Bradley, but it's mainly because of salaries.
In my ultimate pipe dream, the team is able to keep the pick (which lands Ben Simmons), maintain double max cap space (to sign Durant + another star), and trade for an impact player (Cousins? Love? Blake? Butler?) all while keeping 1 of Bradley or Crowder.
Unfortunately, in such a ridiculous over-the-top ultimate pipe-dream, it's basically impossible to pull that off without including Bradley's 8.3 million dollar contract.
The great news is that Bradley and Crowder are on bargain contracts. The bad news is, if you start coming up with wild “best case scenarios” like this, you’re going to need to make some sacrifices just for the idea to work within NBA financial constraints.
For example, let’s say Jimmy Butler is the C’s target. Butler is set to make 17.5 million next year. You could offer Bradley (8.3 mil), Crowder (6.3 mil) and Olynyk (3 mil) to match salary. Imagine Boston also included a future Brooklyn 1st (or two) and some of their later picks this year (such as #16 and #23), and it’s not inconceivable that a Butler trade could actually get done without giving up our pick this year.
It is semi-plausible that a deal could get done without Jae Crowder, but it’s a bit more complicated. Unfortunately, Bradley is likely the odd man out in any scenario. You could, however, maybe trade Bradley (8.3 mil), Olynyk (3 mil), Rozier (1.9 mil), Young (1.8 mil), Mickey (1.2 mil) and Hunter (1.2 mil) to match the 17.5 mil being acquired. Additional picks could be included as necessary, but then it becomes a question of whether or not Chicago can take on six guys + picks for Jimmy Butler:
Tallying up all of the above, Boston could (theoretically) have a summer in which they keep Thomas, keep Smart, keep Crowder, draft Ben Simmons, trade for Jimmy Butler, sign Kevin Durant, sign Al Horford, and still have assets to spare.
1) Whether we would need to send out matching salary depends on whether we are over the cap. The timing of our various transactions matters. It is possible to shed salary to get under the cap by enough room that Danny wouldn't have to send out any matching salary (other than that of the actual key assets of the trade). That sort of sequence may not be best for pulling off other desired transactions, though.
2) Assuming we were completely over the cap when doing the deal, we'd still only need to send out 12.5M to match Butler's 17.5M incoming salary. We don't have to send out the full amount that is coming back in.
There are numerous combinations of Celtic contracts that would work to do the match. Which one to use depends on what CHI wants and what you are trying to achieve.
The advantage to matching salaries is that you maintain double max cap space while acquiring a star.
The disadvantage of matching salaries (when it is not required in order to do the deal) is it means the other side has to _want_ those contracts.
When you use the phrase, "maintain double max cap space", that implies you are doing the deal _with_ that much cap space available, which means you do not _have_ to send out matching salary to do the deal. Yes, you may want to shed more salary in order to free up more room. If you have disposable contracts such as say, Amir's or Jonas' non-guaranteed deals, you could send those out -- but what's the point? You could just let them go if you need the cap room. You only send them if the other team wants them specifically. So any other salary we need to send out to free up cap space would be guaranteed and you may at that point have to send out picks (incentive) for someone to take that salary off your books.
There are a lot of variables here that would determine whether it makes sense to include a player contract in a deal.
Note that if we are over the cap when we do a deal (i.e., suppose we sign two big FAs _before_ we make such a trade), we have multiple tools with which to match salary with, ranging from Amir & JJ's non-guaranteed deals (though those have a short window within which to operate) to the salary of our current contracted rosters to the use of sign & trade of Sully or Zeller and so on.
Timing of these deals will be critical. Danny may have to get some things set up to be agreements in principle that will then have to wait for other transactions to happen before they are finalized.
yes but because the discussion centers around Avery Bradley and Jae Crowder I cant imagine anyone doesnt want those 2 contracts.
No. I was responding originally to LarBrd33's comment:
Bradley, but it's mainly because of salaries.
...
it's basically impossible to pull that off without including Bradley's 8.3 million dollar contract.
That and other points in LarBrd33's post did not reflect the actual trade rules.
Whether Avery or Jae is included in such a trade package would happen because they are the basketball assets being traded. Neither 'has' to be in the deal for it to work for salary reasons. You could match Butler's salary with just Amir and Holland and picks. You can match the salary with Jae and Jonas and Rozier. There are lots of possible combos that work.
And whether any of them HAS to be in the deal for basketball reasons is completely debatable. It depends on what the Bulls decide they want to do (are they trying to rebuild quickly? blow it up for picks? what?) and what Danny is willing to pay.
Where the BKN pick falls could have a big effect on what sort of package is needed. If it is a top 2 pick, then Danny would send a less valuable package of players than if it was, say, #6. Only after that is decided, and you've resolved how the timing will work in relation to other transactions, do you finalize the salary matching bits.
As I've indicated, there are a ton of variables that will go into shaping the final nature of any deal, if a deal happens. The good news is that Danny is well situated to act on just about any possible scenario.
Poll
Topic: If needed, who would you rather see traded....Crowder or Bradley? (Read 6047 times)