RealGM

I've noticed a trend lately around the NBA, where people are saying "if I don't get the value for x player I expect, I'd rather let him walk and get nothing in return, than let him go for less than we've valued him at"

In our case, if it becomes evident that Jimmy is not going to resign him, or our FO doesn't want to sign him to the contract he wants. Would you trade him to the highest package offered(for argument sake 2 first, 2 seconds, and a young guy that is not currently a star but could have some future potential), or would you let him expire and get nothing in return?

**please include a reason as to why picked your choice**

Personally I think it would be extremely negligent of this Heat team to just let him walk given our pick situation. And even if we weren't in the pick hell we are in, 2 is better than none. it's extra trade assets to be in the conversation for that next fruit that shakes loose from the tree. Letting him walk out without any compensation to me at least is like cutting off your nose to spite the face.

If the choice is trade Jimmy because he wants out, for 2 firsts, 2 seconds, and a young player with potential or let him walk for nothing, I go with the first option. The caveat of course is good luck finding the team that's giving that up for an aging, moody, sometimes available guy that's going to take up 35% of your cap.

You're going to get something for Jimmy if you want to. No one is ever going to say that it's too few picks if it's the highest offer available. One 1st is better than no 1st. It's more likely that the sticking point would be contracts coming back.

Whatever the number of picks is fine ... but any player we take back better be on an expiring deal or have a draft pick value attached to him and a market. I don't want someone else's trash. That is the problem with dealing Jimmy. He has a cap figure of ~ $49 million, so you have to take back veteran players. The biggest expiring deal out there is Fred VanVleet (~$43 million) in Houston.

If Houston wants to attach a young guy with a market and a couple of picks to VanVleet's expiring deal, I'd be fine with it.

I'm not expecting a big haul for Jimmy at this point in his career and with his contract status.

I think Jimmy needs another miracle run for the FO to consider extending him.

This looks like a situation, where they want to avoid the tax.
I don't think they are trading him this year, but after the season is done without a miracle run, he either signs somewhere else or he opts in and they'll be looking for a trade.

I hope they get smth. for him, but if they aren't trading him at the deadline it becomes more difficult.

VaDe255 wrote:I think Jimmy needs another miracle run for the FO to consider extending him.

This looks like a situation, where they want to avoid the tax.
I don't think they are trading him this year, but after the season is done without a miracle run, he either signs somewhere else or he opts in and they'll be looking for a trade.

I hope they get smth. for him, but if they aren't trading him at the deadline it becomes more difficult.

If we extend Jimmy, then Pat's got rocks in his head. Jimmy essentially plays 3/4 of the season, and does it at 2/3 effort. At this point Jimmy should be on 1 year deals and earning Bam level money.

Need to get Jimmy healthy then trade him ASAP. You cant compete with an oft injured 35 year old making $50 mil. Get picks and a young player back.

Trade Rozier and his 40% three point shooting to whomever will take him before they get wise to his anti-team tendencies.

My answer is that it obviously depends on the offer.

It is often in response to something like a GSW offer where you get back, say, Wiggins and Kuminga.

Wiggins is overpaid and for a while, and that contract is probably negative value for our cap and potential.

Kuminga is coming up for his extension and wants the max, and could quickly become the next overpaid middle of the road talent.

That trade almost assures you need to retain Kuminga, but our ceiling as a team with a highly paid Kuminga and Wiggins is probably not worth the picks that come with it. We may be better bombing out instead.

I think if you can get mostly expiring contracts and picks, you obviously take that if you know Jimmy will leave, or if you can get what you consider a future piece or someone on a rookie contract with potential to become a true max type player.

The other side, and maybe that is your question, is if Jimmy hasn't indicated he would leave, do you trade him to get something vs the RISK of getting nothing. Then you have the whole optics to fans of not looking after or being disrespectful to your stars to consider. Trading away Jimmy is saying "Thanks for the good years, but we are cashing in now!", whereas letting him opt out can just be "We wanted him to be he, opt in and retire a Heat, but he wanted to go another direction and we wish him luck".

Something tells me having an alpha like butler around helps to filter the weak from the strong. He is an instant attitude check.

wadenation305 wrote:I've noticed a trend lately around the NBA, where people are saying "if I don't get the value for x player I expect, I'd rather let him walk and get nothing in return, than let him go for less than we've valued him at"

In our case, if it becomes evident that Jimmy is not going to resign him, or our FO doesn't want to sign him to the contract he wants. Would you trade him to the highest package offered(for argument sake 2 first, 2 seconds, and a young guy that is not currently a star but could have some future potential), or would you let him expire and get nothing in return?

**please include a reason as to why picked your choice**

Personally I think it would be extremely negligent of this Heat team to just let him walk given our pick situation. And even if we weren't in the pick hell we are in, 2 is better than none. it's extra trade assets to be in the conversation for that next fruit that shakes loose from the tree. Letting him walk out without any compensation to me at least is like cutting off your nose to spite the face.

Easy, with the new CBA it would be beyond foolish to take lesser deal because of the salary considerations. Not only do you not get the payers value, but are stuck with longer term salary. That’s why its more advantageous to let him walk for nothing instead of being handcuffed by a longer term player not worth his value and you have the walking players salary off the books which in our case would get us out of the tax.