Trading Cardinal not just about 2009 Free Agency

[shrink]

Many of the posters here don't see the value to moving Cardinal in 2009 because they don't see legitimate free agents in 2009, to justify giving up any assets to clear space under the cap. However, if Question 1 is "who can we get in2009 Free Agency, Question 1A should be:

"What can we get for trading cap space?"

Players available to us aren't limited to 2009 free agents (including ones we could pick up to trade) -- its any player on a team that needs to shake salary. Some teams will pay to get under the lux, or pay to clear cap space to sign a free agent. To their credit, the Wolves front office has been on the ball the last two years in these types of financial deals, even though we only had small TPE's instead of large amounts of true cap space. Last summer we traded $2 mil worth for $3 mil in cash to San Antonio, and this summer we traded $1.65 mil (I'm assuming vet min exception here for Booth) of TPE for Carney, a protected 1st, and cash.

Good deals, but my point is that cap space next year may be even more valuable, because of the impending 2010 free agency. In 2009, we aren't anywhere near the lux, but every dollar we can clear under the salary cap gives us more leverage and opportunities to improve this team.

[Devilzsidewalk]

who else is gonna be near the luxury tax in 2009 though? The Knicks, the Cavs, the Celtics, and possibly the Lakers. Obviously the Celtics won't give up Perkins on his steal of a salary or Rondo, so they're off the lsit. Cavs can't really afford to be giving away players when LBJ is zooming in on free agency. The Knicks don't need to be addressed and they don't seem to care about money anyways.

The Nuggets giving away Camby isn't a typical situation, and they took a beating in the media for it too. Even if a team wanted to do that again, they probably wouldn't after seeing how everyone ripped on Denver.

I suppose there could be another Carney deal out there, but that's not worth packaging McCants to get rid of Cardinal.

Wolves screwed up giving Jaric his deal, now they have to live with it. No packaging useful players just to save their asses.

[shrink]

The key is to get as far under the salary cap of an estimated $61 mil in 2009, and these are the deals we have in place:

Al Jefferson $12,000,000
Mike Miller $9,128,575
Ryan Gomes 4,017,500
Kevin Love $3,401,040
Randy Foye $3,575,761
Corey Brewer $2,916,120
Mark Madsen $2,840,000
Craig Smith $2,300,000
Sebastian Telfair $2,500,000
Brian Cardinal $6,750,000
---------------------------------------
2009: $49,428,996

+ 2009 picks (0 to 4, @ est. $1-$3 mil)?
+ Rodney Carney $2,539,936 -- team option?
+ Rashad McCants ($3,644,595? qualifying offer -- team option)?


As you can see, while McCants is a big question mark, if we can't move Cardinal, we'll probably finish the roster just over the salary cap. Economically, this is arguably the worst place to be. Most teams try to optimize talent/money by sliding in just under the luxury threshold, and obviously, $10 mil more in salary would give us a better chance for wins. However, if you're barely over the salary cap, you still face its trading restrictions without the talent. In other words, you want to be anywhere but here.

A good Cardinal trade will move additional 2009 salary, maximizing our value in a trade. Moving Madsen would be a plus financially, but not necessarily spiritually. McCants may be a good player to include in a trade, even if he is great this year. We'd need to get fair talent back, but good play means his deal could be much bigger next year. I think either Gomes or Craig Smith should be included, because I am concerned about finding minutes for both in the future. I'd prefer Smith, because he'd have more value to a team with a good defender behind him. Either way, their inclusion means a deal can't be made until Dec 15th. We have a surplus of picks next year to grease the wheels, and the players we have to trade are young and have potential, so that should help too.

In any event, the Wolves front office has demonstrated an ability to make trades from a financial basis, and I'd hope they try to get the financial structure to be able to continue. I think its risky to put all our eggs in the competitive, 2010 Free Agency basket.

[shrink]

who else is gonna be near the luxury tax in 2009 though? The Knicks, the Cavs, the Celtics, and possibly the Lakers.

Its hard to predict the list right now, but there are a lot of possibilities:

ATL, POR, MIA, MEM, OKC - may want additional salary cap space for a 2009 free agent signing.

BOS, CLE, DAL, LAL, IND (Granger + Jack) MIL, NOH, NYK, ORL, PHO, SAC, SAS, UTA, TOR (Bargnani?) WAS

Some teams could want to use their MLE in 2009 and put themselves in luxury problems as well. Of course, the long lux list of buyers may also mean teams that are resistant to trading expirings as well, so its a bit of a Catch-22. However, you only need to find one team to trade with, and I do not believe that every one of our player has more value with the Timberwolves than on any of the other 29 teams. Same goes for any cap space we could generate.

[Winter Wonder]

Admittedly, I have been wooed a bit in regards to 2009 financial flexibility as of late. My main concern was the cost of what would get us there. Mike Miller is very attractive to other teams, but is potentially the one player that will make the biggest difference on how the wolves perform this upcoming season and shouldn't be dealt.

In previous months I had been a big proponent of trading McCants, whether it be for a big, a 1st round draft choice, TPE, whatever. I have to say I am backing off of that stance. One of the reasons was due to what I believed I saw on the court with him and on the bench, primarily a lack of team play and overall being a less than great teammate. I realize, that we have very little of the whole picture, but based on what I could gather and observed I thought he needed to go. I am now more inclined to believe (until someone else with more knowledge can set us straight) that McCants is actually a good factor in team chemistry. We all know he works his but off in the off-season and with his strength and conditioning. He has probably rubbed off on a few with that mind set. Additionally, didn't I read that he was having team meals at his place with a game or card night somewhere? Maybe I am way off, but if he is doing things like this with our young squad, he may be proving worth a longer look than I had wanted to give him..... Of course I could be way off and dreamt the whole thing, and in that case, trade him. Otherwise, I think we need to keep him around.

As for Smith/Gomes, both very likable and seem to be good guys, but I would have to say Smith is much more expendable on this team. Gomes probably has more value, but he is another flexible (position/skill wise) player that brings more to the table and is a glue guy. Smith has less value to us, and probably around the league, but we just have to find a team that needs a strong, low-post scorer, and you know there are and will be teams out there.

Overall, I want the financial flexibility, I just don't want to have to pay heavily for it and am inclined to wait if need comes to be. Deals can still be made at the begginning of free agency if we have to dump a contract and pick to go with it and if we have to wait to 2010, other teams may be more desperate with the increased competition and we will be a deal facilitator and rewarded via other means than free agent signings possibly.

[Devilzsidewalk]

maybe later, but now is not the time. How good is Foye, how good is McCants, how good is Brewer, can Love and Jefferson play together, all these things need to be evaluated before another trade is made. This roster has been completely turned over the past 2 seasons, more trades don't seem like the answer right now. It's time for evaluation. The season hasn't even started yet.

[Winter Wonder]

Unless we are trading at a large premium and gaining a ton more than we are giving, otherwise I may be inclined to not trade. We can wait for other teams to get desperate to bring us down to 09 capspace mid season.

[shrink]

Good posts.

I think in any trade, we're going to want to avoid overpaying. McCants is certainly a guy that can vary in value, going up, or even going down. However, for a team that wants cap space, both are OK if we're getting value for him. Next season McCants is going to get a new contract. If he play poorly, he'll be cheap -- if he plays well, he'll be expensive. His value will correct, and it will be fair. If he does poorly, we should have no problem with a trade. If he does great, we'd have to invest a big chunk of money to keep him .. which may hurt our 2009 AND 2010 plans. If he's great, and we trade him, it may cost us a few wins this season, but we're not contenders anyway, and at worst, it helps protect our 2009 MIN pick that we owe to LAC.

One last thing. I don't think its going to cost a fortune to move Brian Cardinal, regardless of his production.

The cost of moving Cardinal to a new team is a willingness to eat $6.75 mil for one season. For many teams who are targeting 2010 free agency, 2009 salary is not such a big deal (MIN may consider themselves one of those teams!). Moreover, next year he's a particularly valuable expiring, as teams try to maneuver for 2010.

Let me give an example. One trade we've tossed around is

Cardinal + Carney + UTA 1st to IND for expirings.

The price-tag is $6.75 mil for one year. Late picks can usually be easily sold for $3 mil. That's close to half the price right there, though its off the books. Is Carney's potential, playing in his home-town worth the other half? I'd say "yes" providing IND doesn't need the expiring (say, they get outbid on Jarrett Jack).

Anyway, I'm saying that I don't think moving Cardinal is going to be particularly expensive. We should be glad his deal doesn't run into 2011.

[Winter Wonder]

If that were the deal, I would be all for it. That is the inexpensive, non-critical (for on or off court concerns) type of move that would only be acceptable at this time I think.

I don't think IND would be interested per se, but you never know. They do have another SF they are rather found of (Granger) and a bit of a investment cap wise at SG (Dunleavey) so Carney may not be high on there list. It would depend on how they value the late 1st rounder. Cardinal may help with their depth, but he wouldn't be the reason behind the deal for them obviously. Nonetheless, if it is something inexpensive like you indicated, I would be fine with it. I think others would, but they may want to see what Carney may bring.

Questions though. Let's say we free up the cap space for 09 and no deal comes our way. Are we disappointed? We gave up assets to accomplish this, allbeit smaller ones; but no major signing no trade. Would the fan base be ok with that or persecute the FO for penny pinching? Taylor has spent in the past, but has tightened the wallet the last few seasons (not blaming him, we weren't gonig to be competitive). Would this be seen as just a cost cutting move if nothing comes of it? Granted I don't want to make a deal just to have made a deal to use the space, I am just indicating that if nothing comes there way dealwise, they will need to have a very nice plan b, just in case...

[deeney0]

maybe later, but now is not the time. How good is Foye, how good is McCants, how good is Brewer, can Love and Jefferson play together, all these things need to be evaluated before another trade is made. This roster has been completely turned over the past 2 seasons, more trades don't seem like the answer right now. It's time for evaluation. The season hasn't even started yet.

I completely 100% agree. This should be the entire point of this season for the Wolves.

[john2jer]

I think it's time we just give up on the dream of building around Brian Cardinal. The guy has sacrificed for this orginization. We need to move him to a contender so he has a chance of winning a ring before he retires. it would be the "right" thing to do. If KG deserved it, BC sure as hell deserves it.

[Devilzsidewalk]

I think it's time we just give up on the dream of building around Brian Cardinal. The guy has sacrificed for this orginization. We need to move him to a contender so he has a chance of winning a ring before he retires. it would be the "right" thing to do. If KG deserved it, BC sure as hell deserves it.

if there's anything we've learned from the national media, it's that we got ripped off unmercifully in the KG trade and it was all because McHale is a Celtic fan for life and will stop at nothing to help them out in any way possible

so we simply can not make that same mistake again and allow McHale to trade Cardinal to Boston for a run of the mill 20/10 big man, a couple 1sts, and a couple rotation guys. Back off McHale, back off.

[john2jer]

I think it's time we just give up on the dream of building around Brian Cardinal. The guy has sacrificed for this orginization. We need to move him to a contender so he has a chance of winning a ring before he retires. it would be the "right" thing to do. If KG deserved it, BC sure as hell deserves it.

if there's anything we've learned from the national media, it's that we got ripped off unmercifully in the KG trade and it was all because McHale is a Celtic fan for life and will stop at nothing to help them out in any way possible

so we simply can not make that same mistake again and allow McHale to trade Cardinal to Boston for a run of the mill 20/10 big man, a couple 1sts, and a couple rotation guys. Back off McHale, back off.

BUT HE DESERVES IT!

[casey]

The key is to get as far under the salary cap of $58.68 mil in 2009, and these are the deals we have in place:

Al Jefferson $12,000,000
Mike Miller $9,128,575
Ryan Gomes 4,017,500
Kevin Love $3,401,040
Randy Foye $3,575,761
Corey Brewer $2,916,120
Mark Madsen $2,630,000
Craig Smith $2,300,000
Sebastian Telfair $2,500,000
Brian Cardinal $6,300,000
---------------------------------------
2009: $48.8 mil

+ 2009 picks (0 to 4, @ est. $1-$3 mil)
+ Rodney Carney $2,539,936 -- team option
+ Rashad McCants ($3,644,595? qualifying offer -- team option)

Madsen and Cardinal's salaries are wrong and the cap number you're referring to is this year, not next year.

And what exactly were the positive aspects of trading Cardinal, other than 2009 FA?

[shrink]

Madsen and Cardinal's salaries are wrong and the cap number you're referring to is this year, not next year.

Thanks. It looks like I put in Madsen and Cardinal's numbers for this season. I can't do much about salary cap number, since the BRI won't be determined until July, but I think its reasonable to assume it will increase conservatively by $2.5 mil.

I'll go back and change the numbers.

And what exactly were the positive aspects of trading Cardinal, other than 2009 FA?

I think I addressed that in my first two posts in this thread.

[the_bruce]

The only reason I would make a trade is for a slasher
who can get to the rack. McCants has been getting to the line this
preseason, so that may be entirely unnecessary.

I'm not to concerned with moving cardinal. I don't mind him.

The only functional deal I could see is maybe...

Collins + Cardinal for Hughes

Saves CHI ~7m cash. Evens out our lineup a bit.

foye\bassy
hughes\mccants
miller\brewer
Love\gomes
Al\harrison

[Klomp]

The only functional deal I could see is maybe...

Collins + Cardinal for Hughes

If you ask me, thats a pretty good trade proposal. Gives us more money for 2010 too.

[casey]

I think I addressed that in my first two posts in this thread.

Not really, that's why I asked. To take on mediocre overpaid guys from teams looking to get under the luxury tax?

[skorff26]

I'll throw out some ideas that could save some teams some money at the end of the year

1. Atlanta: if they want more cap space maybe Law, Claxton, 3 mill cash for cap space.
2. Boston: scalabrine or house + 3 million cash + some incentive (it would save boston some money from the luxury tax
3. Indiana: maybe Deiner + draft pick for cap space (more cap space for indiana)
4. Orlando: Brian Cook, cash, draft pick for cap space (keep orlando out of luxury tax)
5. San Antonio: a deal like we did with udrih for one of their players making around 3 million to keep them out of luxury tax
6. Utah for Korver to keep them out of luxury tax
7. Washington for Thomas to keep them out of luxury tax.

[shrink]

I think I addressed that in my first two posts in this thread.

Not really, that's why I asked. To take on mediocre overpaid guys from teams looking to get under the luxury tax?

There are four obvious uses I see for the cap space, not just for teams looking to get under the lux.

1. Trade parts of the cap space to teams trying to clear more cap space to make bigger deal for a free agent (like the 2008 PHI deal)
2. Trade parts of the cap space to teams trying to get under the lux (like the 2007 SA trade)
3. Select a 2009 Free Agent for ourselves.
4. Select a 2009 Free Agent we can trade after Dec. 15th to a team that needs them.

The key to all four of these is that our financial situation gives us a different position than other teams. Why should we just trade for a "mediocre overpaid player?" Suppose a team has a good player attached to a $4 mil deal, that gives them $6 mil in production. If he's the guy that puts them over the lux, he's costing them perhaps $10 mil. Trading him for cap space saves them more than he's worth, while we gain a guy who's paid less than he's worth.

Its the same situation for cap space trades to help a team offer a max deal in free agency. In the Philly trade, we certainly got more value than our cap space justified in the Booth/Carney/1st trade. However, PHI also won, since they shouldn't let Carney and the 1st keep them from getting Elton Brand. That little extra cap space was more valuable to them than us, and it made for a good trade for both teams. It wasn't just trading cap space for only a "mediocre and overpaid" Calvin Booth.

The two free agent signing options, to keep or to trade, come into play because only teams under the salary cap can make offers to free agents other than their own in excess of the exceptions. (I know you're aware of this -- I'm just including it for completeness for others that may not know it and are reading the thread). The 2009 MLE may be around $6 mil, so if we can offer $7, we may have access to some players other teams can't get. In 2010, many teams will also be able to make offers in excess of the MLE, and they may be more attractive choices for free agents, and making it jarder to profit on any of the four methods with so much competition driving the value of our commodity (cap space) down.

The bottom-line here is that clearing as much cap space as possible under the salary cap in 2009 gives us the financial flexibility to take advantage of opportunities that may not be available to us if our final salary total leaves us sitting on the cap. I think its too risky to think that we can just wait until 2010 for help. Creating this cap space by moving Brian Cardinal's last year could turn out to be a key way to improve the talent on this team.