[IDEA] E.Gordon for Wallace and Bradley straight up

[jaketwice]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=n4eun6g

Thoughts?

[jaketwice]

Asked and answered
http://www.celticsblog.com/2013/5/22/4356570/a-look-at-eric-gordon

...but what about the allure of shedding Wallace?

[cletus1985]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=n4eun6g

Thoughts?

Not enough incentive for N.O., if Bradley resigns they take on salary and really don't get better. If Bradley doesn't resign they're swapping out Gordon for Wallace for 3 years. What's the point for them?

[jaketwice]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=n4eun6g

Thoughts?

Not enough incentive for N.O., if Bradley resigns they take on salary and really don't get better. If Bradley doesn't resign they're swapping out Gordon for Wallace for 3 years. What's the point for them?

1. They don't need Gordon's shooting with Evans in the fold.

2. They are small, and don't have a real small forward - Wallace would actually fit there.

3. Wallace makes ~$3M/year less than Gordon.

4. AB is a RFA next year with a totally manageable qualifying offer number. If he gets interest elsewhere, they learn from the Eric Gordon fiasco, sign him, trade him, and get a pick or other assets out of the other team.
...Gordon is not an asset this year, or next. They are swapping a non-trade asset for a tradable asset.

[Kane3387]

The Pelicans need a big man to play alongside Anthony Davis. They've got Tyreke Evans to play the two alongside Jrue Holiday. They've denied it, but they've been shopping Gordon for a while. So, what gives?

"The reason they can't move Eric Gordon now," a general manager said Sunday, "is because he's not the same player he was before the injuries."

http://www.nba.com/2014/news/features/david_aldridge/02/10/morning-tip-possible-traded-players-san-antonio-spurs-injury-woes-qa-with-damian-lillard/index.html#$/2014/news/features/david_aldridge/02/10/morning-tip-possible-traded-players-san-antonio-spurs-injury-woes-qa-with-damian-lillard/index.html

It's a risk but...

And that's why moving Gordon could come back to bite New Orleans.

Gordon's had a bunch of injuries the last three seasons, no question -- a chipped bone in his wrist cost him 18 games in 2010-11, and right knee injuries in 2011-12 and 2012-13 kept him out a total of 86 games over those two seasons -- or, a full season-plus. The Clippers couldn't wait on him any longer, and ultimately pulled the trigger to send Gordon to N'awlins (keeping Eric Bledsoe) in order to facilitate the Chris Paul deal in 2011.

But most injuries -- most, not all -- heal. And Gordon showed when he was healthy that he was one of the most explosive and talented two guards in the league -- 22 a night for the Clippers in his last full season there. The Suns gave him that $56 million offer sheet just two summers ago, after all, a deal that New Orleans matched in order to hold onto its asset.

[sofutomygaha]

I'm intrigued. Gordon makes too much money, for sure, but you are right to point out that the most overpaid player in the deal is Gerald Wallace. I'm ok with this deal for us. The Pelicans, on the other hand, probably have more incentive to hold on to Gordon and keep watching to see if he gets back to where he was a couple years ago.

Evans is really flourishing as a 6th man, facilitator, and defensive specialist. I'm guessing they aren't under any pressure to get him back in the starting lineup. He's kinda giving them what Gerald Wallace would, in a perfect world, give them.

[cb8883]

I'd make this deal in a heartbeat. That is until NO asks for a pick as a sweetener...that's when you walk away.

[cletus1985]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=n4eun6g

Thoughts?

Not enough incentive for N.O., if Bradley resigns they take on salary and really don't get better. If Bradley doesn't resign they're swapping out Gordon for Wallace for 3 years. What's the point for them?

1. They don't need Gordon's shooting with Evans in the fold.

2. They are small, and don't have a real small forward - Wallace would actually fit there.

3. Wallace makes ~$3M/year less than Gordon.

4. AB is a RFA next year with a totally manageable qualifying offer number. If he gets interest elsewhere, they learn from the Eric Gordon fiasco, sign him, trade him, and get a pick or other assets out of the other team.
...Gordon is not an asset this year, or next. They are swapping a non-trade asset for a tradable asset.

1. Evans isn't the floor spacing shooter EG is.

2. Al Fariq-Aminu is a real SF who is better than Wallace at this point. They need true size, a PF or C with Anderson and Smith out with injuries.

3. Wallace plays like he should be making 12 mill less than Gordon ( although EG should also be making less).

4. Teams with cap space may be willing to overpay for Bradley, but not willing to give up assets for him if their offer is matched. Bradley has his own injury history as well. Houston also proved a backloaded contract could make his RFA a very risky game of chicken.

Overall I'd rather overpay Gordon a few mill for his production than vastly overpay Wallace while he's still declining (now there's a scary thought, he will probably get worse) all for the chance AB may be an asset if all goes well.

[Atzar]

If I was going to take on Gordon, I'd be interested in a deal that looked something like Bradley + Humphries for Gordon, a 2016 1st and a 2018 1st.   

We get two picks and a bad contract that doesn't hurt us because we aren't contending over the life of the contract anyway.  Also, there's a chance that Gordon regains his pseudo-star form over time, becoming either a decent building block or a valuable trade chip. 

With New Orleans' 2014 pick going to Philly unless it falls in the top 5, they're in a bit of a crappy situation.  They aren't bad enough to save their pick, so they might as well make a run at the playoffs.  Bradley is arguably a slight upgrade over Gordon after you take defense into account (Gordon is a ghastly defender this year, and their offensive numbers are closer than you'd think as well).  Humphries bolsters a very thin, injury-ravaged frontcourt and seems on the surface to complement Davis fairly well.  In addition, both Bradley and Hump are expiring, allowing NO to clear enough money to make a run at a premier free agent.  A prospective core of Davis/Holiday/FA is very competitive. 

I'd want two picks because I firmly believe Davis will turn into a very elite player who will drive those picks toward the end of the first round. 

[RJ87]

I'm intrigued. Gordon makes too much money, for sure, but you are right to point out that the most overpaid player in the deal is Gerald Wallace. I'm ok with this deal for us. The Pelicans, on the other hand, probably have more incentive to hold on to Gordon and keep watching to see if he gets back to where he was a couple years ago.

Evans is really flourishing as a 6th man, facilitator, and defensive specialist. I'm guessing they aren't under any pressure to get him back in the starting lineup. He's kinda giving them what Gerald Wallace would, in a perfect world, give them.

I actually think they can plug in a guy like AB as a starting 2-guard and continue to bring Tyreke off the bench like OKC used to do with Sefolosha and Harden. A bigger PG like Jrue Holiday (at 6'4") would take a lot of pressure off of AB when it comes to the defensive matchups as Jrue could defend opposing SG's when needed.

As it is there now, I'm not entirely sure that backcourt rotation of Holiday/Gordon/Evans can work longterm - especially with Ryan Anderson and Anthony Davis in the mix. That's just too many guys who need the ball in their hands. Too many guys that are best when scoring. I think they can start looking at specialist types who can better complement their core pieces.

[jaketwice]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=n4eun6g

Thoughts?

Not enough incentive for N.O., if Bradley resigns they take on salary and really don't get better. If Bradley doesn't resign they're swapping out Gordon for Wallace for 3 years. What's the point for them?

1. They don't need Gordon's shooting with Evans in the fold.

2. They are small, and don't have a real small forward - Wallace would actually fit there.

3. Wallace makes ~$3M/year less than Gordon.

4. AB is a RFA next year with a totally manageable qualifying offer number. If he gets interest elsewhere, they learn from the Eric Gordon fiasco, sign him, trade him, and get a pick or other assets out of the other team.
...Gordon is not an asset this year, or next. They are swapping a non-trade asset for a tradable asset.

1. Evans isn't the floor spacing shooter EG is.

2. Al Fariq-Aminu is a real SF who is better than Wallace at this point. They need true size, a PF or C with Anderson and Smith out with injuries.

3. Wallace plays like he should be making 12 mill less than Gordon ( although EG should also be making less).

4. Teams with cap space may be willing to overpay for Bradley, but not willing to give up assets for him if their offer is matched. Bradley has his own injury history as well. Houston also proved a backloaded contract could make his RFA a very risky game of chicken.

Overall I'd rather overpay Gordon a few mill for his production than vastly overpay Wallace while he's still declining (now there's a scary thought, he will probably get worse) all for the chance AB may be an asset if all goes well.

1. Agreed on Evans - but he can get his own shot, and overall is a better player. If I could have either one, I would prefer Evans.

2. From where does Gordon bring back size? The Pelicans' best chance at another big man is in free agency, not in a mid-season trade. There are just few quality big men available. ...maybe Kenneth Faried? But why would the Nuggets take back Gordon? They have Galinari to do what Gordon does better, and taller, than Gordon does it.

3. Aminu isn't much better than Wallace. He's younger though.

4. I take your point about Houston. But before bidding on any RFA, wouldn't you call the team and let them know your intention to see whether a mutually beneficial agreement could be reached? There's no denying it's a pole position to hold the restriction. Further, with Anderson back, there's plenty of shooting to make up for the loss of Gordon. Eliminating $5M worth of long term salary (if they decided to part ways with Bradley) would facilitate a Greg Monroe style godfather offer for Greg Monroe, or to pick up a Blatche or a Hawes, and then a decent SF.

[LarBrd33]

NO says no.

[Celtics4ever]

NO says no.

Concur.

[slamtheking]

NO says no.

the impossible has happened --  I agree with you on a trade involving the C's