ImageImageImageImageImage

Transaction Discussion Part 3 (Trades, Free-Agency, News, Rumors & Ideas)

Moderators: og15, TrueLAfan

nickhx2
RealGM
Posts: 10,446
And1: 6,272
Joined: Feb 13, 2014

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#61 » by nickhx2 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 6:43 pm

color me not all that disappointed.

doc would have just swapped frye in for aldrich and the team would have been playing frye/pierce/crawford off the bench all at the same time. piss poor defensive unit.
nickhx2
RealGM
Posts: 10,446
And1: 6,272
Joined: Feb 13, 2014

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#62 » by nickhx2 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 6:46 pm

oh and prigioni. so ya
User avatar
QRich3
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,844
And1: 3,946
Joined: Apr 03, 2011
 

Re: Quick Look at Russo-Hann Exchange Over Stephenson 

Post#63 » by QRich3 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 6:50 pm

MelosSoreWrist wrote:[I think we can all agree, right now, the LAC is lacking verses the Western elite teams of Warriors, Spurs and OKC. Theyd probably have to beat 2 of those 3 teams in the playoffs. So its a long shot anyway. I just feel a stretch 4/5 of Channing Frey in the second unit isnt as impactful as a potential offense, defense, playmaking, hyperactive G/SF guy like Stephenson.

Yeah, we can agree on that, but banking on long shot potential being fulfilled is what makes teams be stuck on the treadmill. The question is not what Lance might potentially offer but what he will likely offer, as opposed to what Frye would surely give. Moot point anyway since it seems we're standing pat.
User avatar
Ranma
RealGM
Posts: 14,456
And1: 4,062
Joined: Jun 13, 2011
Location: OC, CA
Contact:
       

Limited Impact for Longer Contract 

Post#64 » by Ranma » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:06 pm

QRich3 wrote:Exactly, if we're gonna measure the D part of 3&D by BPM we might as well do it randomly. Also, Lance is far from a good 3PT shooter, and implying he is because he happened to shoot 19-47 this season (mostly on garbage time) is the shallowest type of analysis.

This Justin Russo guy is all over the place really, his "analysis" on Frye is pretty absurd as well. Of course the guy is not a great rim protector, if he was a rim protector shooting 58.6 TS% with a 65% 3PAr he'd be making $20M a year as a core piece on a contender, not being available for Lance and Wilcox' contracts.

That's not what you're supposed to be asking of him, he's just supposed to not tear the defense apart while he opens up things for DJ, Blake or Cole on the other end. Yes he has problems moving his feet against small guys in the P&R but he's decent enough to not be unplayable against bench players because of it, and a big advantage on the other side to compensate. He's not gonna be playing crunch time against the Warriors in May, really you're just asking him to be better than Hawes, which is a pretty realistic task. The guy is playing 17 minutes a game for an average defense in Orlando, sharing almost all of his minutes with an awful defender in Vucevic, and his defensive numbers still look good. His on/off numbers are positive, his defensive RAPM is currently in the top 50 in the league and generally everything indicates he doesn't have a considerably negative impact.


I also find Russo's slant in favor of Stephenson to be annoying more often than not, but he does point out that he has been effective in limited opportunities, which poses the question that maybe he should get more opportunities. However, I feel Russo does a decent job of pointing out Frye's limitations for those of us who aren't familiar with him, especially if he's going to be used as the backup C. Of particular interest to me was the point in a previous tweet that he was a much more efficient 3-point shooter when he is wide open as opposed to having a defender within 6 feet of him.

In the end, Frye's limited impact with respect to his remaining contract commitment was not enough to warrant pulling the trigger on the trade. I have my doubts that it would have required a 1st-round pick to acquire him since the Clips were exchanging a practically expiring contract for Frye's 2 seasons after this one, but I'm always relieved when we don't give up #1 picks whenever Doc is involved in deal-making mattters.

As it also turns out, the Clippers apparently do find Stephenson's contributions to be of some worth as Woike reports that the organization has interest in bringing him back after this season presumably at a lower cost. An interesting note in the completed Frye trade is that the Blazers are anticipated to waive Anderson Varejao. Since the Cavs are prohibited from re-acquiring him for the remainder of the season, Varejao would be a nice pickup at a minimum deal if and when he clears waivers.
LA Legends: Kershaw & Koufax_ Image _IGNORED: Max Headrom-esqtvd-QRich3-EBledsoe12-alon8882-45clip
Forte IV
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,379
And1: 6,497
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
   

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#65 » by Forte IV » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:10 pm

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/700396253243256832[/tweet]
If the Clippers win the championship next year I'm getting banned from RealGM
User avatar
QRich3
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,844
And1: 3,946
Joined: Apr 03, 2011
 

Re: Limited Impact for Longer Contract 

Post#66 » by QRich3 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:16 pm

Ranma wrote:I also find Russo's slant in favor of Stephenson to be annoying more often than not, but he does point out that he has been effective in limited opportunities, which poses the question that maybe he should get more opportunities. However, I feel Russo does a decent job of pointing out Frye's limitations for those of us who aren't familiar with him, especially if he's going to be used as the backup C. Of particular interest to me was the point in a previous tweet that he was a much more efficient 3-point shooter when he is wide open as opposed to having a defender within 6 feet of him.

In the end, Frye's limited impact with respect to his remaining contract commitment was not enough to warrant pulling the trigger on the trade. I have my doubts that it would have required a 1st-round pick to acquire him since the Clips were exchanging a practically expiring contract for Frye's 2 seasons after this one, but I'm always relieved when we don't give up #1 picks whenever Doc is involved in deal-making mattters.

As it also turns out, the Clippers apparently do find Stephenson's contributions to be of some worth as Woike reports that the organization has interest in bringing him back after this season presumably at a lower cost. An interesting note in the completed Frye trade is that the Blazers are anticipated to waive Anderson Varejao. Since the Cavs are prohibited from re-acquiring him for the remainder of the season, Varejao would be a nice pickup at a minimum deal if and when he clears waivers.

Yeah good point, maybe I was too harsh on his analysis, it just seemed like Lance homerism to point out all of Frye's weaknesses and turning Lance into the Clippers best 3&D player.

The Cavs gave the Magic clean capspace and a 2nd, we'd give them Lance's $9M contract that they'd have to pay in a buyout. To match the offer we'd have to pay Portland or someone else a pick to absorb Lance in 3-team deal, just like the Cavs did. At that point is not worth it.
User avatar
Ranma
RealGM
Posts: 14,456
And1: 4,062
Joined: Jun 13, 2011
Location: OC, CA
Contact:
       

Did We Really Want Frye for That? 

Post#67 » by Ranma » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:18 pm

nickhx2 wrote:color me not all that disappointed.

doc would have just swapped frye in for aldrich and the team would have been playing frye/pierce/crawford off the bench all at the same time. piss poor defensive unit.


While I was reluctant to pick up the remaining 2 seasons on Frye's contract, I thought he could be of use as either a complement to DJ, BG, or even Aldrich rather than a replacement for any of them. Doc's reluctance to play Lance so far also increased the likelihood of Frye being a bigger contributor. Yeah, Doc would play him some backup C minutes, but his weak rebounding numbers and lack of foot speed and physicality doesn't hold much appeal for that role. I was hoping Doc would use him more as a stretch 4 and even an option to play as a spot-up 3; he couldn't be any worse than Jamal Crawford defensively.

In the end, I'm also not disappointed that we didn't end up making the deal. I remain hopeful in pursuing Joe Johnson as an eventual buyout possibility but the availability of Anderson Varejao also has me intrigued. The Pelicans are apparently looking for a shooting guard for the injured Eric Gordon especially with Tyreke Evans out, so I think a Crawford-and-Stephenson package could get it done to obtain EJ, but given our own current injuries that doesn't look like an even plausible possibility now.
LA Legends: Kershaw & Koufax_ Image _IGNORED: Max Headrom-esqtvd-QRich3-EBledsoe12-alon8882-45clip
nickhx2
RealGM
Posts: 10,446
And1: 6,272
Joined: Feb 13, 2014

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#68 » by nickhx2 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:33 pm

playing a frye as a stretch 4 is the hope and the ideal. but as long as paul pierce exists uninjured on the team there is no hope for anyone else to take that spot.

i mean look at doc's track record. he has a vision (as distorted as it is) in which big guys shoot the ball. paul pierce is a staple of that, meaning doc would literally keep playing frye with all those other trash compactors on defense for better or worse.
TheNewEra
RealGM
Posts: 28,627
And1: 10,409
Joined: Aug 28, 2008
Location: Lob City
       

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#69 » by TheNewEra » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:39 pm

Love we stood strong was not looking forward to a Jamal/Pierce/Frye second unit stretches come playoffs.
TheNewEra
RealGM
Posts: 28,627
And1: 10,409
Joined: Aug 28, 2008
Location: Lob City
       

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#70 » by TheNewEra » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:43 pm

Frye was going to be a 5 no way Doc abandons Pierce as a backup. Also if Doc never played Josh and Cole together I doubt he does so with Frye and Cole
User avatar
TucsonClip
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,522
And1: 937
Joined: Jan 19, 2011
Contact:
 

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#71 » by TucsonClip » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:46 pm

QRich3 wrote:If the price for Frye was a 1st round pick to Portland to absorb Lance, I'm glad we didn't do it.


Lance had a team option, Magic could just decline the option for next year and waive him. Cavs had to pay Portland a 2018 #1 because they are taking on $9.3 mil of Varejao for next season (or stretching him) and then waiving him.

We turned it down, which means Doc has no choice but to get Lance ready for the playoffs. No excuses anymore.
Plus, why would I want to go to the NBA? Duke players suck in the pros.

- Shane Battier
User avatar
QRich3
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,844
And1: 3,946
Joined: Apr 03, 2011
 

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#72 » by QRich3 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:55 pm

TucsonClip wrote:
QRich3 wrote:If the price for Frye was a 1st round pick to Portland to absorb Lance, I'm glad we didn't do it.


Lance had a team option, Magic could just decline the option for next year and waive him. Cavs had to pay Portland a 2018 #1 because they are taking on $9.3 mil of Varejao for next season (or stretching him) and then waiving him.

We turned it down, which means Doc has no choice but to get Lance ready for the playoffs. No excuses anymore.

They'd still have to pay Lance's salary this year in a buyout, which they don't have to do with Cleveland. Their offer was just better and unless someone took Lance's contract we couldn't match it.
User avatar
Ranma
RealGM
Posts: 14,456
And1: 4,062
Joined: Jun 13, 2011
Location: OC, CA
Contact:
       

Trade Wind Advisory 

Post#73 » by Ranma » Thu Feb 18, 2016 7:57 pm

At the risk of incurring more criticism, I'll post the following tweet below. I'm fairly certain he's not credentialed but I've heard of Chris Wylde and the account is followed by Shelburne and Woike. We'll see if anything comes of this, but don't get your hopes up just yet.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/LACLIPCAST/status/700406122553823232[/tweet]
LA Legends: Kershaw & Koufax_ Image _IGNORED: Max Headrom-esqtvd-QRich3-EBledsoe12-alon8882-45clip
Forte IV
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,379
And1: 6,497
Joined: Jun 12, 2008
   

Re: Trade Wind Advisory 

Post#74 » by Forte IV » Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:14 pm

Ranma wrote:At the risk of incurring more criticism, I'll post the following tweet below. I'm fairly certain he's not credentialed but I've heard of Chris Wylde and the account is followed by Shelburne and Woike. We'll see if anything comes of this, but don't get your hopes up just yet.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/LACLIPCAST/status/700406122553823232[/tweet]


Guess not
If the Clippers win the championship next year I'm getting banned from RealGM
User avatar
Ranma
RealGM
Posts: 14,456
And1: 4,062
Joined: Jun 13, 2011
Location: OC, CA
Contact:
       

Not Even Doc is That Stupid...I Would Hope (UPDATED) 

Post#75 » by Ranma » Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:16 pm

QRich3 wrote:They'd still have to pay Lance's salary this year in a buyout, which they don't have to do with Cleveland. Their offer was just better and unless someone took Lance's contract we couldn't match it.


The thing is there's only less than half a season left on Stephenson's $9,000,000 salary for 2015-16. I don't see the point of buying him out when the Magic seem to be waiving the white flag for this season. Plus, given the team option on Stephenson's contract for 2016-17, Orlando would be free and clear of him after the season. Even if they are inclined to buy him out for some reason, it'd be less than $4.5 million.

While Anderson Varejao's salary for this season is similar to Stephenson's, he still has 1 more season committed to this one totaling $9.3 million (or maybe just $4.5 million); there's possibly a team option for 2017-18 at $10 million. That's why it makes sense for Cleveland to give up a 1st-round pick to unload that contract commitment. No one in their right mind--not even Doc Rivers--would give up a 1st-round pick just to unload less than $4.5 million remaining on a salary, especially just to pick up a limited option like Channing Frye who has just under $20 million of commitment left on his deal.


Edit: Updated Anderson Varejao's contract numbers as there seems to be some information that needs to be clarified. HoopsHype says there's a team option for 2017-18 at $10 million while Spotrac says that there's only $4.5 million guaranteed for 2016 if Varejao is waived by 8/1/16. I'll take it to mean that there's roughly $9 million of guaranteed money left on Varejao's contract including this season and part of next season.

It would seem odd that Cleveland would give up a #1 pick for basically the privilege to dump Varejao for 2.5 seasons of Frye but I guess they were really motivated to snipe us. Portland makes out quite well in this transaction in hindsight.
LA Legends: Kershaw & Koufax_ Image _IGNORED: Max Headrom-esqtvd-QRich3-EBledsoe12-alon8882-45clip
User avatar
QRich3
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,844
And1: 3,946
Joined: Apr 03, 2011
 

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#76 » by QRich3 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:17 pm

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/700413566466154496[/tweet]
For Jeff Green apparently, hope we didn't send a pick too

Ranma wrote:
QRich3 wrote:They'd still have to pay Lance's salary this year in a buyout, which they don't have to do with Cleveland. Their offer was just better and unless someone took Lance's contract we couldn't match it.


The thing is there's only less than half a season left on Stephenson's $9,000,000 salary for 2015-16. I don't see the point of buying him out when the Magic seem to be waiving the white flag for this season. Plus, given the team option on Stephenson's contract for 2016-17, Orlando would be free and clear of him after the season. Even if they are inclined to buy him out for some reason, it'd be less than $4.5 million.

While Anderson Varejao's salary for this season is similar to Stephenson's, he still has 2 more seasons committed to this one totaling over $20 million. That's why it makes sense for Cleveland to give up a 1st-round pick to unload that contract commitment. No one in their right mind--not even Doc Rivers--would give up a 1st-round pick just to unload less than $4.5 million remaining on a salary, especially just to pick up a limited option like Channing Frye who has just under $20 million of commitment left on his deal.

It doesn't really matter what Varejao's contract was, the Magic wanted capspace and the Cavs offered it for free, we offered it at a $4.5M price. Their offer beats us no matter how you look at it.
User avatar
TucsonClip
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,522
And1: 937
Joined: Jan 19, 2011
Contact:
 

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#77 » by TucsonClip » Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:18 pm

QRich3 wrote:
TucsonClip wrote:
QRich3 wrote:If the price for Frye was a 1st round pick to Portland to absorb Lance, I'm glad we didn't do it.


Lance had a team option, Magic could just decline the option for next year and waive him. Cavs had to pay Portland a 2018 #1 because they are taking on $9.3 mil of Varejao for next season (or stretching him) and then waiving him.

We turned it down, which means Doc has no choice but to get Lance ready for the playoffs. No excuses anymore.

They'd still have to pay Lance's salary this year in a buyout, which they don't have to do with Cleveland. Their offer was just better and unless someone took Lance's contract we couldn't match it.


Not exactly, they would be responsible for the remainder of his salary this year, but take on his entire cap figure. All they had to do was waive him and open a roster spot.

Cavs could have absorbed Frye into their TPE, but then they still need to dump Varejao, which means sending a #1 to Portland.
Plus, why would I want to go to the NBA? Duke players suck in the pros.

- Shane Battier
User avatar
QRich3
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,844
And1: 3,946
Joined: Apr 03, 2011
 

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#78 » by QRich3 » Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:22 pm

[tweet]https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/700414684017463297[/tweet]

:(

EDIT-

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/700415703195586560[/tweet]

Ugh
User avatar
TucsonClip
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,522
And1: 937
Joined: Jan 19, 2011
Contact:
 

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#79 » by TucsonClip » Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:26 pm

Can I say it? FIRE DOC.

C'mon man, trading ANOTHER #1 for a marginal SF and the right to pay him a massive deal this summer?
Plus, why would I want to go to the NBA? Duke players suck in the pros.

- Shane Battier
User avatar
Quake Griffin
RealGM
Posts: 15,417
And1: 4,640
Joined: Jul 06, 2012
     

Re: Trade Discussion Part 3 (News, Rumors & Ideas) 

Post#80 » by Quake Griffin » Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:32 pm

ANOTHER FIRST ROUND PICK GONE?

this is for what?
a year and a half of Jeff Green? Please tell me he's not an FA after the year is out
“I’ve always felt that drafting is the life blood of any organization.” - Jerome Alan West.

Return to Los Angeles Clippers