ImageImageImageImageImage

Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?)

Moderators: floppymoose, Sleepy51, Chris Porter's Hair

xdrta+
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,236
And1: 3,645
Joined: Jun 18, 2018

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1641 » by xdrta+ » Tue Jun 1, 2021 7:35 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
xdrta+ wrote:
killmongrel wrote: Really? So even if get salary in the deal, we wouldn't be hardcapped? Huh. Seriously confused about these rules.


Salary or no, it doesn't matter. The only time it would matter would be if we received a signed and traded player back. That's what happened with Durant and DLo. We signed and traded Durant and Bklyn signed and traded DLo, so we were both hard-capped. A double sign-and-trade--an unusual case.


IIRC the hard cap can also be kicked in by using the Bi-Annual Exception right?


Yep, there's 3 ways a team can be hard-capped. When a team is below the Apron, and receives a player in a S&T, uses more than the taxpayer MLE, or uses the bi-annual exception they become hard-capped at the Apron.

If they're already above the Apron (or will be when the deal is complete) they can't do any of those three things.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,873
And1: 15,589
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1642 » by FNQ » Wed Jun 2, 2021 6:38 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:So based on those 2 recent posts the Warriors should trade the #2 Warriors pick last year for the Warriors UDFA from 2017 and trade Oubre and 2 more 1st round picks for the Warriors #7 pick from 2012. I think I saw a reference to Marco Bellinelli in another thread.

It's old home week.

Maybe we should trade Draymond for Kendrick Nunn?


only fans get their asshairs chapped about where a player was drafted

Its one of the most nonsensical takes out there.. "we drafted him at 2".. isn't that special. He's a NBA player now, his value is defined by his current and projected achievements.

Maybe we should sell Wiggins as a former #1 overall pick.. how can anyone argue with that value??
User avatar
EvanZ
General Manager
Posts: 8,436
And1: 1,660
Joined: Apr 06, 2011

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1643 » by EvanZ » Wed Jun 2, 2021 6:40 pm

I find this piece of trade history relevant. And yes I posted my tweet. Get over it. It's easier to post a tweet than upload a photo in this forum.

Read on Twitter
?s=20
TB
Head Coach
Posts: 7,250
And1: 329
Joined: Mar 11, 2007

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1644 » by TB » Wed Jun 2, 2021 8:10 pm

EvanZ wrote:I find this piece of trade history relevant. And yes I posted my tweet. Get over it. It's easier to post a tweet than upload a photo in this forum.

Read on Twitter
?s=20


Lets just copy that template exactly and trade for Larry Nance Jr 8-)
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1645 » by Scoots1994 » Wed Jun 2, 2021 8:36 pm

FNQ wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:So based on those 2 recent posts the Warriors should trade the #2 Warriors pick last year for the Warriors UDFA from 2017 and trade Oubre and 2 more 1st round picks for the Warriors #7 pick from 2012. I think I saw a reference to Marco Bellinelli in another thread.

It's old home week.

Maybe we should trade Draymond for Kendrick Nunn?


only fans get their asshairs chapped about where a player was drafted

Its one of the most nonsensical takes out there.. "we drafted him at 2".. isn't that special. He's a NBA player now, his value is defined by his current and projected achievements.

Maybe we should sell Wiggins as a former #1 overall pick.. how can anyone argue with that value??


Where a player is picked does matter because it's a reasonable basis to start talking about their perceived talent level at one point. Obviously distance from the year they were drafted reduces the usefulness of the metric. Giving up on Wiseman so quick is crazy.
Arlo
Ballboy
Posts: 35
And1: 31
Joined: Jul 03, 2018

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1646 » by Arlo » Wed Jun 2, 2021 9:20 pm

TB wrote:
Lets just copy that template exactly and trade for Larry Nance Jr 8-)

Actually think he'd be a great fit.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,873
And1: 15,589
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1647 » by FNQ » Wed Jun 2, 2021 9:47 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
FNQ wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:So based on those 2 recent posts the Warriors should trade the #2 Warriors pick last year for the Warriors UDFA from 2017 and trade Oubre and 2 more 1st round picks for the Warriors #7 pick from 2012. I think I saw a reference to Marco Bellinelli in another thread.

It's old home week.

Maybe we should trade Draymond for Kendrick Nunn?


only fans get their asshairs chapped about where a player was drafted

Its one of the most nonsensical takes out there.. "we drafted him at 2".. isn't that special. He's a NBA player now, his value is defined by his current and projected achievements.

Maybe we should sell Wiggins as a former #1 overall pick.. how can anyone argue with that value??


Where a player is picked does matter because it's a reasonable basis to start talking about their perceived talent level at one point. Obviously distance from the year they were drafted reduces the usefulness of the metric. Giving up on Wiseman so quick is crazy.


No, its not a reasonable basis to put a players' value at where someone selected them, because that value only applies to that team. If teams werent interested in Wiseman that high, he's not valued at #2. And then after a bad season, he certainly isnt. Trying to make it linear for the sake of simplicity doesnt make it accurate.

The idea that he shouldnt be given up is just a simple take. Because usually, a team drafting 2 doesnt have a closing contention window. So yes, a rebuilding team giving up on a #2 in one year is a bit unusual. Apply that standard to our team entirely misses the mark.

The Memphis Grizzlies traded a big man, the #4 overall pick, halfway through his 1st season for Mike Miller. It was the right move, too.
cdubbz
RealGM
Posts: 11,604
And1: 1,960
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Oakland
 

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1648 » by cdubbz » Thu Jun 3, 2021 1:33 am

what's up with Myles Turners rebounding? he avg 6-7 RPG.
Kuya wrote: a good agent collects all the data, including quotes to give them leverage in contract deals.
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1649 » by Scoots1994 » Thu Jun 3, 2021 1:50 am

FNQ wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
FNQ wrote:
only fans get their asshairs chapped about where a player was drafted

Its one of the most nonsensical takes out there.. "we drafted him at 2".. isn't that special. He's a NBA player now, his value is defined by his current and projected achievements.

Maybe we should sell Wiggins as a former #1 overall pick.. how can anyone argue with that value??


Where a player is picked does matter because it's a reasonable basis to start talking about their perceived talent level at one point. Obviously distance from the year they were drafted reduces the usefulness of the metric. Giving up on Wiseman so quick is crazy.


No, its not a reasonable basis to put a players' value at where someone selected them, because that value only applies to that team. If teams werent interested in Wiseman that high, he's not valued at #2. And then after a bad season, he certainly isnt. Trying to make it linear for the sake of simplicity doesnt make it accurate.

The idea that he shouldnt be given up is just a simple take. Because usually, a team drafting 2 doesnt have a closing contention window. So yes, a rebuilding team giving up on a #2 in one year is a bit unusual. Apply that standard to our team entirely misses the mark.

The Memphis Grizzlies traded a big man, the #4 overall pick, halfway through his 1st season for Mike Miller. It was the right move, too.


Yeah, Mike Miller put them over the top for that title.

I think high picks should be given more time to fail. The investment implies there is more potential.

In this case compare Wiseman to other teenage bigs in the NBA and he looks okay. Add in that he had almost no college time and no offseason and he should get the time.

The "closing window" argument was thrown away when they drafted him. They drafted a player they KNEW was going to take time to develop. The worst front offices are the ones that constantly change mid plan and give up on young players too quickly. Wiseman showed enough that he's worth getting more time.
ahmetmekin
Senior
Posts: 591
And1: 304
Joined: Apr 21, 2018
 

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1650 » by ahmetmekin » Thu Jun 3, 2021 7:19 am

Dray talking about the Wizards:
https://streamable.com/12bpt2
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,873
And1: 15,589
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1651 » by FNQ » Thu Jun 3, 2021 3:54 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
FNQ wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
Where a player is picked does matter because it's a reasonable basis to start talking about their perceived talent level at one point. Obviously distance from the year they were drafted reduces the usefulness of the metric. Giving up on Wiseman so quick is crazy.


No, its not a reasonable basis to put a players' value at where someone selected them, because that value only applies to that team. If teams werent interested in Wiseman that high, he's not valued at #2. And then after a bad season, he certainly isnt. Trying to make it linear for the sake of simplicity doesnt make it accurate.

The idea that he shouldnt be given up is just a simple take. Because usually, a team drafting 2 doesnt have a closing contention window. So yes, a rebuilding team giving up on a #2 in one year is a bit unusual. Apply that standard to our team entirely misses the mark.

The Memphis Grizzlies traded a big man, the #4 overall pick, halfway through his 1st season for Mike Miller. It was the right move, too.


Yeah, Mike Miller put them over the top for that title.

I think high picks should be given more time to fail. The investment implies there is more potential.

In this case compare Wiseman to other teenage bigs in the NBA and he looks okay. Add in that he had almost no college time and no offseason and he should get the time.

The "closing window" argument was thrown away when they drafted him. They drafted a player they KNEW was going to take time to develop. The worst front offices are the ones that constantly change mid plan and give up on young players too quickly. Wiseman showed enough that he's worth getting more time.


lol wow what a horrible argument. Miller made them better, he was better than Gooden. It was the correct call. They didnt go down with the bad draft pick, they acted, and acted correctly. But they didnt win a title so bad move? holy ****..

You are acting as if where the player is picked is linear to how much potential they have. That's video game level analysis. And then again make a generalized (and extremely incorrect) idea that FOs that change course and give up on players quickly are the worst. Again, its based on situation. It requires actual competent critical thinking. You aren't providing that, just generalized nonsense

The closing window argument was thrown away? Nah. They literally have said - and most teams dont when talking about young prospects - that they were more raw than they expected. We expected more from Wiseman. Wiseman, among the worst metric'd players in the league, was NOT functional. He did not show he's worth getting more time, because if he was drafted in the 2nd round, he'd be fighting for a rotation spot next year.

Somehow your take here is *worse* than the idea that teams can win now and later and that's damned impressive
TB
Head Coach
Posts: 7,250
And1: 329
Joined: Mar 11, 2007

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1652 » by TB » Thu Jun 3, 2021 4:21 pm

Arlo wrote:
TB wrote:
Lets just copy that template exactly and trade for Larry Nance Jr 8-)

Actually think he'd be a great fit.


Yup, perfect backup 4/5. Was hoping we'd swap Oubre for him last deadline.
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1653 » by Scoots1994 » Thu Jun 3, 2021 4:38 pm

FNQ wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
FNQ wrote:
No, its not a reasonable basis to put a players' value at where someone selected them, because that value only applies to that team. If teams werent interested in Wiseman that high, he's not valued at #2. And then after a bad season, he certainly isnt. Trying to make it linear for the sake of simplicity doesnt make it accurate.

The idea that he shouldnt be given up is just a simple take. Because usually, a team drafting 2 doesnt have a closing contention window. So yes, a rebuilding team giving up on a #2 in one year is a bit unusual. Apply that standard to our team entirely misses the mark.

The Memphis Grizzlies traded a big man, the #4 overall pick, halfway through his 1st season for Mike Miller. It was the right move, too.


Yeah, Mike Miller put them over the top for that title.

I think high picks should be given more time to fail. The investment implies there is more potential.

In this case compare Wiseman to other teenage bigs in the NBA and he looks okay. Add in that he had almost no college time and no offseason and he should get the time.

The "closing window" argument was thrown away when they drafted him. They drafted a player they KNEW was going to take time to develop. The worst front offices are the ones that constantly change mid plan and give up on young players too quickly. Wiseman showed enough that he's worth getting more time.


lol wow what a horrible argument. Miller made them better, he was better than Gooden. It was the correct call. They didnt go down with the bad draft pick, they acted, and acted correctly. But they didnt win a title so bad move? holy ****..

You are acting as if where the player is picked is linear to how much potential they have. That's video game level analysis. And then again make a generalized (and extremely incorrect) idea that FOs that change course and give up on players quickly are the worst. Again, its based on situation. It requires actual competent critical thinking. You aren't providing that, just generalized nonsense

The closing window argument was thrown away? Nah. They literally have said - and most teams dont when talking about young prospects - that they were more raw than they expected. We expected more from Wiseman. Wiseman, among the worst metric'd players in the league, was NOT functional. He did not show he's worth getting more time, because if he was drafted in the 2nd round, he'd be fighting for a rotation spot next year.

Somehow your take here is *worse* than the idea that teams can win now and later and that's damned impressive


I'm saying that a player coming off a rookie year that was shortened and hamstrung from the start is not a good evaluation of the player. The argument for giving up on Wiseman is the closing window on Curry. Your argument to trade him is to get the players needed to win another title. You supported your position by using Mike Miller.

I'm not even clear Miller was a better player than Gooden.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=millemi01&player_id2=goodedr01
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,873
And1: 15,589
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1654 » by FNQ » Thu Jun 3, 2021 4:39 pm

TB wrote:
Arlo wrote:
TB wrote:
Lets just copy that template exactly and trade for Larry Nance Jr 8-)

Actually think he'd be a great fit.


Yup, perfect backup 4/5. Was hoping we'd swap Oubre for him last deadline.


CLE fans love him, for good reason. I was all about him too.. and while we'd lose size for sure, putting him in the old Bogut role, at least offensively, would do great for us.

I kicked around the Oubre idea too, which they hated, but really there's only like 5 CLE fans on the site that venture off their board and a couple of them are a bit loony so.. take that for whatever its worth.

If CLE did want Oubre though, thats definitely what I'd be asking for
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,873
And1: 15,589
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1655 » by FNQ » Thu Jun 3, 2021 4:47 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
FNQ wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
Yeah, Mike Miller put them over the top for that title.

I think high picks should be given more time to fail. The investment implies there is more potential.

In this case compare Wiseman to other teenage bigs in the NBA and he looks okay. Add in that he had almost no college time and no offseason and he should get the time.

The "closing window" argument was thrown away when they drafted him. They drafted a player they KNEW was going to take time to develop. The worst front offices are the ones that constantly change mid plan and give up on young players too quickly. Wiseman showed enough that he's worth getting more time.


lol wow what a horrible argument. Miller made them better, he was better than Gooden. It was the correct call. They didnt go down with the bad draft pick, they acted, and acted correctly. But they didnt win a title so bad move? holy ****..

You are acting as if where the player is picked is linear to how much potential they have. That's video game level analysis. And then again make a generalized (and extremely incorrect) idea that FOs that change course and give up on players quickly are the worst. Again, its based on situation. It requires actual competent critical thinking. You aren't providing that, just generalized nonsense

The closing window argument was thrown away? Nah. They literally have said - and most teams dont when talking about young prospects - that they were more raw than they expected. We expected more from Wiseman. Wiseman, among the worst metric'd players in the league, was NOT functional. He did not show he's worth getting more time, because if he was drafted in the 2nd round, he'd be fighting for a rotation spot next year.

Somehow your take here is *worse* than the idea that teams can win now and later and that's damned impressive


I'm saying that a player coming off a rookie year that was shortened and hamstrung from the start is not a good evaluation of the player. The argument for giving up on Wiseman is the closing window on Curry. Your argument to trade him is to get the players needed to win another title. You supported your position by using Mike Miller.

I'm not even clear Miller was a better player than Gooden.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=millemi01&player_id2=goodedr01


Again, generalized nonsense. The argument for trading Wiseman (not giving up) is that the window is closing, he's not projected to be a good fit, and he's very far away from being a positive contributor. See, thats the honest take.

The argument about Miller is that Miller IS better (laughable that its not clear - every used advanced metric has Miller crushing Gooden) and always was better. The Grizzlies moved on from a player who was a potential case, they evaluated that he was worth shopping, and found a useful #2 scorer and +3 RPM/BPM guy that solidified the Grizzlies as a playoff team after being a 30ish-win team.

I look forward to arguing about how the sky is blue next. Should be fun.
Scoots1994
Veteran
Posts: 2,991
And1: 432
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
       

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1656 » by Scoots1994 » Thu Jun 3, 2021 5:32 pm

FNQ wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
FNQ wrote:
lol wow what a horrible argument. Miller made them better, he was better than Gooden. It was the correct call. They didnt go down with the bad draft pick, they acted, and acted correctly. But they didnt win a title so bad move? holy ****..

You are acting as if where the player is picked is linear to how much potential they have. That's video game level analysis. And then again make a generalized (and extremely incorrect) idea that FOs that change course and give up on players quickly are the worst. Again, its based on situation. It requires actual competent critical thinking. You aren't providing that, just generalized nonsense

The closing window argument was thrown away? Nah. They literally have said - and most teams dont when talking about young prospects - that they were more raw than they expected. We expected more from Wiseman. Wiseman, among the worst metric'd players in the league, was NOT functional. He did not show he's worth getting more time, because if he was drafted in the 2nd round, he'd be fighting for a rotation spot next year.

Somehow your take here is *worse* than the idea that teams can win now and later and that's damned impressive


I'm saying that a player coming off a rookie year that was shortened and hamstrung from the start is not a good evaluation of the player. The argument for giving up on Wiseman is the closing window on Curry. Your argument to trade him is to get the players needed to win another title. You supported your position by using Mike Miller.

I'm not even clear Miller was a better player than Gooden.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=millemi01&player_id2=goodedr01


Again, generalized nonsense. The argument for trading Wiseman (not giving up) is that the window is closing, he's not projected to be a good fit, and he's very far away from being a positive contributor. See, thats the honest take.

The argument about Miller is that Miller IS better (laughable that its not clear - every used advanced metric has Miller crushing Gooden) and always was better. The Grizzlies moved on from a player who was a potential case, they evaluated that he was worth shopping, and found a useful #2 scorer and +3 RPM/BPM guy that solidified the Grizzlies as a playoff team after being a 30ish-win team.

I look forward to arguing about how the sky is blue next. Should be fun.


It's interesting that your "honest" take is opposite of the actual NBA professionals on the Warriors take.

I guess we'll see if the Warriors decide to dump Wiseman this offseason.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,873
And1: 15,589
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1657 » by FNQ » Thu Jun 3, 2021 6:23 pm

Scoots1994 wrote:
FNQ wrote:
Scoots1994 wrote:
I'm saying that a player coming off a rookie year that was shortened and hamstrung from the start is not a good evaluation of the player. The argument for giving up on Wiseman is the closing window on Curry. Your argument to trade him is to get the players needed to win another title. You supported your position by using Mike Miller.

I'm not even clear Miller was a better player than Gooden.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=millemi01&player_id2=goodedr01


Again, generalized nonsense. The argument for trading Wiseman (not giving up) is that the window is closing, he's not projected to be a good fit, and he's very far away from being a positive contributor. See, thats the honest take.

The argument about Miller is that Miller IS better (laughable that its not clear - every used advanced metric has Miller crushing Gooden) and always was better. The Grizzlies moved on from a player who was a potential case, they evaluated that he was worth shopping, and found a useful #2 scorer and +3 RPM/BPM guy that solidified the Grizzlies as a playoff team after being a 30ish-win team.

I look forward to arguing about how the sky is blue next. Should be fun.


It's interesting that your "honest" take is opposite of the actual NBA professionals on the Warriors take.

I guess we'll see if the Warriors decide to dump Wiseman this offseason.


An honest take of MY opinion. JFC

You: The argument for giving up on Wiseman is the closing window on Curry
Me: The argument for trading Wiseman (not giving up) is that the window is closing, he's not projected to be a good fit, and he's very far away from being a positive contributor. Oh and we're getting a very good young C, but we had him before, so must be off the table :roll:

See the difference? I have no need to misstate your argument to make mine valid.
User avatar
whatisacenter
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,043
And1: 5,153
Joined: Aug 05, 2013
 

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1658 » by whatisacenter » Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:02 pm

Sound like there may be a few teams interested in Oubre in the Knicks, Heat and Spurs. I need to look over some of their rosters to see who might be a good S&T fit for the Warriors taking back a player under contract.
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/262903/Heat-Spurs-Knicks-Interested-In-Kelly-Oubre
ChuckDurn
Analyst
Posts: 3,286
And1: 527
Joined: May 13, 2011

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1659 » by ChuckDurn » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:15 am

whatisacenter wrote:Sound like there may be a few teams interested in Oubre in the Knicks, Heat and Spurs. I need to look over some of their rosters to see who might be a good S&T fit for the Warriors taking back a player under contract.
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/262903/Heat-Spurs-Knicks-Interested-In-Kelly-Oubre

The Spurs and Knicks are well under the salary cap, so they can sign Oubre outright without needing to dump any salary. That doesn’t mean that sign-and-trade isn’t possible (with nobody coming back), but in order to get the “asset” of a TPE out of it (i.e. to incentivize the other team to do it as a sign-and-trade), we’d need to make it worth their while by adding another asset, such as a future second-round pick.
If I don't have anything funny to say, can I still have a signature?
User avatar
whatisacenter
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,043
And1: 5,153
Joined: Aug 05, 2013
 

Re: Trade Thread (EPISODE VI: Can't we just put EVERYTHING in the TE?) 

Post#1660 » by whatisacenter » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:06 am

ChuckDurn wrote:
whatisacenter wrote:Sound like there may be a few teams interested in Oubre in the Knicks, Heat and Spurs. I need to look over some of their rosters to see who might be a good S&T fit for the Warriors taking back a player under contract.
https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/262903/Heat-Spurs-Knicks-Interested-In-Kelly-Oubre

The Spurs and Knicks are well under the salary cap, so they can sign Oubre outright without needing to dump any salary. That doesn’t mean that sign-and-trade isn’t possible (with nobody coming back), but in order to get the “asset” of a TPE out of it (i.e. to incentivize the other team to do it as a sign-and-trade), we’d need to make it worth their while by adding another asset, such as a future second-round pick.


Yeah, I agree that will probably be the case with a team that has cap room unless they want to move some salary to add an additional FA.

Return to Golden State Warriors