RealGM

Simple:

Nikola Pekovic, Lazar Hayward

for

Brendan Haywood, Future 1st (lottery protected)

Haywood is owed a lot of money - about 5 years and $45M left. He's also getting old.

However, he gives Wolves a starting center and enforcer in the paint that has few question marks. Further, the money owed to him is slightly less offensive when you discount the $9.5M owed to Pekovic.

With a front court rotation set the Wolves could then use it's assets to upgrade at SG and would no longer have to worry about the center position.

Personally, I don't love it, but I think it's a realistic option and a direction worth considering.

I'd pass. I don't want Haywood taking up that much salary when we don't really have a set core. I'd rather stick with Darko for awhile than go this route.

The Mavs could probably find a better deal for Haywood.

B Calrissian wrote:I'd pass. I don't want Haywood taking up that much salary when we don't really have a set core. I'd rather stick with Darko for awhile than go this route.

I'd agree with that. Might be something worth more consideration at the trade deadline, depending on how the current roster shakes out.

Foye wrote:The Mavs could probably find a better deal for Haywood.

I don't know about that. I think the Mav would want to deal him for cap savings so they can re-sign Chandler. Few, if any other, teams can offer that and could use Haywood.

Haywood's name has even been thrown around as an amnesty candidate.

Deal. 2 pieces of crap for Haywood who is at least a good defensive big, and a future protected 1st is an asset no matter how low it will be.

Krapinsky wrote:

B Calrissian wrote:I'd pass. I don't want Haywood taking up that much salary when we don't really have a set core. I'd rather stick with Darko for awhile than go this route.

I'd agree with that. Might be something worth more consideration at the trade deadline, depending on how the current roster shakes out.

I am hoping by the trade deadline Adelman knows what guys he likes. That way we can add Wes+Utah pick, Williams, or AR+Beas to that offer and get a player like Bogut or Noah(would need a 3rd team).


Does the trade deadline occur the same time as a normal season or is it adjusted for the lockout? I can't remember how it worked during the last one.

B Calrissian wrote:

Krapinsky wrote:

B Calrissian wrote:I'd pass. I don't want Haywood taking up that much salary when we don't really have a set core. I'd rather stick with Darko for awhile than go this route.

I'd agree with that. Might be something worth more consideration at the trade deadline, depending on how the current roster shakes out.

I am hoping by the trade deadline Adelman knows what guys he likes. That way we can add Wes+Utah pick, Williams, or AR+Beas to that offer and get a player like Bogut or Noah(would need a 3rd team).


Does the trade deadline occur the same time as a normal season or is it adjusted for the lockout? I can't remember how it worked during the last one.

But is Bogut even that big of an upgrade over Haywood? Bogut makes even more money and has said he'll never be the same again after his injury. He's certainly better, but would it be better to take on Haywood's contract and then use those assets for a star SG?

It's interesting.

One more twist - I heard one expert say that he wouldn't be surprised to see DAL use the amnesty on Haywood. Initially I thought it'd be ridiculous for Cuban, but he explained that if the lux tax is extremely high, that he might try to get by with Ian Mahinmi or some other cheap sub to back-up Tyson Chandler.

I thought that was still unlikely, but a deal with Pekovic might make some sense for Cuban. The $3 mil reduction in salary probably saves him $9 from that $90 mil payroll, and the better Haywood might not be worth $9 mil more as a back-up. This may be especially true if the new CBA has harsher clauses for teams that stay above the lux for several years, with Haywood having that long deal.

Krapinsky wrote:But is Bogut even that big of an upgrade over Haywood? Bogut makes even more money and has said he'll never be the same again after his injury. He's certainly better, but would it be better to take on Haywood's contract and then use those assets for a star SG?

Yeah the Bogut one would definitely depend on how he is looking by the deadline. I would prefer Noah anyway.

As far as trading for a star SG goes.. Who? There are very few of them. Obviously Kobe and Wade are not options. Manu is too old to justify giving up major assets. Gordon will be next to impossible to pry from the Clippers.

I would much rather have Noah with lets say Webster at SG than Haywood and Ellis/Martin/Iggy.

Martin is certainly one I'd consider. Maybe Harden could be available down the road (Can OKC afford all those guys under a new CBA?)? Maybe it's someone from the draft, like Harrison Barnes? Maybe it's someone that hasn't emerged yet, like Alec Burks or Paul George? Maybe Eric Gordon or Tyreke Evans demands a trade? Who knows - point is there's lots of possible hypotheticals. Just because it's a move we can't make today, doesn't me its a move we can't be prepared for.


Noah is probably unobtainable and at the very least, would cost probably double what Ellis, Martin, or Iggy would. His value is probably near Kevin Loves when you consider position scarcity. So would you rather have Noah and Webster (and no D. Williams) or Ellis/Martin/Iggy and Haywood with D. Williams?

Krapinsky wrote:Martin is certainly one I'd consider. Maybe Harden could be available down the road (Can OKC afford all those guys under a new CBA?)? Maybe it's someone from the draft, like Harrison Barnes? Maybe it's someone that hasn't emerged yet, like Alec Burks or Paul George? Maybe Eric Gordon or Tyreke Evans demands a trade? Who knows - point is there's lots of possible hypotheticals. Just because it's a move we can't make today, doesn't me its a move we can't be prepared for.


Noah is probably unobtainable and at the very least, would cost probably double what Ellis, Martin, or Iggy would. His value is probably near Kevin Loves when you consider position scarcity. So would you rather have Noah and Webster (and no D. Williams) or Ellis/Martin/Iggy and Haywood with D. Williams?

I know Noah is worth that much. I would prefer Noah/Webster + flexibility over Ellis/Martin/Iggy + Williams + Haywood. No question about it. Consolidating talent sounds much better than spending lots of money on Haywood + lots of money for a 2nd tier SG, waiting for someone to demand a trade (rarely happens), or getting even younger.

If we traded for Haywood + Iggy/etc we wouldn't have much if any flexibility to make a trade in the future. Even if we traded Williams, Johnson, and AR for Noah we would still have wiggle room for the types of trades Kahn loves.

Rubio/Ridnour
Webster/Lee/Ellington
Beasley/Hayward
Love/Tolliver
Noah/Darko/Pek - Miller

vs

(assuming something like AR+Beas for Martin for sake of discussion)

Rubio/Ridnour/Lee
Martin/Johnson/Ellington
Williams/Webster
Love/Tolliver
Haywood/Darko - Miller


Obviously the first roster would need a small trade like Pek for a wing but I think it looks better going forward. Still young and plenty of minutes for guys to show what they have.

The second one just looks meh to me. Starting a rookie PG and SF with an expensive old Center and expensive injury prone SG? No thanks.

I like the second option much better. Much better bench and the difference between Martin + Williams vs Beasley and Webster in the starting line up is much much greater than the difference between Noah and Haywood, imo.

Krapinsky wrote:I like the second option much better. Much better bench and the difference between Martin + Williams vs Beasley and Webster in the starting line up is much much greater than the difference between Noah and Haywood, imo.

We aren't contending so I am not worried about the bench. Not at all a factor for me in this.

Yeah this year you are correct but Haywood is going to get worse each year of the small remainder of his career. The difference going forward with Noah over Haywood is not even comparable to what Martin and Williams give us over Webster and Beasley. A front court of Love, Noah, Tolliver, and Darko would be one of the best in the league. I would be fine with a below average wing rotation as long as they can shoot the 3 to compliment the players that really matter.

It seems we just have different goals for the team. The lineup you prefer has a MUCH better chance of making the playoffs this year. I want this year to be about our best assets (Rubio, Love, and Adelman) getting accustomed with each other then going for the playoffs next year and years after.

I could see this trade potentially happening. I doubt it though, primarily because Kahn doesn't seem like the kind of guy who wants to get stuck with this contract. In particular, it's clear that Taylor told him up front to get the total salary low, knowing what was coming. It seems strange to work to get into a position knowing of a coming change of circumstance, and then blow it right away once that change happens.

If it were to happen, I would think it more likely near the trade deadline than in the scrum before the season. At least we would know more about how Pek and Vlade Milicic perform in Adelman's system then.

X factor: The Wolves could trade for him knowing they would have the option to amnesty him in 3 years if his production falls off a cliff. In a macro context it makes a lot more sense to amnesty a guy like this after getting his productive years from the contract than it does to amnesty him up front and have somebody pay him twice for some of those years.

Foye wrote:The Mavs could probably find a better deal for Haywood.

Haywood
Age 32- $7,624,500
Age 33- $8,349,000
Age 34- $9,073,500
Age 35- $9,798,000
Age 36- $10,522,500 (team option....partially guaranteed?)

IMHO Dallas is more likely to amensty him than get a better deal for him.

Interesting trade Krap.
Haywood's 2015 salary is fully unguaranteed until 8/1/15, according to Wyn's DB.
So it's essentially 4 years and 35 million left, with almost 19 million over years 3 and 4. That's a lot of coin for a 7 foot 34/35 year old.

I thought about us having the option to amnesty him and how it might make a deal more enticing.
2 things:
1. Every rumor I've heard states that the amnesty will only be able to be used by teams for players currently under contract on their team (IE can't amnesty a player you traded for).
2. Papa Glen would still have to pay him even if he was amnestied, and it's his money. Losing 7 million dollars with only a 45 million $ or so payroll last year, I don't think he'd approve a deal for Haywood (nor would I in his position).

Maybe if you're a playoff contender and a piece away you think about it. For this team, I don't think an over 30 C making that much coin is a good investment.

I don't feel it would be a big enough improvement to warrant that type of risk. His combination of age and contract really doesn't fit on a young team like Minnesota, which has a core of guys that are 24 or younger.

cpfsf wrote:I don't feel it would be a big enough improvement to warrant that type of risk. His combination of age and contract really doesn't fit on a young team like Minnesota, which has a core of guys that are 24 or younger.

I'd welcome some age on this team. Our young core is too bloated as is. We need to blend in solid vets around Beasley, Rubio, Williams, Johnson and Randolph, not more inexperience. Regardless, we're not going to be adding any more major young pieces going forward, especially considering we won't have a lottery pick next year. More so, I think we need a veteran to lead our defense though before we make any great leaps in the win column. We don't have anyone on our roster that can do that.

Narf wrote:

Foye wrote:The Mavs could probably find a better deal for Haywood.

Haywood
Age 32- $7,624,500
Age 33- $8,349,000
Age 34- $9,073,500
Age 35- $9,798,000
Age 36- $10,522,500 (team option....partially guaranteed?)

IMHO Dallas is more likely to amensty him than get a better deal for him.

There certainly is a better deal out there for them, IMO. There are a bunch of contenders who could use Haywood's services, IMO. Dallas would at least find a deal in which they don't have to give up their 1st rounder.