Clippers discussing a sign and trade with The Bucks

adiedanny · Post #1 » by **adiedanny** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:08 am

Since the commencement of free agency in the NBA on July 1, it's been generally assumed the New York Knicks were the frontrunners for Ramon Sessions.

That might not be the case anymore.

The Los Angeles Clippers have intensified their interest in Sessions and appear on the brink of making a strong pitch for him.

The scuttlebutt around the NBA is the clippers and Bucks are discussing a sign-and-trade scenario with Sessions, a restricted free agent, being the central figure.

The Clippers would ideally like to include point guard Sebastian Telfair in the deal, and have also tossed out some other possibilities, including a draft pick.

If the Clippers can't come to an agreement with the Bucks on a sign-and-trade arrangement, there are growing indications they'll extend an offer sheet to Sessions.

http://my.journaltimes.com/post/woelfel-world-of-sports/bucks_and_clippers_talking_trade.html

WiscoKing13 · Post #2 » by **WiscoKing13** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:12 am

well from the buck no thanks on telfair

but if your willing to move kaman(later in the article it says you want to move 010 salary)

How would Sessions/Alexander/Ridnour(6.5 expiring) work??

ClipperDomination · Post #3 » by **ClipperDomination** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:13 am

Great news! I really hope we sign Sessions for the long term. Sessions/Gordon/Griffin/Jordan young core sounds really, really good.

PlinkingPanda · Post #4 » by **PlinkingPanda** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:15 am

Sounds good. I wonder what we can offer to them. Can you include additional players in a sign&trade? Maybe it'll involve some bigger contracts if so.

Post #5 » by **mkwest** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:20 am

It's good to hear that we're making a strong play for him. My question is what kind of pick might we give up?

Jeezo1 · Post #6 » by **Jeezo1** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:27 am

mkwest wrote:It's good to hear that we're making a strong play for him. My question is what kind of pick might we give up?

Hopefully, it's a future 2nd round pick. I just don't think it would be smart to include a future 1st with any deal unless you are convinced that Sessions is going to be a star.

Look at it this way, our last 2 first round picks were Blake and Eric. Would it be wise to give that up? I don't think so.

WiscoKing13 · Post #7 » by **WiscoKing13** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:30 am

Jeezo1 wrote:
mkwest wrote:It's good to hear that we're making a strong play for him. My question is what kind of pick might we give up?

Hopefully, it's a future 2nd round pick. I just don't think it would be smart to include a future 1st with any deal unless you are convinced that Sessions is going to be a star.

Look at it this way, our last 2 first round picks were Blake and Eric. Would it be wise to give that up? I don't think so.

hell no to second

A lotto protected first sounds about right

kombayn · Post #8 » by **kombayn** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:33 am

Why in the world would the Bucks want Kaman? Anyways I would only offer Telfair & a 1st round pick and try to get a 3rd team involved if the Bucks really don't want Telfair (who I think is way better than Luke Ridnour). If the Clippers can get Sessions, that would be simply amazing (no pun).

Dobber-16 · Post #9 » by **Dobber-16** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:34 am

Bucks fan here. There has been some discussion concerning the Wolves' #1 pick the Clips own. What year is it protected, and when will it be unprotected? I would like to clarify this issue, please.

adiedanny · Post #10 » by **adiedanny** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:38 am

Dobber-16 wrote:Bucks fan here. There has been some discussion concerning the Wolves' #1 pick the Clips own. What year is it protected, and when will it be unprotected? I would like to clarify this issue, please.

unprotected in 2012, I'm pretty sure.

Jeezo1 · Post #11 » by **Jeezo1** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:39 am

Dobber-16 wrote:Bucks fan here. There has been some discussion concerning the Wolves' #1 pick the Clips own. What year is it protected, and when will it be unprotected? I would like to clarify this issue, please.

The pick is top 10 protected for 2010 and 2011. It becomes unprotected in 2012.

paul · Post #12 » by **paul** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:43 am

kombayn wrote:Why in the world would the Bucks want Kaman? Anyways I would only offer Telfair & a 1st round pick and try to get a 3rd team involved if the Bucks really don't want Telfair (who I think is way better than Luke Ridnour). If the Clippers can get Sessions, that would be simply amazing (no pun).

I highly doubt the Bucks would want Kaman, that's just one poster. I have to ask what has brought you to the conclusion that Telfair is 'way better' than Ridnour? He's not, never has been, and never will be. Neither of them are great players, they played almost identical minutes last season for similar scoring but Telfair did it on worse percentages across the board, gave more turnovers, grabbed half as many boards, gave less assists and had less steals. Add to that fact that Ridnour broke his thumb badly halfway through the season and played the second half of the season with it which really hurt his game and numbers and it's tough to see how anyone would rate Telfair above him.

Back on topic, Telfair and a 2010 first might get it done imo, though it would likely depend on the protection of the first.

adiedanny · Post #13 » by **adiedanny** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 3:53 am

paul wrote:
kombayn wrote:Why in the world would the Bucks want Kaman? Anyways I would only offer Telfair & a 1st round pick and try to get a 3rd team involved if the Bucks really don't want Telfair (who I think is way better than Luke Ridnour). If the Clippers can get Sessions, that would be simply amazing (no pun).

I highly doubt the Bucks would want Kaman, that's just one poster. I have to ask what has brought you to the conclusion that Telfair is 'way better' than Ridnour? He's not, never has been, and never will be. Neither of them are great players, they played almost identical minutes last season for similar scoring but Telfair did it on worse percentages across the board, gave more turnovers, grabbed half as many boards, gave less assists and had less steals. Add to that fact that Ridnour broke his thumb badly halfway through the season and played the second half of the season with it which really hurt his game and numbers and it's tough to see how anyone would rate Telfair above him.

Back on topic, Telfair and a 2010 first might get it done imo, though it would likely depend on the protection of the first.

How about if it was lottery protected for 5 years?

paul · Post #14 » by **paul** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 4:00 am

Um, no. If Sessions were in the draft (he's only 23) he'd be a lotto pick easily (no way he would have got past the Knicks, for example), why would the Bucks take a bad player and a lotto protected pick for 5 years when they can just match a deal and trade him later?

I can't speak for them of course, it's just my opinion but I'd say top 5 protection would the most you'd get away with.

WiscoKing13 · Post #15 » by **WiscoKing13** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 4:09 am

so on the bucks board theirs mixed reviews on kaman/bogut

but what would an offer around sessions for kaman look have to look like for the clips?

Post #16 » by **mkwest** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 4:17 am

Jeezo1 wrote:Hopefully, it's a future 2nd round pick. I just don't think it would be smart to include a future 1st with any deal unless you are convinced that Sessions is going to be a star.

Look at it this way, our last 2 first round picks were Blake and Eric. Would it be wise to give that up? I don't think so.

It'd have to be at least lottery-protected for me if it were a first. I'd rather us just use most of the MLE and hope that they didn't match (reports are they won't go over $3M) if they want more than that.

adiedanny · Post #17 » by **adiedanny** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 4:18 am

WiscoKing13 wrote:so on the bucks board theirs mixed reviews on kaman/bogut

but what would an offer around sessions for kaman look have to look like for the clips?

You would have to add to make salaries match.

adiedanny · Post #18 » by **adiedanny** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 4:20 am

paul wrote:Um, no. If Sessions were in the draft (he's only 23) he'd be a lotto pick easily (no way he would have got past the Knicks, for example), why would the Bucks take a bad player and a lotto protected pick for 5 years when they can just match a deal and trade him later?

I can't speak for them of course, it's just my opinion but I'd say top 5 protection would the most you'd get away with.

Let's not forget Dunleavy is doing the negotiations so they may end up agreeing to a sign and trade for Telfair, R.Davis and a top ten protected pick.

paul · Post #19 » by **paul** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 4:51 am

mkwest wrote:
Jeezo1 wrote:Hopefully, it's a future 2nd round pick. I just don't think it would be smart to include a future 1st with any deal unless you are convinced that Sessions is going to be a star.

Look at it this way, our last 2 first round picks were Blake and Eric. Would it be wise to give that up? I don't think so.

It'd have to be at least lottery-protected for me if it were a first. I'd rather us just use most of the MLE and hope that they didn't match (reports are they won't go over $3M) if they want more than that.

Again that report came from a member of the NY press who about two weeks earlier reported that the Bucks would match the full MLE.

It may end up being true but it definitely should NOT be read as gospel or anything close to it.

ClipperDomination · Post #20 » by **ClipperDomination** » Fri Aug 7, 2009 5:20 am

I agree on a lottery protected first, anything higher than that and I don't think it's a fair deal.

Question to Bucks fans: What exactly would the Bucks like player-wise?