The only Melo trade that makes sense for the Clips

Lindecision · Post #1 » by **Lindecision** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 11:28 am

First of all, trading Blake for anyone is ridiculous. Its unforgivable considering he is the guy that put us on the map. CP3 would never have come if Blake wasn't here.

Here's the only trade that makes sense for LAC. Sign & Trade Melo after the draft because we can't trade picks in consecutive years.

Crawford, Dudley, Barnes, Collison, Green, Mullens and Bullock

= 18,794,344 + the rookie contract of our 2014 draft pick

= around 20m or a shave under.... so it works salary wise.

In terms of draft picks, the key would be to get a 3rd team that wants a huge bench upgrade. Get them to include a 1st for 2 our of these 3 guys: Crawford, Dudley and Barnes. Let's say Indiana for argument's sake. To make it work Indiana would send scraps to the Knicks: Copeland, Watson, Hill, Sloan and Johnson.

In total that would be at least 4 1st rd picks for Melo -- Bullock, LAC 2017 1st, IND 2016 1st, and whoever the Knicks want us to select with our 2014 1st. 5 if you include Solomon Hill. They would obviously still have Shumpert and Hardaway too.

Why for the Knicks? It's way better than Melo leaving for nothing. They have their 2015 1st so a tanking package would make sense for them. After the dust settles they would still have Tyson Chandler and Barnes/Dudley to get them another 1st.

Thoughts?

Xepa777 · Post #2 » by **Xepa777** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 12:30 pm

As a Clippers season ticket holder

1) This is an incredibly dumb trade. You're overloading their roster with 6 guys. Too complex. How many players would they cut for this?

2) S&T Collison as a part of the deal? What? (Because you know he's going to opt out for more money)

3) Knicks would rather keep the cap space than have all those mediocre players/prospects.

4) A more realistic deal centers around DeAndre. Most likely Melo stays though (I don't see LAL going after Melo).

As much as I troll the Knicks board for proposing Griffin, this is equally as stupid.

RiversideClips · Post #3 » by **RiversideClips** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 2:41 pm

Why do the CLIPPERS need to be the team that overpays for a player? If Melo really wants to come here I think it should be as a Free Agent at 12 Million Dollar per year/2-3 year deal, that is if he really wants a Championship. I also think DJ may have to be put on the block, to get a BETTER all-round center, yes his defensive play is improving & he is still young (great argument)
I think we need to upgrade the 3 and get some Solid back up Big Man help, but I don't think we need to throw 1st Rd picks at teams. Today's NBA players seem to be about, fashion, media & bling........ Los Angeles has it all & they can even help design the Championship Ring.

adiedanny · Post #4 » by **adiedanny** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 5:53 pm

Lindecision wrote:First of all, trading Blake for anyone is ridiculous. Its unforgivable considering he is the guy that put us on the map. CP3 would never have come if Blake wasn't here.

Here's the only trade that makes sense for LAC. Sign & Trade Melo after the draft because we can't trade picks in consecutive years.

Crawford, Dudley, Barnes, Collison, Green, Mullens and Bullock

= 18,794,344 + the rookie contract of our 2014 draft pick

= around 20m or a shave under.... so it works salary wise.

In terms of draft picks, the key would be to get a 3rd team that wants a huge bench upgrade. Get them to include a 1st for 2 our of these 3 guys: Crawford, Dudley and Barnes. Let's say Indiana for argument's sake. To make it work Indiana would send scraps to the Knicks: Copeland, Watson, Hill, Sloan and Johnson.

In total that would be at least 4 1st rd picks for Melo -- Bullock, LAC 2017 1st, IND 2016 1st, and whoever the Knicks want us to select with our 2014 1st. 5 if you include Solomon Hill. They would obviously still have Shumpert and Hardaway too.

Why for the Knicks? It's way better than Melo leaving for nothing. They have their 2015 1st so a tanking package would make sense for them. After the dust settles they would still have Tyson Chandler and Barnes/Dudley to get them another 1st.

Thoughts?

Sorry man but that trade looks like a trade a Lakers fan would have constructed. The only trade for Melo that makes sense to me is to any other team other than the Clippers!

mttwlsn16 · Post #5 » by **mttwlsn16** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 5:55 pm

No. F Melo. Especially for Blake. No

mj_shoefanatic · Post #6 » by **mj_shoefanatic** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 8:27 pm

So we should trade damn near 80% of the team for Melo. GTFOH!

Neddy · Post #7 » by **Neddy** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 8:43 pm

yet another Melo thread. just merge all 50 of them into 1 and we can laugh at all of them more conveniently.
:giveup:

TheNewEra · Post #8 » by **TheNewEra** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 10:12 pm

That would be best case scenario would try to hang on to Bullock. If during free agency Clippers get the nod Melo will take less to come here and play the team would have to start doing salary dumps to teams with cap. Say he wants the 112 to 15 mil Dudley, Crawford, and Barnes would have to go team teams who can take their contracts for nothing then hope Mullens opts out and sign other guys to minimum and our first rounder.

Long shot but you never know.

TheNewEra · Post #9 » by **TheNewEra** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 10:30 pm

mj_shoefanatic wrote:So we should trade damn near 80% of the team for Melo. GTFOH!

Looking at the players its a clipper fans dream one side deal if they could keep Bullock. Look at the players leaving

Mullens everyone hates anyway wish he was gone

Collision-is probably already gone this is a off season deal so he will can opt out and get more money. If he has any thought he could be dealt if he picks up his option he would be better off signing on the open market.

Green- Third stringer guard could get another vet min guy.

Dudley- Its Melo directly replacing Dudley

Barnes - Would be a tough being dealt with Bullock but if we could keep Bullock then Bullock is being groomed to replace Barnes anyway

Crawford-Would be the toughest to lose because of his scoring and ability for the team off the bench but if this was the last line I would have to do it. We keep JJ and in a very deep draft if we can find a gem big scoring guard we are set.

The Knicks would never do this deal directly but other teams around the league may look to grab these guys for nothing.

LACtdom · Post #10 » by **LACtdom** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 10:41 pm

I would love to have Melo but in almost every trade scenario we are giving up so much that I don't see our team being that much better.

Atlas · Post #11 » by **Atlas** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 11:29 pm

This isn't NBA 2k3. A trade has to work beyond just salaries. Why would the Knicks ever do this trade? Seriously.

Further, I'm not sure why people are viewing Melo like he's just a prime Jason Richardson. His teammates (besides Chandler) are some of the lowest basketball IQ players ever. No star can close games when Bargnani and Smith are throwing up stupid shots.

The only reason why the Clippers shouldn't do a Blake for Melo trade is if the Clippers aren't receiving a post in return.

Neddy · Post #12 » by **Neddy** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 12:03 am

Atlas wrote:This isn't NBA 2k3. A trade has to work beyond just salaries. Why would the Knicks ever do this trade? Seriously.

Further, I'm not sure why people are viewing Melo like he's just a prime Jason Richardson. His teammates (besides Chandler) are some of the lowest basketball IQ players ever. No star can close games when Bargnani and Smith are throwing up stupid shots.

The only reason why the Clippers shouldn't do a Blake for Melo trade is if the Clippers aren't receiving a post in return.

jesus christ.

for the millionth time, please, we don't need no Melo. i don't want Melo. most here shouldn't want Melo. and contrary to the thread starter, NYKs will not trade Melo for a bunch of role players from us. it will take blake and there is no good reason for us to even consider this, because

Blake has better TS% than Melo.

Blake has better Ort and Drt, and much better separation between the two. Melo has a career separation of 1 point between Offensive rating and Defensive rating. that is mediocre, while Blake still leads Melo in Ort.

Blake has far better rebounding rate

Blake has better win-share, both raw and per 48

Blake makes more assists per than Melo

Blake is 24, and has yet to enter his peak. Melo is 30 and near the end of his prime.

Blake scores 22 pts per taking 15 shots a game, Melo scores 26 per while taking more than 21 shots per game. one is an efficient, all around player who doesn't need the ball in his hands to contribute, while the other is a volume shooter who needs the ball in his hands who doesn't have any other facet of the game that is better than blake other than raw scoring... and we already have a ball dominant PG.

Blake at 24 is markedly a better player than Melo at 24.

Most of All, the Clippers is owned by Donald Tukowitz Sterling. unless he chokes on kishka and dies in next few months and a new ownership take over, there is no way he will trade his biggest profit maker in clipper history.

mttwlsn16 · Post #13 » by **mttwlsn16** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 12:47 am

http://ht-mobile.cdn.turner.com/nba/big ... .qtref.mov

Doc kills this stupid rumor

Quake Griffin · Post #14 » by **Quake Griffin** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 1:40 am

I'll take on Melo if i means we don't move CP, JJ, Blake and DJ.
i think the idea of him being a ball stopper is a bit over blown and I believe he could be great off the ball or catching and shooting.

i like adding him to our team.
i do not like moving any of our core for him.

Ranma · Post #15 » by **Ranma** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 2:18 am

mttwlsn16 wrote:http://ht-mobile.cdn.turner.com/nba/big/teams/clippers/2014/01/04/DocRiversPregameSASTrademp4-3095457.qtref.mov

Doc kills this stupid rumor

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/419622557180891136[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/419626053162659840[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/419626229893844993[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/419626981567651840[/tweet]

mttwlsn16 · Post #16 » by **mttwlsn16** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 2:30 am

love how Doc takes shots at espn lol

johnnywishbone · Post #17 » by **johnnywishbone** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 2:42 am

Well... hope you guys are right.

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1294964&p=38096928#p38096928

Ranma · Post #18 » by **Ranma** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 3:05 am

Why would the Knicks even want Blake Griffin? Another one of ESPN's "experts", Skip Bayless, profusely made it clear that Griffin is not enough for the magnificent Melo.

Note: ESPN has now restricted access to their YouTube video where Brainless made the comments I referred to.

What's the matter, ESPN and Skip? Not in the mood to self-incriminate yourselves in revealing the idiocy of "talking head" reporting? Apparently, Skip and the network are embarrassed to have his portion of that conversation up for posterity as any video in a preliminary search has only the Stephen A. Smith comments showing before cutting off before the Bayless portion.

The only thing I can find in a cursory Web search that references the Bayless comments is this article, which also references the same restricted video I mentioned:

Tyler Winch, TheLeagueNews.us (12/5/13)

Stephan A. Smith [sic] of ESPN first take had a pretty bold trade prediction this morning. Smith stated that the Knicks would be wise to consider executing a straight up swap of Blake Griffin for Carmelo Anthony, but Skip Bayless had a quick rebuttal, arguing that the Clippers would hands down win that trade, and he just doesn’t see the Knicks giving up the best scorer in the league for Blake Griffin.

I have to agree with Skip here. The Knicks would be getting the shorter stick in this trade, but what if the Clippers could throw in a couple more incentives? Maybe a player such as Matt Barnes for an extra physical body or even Darren Collison to potentially back up Raymond Felton? Maybe include J.J Redick in the deal and allow the Knicks to trade away a hefty contract like Metta World Peace, or pretty much anyone to allow the trade to happen cap wise.

Would the Clippers Consider a Blake Griffin and Carmelo Anthony Swap?

Roscoe Sheed · Post #19 » by **Roscoe Sheed** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 6:18 am

Why are there so-called "experts" out there that actually think the Clips should make this trade? What is wrong with them? Very low IQ if you ask me.

Lindecision · Post #20 » by **Lindecision** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 8:07 am

Quake Griffin wrote:I'll take on Melo if i means we don't move CP, JJ, Blake and DJ.

i like adding him to our team.
i do not like moving any of our core for him.

Yeh, that's the point. We simply will not move any of our core to do this deal.

If the Knicks don't want 4 (or more) 1st rounders then Melo will sign for a team with cap room and leave for nothing. The Knicks will have next to zero leverage come summer time.