RealGM

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/228595/Blazers-Pacers-Interested-In-Trading-For-Robin-Lopez

It said the article is from Woj. For whom though?

Mahinmi? Green?

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

send them Green and cash today and then buy him out for 500 tomorrow?

Wizop wrote:send them Green and cash today and then buy him out for 500 tomorrow?

A dream come true.

Wizop wrote:send them Green and cash today and then buy him out for 500 tomorrow?

Love this idea. Sign me up. Id even sweeten the deal with a 2nd round pick.

Maybe Lopez and Vasqez for Green and Mahinimi.

Roughly 7.5 million going both ways?

sounding like the pick with green may be next year's first

DWCP2 wrote:Maybe Lopez and Vasqez for Green and Mahinimi.

Roughly 7.5 million going both ways?

I see we're including Paul George as well? I mean, we're giving them the two worst players and contracts in return.....

New Orleans wants cap space for a Tyreke offer and picks for Lopez. We can't provide that. We're probably interested in him but it would have to be a 3 way. They're not going to take on our bad contracts for a guy they could buy out for $500k.

Scoot McGroot wrote:

DWCP2 wrote:Maybe Lopez and Vasqez for Green and Mahinimi.

Roughly 7.5 million going both ways?

I see we're including Paul George as well? I mean, we're giving them the two worst players and contracts in return.....

New Orleans wants cap space for a Tyreke offer and picks for Lopez. We can't provide that. We're probably interested in him but it would have to be a 3 way. They're not going to take on our bad contracts for a guy they could buy out for $500k.

That was what I read they were trying to do by moving Lopez too. Can't figure out why they want to pay Evans monster money when they already are doing that with Gordon but I guess that's their problem.

I'm becoming more and more conviced that the only way Green gets moved this summer is with a buyout.

8305 wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:

DWCP2 wrote:Maybe Lopez and Vasqez for Green and Mahinimi.

Roughly 7.5 million going both ways?

I see we're including Paul George as well? I mean, we're giving them the two worst players and contracts in return.....

New Orleans wants cap space for a Tyreke offer and picks for Lopez. We can't provide that. We're probably interested in him but it would have to be a 3 way. They're not going to take on our bad contracts for a guy they could buy out for $500k.

That was what I read they were trying to do by moving Lopez too. Can't figure out why they want to pay Evans monster money when they already are doing that with Gordon but I guess that's their problem.

I'm becoming more and more conviced that the only way Green gets moved this summer is with a buyout.

No, he's movable. We just have to be willing to swap for an equally bad contract for a player in a position of need, or be willing to include a 1st to someone as incentive for taking on the contract.

A buyout locks in his salary for 2014 with no way to move it. It's probably the least likely solution, unless Green is willing to give up lots of money because he just doesn't want to be here.

The pelicans are trying to shed salary.

A Pelicans blogger at Bourbon Street Shots (the largest Pelicans Blog and ESPN affiliated on True Hoops) says that he knows for a fact that you guys offered us Green.

I would imagine we were not interested at all.

Smirk wrote:The pelicans are trying to shed salary.

A Pelicans blogger at Bourbon Street Shots (the largest Pelicans Blog and ESPN affiliated on True Hoops) says that he knows for a fact that you guys offered us Green.

I would imagine we were not interested at all.

If they're trying to shed salary why not just waive Lopez themselves?

Smirk wrote:The pelicans are trying to shed salary.

A Pelicans blogger at Bourbon Street Shots (the largest Pelicans Blog and ESPN affiliated on True Hoops) says that he knows for a fact that you guys offered us Green.

I would imagine we were not interested at all.

I would agree on boy parts. I'm sure we're pushing Green on everybody. I'd imagine we were including a 1st in that kind of offer and/or Plumlee.

MNPacersfan wrote:

Smirk wrote:The pelicans are trying to shed salary.

A Pelicans blogger at Bourbon Street Shots (the largest Pelicans Blog and ESPN affiliated on True Hoops) says that he knows for a fact that you guys offered us Green.

I would imagine we were not interested at all.

If they're trying to shed salary why not just waive Lopez themselves?

Lopez has value as a player and they want to reap that. They also don't want the $500k on heir books if they don't have to. I'm sure Portland would absorb him for a 2nd or two.

Scoot McGroot wrote:

8305 wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:
I see we're including Paul George as well? I mean, we're giving them the two worst players and contracts in return.....

New Orleans wants cap space for a Tyreke offer and picks for Lopez. We can't provide that. We're probably interested in him but it would have to be a 3 way. They're not going to take on our bad contracts for a guy they could buy out for $500k.

That was what I read they were trying to do by moving Lopez too. Can't figure out why they want to pay Evans monster money when they already are doing that with Gordon but I guess that's their problem.

I'm becoming more and more conviced that the only way Green gets moved this summer is with a buyout.

No, he's movable. We just have to be willing to swap for an equally bad contract for a player in a position of need, or be willing to include a 1st to someone as incentive for taking on the contract.

A buyout locks in his salary for 2014 with no way to move it. It's probably the least likely solution, unless Green is willing to give up lots of money because he just doesn't want to be here.

Or said another way there is no solution to the Green problem right now. I can't think of an equally bad contract/player that plays another position and even if I could I think a pretty strong arguement can be made that the position of greatest need is wing. Look at our roster and consider the possibility of Granger not coming back and can you really say some other position is a greater need? Granger not returning is the thing that could go wrong next year with the highest probablity of occurance.

As to giving up salary in a a buyout, if the Pacers can acquire a Belleneli, Copeland, anyone with wing skills who can shoot or if Granger returns Gerald Green can look forward to a permanent seat at games in street clothes. A buyout would afford him the ability to pick a team where he might fit. Guess it depends upon how he feels about his ability to do better someplace else. Granted, I wouldn't be too optimistic if he asked me.

8305 wrote:Look at our roster and consider the possibility of Granger not coming back and can you really say some other position is a greater need?

yes. see the chart I posted in the random trade thread.

if Granger can't come back, we're no worse on the wing then we were last year with OJ having a year under his belt and S Hill getting rookie minutes and CJW and Sloan allowing G Hill to get some minutes at 2 without us falling about at the 1. even without Danny we're better on the wing than last year and with him playing at his old level we're dynamite there.

but Tyler is not coming back. as much as I agree that he shouldn't come back even at a lower contract, someone has to back up DWest and it is not clear that Plumlee can be as good as Tyler used to be. perhaps Pendi can fill the hole but he is a free agent at the moment.

8305 wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:

8305 wrote:
That was what I read they were trying to do by moving Lopez too. Can't figure out why they want to pay Evans monster money when they already are doing that with Gordon but I guess that's their problem.

I'm becoming more and more conviced that the only way Green gets moved this summer is with a buyout.

No, he's movable. We just have to be willing to swap for an equally bad contract for a player in a position of need, or be willing to include a 1st to someone as incentive for taking on the contract.

A buyout locks in his salary for 2014 with no way to move it. It's probably the least likely solution, unless Green is willing to give up lots of money because he just doesn't want to be here.

Or said another way there is no solution to the Green problem right now. I can't think of an equally bad contract/player that plays another position and even if I could I think a pretty strong arguement can be made that the position of greatest need is wing. Look at our roster and consider the possibility of Granger not coming back and can you really say some other position is a greater need? Granger not returning is the thing that could go wrong next year with the highest probablity of occurance.

As to giving up salary in a a buyout, if the Pacers can acquire a Belleneli, Copeland, anyone with wing skills who can shoot or if Granger returns Gerald Green can look forward to a permanent seat at games in street clothes. A buyout would afford him the ability to pick a team where he might fit. Guess it depends upon how he feels about his ability to do better someplace else. Granted, I wouldn't be too optimistic if he asked me.

Why would be give up any guaranteed money, though? If he's played as poorly as he has, he's going to scratch and claw for every dime, and then we are stuck with his contract no matter what. We just wouldn't have him here.

We'd like to dump his salary. He hasn't been a bad teammate and he's working out. Theres no need to buy him out. Let him play through training camp, and see if say, Toronto, would swap Kleiza for him. They save $1m this year, while we save the last year on Green. We could add in a future 2nd and the future 2nd we own from GS.

Yeah, if I'm advising him financially no way I let take a big discount on a buy out. But on the other side, things would have to get pretty bad for him to ever get minutes again. Two years out where does that leave his career? Yes, he's gotten paid but now he's 30 years and has proven nothing other than that he doesn't know how to pay. Whose got any use for him?

8305 wrote:Yeah, if I'm advising him financially no way I let take a big discount on a buy out. But on the other side, things would have to get pretty bad for him to ever get minutes again. Two years out where does that leave his career? Yes, he's gotten paid but now he's 30 years and has proven nothing other than that he doesn't know how to pay. Whose got any use for him?

Same situation as he would be in anyway, except he'll have all the menu on his contract to fall back on. It's not like getting to play elsewhere is a magic trick to getting an automatic big contract elsewhere. He has to be thinking that he has to get every dollar owed him.

Wizop wrote:

8305 wrote:Look at our roster and consider the possibility of Granger not coming back and can you really say some other position is a greater need?

yes. see the chart I posted in the random trade thread.

if Granger can't come back, we're no worse on the wing then we were last year with OJ having a year under his belt and S Hill getting rookie minutes and CJW and Sloan allowing G Hill to get some minutes at 2 without us falling about at the 1. even without Danny we're better on the wing than last year and with him playing at his old level we're dynamite there.

but Tyler is not coming back. as much as I agree that he shouldn't come back even at a lower contract, someone has to back up DWest and it is not clear that Plumlee can be as good as Tyler used to be. perhaps Pendi can fill the hole but he is a free agent at the moment.

The bar for being better on the wing than we were last year is not very high. Our play backing up George and Stephenson was atrocious. I'm not saying we don't need another big. But in the event that Granger is healthy I think he gets time at the 4. If that's true how many minutes remain for someone else? With the little money we have left I'd allocate more for known quantity shooter.

If Granger isn't healthy are you any less covered counting on Hill and Plumlee covering the backup 4 minutes than you are counting on Johnson and Hill covering backup 3 and 2 minutes? I'm optimistic that CJW will be better than DJ but not so much better that I'm seeing a lot of time for Hill at the 2. I'd rather know there's another guy to play on the wing.