless they're the Lakers, who have a huge media deal (and even then, paying a $60 million tax bill, as they might do next season, should be avoid when possible.)
Thanks for the lesson I didn't need.
Here's one for you. When is the date that salaries are determined so that team's over the luxury tax have to pay their tax?
Answer: The last day of the regular season. The Celtics season isn't over and they can definitely get under the luxury tax with a trade.
So, they are not in the luxury tax and therefore, trading KG only to dump salary doesn't make sense. The team can make a trade to dump salary without getting rid of probably its most important asset.
-
Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo Sports reports that the Clippers and Celtics have terminated trade talkins involving Kevin Garnett for now.
-
Here's one for you. When is the date that salaries are determined so that team's over the luxury tax have to pay their tax?
Answer: The last day of the regular season. The Celtics season isn't over and they can definitely get under the luxury tax with a trade.
Are you suggesting they can make a trade after the trade deadline?
-
Here's one for you. When is the date that salaries are determined so that team's over the luxury tax have to pay their tax?
Answer: The last day of the regular season. The Celtics season isn't over and they can definitely get under the luxury tax with a trade.
Are you suggesting they can make a trade after the trade deadline?
Are you suggesting the trade deadline has passed?
-
Would this work?
http://espn.go.com/nba/trademachine?tradeId=av8m6ew
link doesn't work
That is bizarre. I even still have the saved trade up with that link listed.
It has KG and Collins to LA
Jordan to Atlanta (allows Hortford to be the PF)
Bledsoe and Smith to Boston.
The trade checker direct links havent been working for me today either.
I'd do that trade, and follow it up with the Rondo for Dwight trade.
So you would send Rondo for Dwight Howard? Would he even fit under the cap? Assuming those two trades went down this would be the new Celtics roster:
1 Eric Bledsoe
2 Courtney Lee
3 Paul Pierce
4 Josh Smith
5 Dwight Howard
I guess I can live with that. :)
We're getting two knuckleheads in Smith and Howard but paired together that would make possibly the strongest and most athletic defensive 4/5 in the NBA.
-
So you would send Rondo for Dwight Howard? Would he even fit under the cap? Assuming those two trades went down this would be the new Celtics roster:
1 Eric Bledsoe
2 Courtney Lee
3 Paul Pierce
4 Josh Smith
5 Dwight Howard
I guess I can live with that. :)
We're getting two knuckleheads in Smith and Howard but paired together that would make possibly the strongest and most athletic defensive 4/5 in the NBA.
This is less horrible than some of the others blow-it-up suggestions (mostly because keeping Pierce means having an important go-to guy).