Token Beasley Offers?

[shrink]

Beasley's lack of self-control have left me with a very low opinion of him, and I don't want him here. I hear he's a small 4, and can't play the 3. However, the Ryan Gomes contract would be a nice fit for MIA, since adding more cap space might allow them to sign two max FA's to help Wade in South Beach. Gomes contract fits between the 125% + $100,000, but cap space + #16 is not enough value. I'm curious if someone can come up with a three-teamer that sends Beasley to a good destination, and we act as the third team using Gomes contract to accomodate the deal?

[Casperkid23]

I'm bored, it's a Saturday morning with not-so-great weather... I'm down.

[shrink]

Here's another random thought:

Riley will probably try to trade Beasley in a package for his replacement, most like Amare, Bosh, or Boozer. If they got shut out, would Al Jefferson be the next in line?

Jefferson for Beasley + cap space, and then we trade both in a three teamer?

[shangrila]

Why don't you want Beasley? I know he hasn't had a great career yet but he's still got talent and enough athleticism to benefit from playing off a guy like Rubio or Turner. Add to that he's already been a good 6th man and he could be nice to bring off the bench.

If Miami really wants to dump him and offers him to Minnesota, I wouldn't bother with a 3 team trade. I'd take him and run.

[Casperkid23]

That's a good idea, though I don't know if Phoenix shuts down a trade for Beasley if Amare is wanting out - same with Toronto.

A quick 3-teamer I came up with involved Indiana:

Minnesota:
Out: Gomes, Sessions, Hollins
In: Foster, Rush, Price

Miami (save ~2.1mil)
Out: Beasley
In: Gomes, #10

Indiana
Out: Foster, Rush, Price, #10
In: Beasley, Sessions, Hollins

Think that's enough for Indiana/Miami?

Minnesota loses ~1.8mil in comparison to if they waived Gomes themselves; but Rush is probably more valuable for Minnesota than Sessions and getting rid of Hollins while picking up a potentially valuable asset in Foster seems like a good deal.

[shangrila]

^I'd probably do that deal, although I don't know if it's what Indiana would be looking for. They need to compete while Granger is relatively young and I'm not sure if Beasley is the sort of player that they'd be willing to part with the 10 for. Still Rush seems like an excellent fit for the Triangle, even if he has struggled, Foster is a decent backup and lets Pekovic become a trade asset and Price is good enough to replace Sessions and should actually fit the triangle better. Nice trade, atleast from our end.

[southern wolf]

I can't see Miami or Indiana biting on that one. Miami may be down on Beasley, but they're not going to give him up for Gomes and a mid first-rounder.

Not bad from our perspective.

[shrink]

Gomes is for the cap space, which could be very valuable to them.

Personally, I don't see IND Bird taking on Beasley after the bad taste of Tinsley in his mouth, but who knows? He's a hard one to predict?

I'm trying to think of places where Beasley's physical skills and character question marks would fit. PHO? GSW seems to gave a fast-paced game and a willingness to rehab character guys. I have to confess, I'm not really sure which teams would get the most value out of the Beaz.

[Devilzsidewalk]

I want him for a discount offer, anything involving Al Jefferson seems like a rip

[Calinks]

LMAO, I would shoot someone if they put Big Al in a deal for Beasley. And if the Heat are really looking to move Beasley, unless they can land Bosh or Amare for him, Miami would be stupid as hell to pass up on a Big Al for Beasley deal as well.

[Foye]

LMAO, I would shoot someone if they put Big Al in a deal for Beasley. And if the Heat are really looking to move Beasley, unless they can land Bosh or Amare for him, Miami would be stupid as hell to pass up on a Big Al for Beasley deal as well.

+1

[Dewey]

Defensively, Beasley has always been a mess ... Miami knew this when they drafted him and I would imagine they felt he'd be a much bigger impact offensively. Defensively, we cannot afford to consider a guy like this due the fact we are a horrible defensive team already.

I hope know one bails them out with a care package.

[Klomp]

Gomes contract fits between the 125% + $100,000, but cap space + #16 is not enough value.

Why can't we keep Beasley? IF he can play SF, I think he could be an okay pick. Even as a backup PF, I'd rather have him than Gomes. I'm not sure Miami would necessarily waive Gomes and his contract either. I could see him being a nice fit alongside Wade. He hasn't really had the chance here to play alongside another solid wing, but when he played in Boston next to Pierce, he played well. Miami is a team that can afford to pay the rest of his deal for his production.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=2fk76nn

[Steve_Holiday]

our team is filled with 6th men that don't play defense...that said, if we could get him for relative scraps, I'd be fine with it. I like the proposed idea of the three team trade. It could possibly be adjusted to better entice MIA and IND, but it's a good base.

[Foye]

That's a good idea, though I don't know if Phoenix shuts down a trade for Beasley if Amare is wanting out - same with Toronto.

A quick 3-teamer I came up with involved Indiana:

Minnesota:
Out: Gomes, Sessions, Hollins
In: Foster, Rush, Price

Miami (save ~2.1mil)
Out: Beasley
In: Gomes, #10

Indiana
Out: Foster, Rush, Price, #10
In: Beasley, Sessions, Hollins

Think that's enough for Indiana/Miami?

Minnesota loses ~1.8mil in comparison to if they waived Gomes themselves; but Rush is probably more valuable for Minnesota than Sessions and getting rid of Hollins while picking up a potentially valuable asset in Foster seems like a good deal.

I'd honestly rather keep Sessions. Not a big fan of Rush.

[LordBaldric]

Just say no to this knucklehead.

[shrink]

From a solid Heat poster on the Trade Board:

It's been a while since I've posted here, so hopefully my perception of values is not too unreasonable. :)

Beasley has underperformed, but his offense speaks for itself. He's an inconsistent work in progress. Game 1 and 2 against KG has wasn't very good. Game 3, he did well, both on defense and on offense, but an inconsistent young player is not what an aging Dwyane Wade needs. Miami is not the right place for him. However, I can only see us trading him as a piece in a larger S&T, or with Jones+Cook attached for either pure cap space or a win-now player like Devin Harris (as has been suggested) who would fill a position of need on our 2010 team. Mario Chalmers/Joel Anthony/Kenny Hasbrouck could certainly be in play for these trades too, if they were highly desired. Miami is probably looking to retain at least Haslem in FA, if not Dorell Wright too, and we will need as much capspace as possible to do that and bring on a maximum player.

With that in mind, if/when Beasley goes, it will be in one of the following types of deals:

Type I: Beasley+salary+(1st?) for a player who would fit on our 2010 team. This would be feasible with any team with a PG/SF/PF/C that Miami likes making around $8-10 million in 2010.

Example:
Miami in/NJ out:
Devin Harris

Miami out/NJ in:
Michael Beasley
James Jones (guaranteed only $5.9M over 3 years)
Daequan Cook ($2.1M expiring)
and maybe Toronto 1st or Miami 1st.

Commentary: Fairly even in terms of 2010 salary. If NJ gets Wall, then Harris should be moved, either for a PF or maybe a wing. This does that without really hurting either team's FA dreams. Miami will need a PG, certainly, but it is uncertain whether Riley/Spoelstra see Harris as a good fit next to Wade due to his lack of 3-point-shooting.

Type II: Beasley+salary+picks for cap space. This type of deal would work with a few of the smaller market teams with 2010 cap space, who realize that Lebron/Bosh/Amare/JJ are not coming.

Miami in/Minnesota (or OKC/LAC?) out:
Future protected 2nd round pick

Miami out/Minnesota (or OKC/LAC?) in:
Michael Beasley
James Jones
Daequan Cook
Toronto 1st and/or Miami 1st.
$3M Cash (to buy out Jones if they wish)

Commentary: Miami cuts the remaining $10M in 2010 salaries, meaning that their only salary commitments are to Dwyane Wade, Mario Chalmers, and Joel Anthony. Under the assumption that Minnesota (or OKC) realizes that they are not going to be a prime 2010 FA destination, they accept as Miami throws as much value at them as they possibly can. This type of deal would be best done with Minnesota/OKC/LAC, I feel. I think it's safe to say that NY/NJ/Chicago are too confident in their chances at a major FA to accept this type of deal. LAC doesn't really have a pressing need for Beasley with Griffin around, however, so they might not be a good destination either.

In a type I deal, Miami gets about 25 million to play around with to sign a max player and retain their own players. In a type II deal, Miami winds up with roughly 36 million to go get a big FA, and sign some complementary players. This is clearly the best way to go with Beasley, if possible.

This is another version of MIN selling its cap space to a team that can turn it into an elite. a la the CHI offers. If MIN is willing to sell (not start their future with Gay or someone) then MIN plays kingmaker to whoever will pay the most to add another elite Free Agent.

[shangrila]

^That would be one hell of a deal. But I think Jones has a team option for next year though, so I don't get why he's included if Miami can just decline it anyway. Still, getting someone with talent like Beasley and a future 1st or two would be nice.

[Basti]

if we could seriously grab Beasley for that package I'd be all over that offer. even though he has some red flags this is a deal you can't pass up. this is like the Rodney Carney trade only 14.7389 times better.

btw, shangrila is your name based off Mother Love Bone's song?

[the_bruce]

I'd trade straight cap for him and/or some package of gomes + utah pick + cap with no real intention of keeping him around. Play him at the 3 watch him flounder don't pick up his option if it doesnt work out.