Trade Talk (Part 16): Early Season Anxiety Edition

[_AIJ_]

(A little birdie told me to keep an eye on Eric Gordon. Shhhh)

Yuck

[moss_is_1]

(A little birdie told me to keep an eye on Eric Gordon. Shhhh)

Can he come with Yabusele?


Interesting question though, if it's Gordon i know he's a minimum salary, but his minimum is higher than Ingles. Does that matter with us being a 2nd apron team and can't taken on higher salary?

Spotrac has Ingles at little over $2m while Gordon is roughly 3.3m.

[Domejandro]

If true, that would likely mean something involving Nickeil Alexander-Walker.

[BlacJacMac]

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/trade-machine

Dane Moore says that only this trade simulator knows new CBA rules

As a number of posters here have been saying as well.

[BlacJacMac]

Of course it's a long shot and more than likely won't happen. However, for the sake of the thread...would you rather go into the future with a pairing of Fox/Ant, Rob/Ant, Ant/Jaden as your main duo??

Personally, I'm taking Fox/Ant. Similar timeline, Fox has been great in the clutch and would give Ant a bonafide 1A/B option.

Now, I do think if the wolves were to get below the 2nd apron, they more than likely would have to include Jaden and possibly Rob in any deal for Fox. Would the team or anyone here be willing to do that?

Would Fox be willing to wait until the offseason for a deal to take place? Granted I heard on some show yesterday that Fox does have at least one preferred team. I'm assuming bigger market for sure (like always).

Minnesota: 13
Sacramento: 19
San Antonio: 24

[BlacJacMac]

(A little birdie told me to keep an eye on Eric Gordon. Shhhh)

Can he come with Yabusele?


Interesting question though, if it's Gordon i know he's a minimum salary, but his minimum is higher than Ingles. Does that matter with us being a 2nd apron team and can't taken on higher salary?

Spotrac has Ingles at little over $2m while Gordon is roughly 3.3m.

According to Spotrac, it does not work.

You'd think the rule should allow for swapping minimum contract players for each other without penalty based on their years in the league. But apparently not.

[cmoss84]

NAW (or any of our young guys) for Yabusele and Gordon works...if they use their TPEs.

Gordon for one of our younger guys also works...with the TPE.

[winforlose]

(A little birdie told me to keep an eye on Eric Gordon. Shhhh)

Can he come with Yabusele?


Interesting question though, if it's Gordon i know he's a minimum salary, but his minimum is higher than Ingles. Does that matter with us being a 2nd apron team and can't taken on higher salary?

Spotrac has Ingles at little over $2m while Gordon is roughly 3.3m.

According to Spotrac, it does not work.

You'd think the rule should allow for swapping minimum contract players for each other without penalty based on their years in the league. But apparently not.

My understanding is all minimum contracts hit the cap the same after 3 years of service. So the trade machine is wrong. Now if Gordon is not a vet minimum, that is different.

[shrink]

(A little birdie told me to keep an eye on Eric Gordon. Shhhh)

Can he come with Yabusele?


Interesting question though, if it's Gordon i know he's a minimum salary, but his minimum is higher than Ingles. Does that matter with us being a 2nd apron team and can't taken on higher salary?

Spotrac has Ingles at little over $2m while Gordon is roughly 3.3m.

According to Spotrac, it does not work.

You'd think the rule should allow for swapping minimum contract players for each other without penalty based on their years in the league. But apparently not.

It works. You need to use the “Vet Min” option to send the players on the drop down menu.

I looked into this back in November, even posted the question on the CBA board, and they told me it would.

On an NBA-subsidized salary, the amount the team pays is all that counts on the cap, and therefore in trade matching calculations.

For those that may be unaware, in order to keep vets in the league, the NBA covers the difference between vet min scale and the salary of a two-year. So while the vet minimum salary for a player with 10 years of experience is higher than one with three years of experience, the teams only pay both the amount of a 2-year player.

[Klomp]

(A little birdie told me to keep an eye on Eric Gordon. Shhhh)

Are you sure it wasn't Aaron Gordon?

[shrink]

(A little birdie told me to keep an eye on Eric Gordon. Shhhh)

Are you sure it wasn't Aaron Gordon?

Ok, news Flash. When Commissioner Gordon was in Ramsey County, he told me Howe it would be Jeff.

(I have too much time on my hands)

[Klomp]

Lonzo Ball update time:

Lonzo missed two of the last 4 games. I found out one was rest because they don’t play him in back to backs, and the other was a quad contusion.

Also in the 3 games since his turn the corner offensive clinic, Lonzo is shooting 8 of 25 from the field and 6 of 22 from deep. That means he is 2 of 3 from 2 for a respectable 66.6%. From deep he is 27.27%. To his credit Lonzo usually has a positive plus minus. To his detriment the Bulls have lost 3 of the last 4 he has played, and with offense like that, can you blame them?

If it makes you feel any better...
L. Ball misses 3-pt jump shot from 47 ft
L. Ball misses 3-pt jump shot from 53 ft

Take away those two end-of-quarter heaves and his percentage jumps to 30%. It might not mean much, but it's such a small sample size when you take those away that one make would have bumped up the percentage another 5 points.

The point was more about the regression to the mean than the actual performance. For every one or two good shooting nights you can expect at least that many bad nights.

In the three games since your update, he has made 10 of 23 3-pointers (.435)

[BlacJacMac]

If it makes you feel any better...
L. Ball misses 3-pt jump shot from 47 ft
L. Ball misses 3-pt jump shot from 53 ft

Take away those two end-of-quarter heaves and his percentage jumps to 30%. It might not mean much, but it's such a small sample size when you take those away that one make would have bumped up the percentage another 5 points.

The point was more about the regression to the mean than the actual performance. For every one or two good shooting nights you can expect at least that many bad nights.

In the three games since your update, he has made 10 of 23 3-pointers (.435)

Yeah. He's up to 35% on the season and rising. 37% in 12 January games.

[winforlose]

If it makes you feel any better...
L. Ball misses 3-pt jump shot from 47 ft
L. Ball misses 3-pt jump shot from 53 ft

Take away those two end-of-quarter heaves and his percentage jumps to 30%. It might not mean much, but it's such a small sample size when you take those away that one make would have bumped up the percentage another 5 points.

The point was more about the regression to the mean than the actual performance. For every one or two good shooting nights you can expect at least that many bad nights.

In the three games since your update, he has made 10 of 23 3-pointers (.435)

Yes, it is high volume and up and down. Kinda like Dlo. Some games he will really help you, others he will really hurt you. The issue is consistency. He has 2-3 game stretches where his shot is falling, then he tends to have 3-5 game stretches where it is not. We need more data and that means more time. Ball’s surgery is not well studied in this context. Maybe his knee holds up for the rest of his career, maybe it gives out this year. Maybe he can handle playoff intensity, maybe he cannot. Maybe he will be the player he was maybe not. Randle is valuable enough that you don’t need to take that kind of risk. Especially for a player who at this point is inconsistent at best, and might not fit in with Chris Finch schemes, which at least offensively are vastly inferior to most others.

[Guest84]

Why would the players union agree to this CBA nonsense associated with the aprons? What was the league hoping to accomplish with this?

[shrink]

Why would the players union agree to this CBA nonsense associated with the aprons? What was the league hoping to accomplish with this?

Owners were scared that for super-rich owners like Steve Ballmer, luxury taxes weren’t serving as a strong enough deterrent to keep him from simply trying to buy a championship. They instituted rules outside of salary to make teams less functional if your payroll was high. You’ll note that these rules don’t prevent you from re-signing your own free agents (what GSW was whining about, having to “break up their team.”) but it removes most of the other ways teams can continue to add payroll if they are willing to ignore what it costs them in lux taxes.

The Player’s Union probably agreed because of other beneficial things for them in the deal (like teams forced to bring their payroll to league minimum before the start of the season). Keep in mind, the Players as a whole are always going to get 50% of the BRI regardless of the rules.

In my opinion though, the apron rules exceeded what they aimed to do, tying the hands of half the GMs in the league. The NBA wants trades, because it generate fan interest. The impact has been so great, I expect that the apron rules will be modified before the next CBA comes into effect in 5-6 years. For instance, the rule that doesn’t allow teams to take back more money in trade should be a second apron rule at worst, and certainly not a first apron rule. The frozen pick rule is just being mean.

[BlacJacMac]

The point was more about the regression to the mean than the actual performance. For every one or two good shooting nights you can expect at least that many bad nights.

In the three games since your update, he has made 10 of 23 3-pointers (.435)

Yes, it is high volume and up and down. Kinda like Dlo. Some games he will really help you, others he will really hurt you. The issue is consistency. He has 2-3 game stretches where his shot is falling, then he tends to have 3-5 game stretches where it is not. We need more data and that means more time. Ball’s surgery is not well studied in this context. Maybe his knee holds up for the rest of his career, maybe it gives out this year. Maybe he can handle playoff intensity, maybe he cannot. Maybe he will be the player he was maybe not. Randle is valuable enough that you don’t need to take that kind of risk. Especially for a player who at this point is inconsistent at best, and might not fit in with Chris Finch schemes, which at least offensively are vastly inferior to most others.

He's kind of a perfect fit in that he excels in the areas that Finch preaches. He's fantastic pushing the ball in transition, something Finch has been imploring the team to do. And he's a quick decision maker in the halfcourt that doesn't hold onto the ball. Perfect for Finch's ideal free-flowing offense.

[winforlose]

In the three games since your update, he has made 10 of 23 3-pointers (.435)

Yes, it is high volume and up and down. Kinda like Dlo. Some games he will really help you, others he will really hurt you. The issue is consistency. He has 2-3 game stretches where his shot is falling, then he tends to have 3-5 game stretches where it is not. We need more data and that means more time. Ball’s surgery is not well studied in this context. Maybe his knee holds up for the rest of his career, maybe it gives out this year. Maybe he can handle playoff intensity, maybe he cannot. Maybe he will be the player he was maybe not. Randle is valuable enough that you don’t need to take that kind of risk. Especially for a player who at this point is inconsistent at best, and might not fit in with Chris Finch schemes, which at least offensively are vastly inferior to most others.

He's kind of a perfect fit in that he excels in the areas that Finch preaches. He's fantastic pushing the ball in transition, something Finch has been imploring the team to do. And he's a quick decision maker in the halfcourt that doesn't hold onto the ball. Perfect for Finch's ideal free-flowing offense.

Mike Conley in the Monday win had 4 rebounds, 4 assists, 4 steals, 1 TO, and played 31:22. He also shot 1-9 on 0-5 from deep. This type of night is not super helpful. Mike has similar issues with minutes, and injury risk.

[Klomp]

Yes, it is high volume and up and down. Kinda like Dlo. Some games he will really help you, others he will really hurt you. The issue is consistency. He has 2-3 game stretches where his shot is falling, then he tends to have 3-5 game stretches where it is not. We need more data and that means more time. Ball’s surgery is not well studied in this context. Maybe his knee holds up for the rest of his career, maybe it gives out this year. Maybe he can handle playoff intensity, maybe he cannot. Maybe he will be the player he was maybe not. Randle is valuable enough that you don’t need to take that kind of risk. Especially for a player who at this point is inconsistent at best, and might not fit in with Chris Finch schemes, which at least offensively are vastly inferior to most others.

He's kind of a perfect fit in that he excels in the areas that Finch preaches. He's fantastic pushing the ball in transition, something Finch has been imploring the team to do. And he's a quick decision maker in the halfcourt that doesn't hold onto the ball. Perfect for Finch's ideal free-flowing offense.

Mike Conley in the Monday win had 4 rebounds, 4 assists, 4 steals, 1 TO, and played 31:22. He also shot 1-9 on 0-5 from deep. This type of night is not super helpful. Mike has similar issues with minutes, and injury risk.

So your argument is that Mike Conley is not a fit in Finch's schemes?

[BlacJacMac]

Yes, it is high volume and up and down. Kinda like Dlo. Some games he will really help you, others he will really hurt you. The issue is consistency. He has 2-3 game stretches where his shot is falling, then he tends to have 3-5 game stretches where it is not. We need more data and that means more time. Ball’s surgery is not well studied in this context. Maybe his knee holds up for the rest of his career, maybe it gives out this year. Maybe he can handle playoff intensity, maybe he cannot. Maybe he will be the player he was maybe not. Randle is valuable enough that you don’t need to take that kind of risk. Especially for a player who at this point is inconsistent at best, and might not fit in with Chris Finch schemes, which at least offensively are vastly inferior to most others.

He's kind of a perfect fit in that he excels in the areas that Finch preaches. He's fantastic pushing the ball in transition, something Finch has been imploring the team to do. And he's a quick decision maker in the halfcourt that doesn't hold onto the ball. Perfect for Finch's ideal free-flowing offense.

Mike Conley in the Monday win had 4 rebounds, 4 assists, 4 steals, 1 TO, and played 31:22. He also shot 1-9 on 0-5 from deep. This type of night is not super helpful. Mike has similar issues with minutes, and injury risk.

Ball is an exceptional defender that can switch 1-3. Conley...isn't.

Ball is also a wizard in transition. 37 year-old Conley...isn't.