CBA 3-Team Trade question...

GreekAlex · Post #1 » by **GreekAlex** » Sat Jul 5, 2014 8:17 am

Is it possible to bring in a 3rd team on a S&T? I can't remember it being done before and I'm aware S&T's have some restrictions normal trades do not.

If so, considering Sacramento's desire to acquire Rondo and J. Smith I'd be interested to construction a deal that works for all 3 teams. It maybe easier to deal with the Kings and get IT and pawn off J. Smith if the Kings know Rondo is part of the deal. The NBA trade machine is down and it doesn't work with S&Ts but I could imagine something like:

Det In: {Total in 27 M}
IT (8 M) + R. Gay (19 M)
Det Out: {Total out 18.5}
J. Smith (14 M) + Jonas J. (4.5 M)

-Detroit gets the PG they want and a SF with only one season left on his contract. (The Pistons can absorb the extra salary with their cap space.)

Bos In: {Total 19.5}
Ben McLemore (3 M) + Sac 2015 unprotected 1st + D. Williams (6.5 M) + Jason Terry (5.5 M) + Jonas J. (4.5 M)
Bos out: {Total 22 M}
Rondo (13 M) + Jeff Green (9 M)

-Boston gets Ben McLemore to pair with Marcus Smart, a first round pick with potential & one less season of J. Green and expirings. (The Celtics can absorb the extra salary with their cap space.)

Sac In: {Total 36 M}
Rondo (13 M) + J. Smith (14 M) + J. Green (9 M)
Sac Out: {Total 39 M)
IT (Resigned 8 M) + R. Gay (19 M) + Jason Terry (5.5 M) + D. Williams (6.5 M) + 2015 unprotected 1st

-Sacramento gets the PG they want, the PF they want, a solid SF with a better cap number all for 3 M less than matching an IT offer sheet.

DCintheD · Post #2 » by **DCintheD** » Sat Jul 5, 2014 10:36 am

That's a nice trade but I'm pretty sure Sac wants to retain Gay beyond this year.

Sign and trades are pretty complicated as is, not sure how much more complicated they can get with a 3rd team.

Ghost · Post #3 » by **Ghost** » Sat Jul 5, 2014 11:51 am

I heard somewhere the Kings dont have a pick they can trade till 2017.

GreekAlex · Post #4 » by **GreekAlex** » Sat Jul 5, 2014 4:22 pm

DCintheD wrote:That's a nice trade but I'm pretty sure Sac wants to retain Gay beyond this year.

Sign and trades are pretty complicated as is, not sure how much more complicated they can get with a 3rd team.

Yeah, I've heard that as well. But I think considering the other pieces involved they wouldn't worry about Gay.

Considering the early demands of D. Ainge for Rono I'd be more concerned they'd pass. I just don't see teams lining up to give anything better than a sophomore lottery pick, potential for another high pick and cap space.

HotelVitale · Post #5 » by **HotelVitale** » Sat Jul 5, 2014 5:11 pm

GreekAlex wrote: Considering the early demands of D. Ainge for Rono I'd be more concerned they'd pass. I just don't see teams lining up to give anything better than a sophomore lottery pick, potential for another high pick and cap space.

I think the Kings would be thrilled but, c'mon, Rondo is definitely worth more than that package if the pick isn't expected to be really high. McLemore was awful last year so he's not the type of guy that's really going to entice a trade for a star. He might not be a bust--way too early to judge that--but he's one big step closer to being one after last year. The problems that people noted last year at draft time--he's passive and spacey, has a great stroke but isn't a great shooter, can't do anything except dunk and catch n' shoot--were in full force last year. His stock has significantly dropped.

Green also has some trade value on his own, but you're portraying him as a toxic contract. He's a bit overpaid but is productive and in his prime, some teams would happily give up a modest asset for him. And you're also asking the Celts to take on a bunch of crappy contracts. That's not happening if they're giving up 2 of the best 4 players in the deal and taking back zero established assets.

EDIT: there's also nothing to suggest the Kings really desire Smith. They offered us a bunch of terrible contracts that last nearly as long, knowing that even if Smith isn't very good he's better than that pile of junk. It was a zero risk proposition, and we of course said no since there's almost nothing in it for us.

DCintheD · Post #6 » by **DCintheD** » Sat Jul 5, 2014 5:25 pm

HotelVitale wrote:EDIT: there's also nothing to suggest the Kings really desire Smith. They offered us a bunch of terrible contracts that last nearly as long, knowing that even if Smith isn't very good he's better than that pile of junk. It was a zero risk proposition, and we of course said no since there's almost nothing in it for us.

Great point.

GreekAlex · Post #7 » by **GreekAlex** » Sat Jul 5, 2014 5:44 pm

HotelVitale wrote:
GreekAlex wrote: Considering the early demands of D. Ainge for Rono I'd be more concerned they'd pass. I just don't see teams lining up to give anything better than a sophomore lottery pick, potential for another high pick and cap space.

I think the Kings would be thrilled but, c'mon, Rondo is definitely worth more than that package if the pick isn't expected to be really high. McLemore was awful last year so he's not the type of guy that's really going to entice a trade for a star. He might not be a bust--way too early to judge that--but he's one big step closer to being one after last year. The problems that people noted last year at draft time--he's passive and spacey, has a great stroke but isn't a great shooter, can't do anything except dunk and catch n' shoot--were in full force last year. His stock has significantly dropped.

Green also has some trade value on his own, but you're portraying him as a toxic contract. He's a bit overpaid but is productive and in his prime, some teams would happily give up a modest asset for him. And you're also asking the Celts to take on a bunch of crappy contracts. That's not happening if they're giving up 2 of the best 4 players in the deal and taking back zero established assets.

EDIT: there's also nothing to suggest the Kings really desire Smith. They offered us a bunch of terrible contracts that last nearly as long, knowing that even if Smith isn't very good he's better than that pile of junk. It was a zero risk proposition, and we of course said no since there's almost nothing in it for us.

I guess thats true... If the Pistons did the S&T of IT + ? for J. Smith, what assets would the Kings even have to go after Rondo beside McLemore or Stuskus?

Also I don't see Jeff Green as having a toxic contract but please believe he'll pick up his player option after this season and it just gives the Celtics added flexibility after this season. The Celtics don't seem to care too much for him and I don't view him as part of their core moving forward.

I tried to figure out a deal with Gay staying in Sac and Green coming to Det but the numbers just didn't seem to work in terms of Sac saving any money.

GreekAlex · Post #8 » by **GreekAlex** » Sat Jul 5, 2014 5:53 pm

DCintheD wrote:
HotelVitale wrote:EDIT: there's also nothing to suggest the Kings really desire Smith. They offered us a bunch of terrible contracts that last nearly as long, knowing that even if Smith isn't very good he's better than that pile of junk. It was a zero risk proposition, and we of course said no since there's almost nothing in it for us.

Great point.

Yes but all the contracts were expiring except Thompson or Landry which the Pistons would only be taking one of the two. I can stomach one of the 2 as a 6 M/per backup.

I'm not crazy enough to sound like some of the other posters who suggest SVG squeeze Sac for McLemore as part of a Smith trade but I don't think anyone would be dumb enough to advocate taking Thompson & Landry whose combine salary is nearly as much as Smith and goes for the same duration.