Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks

[saltlover]

Just finished reading this article about the Cavs current financials, and B Haywood's non-guaranteed contract needing to be opted out of by 8/1.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13309223/cleveland-cavaliers-trade-second-round-pick-rakeem-christmas-indiana-pacers-set-larger-deal

My idea is noted above: trade Evan Turner and Kelly Olynyk to the Cavs for Haywood's deal, and those 2019 2nd rounders mentioned. I believe Haywood is only guaranteed around $2mil, so opting out of his deal would actually open up additional cap room this year, while also doing two things:

1) Removing Olynyk from the books for the Summer of 2016
2) Allowing the Cs to sign Jonathan Holmes, who I think has a chance to be a better two way NBA player than KO.

For the Cavs, they add a very useful bench player in Turner, shooting and size from Olynyk on a rookie scale deal, and a trade exception for $5mil+ they can use in season if they need to (as they did last year to acquire Mozgov). They'd presumably walk away from JR Smith after such a trade.

While I would never do this trade to begin with. I believe the Celtics already have 16 signed players and need to get rid of one, so a 2 for 1 still would not open a spot.

Because Haywood's contract is not guaranteed, the presumption is that he would be released upon acquisition, thus making room for Holmes.

[clover]

Just finished reading this article about the Cavs current financials, and B Haywood's non-guaranteed contract needing to be opted out of by 8/1.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13309223/cleveland-cavaliers-trade-second-round-pick-rakeem-christmas-indiana-pacers-set-larger-deal

My idea is noted above: trade Evan Turner and Kelly Olynyk to the Cavs for Haywood's deal, and those 2019 2nd rounders mentioned. I believe Haywood is only guaranteed around $2mil, so opting out of his deal would actually open up additional cap room this year, while also doing two things:

1) Removing Olynyk from the books for the Summer of 2016
2) Allowing the Cs to sign Jonathan Holmes, who I think has a chance to be a better two way NBA player than KO.

For the Cavs, they add a very useful bench player in Turner, shooting and size from Olynyk on a rookie scale deal, and a trade exception for $5mil+ they can use in season if they need to (as they did last year to acquire Mozgov). They'd presumably walk away from JR Smith after such a trade.

While I would never do this trade to begin with. I believe the Celtics already have 16 signed players and need to get rid of one, so a 2 for 1 still would not open a spot.

I think the whole proposal here is a terrible idea, but if I understand correctly, the 2-for-1 would be a 2-for-0 after the C's declined Haywood's option before the 8/1 deadline--and thus it would open up one spot.

[celts55]

Just finished reading this article about the Cavs current financials, and B Haywood's non-guaranteed contract needing to be opted out of by 8/1.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13309223/cleveland-cavaliers-trade-second-round-pick-rakeem-christmas-indiana-pacers-set-larger-deal

My idea is noted above: trade Evan Turner and Kelly Olynyk to the Cavs for Haywood's deal, and those 2019 2nd rounders mentioned. I believe Haywood is only guaranteed around $2mil, so opting out of his deal would actually open up additional cap room this year, while also doing two things:

1) Removing Olynyk from the books for the Summer of 2016
2) Allowing the Cs to sign Jonathan Holmes, who I think has a chance to be a better two way NBA player than KO.

For the Cavs, they add a very useful bench player in Turner, shooting and size from Olynyk on a rookie scale deal, and a trade exception for $5mil+ they can use in season if they need to (as they did last year to acquire Mozgov). They'd presumably walk away from JR Smith after such a trade.

While I would never do this trade to begin with. I believe the Celtics already have 16 signed players and need to get rid of one, so a 2 for 1 still would not open a spot.

Because Haywood's contract is not guaranteed, the presumption is that he would be released upon acquisition, thus making room for Holmes.

Oh. Sorry should have read it closer. So the idea is to give away two pretty good players just to open a roster spot for Holmes, who wasn't drafted.
Even worse now that i get the full picture.

[ssspence]

Just finished reading this article about the Cavs current financials, and B Haywood's non-guaranteed contract needing to be opted out of by 8/1.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13309223/cleveland-cavaliers-trade-second-round-pick-rakeem-christmas-indiana-pacers-set-larger-deal

My idea is noted above: trade Evan Turner and Kelly Olynyk to the Cavs for Haywood's deal, and those 2019 2nd rounders mentioned. I believe Haywood is only guaranteed around $2mil, so opting out of his deal would actually open up additional cap room this year, while also doing two things:

1) Removing Olynyk from the books for the Summer of 2016
2) Allowing the Cs to sign Jonathan Holmes, who I think has a chance to be a better two way NBA player than KO.

For the Cavs, they add a very useful bench player in Turner, shooting and size from Olynyk on a rookie scale deal, and a trade exception for $5mil+ they can use in season if they need to (as they did last year to acquire Mozgov). They'd presumably walk away from JR Smith after such a trade.

While I would never do this trade to begin with. I believe the Celtics already have 16 signed players and need to get rid of one, so a 2 for 1 still would not open a spot.

This is not a two for one. Haywood would be released before 8/1, making it a two for zero.

[ssspence]

Just finished reading this article about the Cavs current financials, and B Haywood's non-guaranteed contract needing to be opted out of by 8/1.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13309223/cleveland-cavaliers-trade-second-round-pick-rakeem-christmas-indiana-pacers-set-larger-deal

My idea is noted above: trade Evan Turner and Kelly Olynyk to the Cavs for Haywood's deal, and those 2019 2nd rounders mentioned. I believe Haywood is only guaranteed around $2mil, so opting out of his deal would actually open up additional cap room this year, while also doing two things:

1) Removing Olynyk from the books for the Summer of 2016
2) Allowing the Cs to sign Jonathan Holmes, who I think has a chance to be a better two way NBA player than KO.

For the Cavs, they add a very useful bench player in Turner, shooting and size from Olynyk on a rookie scale deal, and a trade exception for $5mil+ they can use in season if they need to (as they did last year to acquire Mozgov). They'd presumably walk away from JR Smith after such a trade.

What?!?

You want to trade two productive, borderline starting quality NBA players (both on extremely cheap deals, no less) for an expiring contract and a couple of second rounders?!?

My lord...that's lunacy

Who cares about the second rounders.... they're filler. It's about moving forward with a better roster based on the constraints of the CBA.

Turner's not in Boston's long term plans. Olynyk is overrated due to his 'range'. He's too limited both offensively and (especially) defensively to be anything more that an 7th, 8th man on a legit team, if that. Sullinger and Mickey are better basketball players with differentiated skill sets, and KO's strengths can be easily replicated by Jerebko and Holmes.

As for this "first rounders for second rounders" notion, you're missing the point. Where Barry White Turner was picked at this point is totally moot. It's meaningless. The guy's been cast off by multiple teams, just like he will be by the Cs. Would you trade Turner for Isaiah Thomas? Sure you would -- that's 60th pick for 2nd pick, if you judge value based on where someone was selected years ago.

What are the best 15 assets we can put on this team for 2015, both for growth and trade? Personally, I believe Jones and Holmes have far greater upside on value over Turner and Olynyk -- neither of whom have any significant trade value now, nor are they likely to gain any.

I stopped reading the moment you said Mickey is better than Olynyk.

Good lord.

Apparently you didn't, considering you reply numerous additional times overrating Olynyk. Look, if you like Kelly so much, swap in another player. The question is whether Cleveland would even take Turner and (rookie scale contract du jour) at all, considering its questionable whether any of those players on the Cs could crack the Cavs rotation (except for Smart, who you'd not give up in this deal).

Have to say I find all the vitriol about Olynyk in this thread pretty funny. Classic homering on a highly overrated player.

[saltlover]

Just finished reading this article about the Cavs current financials, and B Haywood's non-guaranteed contract needing to be opted out of by 8/1.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13309223/cleveland-cavaliers-trade-second-round-pick-rakeem-christmas-indiana-pacers-set-larger-deal

My idea is noted above: trade Evan Turner and Kelly Olynyk to the Cavs for Haywood's deal, and those 2019 2nd rounders mentioned. I believe Haywood is only guaranteed around $2mil, so opting out of his deal would actually open up additional cap room this year, while also doing two things:

1) Removing Olynyk from the books for the Summer of 2016
2) Allowing the Cs to sign Jonathan Holmes, who I think has a chance to be a better two way NBA player than KO.

For the Cavs, they add a very useful bench player in Turner, shooting and size from Olynyk on a rookie scale deal, and a trade exception for $5mil+ they can use in season if they need to (as they did last year to acquire Mozgov). They'd presumably walk away from JR Smith after such a trade.

While I would never do this trade to begin with. I believe the Celtics already have 16 signed players and need to get rid of one, so a 2 for 1 still would not open a spot.

Because Haywood's contract is not guaranteed, the presumption is that he would be released upon acquisition, thus making room for Holmes.

Oh. Sorry should have read it closer. So the idea is to give away two pretty good players just to open a roster spot for Holmes, who wasn't drafted.
Even worse now that i get the full picture.

It's slightly better, in my opinion.  All that said, I think if the Celtics like Holmes enough to potentially make a 2-for-0 trade, the more sensible alternative is to just sign Holmes to a guaranteed deal in year 1  and let him win a job in training camp.  If he beats two other guys out for roster spots then, then you can trade/release the two men out at that time.  Fairly sure you could get a couple of seconds still in October.

And as a Holmes supporter, that's what they should do I think.  If Holmes is better than PJ3, then let him earn that spot.  If Holmes is better than James Young, as I think he is, same thing.  If Holmes is better than Evan Turner (who is way underrated on this forum, moreso than Olynyk in my opinion), then Turner can go.  Or whomever.  And if Holmes is in fact not quite good enough, release him then.  I'm fairly sure he'd be claimed on waivers as a minimum contract, so it's not like it would cost the team any actual dollars beyond whatever he gets paid in training camp.  You have to have your roster down to 15 by the first game of the season, not the middle of July, so there's nothing wrong with using your extra cap room to make a low-risk signing like Holmes.

[ssspence]

Just finished reading this article about the Cavs current financials, and B Haywood's non-guaranteed contract needing to be opted out of by 8/1.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13309223/cleveland-cavaliers-trade-second-round-pick-rakeem-christmas-indiana-pacers-set-larger-deal

My idea is noted above: trade Evan Turner and Kelly Olynyk to the Cavs for Haywood's deal, and those 2019 2nd rounders mentioned. I believe Haywood is only guaranteed around $2mil, so opting out of his deal would actually open up additional cap room this year, while also doing two things:

1) Removing Olynyk from the books for the Summer of 2016
2) Allowing the Cs to sign Jonathan Holmes, who I think has a chance to be a better two way NBA player than KO.

For the Cavs, they add a very useful bench player in Turner, shooting and size from Olynyk on a rookie scale deal, and a trade exception for $5mil+ they can use in season if they need to (as they did last year to acquire Mozgov). They'd presumably walk away from JR Smith after such a trade.

While I would never do this trade to begin with. I believe the Celtics already have 16 signed players and need to get rid of one, so a 2 for 1 still would not open a spot.

Because Haywood's contract is not guaranteed, the presumption is that he would be released upon acquisition, thus making room for Holmes.

Oh. Sorry should have read it closer. So the idea is to give away two pretty good players just to open a roster spot for Holmes, who wasn't drafted.
Even worse now that i get the full picture.

It's slightly better, in my opinion.  All that said, I think if the Celtics like Holmes enough to potentially make a 2-for-0 trade, the more sensible alternative is to just sign Holmes to a guaranteed deal in year 1  and let him win a job in training camp.  If he beats two other guys out for roster spots then, then you can trade/release the two men out at that time.  Fairly sure you could get a couple of seconds still in October.

And as a Holmes supporter, that's what they should do I think.  If Holmes is better than PJ3, then let him earn that spot.  If Holmes is better than James Young, as I think he is, same thing.  If Holmes is better than Evan Turner (who is way underrated on this forum, moreso than Olynyk in my opinion), then Turner can go.  Or whomever.  And if Holmes is in fact not quite good enough, release him then.  I'm fairly sure he'd be claimed on waivers as a minimum contract, so it's not like it would cost the team any actual dollars beyond whatever he gets paid in training camp.  You have to have your roster down to 15 by the first game of the season, not the middle of July, so there's nothing wrong with using your extra cap room to make a low-risk signing like Holmes.

Fair enough. Could certainly see the Cs doing so (that is, letting Jones and Holmes duke it out in camp) and trying to find a home for one other player in the meantime.

But, the variable here are: whether Holmes would accept that deal in the first place under the circumstances, and whether the Cs might wish to keep BOTH players. If either are in question, use the Haywood deal to solve the issue.

[colincb]

Cavs supposedly looking to trade Haywood to create a trade exception. Probably something like a second and Haywood for a top 55 protected second with a trading partner who has excess cap room. Cavs trade partner cuts him.

Cavs get trade exception. Counterparty gets a second in essence. Cavs would pay a ridiculous amount with the added tax to actually have the $!0M on their books otherwise.

[saltlover]

Just finished reading this article about the Cavs current financials, and B Haywood's non-guaranteed contract needing to be opted out of by 8/1.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13309223/cleveland-cavaliers-trade-second-round-pick-rakeem-christmas-indiana-pacers-set-larger-deal

My idea is noted above: trade Evan Turner and Kelly Olynyk to the Cavs for Haywood's deal, and those 2019 2nd rounders mentioned. I believe Haywood is only guaranteed around $2mil, so opting out of his deal would actually open up additional cap room this year, while also doing two things:

1) Removing Olynyk from the books for the Summer of 2016
2) Allowing the Cs to sign Jonathan Holmes, who I think has a chance to be a better two way NBA player than KO.

For the Cavs, they add a very useful bench player in Turner, shooting and size from Olynyk on a rookie scale deal, and a trade exception for $5mil+ they can use in season if they need to (as they did last year to acquire Mozgov). They'd presumably walk away from JR Smith after such a trade.

While I would never do this trade to begin with. I believe the Celtics already have 16 signed players and need to get rid of one, so a 2 for 1 still would not open a spot.

Because Haywood's contract is not guaranteed, the presumption is that he would be released upon acquisition, thus making room for Holmes.

Oh. Sorry should have read it closer. So the idea is to give away two pretty good players just to open a roster spot for Holmes, who wasn't drafted.
Even worse now that i get the full picture.

It's slightly better, in my opinion.  All that said, I think if the Celtics like Holmes enough to potentially make a 2-for-0 trade, the more sensible alternative is to just sign Holmes to a guaranteed deal in year 1  and let him win a job in training camp.  If he beats two other guys out for roster spots then, then you can trade/release the two men out at that time.  Fairly sure you could get a couple of seconds still in October.

And as a Holmes supporter, that's what they should do I think.  If Holmes is better than PJ3, then let him earn that spot.  If Holmes is better than James Young, as I think he is, same thing.  If Holmes is better than Evan Turner (who is way underrated on this forum, moreso than Olynyk in my opinion), then Turner can go.  Or whomever.  And if Holmes is in fact not quite good enough, release him then.  I'm fairly sure he'd be claimed on waivers as a minimum contract, so it's not like it would cost the team any actual dollars beyond whatever he gets paid in training camp.  You have to have your roster down to 15 by the first game of the season, not the middle of July, so there's nothing wrong with using your extra cap room to make a low-risk signing like Holmes.

Fair enough. Could certainly see the Cs doing so (that is, letting Jones and Holmes duke it out in camp) and trying to find a home for one other player in the meantime.

But, the variable here are: whether Holmes would accept that deal in the first place under the circumstances, and whether the Cs might wish to keep BOTH players. If either are in question, use the Haywood deal to solve the issue.

Holmes is a free agent, so I have no idea what other offers he's getting, but as an undrafted guy, I'd think a fully guaranteed first year would do it.

But all the players who could potentially be moved (Turner, Jones, Young, Olynyk, and Sully) are cheap, so a lot of teams could be interested in September and October as well as now.  And the price you're getting from the Cavs (two distant seconds from a team that will still very likely be a top 5-10 team in the league at that point, as their top 3-4 players now will be under contract then) is so low that rushing to grab it doesn't make sense.  There are plenty of teams who have small trade exceptions and non-guaranteed players on minimum deals, if not $2-3 million in cap room, to be able to take on whichever player don't quite prove themselves worth, or better ones that do if they're willing to pay more.  Give me 20 minutes and I'll list them for you.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I could be wrong, but I think the Cavs want a trade exception from Haywood's contract, but they can only get a trade exception by trading him to a team that is under the cap for at least Haywood's contract.

However, I don't think we have enough space to do this.

Oh, and the idea of literally giving up on one of the best shooting and passing big men in the NBA blows my mind. That was Stevens' first pick with Ainge. He is a hard worker and continues to develop parts of his game.

I would consider trading him if it meant we could sign a star, but Holmes wasn't ever the fourth best player on our summer league team.

[colincb]

http://www.spotrac.com/nba/cap/

POR and PHI have enough space to do this.

[saltlover]

Cavs supposedly looking to trade Haywood to create a trade exception. Probably something like a second and Haywood for a top 55 protected second with a trading partner who has excess cap room. Cavs trade partner cuts him.

Cavs get trade exception. Counterparty gets a second in essence. Cavs would pay a ridiculous amount with the added tax to actually have the $!0M on their books otherwise.

It's not about the luxury tax.  Haywood will be released.  The exception lets them take on the salary in the middle of the season when they can see what short-term needs they have without sending salary back to another team.  Any salary they take on at the trade deadline counts fully (not pro-rated) against their tax amount.  So if they trade Haywood now for that $10.5 million exception, and then take on $10.5 million in salaries mid-season, they'll owe the same amount of luxury tax.  Having the TPE just makes trades easier, because it let's them get two $5 million guys from two different teams, and neither of those teams would need to take on any money (and would get their own TPE as well).

That's what Cleveland's trade of Rakeem Christmas yesterday was partly about -- to acquire one of the seconds needed to create this trade exception, as well make use of it for expiring contracts in 6 months.

[ssspence]

Cavs supposedly looking to trade Haywood to create a trade exception. Probably something like a second and Haywood for a top 55 protected second with a trading partner who has excess cap room. Cavs trade partner cuts him.

Cavs get trade exception. Counterparty gets a second in essence. Cavs would pay a ridiculous amount with the added tax to actually have the $!0M on their books otherwise.

It's not about the luxury tax.  Haywood will be released.  The exception lets them take on the salary in the middle of the season when they can see what short-term needs they have without sending salary back to another team.  Any salary they take on at the trade deadline counts fully (not pro-rated) against their tax amount.  So if they trade Haywood now for that $10.5 million exception, and then take on $10.5 million in salaries mid-season, they'll owe the same amount of luxury tax.  Having the TPE just makes trades easier, because it let's them get two $5 million guys from two different teams, and neither of those teams would need to take on any money (and would get their own TPE as well).

That's what Cleveland's trade of Rakeem Christmas yesterday was partly about -- to acquire one of the seconds needed to create this trade exception, as well make use of it for expiring contracts in 6 months.

What's with the paraphrasing of Winhorst's article? Did you guys bother to read it?

The Cavs could choose to have a larger trade exception (by dealing with a Philly or Portland) over taking on the likes of Turner now. In fact there's a pretty good chance Ainge has already expired some form of deal like I suggest with the Cavs. But if not, I hope they will.

[Bdiddy]

This trade only makes sense if you believe that Jonathon Holmes (an undrafted rookie) is better than Olynyk and Turner (2 proven NBA rotation players). I do not believe anyone in their right mind would come to this conclusion. Cap space is irrelevant to the C's at this point.

[saltlover]

Cavs supposedly looking to trade Haywood to create a trade exception. Probably something like a second and Haywood for a top 55 protected second with a trading partner who has excess cap room. Cavs trade partner cuts him.

Cavs get trade exception. Counterparty gets a second in essence. Cavs would pay a ridiculous amount with the added tax to actually have the $!0M on their books otherwise.

It's not about the luxury tax.  Haywood will be released.  The exception lets them take on the salary in the middle of the season when they can see what short-term needs they have without sending salary back to another team.  Any salary they take on at the trade deadline counts fully (not pro-rated) against their tax amount.  So if they trade Haywood now for that $10.5 million exception, and then take on $10.5 million in salaries mid-season, they'll owe the same amount of luxury tax.  Having the TPE just makes trades easier, because it let's them get two $5 million guys from two different teams, and neither of those teams would need to take on any money (and would get their own TPE as well).

That's what Cleveland's trade of Rakeem Christmas yesterday was partly about -- to acquire one of the seconds needed to create this trade exception, as well make use of it for expiring contracts in 6 months.

What's with the paraphrasing of Winhorst's article? Did you guys bother to read it?

The Cavs could choose to have a larger trade exception (by dealing with a Philly or Portland) over taking on the likes of Turner now. In fact there's a pretty good chance Ainge has already expired some form of deal like I suggest with the Cavs. But if not, I hope they will.

I have no idea what article you're talking about.  I'm just using salary cap logic.