Chicago & Memphis: Vuc + Vets to Grizzlies

[drosestruts]

Chicago in: Brandon Clarke, Santi Aldama, and Derrick Rose

Memphis in: Nikola Vucevic, Torrey Craig, and Jevon Carter


Bulls:
Chicago continues getting younger while adding size with Clarke (27) and Aldama (23). At 35 I imagine this would pretty much be a retirement tour for Rose bookending his career back where it all started.

Giddey/Ball/Rose
White/Dosunmu/Duarte
LaVine/Buzelis/Terry
Williams/Clarke/Philips
Smith/Aldama/

Think you could additionally cut the unguaranteed Bitim and sign someone like Omer Yurtseven who remains available.


Grizzlies:
Add veteran depth across three spots, none of it long-term. No need to rush it with Eddey, Vuc can serve as a transition starter as Edddey gets up to speed. Craig gives them size, shooting, and defense to round out their starting lineup that compliments their heavy usage players I the starting group well. Carter is depth at the guard spot that's pretty much just a 3&d guard, previously played in Memphis, front office is familiar with his game.

Grizzlies stay under the tax and will have all incoming players + Smart coming off the books when the Jacksons will need extensions.

Morant/Smart/Carter
Bane/Konchar
Craig/GG Jackson
Jackson/LaRavia
Vucevic/Eddey

[BarbaGrizz]

At his age, contract and defense Vucevic is a negative asset, no one is taking him without pick(s), much less adding positive value such as Clarke and Aldama

[psman2]

We have chosen a direction at center, Vuc on his contract just makes little sense for us anymore.

[esvl]

a couple of FRPs should be included by CHI just to grab the Grizz attention

Also I suggest that people follow Aldama on the Olympics

[drosestruts]

We have chosen a direction at center, Vuc on his contract just makes little sense for us anymore.

Fair enough - the Grizzlies cap situation is one that could, with no issue, take on Vuc for two years and they looked to me like a team that could value a stop-gap/bridge center up until Edey proves fully ready, and then have a veteran there for backup minutes or to spot-start if needed.

I certainly wasn't viewing Vuc as some sort of long-term piece for Memphis.

I also wasn't entirely sure of how Memphis at this point was viewing Clarke. Ridiculously small sample size in a less than ideal environment, but Clarke was bad in his 6 games last season. That last year being guaranteed could create cap issues for Memphis, granted that's something you don't have to deal with today.

unrelated to Vuc, but related to this trade - what do you see as the starting 5 for Memphis? Perhaps there's a smaller version of this trade available, but I think a vet like Craig would fit in great with Morant-Bane-Jackson

[Colbinii]

I think the Grizzles are fine with Edey.

[Godaddycurse]

At his age, contract and defense Vucevic is a negative asset, no one is taking him without pick(s), much less adding positive value such as Clarke and Aldama

aldama probably is slightly positive. Clarke is a giant unknown at this point

[psman2]

We have chosen a direction at center, Vuc on his contract just makes little sense for us anymore.

Fair enough - the Grizzlies cap situation is one that could, with no issue, take on Vuc for two years and they looked to me like a team that could value a stop-gap/bridge center up until Edey proves fully ready, and then have a veteran there for backup minutes or to spot-start if needed.

I certainly wasn't viewing Vuc as some sort of long-term piece for Memphis.

I also wasn't entirely sure of how Memphis at this point was viewing Clarke. Ridiculously small sample size in a less than ideal environment, but Clarke was bad in his 6 games last season. That last year being guaranteed could create cap issues for Memphis, granted that's something you don't have to deal with today.

unrelated to Vuc, but related to this trade - what do you see as the starting 5 for Memphis? Perhaps there's a smaller version of this trade available, but I think a vet like Craig would fit in great with Morant-Bane-Jackson

Clarke looked liked his old self, not sure if you actually watched those six games? He is likely a 20-24 minute player for us and not viewed as a bad contract, a sub MLE paid rotation player is not something we are going to be trying to get off. He and JJJ's net pairing is one of the strongest +/- that we have. JJJ is likely our closing center and we will want to get Edey 24+ minutes. So we only have 10-15 minutes of backup center minutes available that Clarke can more than adequately fill.

I don't think Craig would be in our rotation. He would be behind VWill, GG Jackson, Kennard, and Aldama. Likely LaRavia and Konchar play ahead of Craig as well. We are still rather deep team at 2-4 with Craig level options.

I see the minutes breakdown as of right now.

Ja (33) Smart (11) VWill (4)
Bane (33) Smart (6) VWill (9)
Smart (10) GG Jackson (14) Kennard (16) VWill (8)
JJJ (18) Aldama (20) Clarke (6) GG (4)
Edey (24) JJJ (10) Clarke (14)

With Konchar and LaRavia 1st off the bench for injuries. Scottie Pippen Jr likely is given a chance to earn minutes as the season progresses and we deal with a eventual Morant injury.

[ChettheJet]

It's a good enough move for both.

But when it's done the Bulls look like chumps. They get 2 backups and If Lonzo is healthy DRose really doesn't see much action. A farewell tour on the bench isn't much respect. Clarke fits the definition of injury prone just like Lavine so you're getting him for three years even at a low cost, with Patrick signed are you giving up on Phillips, eliminating the possibility of Lonzo getting minutes at the 3, not figuring Matas can contribute year one? And don't give me the they can redirect Clarke, MEM can't direct him easily. And why even keep Terry?

The way you've got it, MEM actually gets 2 starters which if they entertain playoff aspirations I would hope they aren't in dire need of. Craig comes from the Bulls bench to start? Getting Vuc is the upside of the deal even if people act like he's a slow walking corpse.

[drosestruts]

It's a good enough move for both.

But when it's done the Bulls look like chumps. They get 2 backups and If Lonzo is healthy DRose really doesn't see much action. A farewell tour on the bench isn't much respect. Clarke fits the definition of injury prone just like Lavine so you're getting him for three years even at a low cost, with Patrick signed are you giving up on Phillips, eliminating the possibility of Lonzo getting minutes at the 3, not figuring Matas can contribute year one? And don't give me the they can redirect Clarke, MEM can't direct him easily. And why even keep Terry?

The way you've got it, MEM actually gets 2 starters which if they entertain playoff aspirations I would hope they aren't in dire need of. Craig comes from the Bulls bench to start? Getting Vuc is the upside of the deal even if people act like he's a slow walking corpse.

Craig started 60 games with Phoenix the year before he came to Chicago with his usual good defense, low usage, and 39% 3-point shooting.

This trade idea aside - I think Craig would be a better starter alongside Morant/Bane/JJJ than Smart, GG Jackson, or Kenard.

In a vacuum several of those players are probably better than Craig (Smart and GG Jackson), but I simply think he's an ideal fit alongside Memphis' top guys.

[esvl]

At his age, contract and defense Vucevic is a negative asset, no one is taking him without pick(s), much less adding positive value such as Clarke and Aldama

Clarke is a giant unknown at this point, aldama probably is slightly positive.

PS I wonder what makes you so “giantly” uncertain about Clarke?

[Godaddycurse]

At his age, contract and defense Vucevic is a negative asset, no one is taking him without pick(s), much less adding positive value such as Clarke and Aldama

Clarke is a giant unknown at this point, aldama probably is slightly positive.

PS I wonder what makes you so “giantly” uncertain about Clarke?

Re: Aldama
i take FIBA play with a grain of salt. See schroder from last year.

Re: Clarke
he is returning from a major injury and wasn't very impressive in his brief return last year. time will tell if he returns to his prior level of play

[drosestruts]

I'm also confused by the "Clarke looked like his old self"

He was well below his career averages in most FG% by Distance metrics.

His TS% dropped from a 68.2% before his injury to a 54.8%

This is not what looking like his old self means

His rebounding dropped, his efficiency dropped

He was a -5.6 pts/100 possesions last season. The worst of his career and only time he's registered a negative +/-

So no, Clarke did not look like his same old self.

[jayjaysee]

I'm also confused by the "Clarke looked like his old self"

He was well below his career averages in most FG% by Distance metrics.

His TS% dropped from a 68.2% before his injury to a 54.8%

This is not what looking like his old self means

His rebounding dropped, his efficiency dropped

He was a -5.6 pts/100 possesions last season. The worst of his career and only time he's registered a negative +/-

So no, Clarke did not look like his same old self.

6 games though.. when the team was finishing a tank.

Such a small sample size should mostly be ignored.. In those 6 games, the team was -65 overall and only -8 in the minutes he played?

[Godaddycurse]

I'm also confused by the "Clarke looked like his old self"

He was well below his career averages in most FG% by Distance metrics.

His TS% dropped from a 68.2% before his injury to a 54.8%

This is not what looking like his old self means

His rebounding dropped, his efficiency dropped

He was a -5.6 pts/100 possesions last season. The worst of his career and only time he's registered a negative +/-

So no, Clarke did not look like his same old self.

6 games though.. when the team was finishing a tank.

Such a small sample size should mostly be ignored.. In those 6 games, the team was -65 overall and only -8 in the minutes he played?

Ya i would dismiss that small body of work and reserve judgement on his value with more time on the court

[psman2]

I'm also confused by the "Clarke looked like his old self"

He was well below his career averages in most FG% by Distance metrics.

His TS% dropped from a 68.2% before his injury to a 54.8%

This is not what looking like his old self means

His rebounding dropped, his efficiency dropped

He was a -5.6 pts/100 possesions last season. The worst of his career and only time he's registered a negative +/-

So no, Clarke did not look like his same old self.

6 games though.. when the team was finishing a tank.

Such a small sample size should mostly be ignored.. In those 6 games, the team was -65 overall and only -8 in the minutes he played?

Ya i would dismiss that small body of work and reserve judgement on his value with more time on the court

If you look at his six games, he was running and jumping well, that is what I mean by looking like his old self. But it seems obvious that a little context would be applied here versus just looking at the stats in a vacuum. Of course there is going to be some rust and the majority of the minutes he played with players that are not even currently on NBA rosters.

But drosestruts please breakdown Vuc's percentages last year.

[psman2]

It's a good enough move for both.

But when it's done the Bulls look like chumps. They get 2 backups and If Lonzo is healthy DRose really doesn't see much action. A farewell tour on the bench isn't much respect. Clarke fits the definition of injury prone just like Lavine so you're getting him for three years even at a low cost, with Patrick signed are you giving up on Phillips, eliminating the possibility of Lonzo getting minutes at the 3, not figuring Matas can contribute year one? And don't give me the they can redirect Clarke, MEM can't direct him easily. And why even keep Terry?

The way you've got it, MEM actually gets 2 starters which if they entertain playoff aspirations I would hope they aren't in dire need of. Craig comes from the Bulls bench to start? Getting Vuc is the upside of the deal even if people act like he's a slow walking corpse.

Craig started 60 games with Phoenix the year before he came to Chicago with his usual good defense, low usage, and 39% 3-point shooting.

This trade idea aside - I think Craig would be a better starter alongside Morant/Bane/JJJ than Smart, GG Jackson, or Kenard.

In a vacuum several of those players are probably better than Craig (Smart and GG Jackson), but I simply think he's an ideal fit alongside Memphis' top guys.

Craig is a 20 minute journeyman that is turning 34 soon. He would not play over Smart, GG, VWill or Kennard. Maybe he earns minutes over LaRavia but that would mean he is the 10/11 man at best for us.

And OP you have Memphis taking on close to 10 million in salary which would push us 10 million into the tax and past the 1st apron which would make this trade illegal regardless. We are just 900k or so over the tax as of right now, likely going to dump a little salary and operate under the tax this year.

Vuc if his shot is gone is just no longer a rotation player on a winning team. Ja needs D behind him, Vuc is a just a very bad and overpaid fit for Memphis.

[drosestruts]

It's a good enough move for both.

But when it's done the Bulls look like chumps. They get 2 backups and If Lonzo is healthy DRose really doesn't see much action. A farewell tour on the bench isn't much respect. Clarke fits the definition of injury prone just like Lavine so you're getting him for three years even at a low cost, with Patrick signed are you giving up on Phillips, eliminating the possibility of Lonzo getting minutes at the 3, not figuring Matas can contribute year one? And don't give me the they can redirect Clarke, MEM can't direct him easily. And why even keep Terry?

The way you've got it, MEM actually gets 2 starters which if they entertain playoff aspirations I would hope they aren't in dire need of. Craig comes from the Bulls bench to start? Getting Vuc is the upside of the deal even if people act like he's a slow walking corpse.

Craig started 60 games with Phoenix the year before he came to Chicago with his usual good defense, low usage, and 39% 3-point shooting.

This trade idea aside - I think Craig would be a better starter alongside Morant/Bane/JJJ than Smart, GG Jackson, or Kenard.

In a vacuum several of those players are probably better than Craig (Smart and GG Jackson), but I simply think he's an ideal fit alongside Memphis' top guys.

Craig is a 20 minute journeyman that is turning 34 soon. He would not play over Smart, GG, VWill or Kennard. Maybe he earns minutes over LaRavia but that would mean he is the 10/11 man at best for us.

And OP you have Memphis taking on close to 10 million in salary which would push us 10 million into the tax and past the 1st apron which would make this trade illegal regardless. We are just 900k or so over the tax as of right now, likely going to dump a little salary and operate under the tax this year.

Vuc if his shot is gone is just no longer a rotation player on a winning team. Ja needs D behind him, Vuc is a just a very bad and overpaid fit for Memphis.

Good call on the money. Fanspo had this trade as legal, and keeping Memphis under the tax which seems to clearly be wrong.

For money reasons alone this trade is dead.

I still argue that Craig is a very good wing defender, 3-point shooter, and ideal low-usage guy to mix in. If you start Smart or GG Jackson I fear you're either underutilizing them, or having them take opportunities away from better options like Morant, Bane, and JJJ.

I know Smart can guard bigger players - I'm just not sold it's the best use given the makeup of the roster.

Would like to see Memphis acquire a veteran center and not have to start Edey right off the bat. I see no harm in letting him grow into the role of starting center.