POINT SCORED KOTB Entry: BKN-LAC

[BullyKing]

Based on feedback from the three team version of Pierce really being done and probably retiring:

BKN trades top-55 protected 2021 2nd (man they are low on picks) for Pierce, 2020 2nd (more favorable of LAC/CLE) and 2019 2022 2nd round swap rights

Brooklyn sends some extra cap space for Clippers to get out of the tax and mitigates,if only EXTREMELY slightly, the huge cost of the mistake of acquiring Pierce the first time.

Edit: corrected swap year -- HF

[Trader_Joe]

Don't think the Nets can trade BB's rights.
He's not guaranteed and for him to be traded he would have to make the team. Not sure who gets cut if he does, so that has to be factored. It may make more sense with Killpatrick.

[BullyKing]

Don't think the Nets can trade BB's rights.
He's not guaranteed and for him to be traded he would have to make the team. Not sure who gets cut if he does, so that has to be factored. It may make more sense with Killpatrick.

Why would that be? Am I missing something unique about his situation?

[Trader_Joe]

Don't think the Nets can trade BB's rights.
He's not guaranteed and for him to be traded he would have to make the team. Not sure who gets cut if he does, so that has to be factored. It may make more sense with Killpatrick.

Why would that be? Am I missing something unique about his situation?

They signed him this summer so he cannot be traded until December 15th I believe. For him to be on the roster then means one of the 15 guaranteed guys needs to be cut or shipped out for a roster spot. I could be wrong here, though.

[BullyKing]

Don't think the Nets can trade BB's rights.
He's not guaranteed and for him to be traded he would have to make the team. Not sure who gets cut if he does, so that has to be factored. It may make more sense with Killpatrick.

Why would that be? Am I missing something unique about his situation?

They signed him this summer so he cannot be traded until December 15th I believe. For him to be on the roster then means one of the 15 guaranteed guys needs to be cut or shipped out for a roster spot. I could be wrong here, though.

Ugh, you're totally right my bad. Since no one has really voted yet, I'm going to change that to a top-55 protected 2nd since his only point was to be the something going the other way.

[Trader_Joe]

KOTB: No

Our picks are too valuable to move in trade. I'd rather send someone like Beau Beech when he is eligible to be traded.

J/K...if PP promised to retire then KOTB; Yes.

[Texas Chuck]

KOTB: No

Our picks are too valuable to move in trade. I'd rather send someone like Beau Beech when he is eligible to be traded.

J/K...if PP promised to retire then KOTB; Yes.

I don't think there is much question he retires. Or at the worst agrees to a buyout to sign with a contender?

I'm on the fence on this one because I'm not sure Doc is willing to trade Truth just for the money savings after how terribly he has proven to be at managing the cap. But with Pierce possibly retiring anyway and just how much sense this makes for both sides:

KOTB: YES

[jayjaysee]

I like the edited, creating a small TPE for Doc to try to use later.. I think more realistically Boston would take Pierce for less value (or one of their soon to be cut guys and less cash) and Pierce could retire a Celtic, Boston has the cap space to do it..

But if this is what it costs and Pierce is retiring, LAC would do it and Brooklyn has no reason not to.

Yes

[HartfordWhalers]

Based on feedback from the three team version of Pierce really being done and probably retiring:

BKN trades top-55 protected 2021 2nd (man they are low on picks) for Pierce, 2020 2nd (more favorable of LAC/CLE) and 2019 2nd round swap rights

Brooklyn sends some extra cap space for Clippers to get out of the tax and mitigates,if only EXTREMELY slightly, the huge cost of the mistake of acquiring Pierce the first time.

Okay, I guess I should nitpick. 2019 Nets don't have a 2nd. Do the Nets get 2 2nds, or swap rights that they cannot get and just one.

[BullyKing]

Based on feedback from the three team version of Pierce really being done and probably retiring:

BKN trades top-55 protected 2021 2nd (man they are low on picks) for Pierce, 2020 2nd (more favorable of LAC/CLE) and 2019 2nd round swap rights

Brooklyn sends some extra cap space for Clippers to get out of the tax and mitigates,if only EXTREMELY slightly, the huge cost of the mistake of acquiring Pierce the first time.

Okay, I guess I should nitpick. 2019 Nets don't have a 2nd. Do the Nets get 2 2nds, or swap rights that they cannot get and just one.

Matching up the few picks these guys have is really something. They can swap 2022 2nds I guess.

[HartfordWhalers]

Based on feedback from the three team version of Pierce really being done and probably retiring:

BKN trades top-55 protected 2021 2nd (man they are low on picks) for Pierce, 2020 2nd (more favorable of LAC/CLE) and 2019 2nd round swap rights

Brooklyn sends some extra cap space for Clippers to get out of the tax and mitigates,if only EXTREMELY slightly, the huge cost of the mistake of acquiring Pierce the first time.

Okay, I guess I should nitpick. 2019 Nets don't have a 2nd. Do the Nets get 2 2nds, or swap rights that they cannot get and just one.

Matching up the few picks these guys have is really something. They can swap 2022 2nds I guess.

You had my yes vote when I thought it was 2019 2nd, and before I nit picked into Pierce's contract details.

BBinsiders shows it as:
Paul Pierce $3,527,920 $3,679,840 (just under 1.1m gtd)

That 1.1m guarantee makes it need more than this.

Sorry, but I need to vote KOTB no.

However, Paul Pierce with 2 second round picks and maybe 1m in cash would be a trade I could see happening easily. This just was too little value.


Also, when did he get that 17-18 gtd money? I swear it was all ungtd last time I looked.

....

Can you confirm his 17-18 details?

[HartfordWhalers]

3 yes, 1 no.

Please vote people. Thanks!

[QRich3]

I vote no.

Value wise it's fine, but even leaving aside the whole doing-Pierce-dirty situation that makes it unrealistic, paying two unprotected distant 2nds to get out of the luxury tax seems quite a steep price, when if my calculations are right (Clips payroll is $114.7M, tax is $113.3M), dumping Speights at the deadline would suffice to duck it. And I'm convinced that if Bass is healthy and Brice shows a pulse, Speights will be out of the rotation by then. It shouldn't be that expensive to dump a minimum salary as it is to dump Pierce.

Then you have to compare the cost of buying your average 2nd rounder nowadays with the cost of being a million and a half over the tax, and I'm not sure getting under the tax is even beneficial at this price.

[HartfordWhalers]

3 yes, 2 no. Stuck in limbo.

[Texas Chuck]

Seriously guys Bully King is a good reg. He deserves people to come in and vote here. Give the dude a yes or a no please!

[jayjaysee]

I already voted yes, but I wonder - if Pierce is retiring.. And the Celtics pay him his 1.1 million to fade away.. Aren't they under the tax by trimming that 2+ mil from his contract?

And shouldn't they be able to find a team willing to take Pierce +1.5 mil to buy him out and keep the two (low value) distant 2nds? I mean if Rivers called Danny and asked him to let Pierce retire a Celtic, AND get a few hundred thousand on top?

And I'm going to post an awful idea I've taken from this.

[moocow007]

I'll go with KOTB - Yes.

It's not a wow trade but yeah sure there's no harm in it. It's like finding a nickel on the floor. Are you thrilled? No. Would you still be ok with pocketing the nickel? Yes.

[HartfordWhalers]

I already voted yes, but I wonder - if Pierce is retiring.. And the Celtics pay him his 1.1 million to fade away.. Aren't they under the tax by trimming that 2+ mil from his contract?

And shouldn't they be able to find a team willing to take Pierce +1.5 mil to buy him out and keep the two (low value) distant 2nds? I mean if Rivers called Danny and asked him to let Pierce retire a Celtic, AND get a few hundred thousand on top?

And I'm going to post an awful idea I've taken from this.

Why would Pierce only take 1.1m? I feel like the default is to assume a guy gets his full money, and I'm not sure why it wouldn;t happen here.

Edit: That 1.1m is for next year, as in 17-18.

So, Pierce would cost 4.6m which is why I think its just a little light to the Nets.

[jayjaysee]

I already voted yes, but I wonder - if Pierce is retiring.. And the Celtics pay him his 1.1 million to fade away.. Aren't they under the tax by trimming that 2+ mil from his contract?

And shouldn't they be able to find a team willing to take Pierce +1.5 mil to buy him out and keep the two (low value) distant 2nds? I mean if Rivers called Danny and asked him to let Pierce retire a Celtic, AND get a few hundred thousand on top?

And I'm going to post an awful idea I've taken from this.

Why would Pierce only take 1.1m? I feel like the default is to assume a guy gets his full money, and I'm not sure why it wouldn;t happen here.

Edit: That 1.1m is for next year, as in 17-18.

So, Pierce would cost 4.6m which is why I think its just a little light to the Nets.

Gotta come with facts and make my perfectly good argument completely empty.. Thanks.

Changes my opinion on this thread and my thread.

.

EDIT /

I think given Brooklyn's cap situation this year AND their lack of future picks... They'd still do it. After this move, they still have what 15 mil in cap space, if they decide to take on a contract midseason this doesn't stop it.. They have expendable, expiring deals they can add if they need more cap space midseason.

Still a Yes. Just not as easy a yes.

[HartfordWhalers]

4 yes, 2 no. If people don;t vote I can just keep bumping this. Or Change my vote to a yes already.