CHI - POR- MIN - CHA (Flexibile)
Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:09 pm
CHI GIVES: 2012 CHA 1st + 2014 CHI 2nd
CHI GETS: Rudy Fernandez + Koufos
POR GIVES: Rudy Fernandez
POR GETS: 2011 UTA 1st + 2014 CHI 2nd
CHA GIVES: Dampier
CHA GETS: $13 mil TPE (+West? Brewer?)
MIN GIVES: Koufos + 2011 UTA 1st + Cap space
MIN GETS: Dampier's unguaranteed deal + 2012 CHA 1st (with less protections)
This is the device I'd use to allow the Bobcats to provide value in a move that turns Dampier into a TPE, before they have to start paying his salary. Based on the Bobcats concessions on the future pick, it allows us to discuss other players they may like (Brewer, Koufos, Delonte West), when previously CHA realistically had nothing we'd really value
WHY FOR CHI: The Bulls only back-up at center is Omer Asik, who is not ready.
http://nbaplaybook.com/2010/07/30/overs ... omer-asik/
They are trying to send a pick to POR for Rudy, but feel the CHA pick might be overspending a little, and one poster would do it but "wants change."
WHY FOR POR: They move Rudy Fernandez, and get back a decent asset, that doesn't take up playing time on a talented staff.
UTA 1st: (probably protections)
2011: Top 14 protected
2012: Top 12 protected
2013: Top 10 protected
2014: Top 9 protected
2015: Top 9 protected
2016: Cash
CHA 1st:
2012: Top 14 protected
2013: Top 12 protected
2014: Top 10 protected
2015: Top 8 protected
2016: Unprotected
WHY FOR CHA: If CHA can't find a taker for Dampier, they need to get rid of him very soon, or start writing paychecks on his $13 mil salary. If they end up waiving him, they are over the cap, so they get no exception, but a trade to a team with enough cap space to absorb Dampier gives them a $13 mil TPE. The TPE is far better, because they keep the trading chip without paying anything, and it lasts for a year.
The price for this is reducing the protections on the pick. If the deal is only for the TPE, I'd ask that they back-up the protection for the first year, so it becomes:
CHA 1st:
2012: Top 12 protected
2013: Top 10 protected
2014: Top 8 protected
2015: Unprotected
On the CHA board, they've talked about wanting West (to play, not waive) and Koufos, and if we owned the pick, they could reduce the protections further to improve it's value. For example, if they wanted Koufos, they could drop the protections by 2. If they wanted Brewer, maybe move up the whole thing by 1 year. Owning the protected pick provides room for negotiation that their current assets do not, imo.
WHY FOR MIN: It costs MIN nothing to waive Dampier's unguaranteed deal now, and get all their cap space back immediately. $1 mil for an improved pick that has a chance of being unguaranteed seems like a small investment. A deal like this allows MIN to get compensation in potential young talent, rather than adding CHA's questionable older players or cash.
CHI GETS: Rudy Fernandez + Koufos
POR GIVES: Rudy Fernandez
POR GETS: 2011 UTA 1st + 2014 CHI 2nd
CHA GIVES: Dampier
CHA GETS: $13 mil TPE (+West? Brewer?)
MIN GIVES: Koufos + 2011 UTA 1st + Cap space
MIN GETS: Dampier's unguaranteed deal + 2012 CHA 1st (with less protections)
This is the device I'd use to allow the Bobcats to provide value in a move that turns Dampier into a TPE, before they have to start paying his salary. Based on the Bobcats concessions on the future pick, it allows us to discuss other players they may like (Brewer, Koufos, Delonte West), when previously CHA realistically had nothing we'd really value
WHY FOR CHI: The Bulls only back-up at center is Omer Asik, who is not ready.
http://nbaplaybook.com/2010/07/30/overs ... omer-asik/
They are trying to send a pick to POR for Rudy, but feel the CHA pick might be overspending a little, and one poster would do it but "wants change."
WHY FOR POR: They move Rudy Fernandez, and get back a decent asset, that doesn't take up playing time on a talented staff.
UTA 1st: (probably protections)
2011: Top 14 protected
2012: Top 12 protected
2013: Top 10 protected
2014: Top 9 protected
2015: Top 9 protected
2016: Cash
CHA 1st:
2012: Top 14 protected
2013: Top 12 protected
2014: Top 10 protected
2015: Top 8 protected
2016: Unprotected
WHY FOR CHA: If CHA can't find a taker for Dampier, they need to get rid of him very soon, or start writing paychecks on his $13 mil salary. If they end up waiving him, they are over the cap, so they get no exception, but a trade to a team with enough cap space to absorb Dampier gives them a $13 mil TPE. The TPE is far better, because they keep the trading chip without paying anything, and it lasts for a year.
The price for this is reducing the protections on the pick. If the deal is only for the TPE, I'd ask that they back-up the protection for the first year, so it becomes:
CHA 1st:
2012: Top 12 protected
2013: Top 10 protected
2014: Top 8 protected
2015: Unprotected
On the CHA board, they've talked about wanting West (to play, not waive) and Koufos, and if we owned the pick, they could reduce the protections further to improve it's value. For example, if they wanted Koufos, they could drop the protections by 2. If they wanted Brewer, maybe move up the whole thing by 1 year. Owning the protected pick provides room for negotiation that their current assets do not, imo.
WHY FOR MIN: It costs MIN nothing to waive Dampier's unguaranteed deal now, and get all their cap space back immediately. $1 mil for an improved pick that has a chance of being unguaranteed seems like a small investment. A deal like this allows MIN to get compensation in potential young talent, rather than adding CHA's questionable older players or cash.