Author Topic: Why is Love not traded yet?  (Read 5278 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #15 on: July 31, 2014, 02:04:09 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15717
  • Tommy Points: 1386
It's been a done deal for a while now.  Love will be a Cav.  They aren't legally allowed to confirm it publicly until wiggins can be traded.

That team should own the Eastern Conference with an iron fist for the foreseeable future. Maybe in 5 years philly can give them a fight.

You are such a pessimist....

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #16 on: July 31, 2014, 02:05:02 PM »

Offline puskas54_10

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 282
  • Tommy Points: 13
Wiggins will not be traded. That's why it takes longer to work out the deal.
Love told he will only sign with the cavs (and even that's not set in stone), so the wolves will not get what they want. I think it will be Waiters, Bennett and a pick for Love.

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2014, 02:06:16 PM »

Offline MBunge

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4661
  • Tommy Points: 471
They could agree a deal in principle involving Wiggins and announce it right now before Wiggins is eligible to be traded.

Sacramento and Houston did that a few years ago when trading Artest there for Donte Greene. They agreed a deal and then had to wait a few weeks until Greene was eligible to be traded after signing rookie contract during summer league.

I am surprised that that hasn't happened yet. I wonder what the hold up is.

It's being reported that the league won't allow it:

Quote
NBA officials are adamant that there can be no acknowledgement of a trade, from either the Wolves or the Cavaliers, until the 30 days pass from Wiggins' signing.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11289379/minnesota-timberwolves-talking-kevin-love-trade-only-cleveland-cavaliers

Why couldn't they have announced it right before they signed Wiggins?

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2014, 02:06:55 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 36703
  • Tommy Points: 2951
Silver nixed it,

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2014, 02:09:11 PM »

Offline gpap

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8224
  • Tommy Points: 417
It's been a done deal for a while now.  Love will be a Cav.  They aren't legally allowed to confirm it publicly until wiggins can be traded.

That team should own the Eastern Conference with an iron fist for the foreseeable future. Maybe in 5 years philly can give them a fight.

Sweet! Thanks for the pick me up. Great to hear if you're a Celtics fan!

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #20 on: July 31, 2014, 02:13:47 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15717
  • Tommy Points: 1386
It's been a done deal for a while now.  Love will be a Cav.  They aren't legally allowed to confirm it publicly until wiggins can be traded.

That team should own the Eastern Conference with an iron fist for the foreseeable future. Maybe in 5 years philly can give them a fight.

Sweet! Thanks for the pick me up. Great to hear if you're a Celtics fan!

its just pessimistic hyperbole don't let it ruin your day

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #21 on: July 31, 2014, 02:17:59 PM »

Online Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33431
  • Tommy Points: 1532
What about Boston getting involved and taking on Barea for Bogans while picking up that Cleveland 1st that was going to go to Minnesota.  I might even consider Martin for Bogans (and one of the other non-guaranteed deal like Johnson, Babb) for the 1st.  Though I really wouldn't want Martin.

Or maybe Boston gets Bennett and Martin for Green and Bogans.   I think Bennett is worth that sort of trade.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #22 on: July 31, 2014, 02:26:44 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47112
  • Tommy Points: 2401
They could agree a deal in principle involving Wiggins and announce it right now before Wiggins is eligible to be traded.

Sacramento and Houston did that a few years ago when trading Artest there for Donte Greene. They agreed a deal and then had to wait a few weeks until Greene was eligible to be traded after signing rookie contract during summer league.

I am surprised that that hasn't happened yet. I wonder what the hold up is.

It's being reported that the league won't allow it:

Quote
NBA officials are adamant that there can be no acknowledgement of a trade, from either the Wolves or the Cavaliers, until the 30 days pass from Wiggins' signing.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11289379/minnesota-timberwolves-talking-kevin-love-trade-only-cleveland-cavaliers

I looked up that Donte Greene for Artest trade to see if it was the same back then. It was reported at the end of July (30th) but couldn't be completed until August 14th. The trade was confirmed by "multiple sources" but not from either team as league rules stated that neither team was allowed to confirm or discuss it publicly until August 14th.

The exact details of the trade were reported accurately at July 30th (Bobby Jackson, Donte Greene, 2009 1st round pick for Ron Artest).

So same rule back then and the teams were not allowed announce or talk about it.

That Artest-Green trade still found it's way into the media though despite the rule. I would expect the same to happen this time around as well if an agreement had been reached for Kevin Love - Andrew Wiggins. My guess is they've agreed that main part of the deal but are still haggling over the smaller parts.

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #23 on: July 31, 2014, 02:30:26 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
What about Boston getting involved and taking on Barea for Bogans while picking up that Cleveland 1st that was going to go to Minnesota.  I might even consider Martin for Bogans (and one of the other non-guaranteed deal like Johnson, Babb) for the 1st.  Though I really wouldn't want Martin.

Or maybe Boston gets Bennett and Martin for Green and Bogans.   I think Bennett is worth that sort of trade.

Regarding Berea, that'd be fine with me, but I'd hope that would be the death knell for those who believe it wouldn't take more than 1 pick to get rid of Wallace.

That said, I think Minnesota would be idiotic to forego getting a pick from Cleveland just for the purpose of unloading Barea's expiring contract when they can't do anything better with the money anyway (other than send it to Glen Taylor's bank account).

To get draft picks, I think we'd have to end up with Martin's longer-term deal, which I'm not against, but his skills are pretty redundant with what we've got.

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #24 on: July 31, 2014, 02:33:09 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47112
  • Tommy Points: 2401
What about Boston getting involved and taking on Barea for Bogans while picking up that Cleveland 1st that was going to go to Minnesota. 

I would love to take Barea to Boston in this deal.

I wouldn't need a 1st round pick included. Barea is an expiring contract and I think he'd be a really good piece for this Celtics team.

It'd be nice for Rondo to have a true backup PG behind him. The number of scoring guards and combo guards who have failed as backup to Rondo in recent years has really annoyed me. They have never worked as well as intended. Having a backup PG who can run an offense and create for others -- and particularly get more dribble penetration for a Boston offense that was starved of it last season outside of Rondo -- would be a very good addition for the Celtics.

So I am happy with a straight swap of Bogans for Barea. Anything above that is bonus.

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #25 on: July 31, 2014, 02:37:45 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
What about Boston getting involved and taking on Barea for Bogans while picking up that Cleveland 1st that was going to go to Minnesota. 

I would love to take Barea to Boston in this deal.

I wouldn't need a 1st round pick included. Barea is an expiring contract and I think he'd be a really good piece for this Celtics team.

It'd be nice for Rondo to have a true backup PG behind him. The number of scoring guards and combo guards who have failed as backup to Rondo in recent years has really annoyed me. They have never worked as well as intended. Having a backup PG who can run an offense and create for others -- and particularly get more dribble penetration for a Boston offense that was starved of it last season outside of Rondo -- would be a very good addition for the Celtics.

So I am happy with a straight swap of Bogans for Barea. Anything above that is bonus.

I mean, it's not our money, but there are luxury tax implications with that trade.  Is Barea really worth that?  You'd also have to cut a non-guaranteed player, presumably Pressey given the role Barea would fill.  I think it shouldn't be worth a pick for Minny to get rid of Barea, but it should be worth a pick for the Celtics to acquire him.

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2014, 02:38:51 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47112
  • Tommy Points: 2401
I might even consider Martin for Bogans (and one of the other non-guaranteed deal like Johnson, Babb) for the 1st.  Though I really wouldn't want Martin.

Or maybe Boston gets Bennett and Martin for Green and Bogans.   I think Bennett is worth that sort of trade.
I have no interest in Kevin Martin. I think Ainge has enough future 1st round picks so I value the cap flexibility more than the 1st rounder at a cost of being stuck with Kevin Martin for 3 more years.

Anthony Bennett is an interesting young player. I think he'll be a good player in time. Nice combination of rebounding, size and shooting ability. I like his chances of being a top backup PF to quality starting PF.

I am worried about taking on another young PF who needs minutes at that same position with Sullinger and Olynyk already in the mix. I don't like having multiple young players competing for the same spot / minutes while desperately needing those minutes to develop properly. I think they would get in each others way and that it would cause more problems than solutions.

So I would probably pass on Bennett unless Olynyk or Sully was heading somewhere else in a separate deal.

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2014, 02:42:29 PM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47112
  • Tommy Points: 2401
What about Boston getting involved and taking on Barea for Bogans while picking up that Cleveland 1st that was going to go to Minnesota. 

I would love to take Barea to Boston in this deal.

I wouldn't need a 1st round pick included. Barea is an expiring contract and I think he'd be a really good piece for this Celtics team.

It'd be nice for Rondo to have a true backup PG behind him. The number of scoring guards and combo guards who have failed as backup to Rondo in recent years has really annoyed me. They have never worked as well as intended. Having a backup PG who can run an offense and create for others -- and particularly get more dribble penetration for a Boston offense that was starved of it last season outside of Rondo -- would be a very good addition for the Celtics.

So I am happy with a straight swap of Bogans for Barea. Anything above that is bonus.

I mean, it's not our money, but there are luxury tax implications with that trade.  Is Barea really worth that?  You'd also have to cut a non-guaranteed player, presumably Pressey given the role Barea would fill.  I think it shouldn't be worth a pick for Minny to get rid of Barea, but it should be worth a pick for the Celtics to acquire him.

Oh nevermind then. I didn't realize Celtics were in luxury tax situation. Not worth paying tax for bench player playing on a non-contender.

Edit: According to Shamsports.com, the Celtics have $78.76 million in salary which includes the non-guaranteed payroll in the total figure. If they swap Bogans for Barea, that shaves $766k off salary. If they waive other non-guaranteed contracts (Johnson, Babb), Boston $1.713 million off salary. That would put them at $76.281 million which is a small bit below the luxury tax threshold of $76.829 million.

So that might be possible for Boston to swap Bogans for Barea and stay below LT threshold. If Shamsport salary figures are correct that is.


Oh, Evan Turner. He is not included in Shamsport figures. Not enough room.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2014, 02:53:51 PM by Who »

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2014, 02:58:05 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30859
  • Tommy Points: 1327
They still haven't announced Turner's salary. I wonder what exactly is the hold up, probably the potential inclusion in the Love trade or some other move.

Re: Why is Love not traded yet?
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2014, 03:00:09 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
What about Boston getting involved and taking on Barea for Bogans while picking up that Cleveland 1st that was going to go to Minnesota. 

I would love to take Barea to Boston in this deal.

I wouldn't need a 1st round pick included. Barea is an expiring contract and I think he'd be a really good piece for this Celtics team.

It'd be nice for Rondo to have a true backup PG behind him. The number of scoring guards and combo guards who have failed as backup to Rondo in recent years has really annoyed me. They have never worked as well as intended. Having a backup PG who can run an offense and create for others -- and particularly get more dribble penetration for a Boston offense that was starved of it last season outside of Rondo -- would be a very good addition for the Celtics.

So I am happy with a straight swap of Bogans for Barea. Anything above that is bonus.

I mean, it's not our money, but there are luxury tax implications with that trade.  Is Barea really worth that?  You'd also have to cut a non-guaranteed player, presumably Pressey given the role Barea would fill.  I think it shouldn't be worth a pick for Minny to get rid of Barea, but it should be worth a pick for the Celtics to acquire him.

Oh nevermind then. I didn't realize Celtics were in luxury tax situation. Not worth paying tax for bench player playing on a non-contender.

Edit: According to Shamsports.com, the Celtics have $78.76 million in salary which includes the non-guaranteed payroll in the total figure. If they swap Bogans for Barea, that shaves $766k off salary. If they waive other non-guaranteed contracts (Johnson, Babb), Boston $1.713 million off salary. That would put them at $76.281 million which is a small bit below the luxury tax threshold of $76.829 million.

So that might be possible for Boston to swap Bogans for Barea and stay below LT threshold. If Shamsport salary figures are correct that is.


Oh, Evan Turner. He is not included in Shamsport figures. Not enough room.

Yeah, it would have worked pre-Turner.  Post-Tuner, while not knowing what they're paying him of course, I think acquiring Barea would put the C's about $2-3 million over the tax.

That said, the C's haven't yet signed Turner for a reason, and I think that's largely so they can try to move Bogans for something, and then sign Turner using the regular MLE and not the taxpayer MLE (thus preserving some of the MLE for a mid-season signing).  At a certain point, they'll just release Bogans and sign Turner, but I think they're waiting for the Love deal to occur.  I doubt it'd be for Barea, but who knows.