Trade Targets (postcript on yesterday-other teams)

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

In any event, this is all hypothetical since Sanders money is so dead, there is no way Toronto takes on that deal just to get BK.

you never use an asset to dump dead money. and some dead money is such a killer no asset can make it tolerable.

wait a minute. how can both these be rules?

[M-C-G]

Guys, that is horrific asset management. The need to get rid of Larry is simply not so grave that you flush other assets down the toilet to do it. You let this Larry thing play out. This is coming from a guy who dreads paying Knight a bunch of money. I just want to actually get value for him. Let Larry sit on the shelf for a while. Maybe he hits rock bottom and then comes back and becomes a valuable asset again. Maybe not, but it's way too soon and rash to make such a move.

Move Knight and Ersan in different deals to get value back.

Not that this deal would ever happen, because I really don't think Sanders is movable but what stops you from then coming back and offering Knight a larger than market contract that would likely not get matched?

If we don't trade him (and I am not advocating we should trade, more responding to this hypothetical deal), you risk someone giving him a greater than market contract which you are either forced to match, or hope they have assets for a S&T which the teams with the most cap don't have much in way of assets.

In this scenario you trade Knight, and in restricted free agency let's say you offer a ridiculous 16M per year to Knight. By getting rid of Sanders and Ersan, you cleared out about 20M dollars next year....You still come out ahead on the deal for the risk that Toronto or whomever would match.

Or am I just not seeing something here?

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

knight can play the 2 with a big pg next to him..... or he can play the 1 with a playmaking 2. makes no matter on that level.

in this case im just not willing to pay him 4/48 - 4/56 and pay sanders/ersan another 41 mil.... if there was a way out from under it. if this deal was on the table and you turn it down you might as well be extending knight for 100 million. theres no f'in way that makes any sense whatsoever and that's why no team in the nba would be willing to do it.

another way to look at it is....if you want knight that bad, then you still make the deal and offer him a full max contract in july. if Toronto matched oh well. if they didn't then we still just saved 40 million.

[mlloyd10]

Going with the trade being discussed where we get rid of Knight/Ersan/Sanders and then we trade our 2015 1st/Clippers 2017 1st for Holiday. Sign Monroe 4/60....If we go into next season with this lineup, how many could we win

Holiday(11)/Bayless(3)
Middleton(6?)/Mayo(8)
Giannis(1.9)/Dudley(4.3)
Parker(5.1)/Henson(2.9)
Monroe(15)/Zaza(5.2)

62.4 Mil total

[M-C-G]

then we trade our 2015 1st/Clippers 2017 1st for Holiday.

Absolutely not.

[mlloyd10]

then we trade our 2015 1st/Clippers 2017 1st for Holiday.

Absolutely not.

You think that is too much? What do you think it would cost?

[LUKE23]

What in the world is the infatuation with Holiday?

[KidA24]

The issue I have with posters here is their unwavering ignorance in accounts to Knight. Knight is not the exact mold of player THEY want HIM to be, so they want him gone for marginal returns. That is just terrible business. If we pay Knight 12m, if we pay him 14m, whatever we pay him, he is a RFA and the market will dictate his going rate. He will not become this unmovable asset that many are worried about.

I have no doubt in my mind you would've been a proponent for giving Brandon Jennings 4/48 and just gone with him. He was, afterall, a near all-star talent.

No one is saying let Knight walk for nothing. The idea of a S&T (gasp) instead of overpaying to keep your own guy is very appealing. Getting an asset while not overpaying is much better than paying market value -- when that market value is beyond what the player provides on the court.

[M-C-G]

then we trade our 2015 1st/Clippers 2017 1st for Holiday.

Absolutely not.

You think that is too much? What do you think it would cost?

1. The stress "reactions" in his ankle are a huge red flag
2. Based on what you and I have read on the trade board, it seems like NOP fans are realizing he and Evans won't be able to co-exist

I certainly don't give up the 2015 pick, in any way...There is always a chance that we can move up or a guy slides that can be a franchise changing talent. I just don't think there is a great trade to make there.

Assuming we opened up a ton of a cap, that we didn't find anyone to sign, I would probably do a Mayo <> Gordon swap ( we take on about 6M), Clippers 1st, and some kind of 3 way deal where Ersan goes to SAC, Jason Thompson / Sessions go to New Orleans and Holiday comes here.

So a 2017 1st, 6M on the SG swap, and pieces that fit better from an Ersan deal. That's about it.

[Baddy Chuck]

No one is saying let Knight walk for nothing.

I could live with it.

[Garden Of Edens]

Does anyone have any serious trade rumors? I'm going insane watching the deadline clock

[mlloyd10]

No one is saying let Knight walk for nothing.

I could live with it.

Of course you would and that's why you are always bitching

[Baddy Chuck]

No one is saying let Knight walk for nothing.

I could live with it.

Of course you would and that's why you are always bitching

True, what was Sacramento thinking not matching Tyreke Evans' deal, the market set his price! That line of thinking is stupid. He's worth what he's worth to you, not because another team came in with an offer.

[HurricaneKid]

Knight for Holiday?

I am one of the few people around that really likes Holiday but his career may very well be over. Last year he had a nasty leg injury that just never healed. D2D ended up with a season ending surgery. A few weeks ago he started having pain in the same leg and hasn't played again. It was supposedly just a stress fracture but their unwillingness to address it suggests its something more.

[MiltownHawkeye]

What in the world is the infatuation with Holiday?

He's an obtainable point guard we haven't yet seen in a Bucks jersey.

[HurricaneKid]

He is obtainable because his leg is done. Same reason I don't want Lawson. Our window starts in 2-3 years. Lets stop imaginary trading for people who are going to be awful in 2-3 years.

[Giannis Parker]

I have no doubt in my mind you would've been a proponent for giving Brandon Jennings 4/48 and just gone with him. He was, afterall, a near all-star talent.

No one is saying let Knight walk for nothing. The idea of a S&T (gasp) instead of overpaying to keep your own guy is very appealing. Getting an asset while not overpaying is much better than paying market value -- when that market value is beyond what the player provides on the court.

Nope, I did not like Jennings, he was selfish and doubt he ever becomes a winner. He is Starbury without the talent essentially.

All I see is offers for another teams trash. Something interesting would be Knight for Kanter and find a 3rd team to take on Knight. That makes sense. But these offers for guys like DMO, Canaan, etc.... I just do not get. These are low end players that will not become the talent that Knight is today.

The best example I can use is the Thunder. I know Knight is not Harden, but Knight can in fact impact games, letting him go in these trades many of you propose could be exactly what prevents us from making the climb to the top. Had the Thunder kept Harden, no doubt in my mind that they have 1-2 titles right now. Again, not saying Knight is Harden-esque, but that could really be a move that hurts us. We need to be looking at others players that actually have as high a ceiling as Knight, not bench fodder like DMO and Canaan.

[breakchains]

I have no doubt in my mind you would've been a proponent for giving Brandon Jennings 4/48 and just gone with him. He was, afterall, a near all-star talent.

No one is saying let Knight walk for nothing. The idea of a S&T (gasp) instead of overpaying to keep your own guy is very appealing. Getting an asset while not overpaying is much better than paying market value -- when that market value is beyond what the player provides on the court.

Nope, I did not like Jennings, he was selfish and doubt he ever becomes a winner. He is Starbury without the talent essentially.

All I see is offers for another teams trash. Something interesting would be Knight for Kanter and find a 3rd team to take on Knight. That makes sense. But these offers for guys like DMO, Canaan, etc.... I just do not get. These are low end players that will not become the talent that Knight is today.

The best example I can use is the Thunder. I know Knight is not Harden, but Knight can in fact impact games, letting him go in these trades many of you propose could be exactly what prevents us from making the climb to the top. Had the Thunder kept Harden, no doubt in my mind that they have 1-2 titles right now. Again, not saying Knight is Harden-esque, but that could really be a move that hurts us. We need to be looking at others players that actually have as high a ceiling as Knight, not bench fodder like DMO and Canaan.

And you also didn't think Gobert or Schroder were starting caliber players, so it doesn't surprise me when you look to other guys who aren't big names and think the same.

Also, your "best example" is awful. Almost zero parallels, except for the fact that it involves two ball dominant shooting guards.

[Jez2983]

He would be backing up Sova Jez2983.

I think we need prospects and picks, not Booker.

Also, my comment wasn't just to you.

Hi Jez, I can confirm that we do not at all need Booker. He's kind of like old man K Mart except he thinks he's a stretch four IMO.

I felt like I'd entered the twilight zone there. Trevor Booker, whose best play was on an average Wizards team. Trevor Booker, 27. Trevor Booker, whose primary attribute was scrappy play.

[Jez2983]

He is obtainable because his leg is done. Same reason I don't want Lawson. Our window starts in 2-3 years. Lets stop imaginary trading for people who are going to be awful in 2-3 years.

In terms of Lawson, I feel like that argument would have been made for Andre Miller.