mavs bull lakers warriors rondo rose iggy

[avon barksdale]

Mavs out rajon rondo S&T ray felton
mavs in Andre iguodola future first lotto protected from gsw

Dallas slide Ellis to point, he's not a true point but neither are westbrook Parker curry lillard, he can also share the ball handling and play making with parsons and iggy

Chicago out derrick rose
Chicago in rajon rondo s&t

Bulls free up some salary for butlers Max deal and turn the page from rose, rondo would be a great fit back to play making defense and tough minded half court basketball

Lakers in derrick rose

With Kobe winding down they need a star, rose can be that, it's a gamble but he only has two years left and all they're using is cap

Gsw out iggy future lotto protected first
Gsw in ray felton

Dumping lee is an option but with one year left bigs still have value, shedding iggy frees up money to keep green without going in the tax(the owner said he'll pay it but what else do u expect him to say) they also pick up a 7+ million TPE

[Texas Chuck]

Lakers might be willing to take that gamble, but I wouldn't if I were them. They are the freaking Lakers--they won't have problems attracting stars that aren't broken.

Can't see the Warriors giving a pick to dump a useful player. Either their owner pays tax for a year while waiting for Lee to expire or they use an asset to move him.

I think I'd do this as Chicago depending on the numbers on the Rondo contract. They would have to go out and find a wing who could shoot/score (Kevin Martin perhaps), but removing the health risk of Rose while getting a good replacement makes sense.

I don't get this for Dallas at all. Monta isn't a PG and Rick has been clear that he doesn't want to play him there. And Iggy isn't any better offensively than Rondo so what are you gaining there?

[avon barksdale]

Lakers might be willing to take that gamble, but I wouldn't if I were them. They are the freaking Lakers--they won't have problems attracting stars that aren't broken.

Can't see the Warriors giving a pick to dump a useful player. Either their owner pays tax for a year while waiting for Lee to expire or they use an asset to move him.

I think I'd do this as Chicago depending on the numbers on the Rondo contract. They would have to go out and find a wing who could shoot/score (Kevin Martin perhaps), but removing the health risk of Rose while getting a good replacement makes sense.

I don't get this for Dallas at all. Monta isn't a PG and Rick has been clear that he doesn't want to play him there. And Iggy isn't any better offensively than Rondo so what are you gaining there?

To your first point I agree as have I admitted there's a gamble for the lakers but rose has the most star potential they can attract this summer, we agree on Chicago, as for gsw the pick might be a bit much so maybe a couple seconds, for us, again monta isn't a point but our system is ball movement and spacing, iggy isn't a knockdown shooter but he's adequate which rondo isn't he's better and more versatile defensively, and most importantly he's only two years at decent money, we also dump feltons money. We may disagree about rondos fit but if he wants to go this is a solid play for us.

[DLeagueAllStars]

So let me get this right.. u want to dump felton and want picks back even if they are seconds and get the more useful player...

Thats insulting

[avon barksdale]

So let me get this right.. u want to dump felton and want picks back even if they are seconds and get the more useful player...

Thats insulting

I'm assuming you're speaking from the gsw pov this is a salary dump for them they're sitting at almost 80m next year without green locked up, they're going to have to lee or iggy to not be in tax hell and assets will have to be moved to dump either, this deal they're saving 18m in salary alone not including the possible tax savings, they also acquire a tpe of around 7m, iggy is a solid player but his production doesn't come close to his contract. Regardless to people thinking owners are rich so they'll just spend the money, if there's a way to cut money they'll do it, you don't become a billionaire by wasting money

[Porzingis]

Iggy + late 1st for ......... wait for it.....


Raymond 'fat' Felton???



Nah Iggy is still good try this with boston and gerald wallace.

[ChuckDurn]

Speaking from the Warriors perspective.....

Not sure if serious, or trolling.

Lacob's group bought the Warriors for $450 about 5 years ago..... now it's worth something like $1.2 or $1.3B.

It's been built largely by getting good talent, while managing the finances relatively well.

Why are people so concerned about a 1-year, $10-20M sacrifice in the luxury tax to keep a team intact and make a run for a title or two, when the team has appreciated over $700M in 5 years? Gotta believe a deep run in the playoffs easily adds $10-$20M in value (and revenues) to the club, more than offsetting the luxury tax.

If anybody is going to be moved, it will almost certainly be David Lee, which would happen either this summer or at next year's deadline. We're not going to just give away productive players and additional assets to take back trash such as Felton.....

[Coxy]

Speaking from the Warriors perspective.....

Not sure if serious, or trolling.

Lacob's group bought the Warriors for $450 about 5 years ago..... now it's worth something like $1.2 or $1.3B.

It's been built largely by getting good talent, while managing the finances relatively well.

Why are people so concerned about a 1-year, $10-20M sacrifice in the luxury tax to keep a team intact and make a run for a title or two, when the team has appreciated over $700M in 5 years? Gotta believe a deep run in the playoffs easily adds $10-$20M in value (and revenues) to the club, more than offsetting the luxury tax.

If anybody is going to be moved, it will almost certainly be David Lee, which would happen either this summer or at next year's deadline. We're not going to just give away productive players and additional assets to take back trash such as Felton.....

+1.

[DLeagueAllStars]

I think other warrior fans agree with my thinking... its ONE year of tax

[gswhoops]

Nothing to add but...ridiculous for GS.

[Golabki]

Lakers might be willing to take that gamble, but I wouldn't if I were them. They are the freaking Lakers--they won't have problems attracting stars that aren't broken.

Can't see the Warriors giving a pick to dump a useful player. Either their owner pays tax for a year while waiting for Lee to expire or they use an asset to move him.

I think I'd do this as Chicago depending on the numbers on the Rondo contract. They would have to go out and find a wing who could shoot/score (Kevin Martin perhaps), but removing the health risk of Rose while getting a good replacement makes sense.

I don't get this for Dallas at all. Monta isn't a PG and Rick has been clear that he doesn't want to play him there. And Iggy isn't any better offensively than Rondo so what are you gaining there?

I agree on the Lakers... they probably don't do it, but when it comes to teams crazy enough to take a chance on Rose, they might be #1 on the list.

Rondo to Chicago is interesting if Rose is leaving, but all the obvious Rondo-fit questions apply.

I agree it's hard to see GSW giving up a pick to move Iggy in order to keep Lee.

I actually like the idea of Iggy in Dallas a lot. I think you're okay with Monta/Iggy/Harris as your 3 main guards, although Harris is the only natural PG and he's not a particularly great one. Your defense with Iggy is a LOT better and I think he would fit the Dallas ball movement system nicely. I'd actually take Iggy without the incentive of the pick.

[Texas Chuck]

Your defense with Iggy is a LOT better and I think he would fit the Dallas ball movement system nicely. I'd actually take Iggy without the incentive of the pick.

I like Iggy too and think he is still a great defender, but the defense with Rondo is one of the 2 or 3 best in the league right now. Im not sure we really gain much defensively especially since we now have no one to guard PG's which is becoming nearly as important as the traditional big man anchor under today's rules. If you can't put up resistance against PG's you are DOA, and for all of Rondo's offensive struggles in Dallas, one thing he is doing is really making life difficult on opposing PG's. You can see this not only by the huge difference in stats for opposing PG's but also in how the Mavs have gone from one of the worst teams in the league defending the 3 to one of the best. Guys are able to stay at home far more because Rondo doesn't get beat every single time like Nelson was.

[Golabki]

Your defense with Iggy is a LOT better and I think he would fit the Dallas ball movement system nicely. I'd actually take Iggy without the incentive of the pick.

I like Iggy too and think he is still a great defender, but the defense with Rondo is one of the 2 or 3 best in the league right now. Im not sure we really gain much defensively especially since we now have no one to guard PG's which is becoming nearly as important as the traditional big man anchor under today's rules. If you can't put up resistance against PG's you are DOA, and for all of Rondo's offensive struggles in Dallas, one thing he is doing is really making life difficult on opposing PG's. You can see this not only by the huge difference in stats for opposing PG's but also in how the Mavs have gone from one of the worst teams in the league defending the 3 to one of the best. Guys are able to stay at home far more because Rondo doesn't get beat every single time like Nelson was.

I don't agree with you on the defense REALLY being that good. I think there's going to be a regression to the mean. And I'd have no problem putting Iggy on a PG.

[avon barksdale]

I think the question warriors fans have to ask is who goes lee or iggy, I chose iggy because his contract is longer, to dump lee is going to require a first with his injury history so why move a big who's expiring anyway next summer when bogut and festus are also injury prone? As for the 'it's one year of tad's argument, its not your money, this deal saves 20-30 million and iggy isn't worth that, look at his production and his age and his injury history. So it's not iggy plus 2 2nds for felton, its iggy 2 2nds for felton 20-30m and a tpe of around 7m.

For the rondo argument, his defense hasn't been great here by any stretch but anything from Nelson is a huge jump, he's been very good off ball defensively but on ball has been average, it'll cost big money to keep him if he wants to stay paying that for his production isn't worth it. Iggy can guard 1-3, I don't love his injury history but it's only a two year deal

[Texas Chuck]

I don't agree with you on the defense REALLY being that good. I think there's going to be a regression to the mean. And I'd have no problem putting Iggy on a PG.

I agree there is going to likely be some regression, but its safe to say the Mavs are now a top 10 defense and Rondo is a big part of that. Im not sure the team gets better by playing several guys OOP and making changes almost just to make changes.

And I don't think Iggy can guard a PG for 30-35 mpg a game at this point which makes Rondo more valuable imo.

[DLeagueAllStars]

The one yr talk is because the warriors window is about 3 yrs as is... adding felton decreases that window with the subtraction so yes that is worth the extra 15m or so.. iggy minus felton contract times two.. as is indint even think the warriors side of a deal is legal financially let alone basketball wise

[Scoot McGroot]

I think other warrior fans agree with my thinking... its ONE year of tax

Don't worry, non-Warriors fans agree, too.

It sucks to pay the tax, but it really is just one year ahead for them before a massive cap increase, and they don't have any repeater tax issues to pay for. While it hurts to pay a big bill, it hurts to give up a big piece of talent and a pick to avoid something for one year. If the owner can afford to slug through that payment for one year, where there's guaranteed light at the end of the tunnel, AND you're winning, you do it! This isn't the Knicks selling off some talent that kind of helps them, but not really, they're repeat payers, and they aren't close to winning.

If the Warriors could avoid the tax in a move that makes sense for them, then they probably would. If they have to suffer through one year of the tax to keep this team together long-term, then they probably would, too, and they should.

[DLeagueAllStars]

I think other warrior fans agree with my thinking... its ONE year of tax

Don't worry, non-Warriors fans agree, too.

It sucks to pay the tax, but it really is just one year ahead for them before a massive cap increase, and they don't have any repeater tax issues to pay for. While it hurts to pay a big bill, it hurts to give up a big piece of talent and a pick to avoid something for one year. If the owner can afford to slug through that payment for one year, where there's guaranteed light at the end of the tunnel, AND you're winning, you do it! This isn't the Knicks selling off some talent that kind of helps them, but not really, they're repeat payers, and they aren't close to winning.

If the Warriors could avoid the tax in a move that makes sense for them, then they probably would. If they have to suffer through one year of the tax to keep this team together long-term, then they probably would, too, and they should.

Thank you

[spearsy23]

Unless I'm mistaken you can't combine players in a sign and trade. Even before value and fit problems, that would be the biggest problem.

[Scoot McGroot]

Unless I'm mistaken you can't combine players in a sign and trade. Even before value and fit problems, that would be the biggest problem.

You can, unless there's other trade restrictions in place, BYC issues, etc.

No rule against it.