Author Topic: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks  (Read 14542 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #30 on: July 24, 2015, 09:31:59 AM »

Offline colincb

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Tommy Points: 501
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.

Nope. Knew about it from elsewhere.

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #31 on: July 24, 2015, 09:41:25 AM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403
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.

Nope. Knew about it from elsewhere.

That's great. I didn't see you report it for an major news outlets, so I chose to site such an article so the whole thing didn't need to be hashed out again in questionable detail.
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #32 on: July 24, 2015, 10:07:00 AM »

Offline ForexPirate

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 292
  • Tommy Points: 19
You know, in general I like the idea of trading for Haywoods expiring.  But all it would take according to real gm's trade checker is Turner for Haywood.

It would give us a little more cap room after we release haywood and open a spot for jones or holmes.

Though it would be nice to do a 2 for 0 trade a 1 for 0 trade works and Turner will be looking for a pay day after this year is out anyway and not sure he fits the future vision of where this team is going.  I like turner and think he was a key player because Marcus was not ready to assume the point guard duties.

Like another poster said - sign holmes and let someone play themselves out of a job.  I think that will be young or sully if he comes in fat again.

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #33 on: July 24, 2015, 10:12:06 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
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.

Here are teams that can send back virtually no salary in a trade for some of the cheap players:

Brookyln -- $2.17 million in minimum contracts, only $50k guaranteed before 10/26
Chicago --$1.86 million in minimum contracts, only $420k guaranteed before opening night
Dallas -- $2.3 million in cap space (after presumably signing Justin Anderson to 120% of his slot value)
Denver - lots of cap space currently, probably around $5 million by the time camp rolls around, or the $4.7 million non-guaranteed contract of Kostas P. until October 4th if they use that cap space.
Golden State -- $5.3 million TPE once the David Lee trade is done
Indiana -- Currently about $4 million in cap space with 13 players.
Miami -- $1.95 million in non-guaranteed minimums until 8/1, when $420k becomes guaranteed (not including Whiteside, because I don't see him being traded).
Milwaukee - Trade exceptions worth $5.2 million and $4.25 million, respectively.
Minnesota -- Trade exception of $6.4 million expires in August
New York - $1.79 million in minimums, $220k guaranteed before 8/1,  or $320k guaranteed by 9/15
OKC - Trade exceptions in the $2-3 million range for PJ3 and Luke Ridnour.
Orlando -- Currently $2-3 million in cap room, plus $1.8 million in non-guaranteed contracts through 8/1
Philly -- enough said
Portland -- more room than Philly
Sacramento -- $1.7 million in non-guaranteed minimums
Utah -- Several million in cap space, plus non-guaranteed contracts

That's 16 teams in addition to Cleveland who can take on a couple of players, many of them with time horizons well beyond 8/1, like it is for Haywood's deal.  Certainly you could get better than a couple of late 2nds from the group of those.  It's not like it's Haywood or bust.

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #34 on: July 24, 2015, 10:31:01 AM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403
Certainly you could get better than a couple of late 2nds from the group of those.

You presume that these teams would be willing to give up either players or first round picks for Turner or Olynyk. Neither is generating such a pick, and the Cs don't have much use for must vet min players when they'd rather develop Jones or Holmes.

So while I get your point, not much of a clear advantage to waiting when the Cs could get additional cap room that could be useful in a trade this year by taking Haywood.
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #35 on: July 24, 2015, 10:38:39 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
Certainly you could get better than a couple of late 2nds from the group of those.

You presume that these teams would be wiling to give up either players or first round picks for Turner or Olynyk. Neither is generating such a pick, and the Cs don't have much use for must vet min players when they'd rather develop Jones or Holmes.

So while I get your point, not much of a clear advantage to waiting when the Cs could get additional cap room that could be useful in a trade this year by taking Haywood.

There's nothing useful about cap room at this point.  We still have $5 million as is, and nothing to do with it.  Yes, we could create an additional $5 million of that, but it disappears the second we sign Crowder and trade for Lee, which will supposedly be on Monday.  So you're trading Olynyk and Turner for two 2nds in 2019, and that's it.  I'm quite certain we could do better for that package.

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #36 on: July 24, 2015, 10:38:39 AM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403
  I think that will be young or sully if he comes in fat again.

Zero chance the Cs cut or trade Young in an end-of-camp move. Sully is also an unlikely candidate, IMO, though I could certainly see them trading him if they got a little value in return. I'm for keeping him and seeing if he can make some strides. If he put together a half a season of 20 and 10 he'd increase his value tremendously.
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #37 on: July 24, 2015, 10:44:48 AM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403
Certainly you could get better than a couple of late 2nds from the group of those.

You presume that these teams would be wiling to give up either players or first round picks for Turner or Olynyk. Neither is generating such a pick, and the Cs don't have much use for must vet min players when they'd rather develop Jones or Holmes.

So while I get your point, not much of a clear advantage to waiting when the Cs could get additional cap room that could be useful in a trade this year by taking Haywood.

There's nothing useful about cap room at this point.  We still have $5 million as is, and nothing to do with it.  Yes, we could create an additional $5 million of that, but it disappears the second we sign Crowder and trade for Lee, which will supposedly be on Monday.  So you're trading Olynyk and Turner for two 2nds in 2019, and that's it.  I'm quite certain we could do better for that package.

As for better value, like what? If you like Holmes, what do you think Olynyk, for example, could garner, that would be better? Very few teams have any need or minutes for him. Only one I can really see is Toronto, and they don't have much to offer than they'd give up for KO.
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #38 on: July 24, 2015, 10:47:55 AM »

Offline max215

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8448
  • Tommy Points: 624
I'm not a fan of KO or ET, but this is not something I'd ever consider.
Isaiah, you were lightning in a bottle.

DKC Clippers

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #39 on: July 24, 2015, 10:49:13 AM »

Offline kraidstar

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5368
  • Tommy Points: 2478
  I think that will be young or sully if he comes in fat again.

Zero chance the Cs cut or trade Young in an end-of-camp move. Sully is also an unlikely candidate, IMO, though I could certainly see them trading him if they got a little value in return. I'm for keeping him and seeing if he can make some strides. If he put together a half a season of 20 and 10 he'd increase his value tremendously.

so we can't afford to lose young for nothing but we should trade KO, who's shown far better potential, for nothing?

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #40 on: July 24, 2015, 10:51:37 AM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403
  I think that will be young or sully if he comes in fat again.

Zero chance the Cs cut or trade Young in an end-of-camp move. Sully is also an unlikely candidate, IMO, though I could certainly see them trading him if they got a little value in return. I'm for keeping him and seeing if he can make some strides. If he put together a half a season of 20 and 10 he'd increase his value tremendously.

so we can't afford to lose young for nothing but we should trade KO, who's shown far better potential, for nothing?

Right.

You think KO has more "potential". That's your POV, your right.

But good luck finding anyone in the Cs org or any other org who would agree, especially when you consider that Holmes (if you believe in him) replicates what Olynyk is supposed to bring as a player, yet is almost certainly going to prove to be a far better, more versatile defender than KO.
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #41 on: July 24, 2015, 11:01:34 AM »

Offline Geo123

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1470
  • Tommy Points: 33
Well according to Steve Kyler they don't want players, they want a TPE, so it's not realistic.

Steve Kyler ?@stevekylerNBA  · 15h15 hours ago 

Steve Kyler retweeted JPM
Cavs do not want salary or players back and have to do a deal before the 1st.


Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #42 on: July 24, 2015, 11:08:57 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
I'm not a fan of KO or ET, but this is not something I'd ever consider.
+1

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #43 on: July 24, 2015, 11:13:31 AM »

Offline hodgy03038

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3701
  • Tommy Points: 440
  • Marcus Smart #1 Fan
Ridiculous. Besides the fact that Cleveland don't want players back - why in the HELL would we help out the Cavs with TPE???   ::) ::) ::) ::)

Re: Trade Idea: Turner & Olynyk for Brandon Haywood and picks
« Reply #44 on: July 24, 2015, 11:18:16 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Love probably demanded they trade for Olynyk, he loves the Guy! :)   NOT!   This is silly on so many levels.  I call the OP a CAVS fan.