Trade Targets (postcript on yesterday-other teams)

Chemthethriller · Post #3201 » by **Chemthethriller** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 6:40 pm

The reason we get nothing at all back for Knight is because we are dropping 5.5m on sanders for the rest of this year and 33m over the next 3 years for a player that may never play again. I took fields and Stim because they are expiring contracts, and involved the 76ers to drop Ersan who honestly I wouldn't expect **** back for since he also is overpayed for his value.

Everyone out here thinks we can just buyout Sanders, what if he doesn't accept it? Ersan doesn't deserve his contract either.

I'd rather clear cap, keep our young core and go after a big contract like Dragic and run Dragic/middleton/giannas/Parker/1st round pick or a good FA pickup. We can't do that spending 20m on two players that contribute about as much as I do to the team night in and night out.

Also, if we don't cash in on Knight, we will be stuck when someone offers him 13m/yr and we have to match it or let him walk. If we match it, we will have 50% of our salary cap invested in Knight, Sanders, Ersan... This will waste the "cheap" years of Parker and Giannas, because when we have to resign them, it will cost us a lot of money, and we then will have two larger contracts (hopefully well earned!) and we will have to work around them. At the time we need to take advantage of their cheap contracts and work for being a contender in 2016, big signings in 2015 and build chemisty, carry over into 2016 and make a run for the title.

Giannis Parker · Post #3202 » by **Giannis Parker** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 6:44 pm

Was that offer intended to get people worked up about us making another "Kohl Era" move?

I mean, I thought we learned over the last 26 yrs that the worst asset management move you can make is using one asset to dump a bad asset. Now we want to trade two assets to dump one asset.....O boy........

Chemthethriller · Post #3203 » by **Chemthethriller** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 6:50 pm

Two assets? Where? Knight is our only Asset, the next best is that 2nd round pick.

The writing is on the wall for Sanders, and Ersan hasn't been himself in 1.5 years. Bad management is continuing to hold onto players like this, like all the sudden they are going to comeback and be the old version.

Knight is fools gold, he is a volume shooter that isn't good enough to carry a team like Iverson. He will never lead a team in scoring that wins a championship. He will continue to bring us wins and keep us floating around .500 though.

If we can dump Sanders and Ersan without moving knight, awesome! But I can't see that happening unless the receiving team is in love with him and works out an extension with Knight prior to a trade.

I wouldn't also be against moving only Knight and Ersan for value i.e. a top lotto pick, but that to me is unrealistic.

LUKE23 · Post #3204 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:02 pm

We shouldn't use any assets to get rid of Sanders contract. Assuming we don't make bad veteran signings, we can live with the Sanders deal, especially if it lowers due to a buyout.

I don't see the absolute need to include an asset to move Ersan either. Float him out there, if he doesn't get any kind of return, just let him expire.

Our cap situation is more than fine, especially with the 2016-17 cap explosion.

mlloyd10 · Post #3205 » by **mlloyd10** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:03 pm

Would anyone be interested in Holiday assuming the Pelicans want to move him?

emunney · Post #3206 » by **emunney** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:06 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:
Chemthethriller wrote:How about a trade like this:

Bucks receive: Landry Fields, Stimesma (tor)
Raptors receive: Knight and Sanders
76ers receive: Ersan, Chuck Hayes, MKE 2nd, TOR 2nd

Salaries work out on trade machine. This trade is basically giving away Knight when his value is high enough to remove Sanders from our roster. TOR gets scoring, and takes Sanders on with a possibilty of talking him back into playing. 76ers take on salary and receive more draft picks. MKE receives cap relief for the next 4 years dumping larry, also avoids overpaying for a volume shooting medicore PG. We dump both Fields and Stim after this year opening up 34m (roughly) in cap room for this offseason.

Sign me up for this one.

We are dumping Sanders and Ersan ($41 million saved after this season) for Brandon Knight. And in the process we open up 3 roster spots on next years squad for rookies or FA's.

The problem with this deal is Sanders. I see no one taking that contract right now.

I'd be down with this also. When you factor in Knight, this is like dumping three bad contracts for free.

GHOSTofSIKMA · Post #3207 » by **GHOSTofSIKMA** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:08 pm

knight, ersan, sanders, and a 2nd for nothing is tempting

Giannis Parker · Post #3208 » by **Giannis Parker** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:09 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:knight, ersan, sanders, and a 2nd for nothing is tempting

#OwnTheFuture

To bad you have no clue what it is....

LUKE23 · Post #3209 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:12 pm

Do people think Knight wouldn't help us off ball? I don't view him as a negative asset if that's his role. If the team thinks he's our future PG, I throw him into any deal.

I don't see any need to include assets to clear the vets that expire after next year though. Unless you are figuring we are going to be huge FA players this summer, why not just have a huge conglomerate of expirings next season if we can't unload those contracts without including assets?

Chemthethriller · Post #3210 » by **Chemthethriller** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:14 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:knight, ersan, sanders, and a 2nd for nothing is tempting

I guess the question is... Are we building around Knight or Giannas/Parker?

If the answer is the latter we need to attempt to pay big for a good pairing FA (ie dragic), keep our quality (middleton) and attempt to draft a big man (WCS/Daraki Johnson/etc) while retaining solid bench play.

We can't do all of these with Knight @ 10-13m, Sanders 11m, and Ersan 8m on a team that already doesn't like to spend (2nd lowest spent on contracts this year only to the 76ers)

LUKE23 · Post #3211 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:18 pm

Chemthethriller wrote:
We can't do all of these with Knight @ 10-13m, Sanders 11m, and Ersan 8m on a team that already doesn't like to spend (2nd lowest spent on contracts this year only to the 76ers)

Ersan's last year is $400K guaranteed. He's basically an expiring next year. If Dudley opts in we have $31M in expiring contracts next season. Even if Sanders cap hit doens't go down we are currently $65-$70M under the cap in 2016-17 ($21.756M committed). Obviously we add some contracts and rookies to that, but there is no cap crisis.

GHOSTofSIKMA · Post #3212 » by **GHOSTofSIKMA** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:19 pm

im a big knight supporter but next year you give him 4/48, alongside sanders at 3/33, and ersan at 1/8..... then NOT making this deal is basically saying knight is worth paying 89 million over the next 4 years.... that's his money AND all the dead money we could dump by moving him.

id be seriously bummed losing knight but the prospect of having 32-34 million in free space next year for Hammond/kidd to burn in place of Brandon knight is tempting. anybody that's says it isn't is a homer and waaaaay too high on Brandon knight. and that's od considering that's ben what ive been accused of all year. id make this deal if kidd wants flexibility to recruit. simple as that.

emunney · Post #3213 » by **emunney** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:21 pm

Chemthethriller wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:knight, ersan, sanders, and a 2nd for nothing is tempting

I guess the question is... Are we building around Knight or Giannas/Parker?

If the answer is the latter we need to attempt to pay big for a good pairing FA (ie dragic), keep our quality (middleton) and attempt to draft a big man (WCS/Daraki Johnson/etc) while retaining solid bench play.

We can't do all of these with Knight @ 10-13m, Sanders 11m, and Ersan 8m on a team that already doesn't like to spend (2nd lowest spent on contracts this year only to the 76ers)

I agree with all of this except for that last premise about the team not liking to spend. The low payroll this year is a product of circumstance. When we are ready to compete, we will spend up to the lux tax line at minimum. I don't think we have any reason to doubt that. L&E have not been cheap in how they've operated the organization so far.

imithanos · Post #3214 » by **imithanos** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:22 pm

We have to move one of Mayo or Ersan. Unfortunately Ersan has turned to an injury prone player, otherwise he could bring a late 1st..

Giannis Parker · Post #3215 » by **Giannis Parker** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:24 pm

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:im a big knight supporter but next year you give him 4/48, alongside sanders at 3/33, and ersan at 1/8..... then NOT making this deal is basically saying knight is worth paying 89 million over the next 4 years.... that's his money AND all the dead money we could dump by moving him.

id be seriously bummed losing knight but the prospect of having 32-34 million in free space next year for Hammond/kidd to burn in place of Brandon knight is tempting. anybody that's says it isn't is a homer and waaaaay too high on Brandon knight. and that's od considering that's ben what ive been accused of all year. id make this deal if kidd wants flexibility to recruit. simple as that.

Yeah, I want a team full of Bayless and Dudley, lets do it....

Trade Parker for David West and trade Giannis for Batum......CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chemthethriller · Post #3216 » by **Chemthethriller** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:25 pm

LUKE23 wrote:Do people think Knight wouldn't help us off ball? I don't view him as a negative asset if that's his role. If the team thinks he's our future PG, I throw him into any deal.

I don't see any need to include assets to clear the vets that expire after next year though. Unless you are figuring we are going to be huge FA players this summer, why not just have a huge conglomerate of expirings next season if we can't unload those contracts without including assets?

My only problem with Knight off the ball is that limits what we get at PG in the future. Can we afford to get another 6'1 small type of PG if we have knight playing the 2? They will be severely undersized. Oh and we're paying in excess of 10m to a shooter that isn't that great...

One thing I always hate about Knight is how he seems to stall the offense, whether he doesn't pass it around or he is being told to just stand around and dribble... 32% of his shots come off of 7+ dribbles, he also has the ball on average 6+ seconds of touch time 30% of the time. Dragic comes in at 13% 7+ dribbles and 14% on 6+ sec touch time.

The formula to win without superstars is shown in SA, it isn't having an undersized SG playing the point with some heroball antics.

GHOSTofSIKMA · Post #3217 » by **GHOSTofSIKMA** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:25 pm

Giannis Parker wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:knight, ersan, sanders, and a 2nd for nothing is tempting

#OwnTheFuture

To bad you have no clue what it is....

don't be a dick. I don't deserve it

Matches Malone · Post #3218 » by **Matches Malone** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:26 pm

I'd love the cap space if we are going to be acquiring bad contracts with 1st round picks attached. Otherwise there really isn't a point. Not a very good batch of free agents this year outside of Monroe, Millsap, Rondo, Gasol and Dragic if he opts out. And most of those players are up there in age looking to compete for rings now.

LUKE23 · Post #3219 » by **LUKE23** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:27 pm

Chemthethriller wrote:
My only problem with Knight off the ball is that limits what we get at PG in the future. Can we afford to get another 6'1 small type of PG if we have knight playing the 2? They will be severely undersized. Oh and we're paying in excess of 10m to a shooter that isn't that great...

One thing I always hate about Knight is how he seems to stall the offense, whether he doesn't pass it around or he is being told to just stand around and dribble... 32% of his shots come off of 7+ dribbles, he also has the ball on average 6+ seconds of touch time 30% of the time. Dragic comes in at 13% 7+ dribbles and 14% on 6+ sec touch time.

The formula to win without superstars is shown in SA, it isn't having an undersized SG playing the point with some heroball antics.

All the Synergy stats show him playing well in an off ball role. Nab a big PG in the draft, move him to SG, and I'm good. Obviously, I have a limit on what I'd pay him.

My biggest point here is that I'm against using assets to clear contracts. If we were in a huge cap crisis, I'd see it, but we aren't. I also expect Sanders cap hit to go down due to a buyout.

I'd rather just try and get expirings for the vets (I know he won't) and if not now, just let them expire. Don't use assets to get rid of them.

Chemthethriller · Post #3220 » by **Chemthethriller** » Mon Feb 2, 2015 7:27 pm

Giannis Parker wrote:
GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:im a big knight supporter but next year you give him 4/48, alongside sanders at 3/33, and ersan at 1/8..... then NOT making this deal is basically saying knight is worth paying 89 million over the next 4 years.... that's his money AND all the dead money we could dump by moving him.

id be seriously bummed losing knight but the prospect of having 32-34 million in free space next year for Hammond/kidd to burn in place of Brandon knight is tempting. anybody that's says it isn't is a homer and waaaaay too high on Brandon knight. and that's od considering that's ben what ive been accused of all year. id make this deal if kidd wants flexibility to recruit. simple as that.

Yeah, I want a team full of Bayless and Dudley, lets do it....

Trade Parker for David West and trade Giannis for Batum......CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The idea is to surround Parker and Giannas well we have them very cheap with good talent from FA, not stick them with mediocre talent, then pay them big and hope that they alone can bring us a championship in 5 years.