Buying Cheap: Justin Champagnie (WAS) and Dalano Banton (POR)

[realEAST]

So, I have a simple question for Wizards and Trailblazers fans - what would be their targeted price for each of those two guys?

Banton has been an interesting guy since being drafted by Raptors, due to his size, agility and decent ball skill, and with his shot looking semi reliable and improving, I think he could be good interesting under the radar pick up. He is an expiring minimum contract so not likely to stick in Portland past this season.

Champagnie has recently been picked up as two way contract by Wizards and has had a pretty good start so far. He is still on two way contract, so I guess he should be available. What would br his price?

Would a matching salary (expiring minimum in Banton case) along some random 2nd rounder + some cash be enough for Banton or Champaigne?

Thanks

[GatherStepGuru]

Champagnie is exactly the kind of diamond-in-the-rough/ late bloomer that a rebuilding team hopes to find. As a 2-way player who is outplaying players making 10+ mill a year, he’s more of a building block than trade piece.

[JRoy]

I think a lot of folks are too high on Banton.

I’d move him for a couple SRP.

[wemby]

I'm not overly interested in Banton, but I would consider making Justin Champagnie an offer to join his brother and reunite the family. Seems to be following in his brother's footsteps as useful 2 way wings, sample is small and Justin's shooting is less proven than Julian's but other than that he's been outplaying a lot of the higher profile prospects on the Wizards.

[Lucky Once]

For Champagnie I think a lot of it depends on what he wants to do. Either Winger or Dawkins had described the Wiz as currently being in a "deconstruction" phase. Cheap, productive players don't have as much value to a team with plenty of cap space that is looking to lose the next couple seasons and land a star in the draft. It appears part of the team's strategy to keeping players engaged amongst the losing is to do right by the players when they can.
If Champagnie wants to play meaningful basketball I would imagine he can be had for a decent 2nd if there isn't bad salary coming back. If he wants to stick around and try take advantage of a bigger role available on a bad team they'll probably keep him around.
The best way to extract value for the team might be to attach him to one of the other vets if it can allow them to net a heavily protected first rather than more 2nds, which they have plenty of.

[Tim Lehrbach]

No idea how Blazers management feels about Banton, but fans don't pencil him into any future plans. A second round pick is plenty.

[realEAST]

Thanks for the feedback.
So, it is along the lines of what I thought / hoped, as I think both of them would be good pick ups for contenders who don't have much assets and are top heavy, but lack more reliable depth.

[MoneyTalks41890]

What are the rules on trading for two ways? Justin would be a good target for any contender who could actually roster him. Though the current stats may be a bit of a mirage.

[Tim Lehrbach]

What are the rules on trading for two ways? Justin would be a good target for any contender who could actually roster him. Though the current stats may be a bit of a mirage.

My recollection is that you can trade two-way contracts, but they are subject to the same rules as a regular contract, like the "recently signed" restriction of 30 or 60 days (can't remember which). I cannot recall one ever being traded, however. EDIT: Never mind, a quick search tells me that it's happened at least twice, so there is precedent.

[realEAST]

What are the rules on trading for two ways? Justin would be a good target for any contender who could actually roster him. Though the current stats may be a bit of a mirage.

My recollection is that you can trade two-way contracts, but they are subject to the same rules as a regular contract, like the "recently signed" restriction of 30 or 60 days (can't remember which). I cannot recall one ever being traded, however. EDIT: Never mind, a quick search tells me that it's happened at least twice, so there is precedent.

I had a brief look at it yesterday, and as far as I've seen it is like trading for a player under contract, but his salary counts as 0$. Only thing is, you can't have more than three 2 way players on the roster, so you have to cut / send out some of those guys, but it usually shouldn't be a problem. Maybe I missed something, but I think that is it.

[Myth]

I like Banton, but he is definitely expendable. Here are the scenarios I would be fine with trading him:
-A bigger trade requires him as sweetener to get done
-Multiple 2nds
-A single 2nd on draft night if the team has identified a specific player they want (meaning I don’t want to trade him for 1 2nd right now just to hope for a targeted player at that time)