DAL-UTA-MIN .. Secret Value

[shrink]

jes brought this up on the trade board, and it has hidden benefit:

DAL GIVES: Butler + Stevenson
DAL GETS: Kirilenko + Corey Brewer

UTA GIVES: Kirilenko
UTA GETS: Butler

MIN GIVES: Corey Brewer
MIN GETS: Stevenson + "something" (let's say less protection on the UTA pick)

DAL spends money to try to get a chanmpionship, and UTA does the deal because it gets them under the lux, and saves them about $17 mil. I think they only do this in the future if they don't think they are a true contender (injury, string of losses), since no owner wants to spend lux money on a non-contender .. especially cost-concious UTA.

OK, what's cool here about MIN? I've never seen documentation anywhere on the pick protections on our UTA, except a vague theory that they are similar to the protections on the MEM pick. Those protections are

2011: Top 14 protected
2012: Top 12 protected
2013: Top 10 protected
2014: Top 9 protected
2015: Top 9 protected
2016: Cash

Now suppose we simply said, "Change it to Top 8 protections for 5 years, and its a deal!"

But is it? One could say that UTA is probably a play-off team whether they have Kirilenko or not, so reducing the protection probably doesn't help us. And they'd probably be right. However, that doesn't mean that doing the trade still doesn't help us. For example, if we do nothing, perhaps that UTA pick comes to us at #24. However, if Kirilenko is not on that team, it may raise the value to #16. And if we're going to get a pick next year, I'd rather get a #16.

(And of course, if the lower protection isn't going to provide value, we could ask for some other benefit -- I use the lower protections to illustrate that even unused, we still get benefit.)

This brings out an interesting point. While we hold the protected picks for cost-conscious UTA and cost-chaotic MEM, we benefit from helping any trade they do trading talent away from the team. If MEM decides to trade OJ Mayo, that's good news for us. We should help make that happen. Same goes for a UTA deal, moving Kirilenko or Okur. If we can assist in trades that lower the team's talent, we gain hidden value in the next draft.

[shrink]

Let me simplify:

MIN GIVES: cap space
MIN GETS: unproductive expiring + small incentive + incentive

UTA GIVES: Kirilenko or Okur or other salary + small incentives
UTA GETS: cap space

CONTENDING THIRD TEAM GIVES: Unproductive expirings + incentive
CONTENDING THIRD TEAM GETS: Productive expirings

MIN gets stuff for their cap space, PLUS an improved UTA pick

UTA gets $17 mil in savings.

CTT gets a better chance at a ring.

[Mr Dew]

In the example provided (Utah's pick dropping from 24 to 16), that would mean they move from teh 6th best record in the league to basically an 8th seed in the playoffs. Fact is, they would never do any deal that would impact their record enough for this theory to hold true. Brewer will either be included as part of a package to get us a quality player or he'll be with us through the end of the year.

[Krapinsky]

I don't know why, but this thread made me laugh.

We'll eventually monetize our cap space, but it won't be until January at the earliest. i don't think Dallas or Utah make good trade partners though because neither can provide enough incentive to make a trade worthwhile.

[[RCG]]

How about turning it from Top # protected into Bottom # protected? Or some combination of the two.
Say 10 > # > 20 protected eventually becoming 5 > # > 25 protected. Is this legal?

[Stephen S]

or...

Brewer to Dallas for Stevenson plus 2011 1st

[horaceworthy]

I think the Wolves will end up with the Utah pick this year with the protections as is, so this deal to me is just Brewer for Stevenson. In that case I'd rather keep Brewer throughout the year and let him walk when the time comes.

If it were the Memphis pick with the protections lowered, that may be more intriguing.

[shrink]

How about turning it from Top # protected into Bottom # protected? Or some combination of the two.
Say 10 > # > 20 protected eventually becoming 5 > # > 25 protected. Is this legal?

I've asked about this, because to me, it makes the most sense. As a pick varies farther and farther from its midpoint, one team or the other is going to be adversely affected. It has always seemed strange to me that we set limits on one side of a pick's protections, and never do the other.

That said, I think the answer to your question is this: The CBA grants a lot of liberty on the specification of the picks, which is a perk that the lawyers of some front offices take full advantage of. There is nothing in the CBA preventing it .. I just haven't seen it before.

[shrink]

The key is that helping remove talent from UTA or MEM improves our currently owned pick.

It may not say we get anything in THIS trade, but it improves the value we get from a previous trade.


If UTA fades, the tough part is finding the right team to move Kirilenko to. The ones that would give us the most:

1. Most likely will be an owner with a very short window of opportunity. AK is an expiring
2. Fit. Needs the SF-PF skills/size that Kirilenko provides.
3. Carries a large, unproductive expiring on the team, wasting payroll more than AK.
4. Young incentive/picks to motivate us to help.

[Stephen S]

The key is that helping remove talent from UTA or MEM improves our currently owned pick.

It may not say we get anything in THIS trade, but it improves the value we get from a previous trade.


If UTA fades, the tough part is finding the right team to move Kirilenko to. The ones that would give us the most:

1. Most likely will be an owner with a very short window of opportunity. AK is an expiring
2. Fit. Needs the SF-PF skills/size that Kirilenko provides.
3. Carries a large, unproductive expiring on the team, wasting payroll more than AK.
4. Young incentive/picks to motivate us to help.

I think NO fits the bill....their depth is horrendous down low...Peja and Thornton going to Utah...AK47 going to NO...don't where Wolves come in, but that helps both teams imo.

[john2jer]

Keep Stevenson away from this team. That is all.

[shrink]

The key is that helping remove talent from UTA or MEM improves our currently owned pick.

It may not say we get anything in THIS trade, but it improves the value we get from a previous trade.


If UTA fades, the tough part is finding the right team to move Kirilenko to. The ones that would give us the most:

1. Most likely will be an owner with a very short window of opportunity. AK is an expiring
2. Fit. Needs the SF-PF skills/size that Kirilenko provides.
3. Carries a large, unproductive expiring on the team, wasting payroll more than AK.
4. Young incentive/picks to motivate us to help.

I think NO fits the bill....their depth is horrendous down low...Peja and Thornton going to Utah...AK47 going to NO...don't where Wolves come in, but that helps both teams imo.

I like it: UTA needs the cap space, so just for fun, let's pass the hat:

UTA GIVES: Kirilenko + incentive
UTA GETS: "stuff" + $7 mil in needed cap space

NOH GIVES: Peja + Thornton
NOH GETS: Kirilenko

NYK GIVES: Curry + incentive
NYK GETS: Peja

MIN GIVES: cap space
MIN GETS: Curry (buy-out) + Thorton (NOH) + incentive (UTA) + incentive (NYK)

MIN brokers a deal to improve three teams .. for a small surcharge.

[shrink]

uh oh .. Ill check the numbers later tonight, but if the "stuff" can include Eddy Curry (and it might .. UTA wants to save money in this situation, and part of Curry's contract is prepaid), I might have nearly financialled MIN right out of the deal. Bummer .. I'd rather collect the Halloween traeats for ourselves.

[Stephen S]

uh oh .. Ill check the numbers later tonight, but if the "stuff" can include Eddy Curry (and it might .. UTA wants to save money in this situation, and part of Curry's contract is prepaid), I might have nearly financialled MIN right out of the deal. Bummer .. I'd rather collect the Halloween traeats for ourselves.

I don't get why New York would want to be included in that deal to begin with...is Peja an upgrade over Curry? Is the extra salary enough to make a difference in a Melo trade?

The problem with doing this sort of deal with either Utah or NO is that neither have a 1st next year...

[Peezo]

Not a bad idea Shrink. I think we could get better value for Corey Brewer or our cap space. I think in all likelihood we would only get a few spots, 3 or 4, out of that type of protection removal. Also, it might have a negative affect on where our pick ends up.

I would be more interested in trying to use either our cap or Corey to get a second round pick or two (=Beas) or a low risk tryout candidate (Darko, Beas). I do think the idea is really interesting though.

[younggunsmn]

First trade does not salary match for Dallas.
I like the idea, but I think you are underestimating how key Kirilenko is for Utah, he is their defensive anchor. As long as they are in contention, I don't think he goes anywhere.

Sloan loves Okur too, but I could see him moving if they get a decent defensive center back. But Okur is going to be very hard to move, being injured and owed 21 million over 2 years.

[shrink]

First trade does not salary match for Dallas.
I like the idea, but I think you are underestimating how key Kirilenko is for Utah, he is their defensive anchor. As long as they are in contention, I don't think he goes anywhere.

I didn't think people would check, so I didn't include this note from JES (or check it, to be honest)

Now, before any of you say this is not CBA legal, the trade breakdown is like this:
Dallas: Butler & Stevenson for AK47...Stevenson to Minny via cap space, Butler to Utah and then a seperate trade of Brewer to Dallas via Matt Carroll TPE

And I agree completely that Utah won't do this deal if they are in contention. I respect Kirilenko's ability and they love him there - its just that he's an extremely hard player for a team like UTA to hold onto at that price, especially wading through the lux. I wrote:

I think they only do this in the future if they don't think they are a true contender (injury, string of losses), since no owner wants to spend lux money on a non-contender .. especially cost-conscious UTA.

[shrink]

BTW, I am going to look into trades that move talent from MEM as well, either for financial savings (who can tell with them?) or other considerations.

If they would stray down into rebuilding, that's only going to increase the value of the pick we hold of theirs.

There are certainly whispers about OJ Mayo being available, and downright shouts about Acie Law (if he can be considered "talent")

[Krapinsky]

I'd be more interested in trades that bring the highest pick back using our cap space. I like the way our team is set up (when Martell returns and Pekovic gets more comfortable) and I don't really think we should be messing with out developing chemistry and adding more youth at the expense of the guys already here.