next »

[Moranis]

Something like this would work financially

Houston - Granger
Indiana - Pierce, Douglas
Boston - Augustin, Aldrich, Delfino, and then one (or more) of the young Rockets prospects (Jones, Patterson, Parsons, Morris, White, etc.)

[scaryjerry]

Eh....nothing to get excited about...not sure why anyone is interested in Granger or why we want a platter of poo....highly doubt the rockets would include Parsons...the only name in there that would interest me

[slamtheking]

that's a lot of lesser-quality players coming back to the C's for their best clutch performer (PP) and someone who might be major salary relief for Indy next year if they get him.

I'd want at least Parsons and either Jones or Patterson too in place of Delfino (if the $ works).  Augustin, Delfino and Aldrich just don't do it for me as an incentive to trade PP

[Fan from VT]

This is why I'd probably be a bad GM in terms of not actually being able to pull the trigger on a trade. If I were trading with Houston, I find so many of their players to be so similar that I would want several back in a trade. for example, this 3 way works financially:

Boston
Gives: Pierce
Gets: Delfino, Aldrich, Jones, Motiejunas, Parsons, Smith
Has to cut: Wilcox, Collins, Barbosa

Indiana:
Gives: Ben Hansbrough, Granger
Gets: Pierce

Houston:
Gives: Delfino, Aldrich, Jones, Motiejunas, Parsons, Smith
Gets: Granger, Ben Hansbrough


So Indiand upgrades Granger to Pierce and saves some money. They have to include 1 small contract with Granger to make the money work.

Houston likely doesn't do this. But the challenge for them is unless they are giving up Lin or Asik, they need to include a bunch of small contracts; in this case Delfino and Aldrich are just salary filler, while the rest are the meat of the trade. I don't know if Houston would give all that up for Granger, but I probably would take that.

[Mencius]

This is why I'd probably be a bad GM in terms of not actually being able to pull the trigger on a trade. If I were trading with Houston, I find so many of their players to be so similar that I would want several back in a trade. for example, this 3 way works financially:

Boston
Gives: Pierce
Gets: Delfino, Aldrich, Jones, Motiejunas, Parsons, Smith
Has to cut: Wilcox, Collins, Barbosa

Indiana:
Gives: Ben Hansbrough, Granger
Gets: Pierce

Houston:
Gives: Delfino, Aldrich, Jones, Motiejunas, Parsons, Smith
Gets: Granger, Ben Hansbrough


So Indiand upgrades Granger to Pierce and saves some money. They have to include 1 small contract with Granger to make the money work.

Houston likely doesn't do this. But the challenge for them is unless they are giving up Lin or Asik, they need to include a bunch of small contracts; in this case Delfino and Aldrich are just salary filler, while the rest are the meat of the trade. I don't know if Houston would give all that up for Granger, but I probably would take that.

I like the general idea, Fan from VT.  I was playing with the trade machine last night for Pierce trades, and the only one that even remotely made sense was Indy, and including Houston makes a lot of sense.  I just think that your proposal has them giving up too many decent young assets.  Parsons, in particular is a good player, and I could see them keeping him as a piece going forward for their team (would like him on ours, too).  Jones has a lot of talent and will be a player, imo.  Smith is a very useful guy, as we've seen all year.  Montiejunas looked like a very solid project in the preseason (or was it summer league, can't remember) when I saw him.  Still, they'd be getting Granger, a youngish borderline all-star type of guy.  He'd pair nicely with Harden.  I really like what they're doing down there in Houston.

Anyway, some variation of your 3 way makes a lot of sense.  Even if we don't get 4 prospects as in your idea, just getting, say, Parsons and Jones out of it (if you're going the rebuild/trade PP route) is a decent jump start on the rebuild, and like I said, it's hard to find a PP trade that makes any sense for other teams.  Indy is one of the few that might work.

Then, the other shoe to drop would be KG to LAC.  It's going to be an interesting couple of weeks.  A team (in this case Indy) would have to feel like they're right there on the cusp to do a deal like this, and I'm not sure they're quite that close.  It's all pretty unlikely still, but I do think Indy is the most likely landing spot for PP if any deal is to be done. 

[Yoki_IsTheName]

This is why I'd probably be a bad GM in terms of not actually being able to pull the trigger on a trade. If I were trading with Houston, I find so many of their players to be so similar that I would want several back in a trade. for example, this 3 way works financially:

Boston
Gives: Pierce
Gets: Delfino, Aldrich, Jones, Motiejunas, Parsons, Smith
Has to cut: Wilcox, Collins, Barbosa

Indiana:
Gives: Ben Hansbrough, Granger
Gets: Pierce

Houston:
Gives: Delfino, Aldrich, Jones, Motiejunas, Parsons, Smith
Gets: Granger, Ben Hansbrough


So Indiand upgrades Granger to Pierce and saves some money. They have to include 1 small contract with Granger to make the money work.

Houston likely doesn't do this. But the challenge for them is unless they are giving up Lin or Asik, they need to include a bunch of small contracts; in this case Delfino and Aldrich are just salary filler, while the rest are the meat of the trade. I don't know if Houston would give all that up for Granger, but I probably would take that.

I think this is such a one sided trade for Boston. Pierce is not and upgrade for Granger and Houston is giving up way too much for Granger as well.

IMO of course.

[Mencius]

This is why I'd probably be a bad GM in terms of not actually being able to pull the trigger on a trade. If I were trading with Houston, I find so many of their players to be so similar that I would want several back in a trade. for example, this 3 way works financially:

Boston
Gives: Pierce
Gets: Delfino, Aldrich, Jones, Motiejunas, Parsons, Smith
Has to cut: Wilcox, Collins, Barbosa

Indiana:
Gives: Ben Hansbrough, Granger
Gets: Pierce

Houston:
Gives: Delfino, Aldrich, Jones, Motiejunas, Parsons, Smith
Gets: Granger, Ben Hansbrough


So Indiand upgrades Granger to Pierce and saves some money. They have to include 1 small contract with Granger to make the money work.

Houston likely doesn't do this. But the challenge for them is unless they are giving up Lin or Asik, they need to include a bunch of small contracts; in this case Delfino and Aldrich are just salary filler, while the rest are the meat of the trade. I don't know if Houston would give all that up for Granger, but I probably would take that.

I think this is such a one sided trade for Boston. Pierce is not and upgrade for Granger and Houston is giving up way too much for Granger as well.

IMO of course.

You're right.  That is homerish for Boston.  The truth is, if Houston wants Granger, they've got better pieces (at least for the long term) to give Indy than we do.  Indy already has Paul George at the 3, who's merely playing great.  Crazy as it sounds, we'd probably have to throw in a first to shoehorn in on this.  Danny would have to decide whether the players he'd get back are more valuable/have more upside than who he might get in the draft.

[pearljammer10]

Eh....nothing to get excited about...not sure why anyone is interested in Granger or why we want a platter of poo....highly doubt the rockets would include Parsons...the only name in there that would interest me

I would be mighty scared of Granger. He's dropped off the last two years and that was before he had major surgery.

[action781]

If I'm giving up Pierce, I want a legit building piece back.  Doesn't have to be a sure thing, but it has to have more potential than any of those players.

[Lucky17]

Houston is interested in Granger?

[Fafnir]

Eh....nothing to get excited about...not sure why anyone is interested in Granger or why we want a platter of poo....highly doubt the rockets would include Parsons...the only name in there that would interest me

I would be mighty scared of Granger. He's dropped off the last two years and that was before he had major surgery.

And the knee he had surgery on is apparently a bad degenerative condition too...

[Who]

If I'm giving up Pierce, I want a legit building piece back.  Doesn't have to be a sure thing, but it has to have more potential than any of those players.

You can get a legit building piece with Pierce's vacated salary slot. That piece doesn't have to come directly in the trade.

[kozlodoev]

If I'm giving up Pierce, I want a legit building piece back.  Doesn't have to be a sure thing, but it has to have more potential than any of those players.

You can get a legit building piece with Pierce's vacated salary slot. That piece doesn't have to come directly in the trade.

You can get a legit piece with Pierce's slot when his contract expires too -- so no need to trade him.

[Fafnir]

If I'm giving up Pierce, I want a legit building piece back.  Doesn't have to be a sure thing, but it has to have more potential than any of those players.

You can get a legit building piece with Pierce's vacated salary slot. That piece doesn't have to come directly in the trade.

You can get a legit piece with Pierce's slot when his contract expires too -- so no need to trade him.

Yeah, which is why Danny might instead trade some of the role players if he can.

[Who]

If I'm giving up Pierce, I want a legit building piece back.  Doesn't have to be a sure thing, but it has to have more potential than any of those players.

You can get a legit building piece with Pierce's vacated salary slot. That piece doesn't have to come directly in the trade.

You can get a legit piece with Pierce's slot when his contract expires too -- so no need to trade him.

Two extra years from now.

Trading Pierce (and others) now gives Danny more time and more opportunities to put a new contender together around Rondo.