Author Topic: Teams with trade exceptions that can be used on Evan Turner or Jared Sullinger  (Read 5131 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
While people talk about a 2-for-1 trade to trim the roster, I think we should consider the idea of a 1-for-0 trade in which a player is traded to a team with a trade exception for future picks.  The two best candidates for such a trade are probably Evan Turner and Jared Sullinger, since both have small-ish expiring contracts.  Turner makes approximately $3.4 million, while Sullinger is a shade under $2.3 million.

Here are the teams which have trade exceptions or cap space large enough to acquire one of those players:
Brooklyn (has two separate TEs that are barely big enough to acquire both)
Cleveland (TEs large enough for both)
Milwaukee (TEs for both)
Orlando (cap space large enough for Sullinger but not Turner)
Philadelphia (cap space for both)
Golden State (TEs for both)
Minnesota (TEs for both)
Portland (cap space to acquire one but not both)
Utah (cap space for both)

It's hard to come up with a good spot for either Turner or Sullinger among those teams.  Maybe Utah would want to enhance its bench with either player if they think they can make a serious playoff push this season.

Can you come up with a reason for any of these teams to use their trade exception or cap space to send a pick or two for Turner or Sullinger?
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Offline Evantime34

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11942
  • Tommy Points: 764
  • Eagerly Awaiting the Next Fantasy Draft
While people talk about a 2-for-1 trade to trim the roster, I think we should consider the idea of a 1-for-0 trade in which a player is traded to a team with a trade exception for future picks.  The two best candidates for such a trade are probably Evan Turner and Jared Sullinger, since both have small-ish expiring contracts.  Turner makes approximately $3.4 million, while Sullinger is a shade under $2.3 million.

Here are the teams which have trade exceptions or cap space large enough to acquire one of those players:
Brooklyn (has two separate TEs that are barely big enough to acquire both)
Cleveland (TEs large enough for both)
Milwaukee (TEs for both)
Orlando (cap space large enough for Sullinger but not Turner)
Philadelphia (cap space for both)
Golden State (TEs for both)
Minnesota (TEs for both)
Portland (cap space to acquire one but not both)
Utah (cap space for both)

It's hard to come up with a good spot for either Turner or Sullinger among those teams.  Maybe Utah would want to enhance its bench with either player if they think they can make a serious playoff push this season.

Can you come up with a reason for any of these teams to use their trade exception or cap space to send a pick or two for Turner or Sullinger?
I could see Utah adding an extra ball handler in Turner since their point guards are either very young or not very good.
DKC:  Rockets
CB Draft: Memphis Grizz
Players: Klay Thompson, Jabari Parker, Aaron Gordon
Next 3 picks: 4.14, 4.15, 4.19

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
For Turner I'd be pleased to receive anything in return.  Even just straight dumping him would be OK with me.

I don't think a lot of Jared Sullinger, but he's a useful young big and that means dumping him for a mid to late 1st round pick would seem like something of a waste.  I'd like to get at least a young player with potential utility to the team in return.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Offline PutItInTheAir

  • Jordan Walsh
  • Posts: 22
  • Tommy Points: 1
dont know why you would be interested in trading the second best scoring option and the utility guy, but if i had to, i would avoid all eastern teams, unless it was for an actual player. but cavs certainly could use more bench presence. brooklyn definitely could use all the help they could get but that would harm our chances at a good from them. to be frank i think all these teams could use either turner or sully or both. theyre good players

Offline Evantime34

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11942
  • Tommy Points: 764
  • Eagerly Awaiting the Next Fantasy Draft
If Exum is out for any extended time I think that would make Turner even more attractive.
DKC:  Rockets
CB Draft: Memphis Grizz
Players: Klay Thompson, Jabari Parker, Aaron Gordon
Next 3 picks: 4.14, 4.15, 4.19

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
dont know why you would be interested in trading the second best scoring option and the utility guy, but if i had to, i would avoid all eastern teams, unless it was for an actual player. but cavs certainly could use more bench presence. brooklyn definitely could use all the help they could get but that would harm our chances at a good from them. to be frank i think all these teams could use either turner or sully or both. theyre good players

With Lee on board, I don't think Sullinger is the second best scoring option.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Offline Irish Stew

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1080
  • Tommy Points: 56
Informative and organized way to approach our roster situation. However, I don't want to move Sullinger until we find out if the alleged weight loss has resulted in a player that we want as a rotation player for the long term. Turner doesn't seem to have a future here. He's an expiring contract who really doesn't fit Steven's ball movement, 3-point shooting offense. I don't want to help the other Eastern Conference teams next year except for the irrelevant Sixers. For the same reason as the Celtics, he doesn't really fit GS. I would love to move him to Minnesota as anything that gives them a better shot to make the playoffs obviously helps us with their protected draft pick. A way-in-the-future 2nd round pick works for me, even with some protection.

Offline dreamgreen

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3558
  • Tommy Points: 182
Who does Portland have for bigs?

Online hwangjini_1

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17837
  • Tommy Points: 2661
  • bammokja
Who does Portland have for bigs?
in the time it took you to type that post, you could have found this....

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/teams/Portland_Trail_Blazers/24/Rosters
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Offline ThePoeticWolf

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 289
  • Tommy Points: 14
While people talk about a 2-for-1 trade to trim the roster, I think we should consider the idea of a 1-for-0 trade in which a player is traded to a team with a trade exception for future picks.  The two best candidates for such a trade are probably Evan Turner and Jared Sullinger, since both have small-ish expiring contracts.  Turner makes approximately $3.4 million, while Sullinger is a shade under $2.3 million.

Here are the teams which have trade exceptions or cap space large enough to acquire one of those players:
Brooklyn (has two separate TEs that are barely big enough to acquire both)
Cleveland (TEs large enough for both)
Milwaukee (TEs for both)
Orlando (cap space large enough for Sullinger but not Turner)
Philadelphia (cap space for both)
Golden State (TEs for both)
Minnesota (TEs for both)
Portland (cap space to acquire one but not both)
Utah (cap space for both)

It's hard to come up with a good spot for either Turner or Sullinger among those teams.  Maybe Utah would want to enhance its bench with either player if they think they can make a serious playoff push this season.

Can you come up with a reason for any of these teams to use their trade exception or cap space to send a pick or two for Turner or Sullinger?

I don't need to come up with a reason for these teams to use it.  The Celtics would be stupid to trade these two players for anything but young talent and draft picks.

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • NCE
  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15402
  • Tommy Points: 2785
Can someone PLEASE explain to me the fascination in trading ET?

Seriously, why trade one of our top all-around players? He's a glue guy, does many things well, and seems to fit in well with Coach Stevens' plan.

His salary is good for us, too - and no I don't think that's a good reason to trade him.

Who will take his spot? James Young? Crowder? Besides the slight drop-off in defense vs Crowder, ET is better than both of these guys.

Who are we looking to bring in for ET?

Unless the return is a clear-cut improvement, I don't see the reason for trading him.

IMO we trade him we'll be taking a step back.....but that's what some of the tankers probably want anyway, LOL.

BUT - we have an Anti-Tank weapon right here in BOS:



No, not THAT....THIS:



With Brad Stevens, Danny would have to basically trade EVERYONE before we could successfully (sigh) tank.

I just don't see the logic in trading ET...or Sully for that matter. I'd rather just let the season play out.

To me, it's obvious that the team intends to play for a 4th or 5th spot, and that is GREAT to me.

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
dont know why you would be interested in trading the second best scoring option and the utility guy, but if i had to, i would avoid all eastern teams, unless it was for an actual player. but cavs certainly could use more bench presence. brooklyn definitely could use all the help they could get but that would harm our chances at a good from them. to be frank i think all these teams could use either turner or sully or both. theyre good players

With Lee on board, I don't think Sullinger is the second best scoring option.

Even before acquiring Lee, I'd still consider Sully to be our third offensive option behind Thomas and Bradley.

Based purely on eye-test, Bradley has been a consistent #2 option for us in both 2013/14 (after Green) and 2014/15 (after Thomas). 

I see Sully as more of a 'catch and shoot' and 'rebound and put-back' type of guy rather than a natural scorer / shot creator. 

Bradley isn't an elite shot creator either, but he is capable of getting his own shot off.  He can get to the rim off the dribble (on the odd occasion, at least) and he makes a living off those one dribble pull-ups, which he's deadly on.

In terms of numbers they're pretty close, but I give the nod to Bradley for his ability to (occasionally) create his own shot.

Offline BDeCosta26

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1314
  • Tommy Points: 232
Depending on the picks, I'd consider it with Turner. Maybe Sullinger for a pretty good pick.

But I don't think that really maximizes their value, obviously. I still believe we can build trades around some of our guys should the chance arise.

I've liked Ainge's moves this off-season, but the sheer volume of players who should be getting some form of PT is crazy, and I like how LC is pointing out that trimming that volume could require a few less than ideal solutions. Hard to see Ainge just dumping Sully for a late 1st unless he really doesn't think he's improved his conditioning at all.

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Can someone PLEASE explain to me the fascination in trading ET?

Seriously, why trade one of our top all-around players? He's a glue guy, does many things well, and seems to fit in well with Coach Stevens' plan.

His salary is good for us, too - and no I don't think that's a good reason to trade him.

Who will take his spot? James Young? Crowder? Besides the slight drop-off in defense vs Crowder, ET is better than both of these guys.

Who are we looking to bring in for ET?

Unless the return is a clear-cut improvement, I don't see the reason for trading him.

IMO we trade him we'll be taking a step back.....but that's what some of the tankers probably want anyway, LOL.

BUT - we have an Anti-Tank weapon right here in BOS:



No, not THAT....THIS:



With Brad Stevens, Danny would have to basically trade EVERYONE before we could successfully (sigh) tank.

I just don't see the logic in trading ET...or Sully for that matter. I'd rather just let the season play out.

To me, it's obvious that the team intends to play for a 4th or 5th spot, and that is GREAT to me.

I can give you my logic:

If he's one of our all-around-top-players (and I don't argue with that), that means that our team is pretty bad. Maybe not bad enough to miss the playoffs in the East, but bad nonetheless. It would seem to be a wasted season going through the year with the roster as it stands -- we have three players who are probably not going to be on the team when our squad is legitimately contending for the ECF in Lee, Turner, and Johnson, but those are the three players who are going to see a lot of playing time since Stevens, as you've pointed out, coaches to win games, and that usually entails playing your best players, even when they aren't that great compared to the rest of the NBA.

I would much rather see our team focus on developing the players that fit the timeline for contention -- and that includes players who will contribute to a title winning team if Ainge managed to pull off a ridiculous, 2007-esque trade this season. That does not include Evan Turner, who has played fewer minutes the better his teams got for his entire NBA career.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • NCE
  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15402
  • Tommy Points: 2785
Can someone PLEASE explain to me the fascination in trading ET?

Seriously, why trade one of our top all-around players? He's a glue guy, does many things well, and seems to fit in well with Coach Stevens' plan.

His salary is good for us, too - and no I don't think that's a good reason to trade him.

Who will take his spot? James Young? Crowder? Besides the slight drop-off in defense vs Crowder, ET is better than both of these guys.

Who are we looking to bring in for ET?

Unless the return is a clear-cut improvement, I don't see the reason for trading him.

IMO we trade him we'll be taking a step back.....but that's what some of the tankers probably want anyway, LOL.

BUT - we have an Anti-Tank weapon right here in BOS:



No, not THAT....THIS:



With Brad Stevens, Danny would have to basically trade EVERYONE before we could successfully (sigh) tank.

I just don't see the logic in trading ET...or Sully for that matter. I'd rather just let the season play out.

To me, it's obvious that the team intends to play for a 4th or 5th spot, and that is GREAT to me.

I can give you my logic:

If he's one of our all-around-top-players (and I don't argue with that), that means that our team is pretty bad. Maybe not bad enough to miss the playoffs in the East, but bad nonetheless. It would seem to be a wasted season going through the year with the roster as it stands -- we have three players who are probably not going to be on the team when our squad is legitimately contending for the ECF in Lee, Turner, and Johnson, but those are the three players who are going to see a lot of playing time since Stevens, as you've pointed out, coaches to win games, and that usually entails playing your best players, even when they aren't that great compared to the rest of the NBA.

I would much rather see our team focus on developing the players that fit the timeline for contention -- and that includes players who will contribute to a title winning team if Ainge managed to pull off a ridiculous, 2007-esque trade this season. That does not include Evan Turner, who has played fewer minutes the better his teams got for his entire NBA career.

Fair points.

I could also see some scenarios where ET is still here if we acquired a star or two.

Danny has some options at his disposal, and ET could still very well be here playing for CBS in the future.

And I wouldn't call our team "bad" per se.

It is "bad" as most of us only count contending or nothing else. But as for me I'm accepting the process and I know that we're closer to getting to the top than some teams. We're improving and staying flexible for the future.

But fair points, though.