2017 Trade & Free Agency Ideas & Discussion

[Mulhollanddrive]

I think Chicago would take Tatum if they did a Butler trade.

[Bogyo]

I think Chicago would take Tatum if they did a Butler trade.

I hope, becouse we could get JJ. But if they do trade Butler, they do not have anything on their roster besides an OK starting center in Robin Lopez. wow, it felt weird typing that

[BobbieL]

I'd be OK taking Ball @ 4 and even OK taking him at 2 if the only cost to move up was to take on Deng.

I think Ball could bust hard, but after what I saw from Ulis last year...we may already have our future star PG. If Ball actually pans out, then we'd have two "pass first" point guards.

If we take on Deng's deal and ship out Bledsoe, it's a wash.

Ulis/Ball
Booker/
TJ/#
Bender/
Chris/

#Add whoever we draft with the pick we move Bledsoe for - One of Jackson/Tatum/Issac will fall.

That's a load of youth talent and potential.

One more year of tanking (this time naturally) then we start seriously trying to bring in free agents.

I don't see any value in Deng. I do see value in Mozgov if you truly don't believe Len can improve or you can trade Chandler for nothing

But the problem with taking one of those contracts is it means you are HELPING the lakers - do not help the Lakers with cap space. That's just bad business. If they want to take Knight for Deng to swap spots, I might do that. Probably not

I just sit back and figure out other trades - meaning Knight and if you are keeping Len, Chandler

[Son of Ra]

So if Boston can get Butler for a package around the #3 pick then I think we should definitely try to get him with our #4+whatever.
Yes, yes I know he's 27 and 200 some days but that means he can give us a solid 6-7 years easily. His two on this contract plus 5 on the upcoming super-max.
I know everyone thinks that a player above 30 is old and washed up but look at sports in general these days (in soccer a Chinese team supposedly offered a €200 million transfer fee plus €200 millions/4 years in salary for a 32 year old Ronaldo, there's LeBron, Duncan, Brady and it's becoming the norm). It's not like it used to be. Athletes take much better care of their body and can play at a high level until 35 easily. Hence I don't think the "Bledsoe doesn't fit our timeline" argument is valid. He is just twenty-freaking-seven. (Even though I wouldn't mind trading him because of fit with our current roster)
I think we'd have a pretty good chance of signing Griffin or comparable then.
Barring injuries that'd be a team that could beat anyone, especially because of a really good 2nd unit IMHO.

Bledsoe/Ulis
Booker/(Bledsoe-Ulis-Knight?)
Butler/Warren/Dudley
Griffin/Bender/Chriss
Chandler/Chriss/Williams/(Len?)

If I still lived in the valley I'd buy season tickets for the next 5 years the second this roster stands.

[BobbieL]

So if Boston can get Butler for a package around the #3 pick then I think we should definitely try to get him with our #4+whatever.
Yes, yes I know he's 27 and 200 some days but that means he can give us a solid 6-7 years easily. His two on this contract plus 5 on the upcoming super-max.
I know everyone thinks that a player above 30 is old and washed up but look at sports in general these days (in soccer a Chinese team supposedly offered a €200 million transfer fee plus €200 millions/4 years in salary for a 32 year old Ronaldo, there's LeBron, Duncan, Brady and it's becoming the norm). It's not like it used to be. Athletes take much better care of their body and can play at a high level until 35 easily. Hence I don't think the "Bledsoe doesn't fit our timeline" argument is valid. He is just twenty-freaking-seven. (Even though I wouldn't mind trading him because of fit with our current roster)
I think we'd have a pretty good chance of signing Griffin or comparable then.
Barring injuries that'd be a team that could beat anyone, especially because of a really good 2nd unit IMHO.

Bledsoe/Ulis
Booker/(Bledsoe-Ulis-Knight?)
Butler/Warren/Dudley
Griffin/Bender/Chriss
Chandler/Chriss/Williams/(Len?)

If I still lived in the valley I'd buy season tickets for the next 5 years the second this roster stands.

Butler for the #4, Warren and the Miami pick - would that do it?

Its worth a phone call

Not sure the team would have Knight - how about Knight and LB for Frye/Shumpert

The Cavs would save money and can waive LB before July 3 - that's almost a dollar for dollar savings.But this trade would somehow have to be approved to allow LB being waived before 7/3. Granted, the Suns waive LB they save a bunch of cap space too. But Knight doesn't have a fit, Cavs need offense, they might want to save from Frye by waiving LB. Suns get a veteran in Frye to help the young guys while also getting ride of Knight

[Zelaznyrules]

So if Boston can get Butler for a package around the #3 pick then I think we should definitely try to get him with our #4+whatever.
Yes, yes I know he's 27 and 200 some days but that means he can give us a solid 6-7 years easily. His two on this contract plus 5 on the upcoming super-max.
I know everyone thinks that a player above 30 is old and washed up but look at sports in general these days (in soccer a Chinese team supposedly offered a €200 million transfer fee plus €200 millions/4 years in salary for a 32 year old Ronaldo, there's LeBron, Duncan, Brady and it's becoming the norm). It's not like it used to be. Athletes take much better care of their body and can play at a high level until 35 easily. Hence I don't think the "Bledsoe doesn't fit our timeline" argument is valid. He is just twenty-freaking-seven. (Even though I wouldn't mind trading him because of fit with our current roster)
I think we'd have a pretty good chance of signing Griffin or comparable then.
Barring injuries that'd be a team that could beat anyone, especially because of a really good 2nd unit IMHO.

Bledsoe/Ulis
Booker/(Bledsoe-Ulis-Knight?)
Butler/Warren/Dudley
Griffin/Bender/Chriss
Chandler/Chriss/Williams/(Len?)

If I still lived in the valley I'd buy season tickets for the next 5 years the second this roster stands.

Butler for the #4, Warren and the Miami pick - would that do it?

Its worth a phone call

Not sure the team would have Knight - how about Knight and LB for Frye/Shumpert

The Cavs would save money and can waive LB before July 3 - that's almost a dollar for dollar savings.But this trade would somehow have to be approved to allow LB being waived before 7/3. Granted, the Suns waive LB they save a bunch of cap space too. But Knight doesn't have a fit, Cavs need offense, they might want to save from Frye by waiving LB. Suns get a veteran in Frye to help the young guys while also getting ride of Knight

But why? What does that get us? Butler, with more talent around him than we have, could barely lead the Bulls into the playoffs in the East. And your offer subtracts 3 assets. Maybe Butler is worth it, maybe he's worth even more? But until Booker, Chriss and Bender hit their stride (probably 3 to 6 years from now), we're going nowhere with a one player fix and by then Butler will be in decline. And we'd be just good enough each year to miss out on the better players in the draft.

[AtheJ415]

So if Boston can get Butler for a package around the #3 pick then I think we should definitely try to get him with our #4+whatever.
Yes, yes I know he's 27 and 200 some days but that means he can give us a solid 6-7 years easily. His two on this contract plus 5 on the upcoming super-max.
I know everyone thinks that a player above 30 is old and washed up but look at sports in general these days (in soccer a Chinese team supposedly offered a €200 million transfer fee plus €200 millions/4 years in salary for a 32 year old Ronaldo, there's LeBron, Duncan, Brady and it's becoming the norm). It's not like it used to be. Athletes take much better care of their body and can play at a high level until 35 easily. Hence I don't think the "Bledsoe doesn't fit our timeline" argument is valid. He is just twenty-freaking-seven. (Even though I wouldn't mind trading him because of fit with our current roster)
I think we'd have a pretty good chance of signing Griffin or comparable then.
Barring injuries that'd be a team that could beat anyone, especially because of a really good 2nd unit IMHO.

Bledsoe/Ulis
Booker/(Bledsoe-Ulis-Knight?)
Butler/Warren/Dudley
Griffin/Bender/Chriss
Chandler/Chriss/Williams/(Len?)

If I still lived in the valley I'd buy season tickets for the next 5 years the second this roster stands.

Butler for the #4, Warren and the Miami pick - would that do it?

Its worth a phone call

Not sure the team would have Knight - how about Knight and LB for Frye/Shumpert

The Cavs would save money and can waive LB before July 3 - that's almost a dollar for dollar savings.But this trade would somehow have to be approved to allow LB being waived before 7/3. Granted, the Suns waive LB they save a bunch of cap space too. But Knight doesn't have a fit, Cavs need offense, they might want to save from Frye by waiving LB. Suns get a veteran in Frye to help the young guys while also getting ride of Knight

But why? What does that get us? Butler, with more talent around him than we have, could barely lead the Bulls into the playoffs in the East. And your offer subtracts 3 assets. Maybe Butler is worth it, maybe he's worth even more? But until Booker, Chriss and Bender hit their stride (probably 3 to 6 years from now), we're going nowhere with a one player fix and by then Butler will be in decline. And we'd be just good enough each year to miss out on the better players in the draft.

Exactly this. And the same logic applies with trading Bledsoe. I keep reading here and on twitter that you can't trade him unless you are SURE the guy you are replacing him with is going to be better. I don't agree with that. If you have the opportunity to trade into the back of the lottery and pick up a great PG, or if Ball slips to 4 and you can move Bledsoe to get good picks in later drafts, you do it and don't think twice. You push the reset button on the PG position and build for 3-6 years from now instead of this season when Booker, Chriss, Bender, Warren, etc. are closer to their primes, leaving you with a much greater window and a much greater margin of error going forward.

[Zelaznyrules]

Butler for the #4, Warren and the Miami pick - would that do it?

Its worth a phone call

Not sure the team would have Knight - how about Knight and LB for Frye/Shumpert

The Cavs would save money and can waive LB before July 3 - that's almost a dollar for dollar savings.But this trade would somehow have to be approved to allow LB being waived before 7/3. Granted, the Suns waive LB they save a bunch of cap space too. But Knight doesn't have a fit, Cavs need offense, they might want to save from Frye by waiving LB. Suns get a veteran in Frye to help the young guys while also getting ride of Knight

But why? What does that get us? Butler, with more talent around him than we have, could barely lead the Bulls into the playoffs in the East. And your offer subtracts 3 assets. Maybe Butler is worth it, maybe he's worth even more? But until Booker, Chriss and Bender hit their stride (probably 3 to 6 years from now), we're going nowhere with a one player fix and by then Butler will be in decline. And we'd be just good enough each year to miss out on the better players in the draft.

Exactly this. And the same logic applies with trading Bledsoe. I keep reading here and on twitter that you can't trade him unless you are SURE the guy you are replacing him with is going to be better. I don't agree with that. If you have the opportunity to trade into the back of the lottery and pick up a great PG, or if Ball slips to 4 and you can move Bledsoe to get good picks in later drafts, you do it and don't think twice. You push the reset button on the PG position and build for 3-6 years from now instead of this season when Booker, Chriss, Bender, Warren, etc. are closer to their primes, leaving you with a much greater window and a much greater margin of error going forward.

Yeah, there are reasons to keep Bledsoe and there are reasons to trade him but the biggie, IMO, is that we simply aren't going to re-sign him in 2 years so why wait around for his value to decline. I'd feel pretty good about something like a Ulis/Jawun Evans pairing at the 1 even if we eventually decide that neither of them are quite good enough to be a full time starter.

[BobbieL]

But why? What does that get us? Butler, with more talent around him than we have, could barely lead the Bulls into the playoffs in the East. And your offer subtracts 3 assets. Maybe Butler is worth it, maybe he's worth even more? But until Booker, Chriss and Bender hit their stride (probably 3 to 6 years from now), we're going nowhere with a one player fix and by then Butler will be in decline. And we'd be just good enough each year to miss out on the better players in the draft.

Exactly this. And the same logic applies with trading Bledsoe. I keep reading here and on twitter that you can't trade him unless you are SURE the guy you are replacing him with is going to be better. I don't agree with that. If you have the opportunity to trade into the back of the lottery and pick up a great PG, or if Ball slips to 4 and you can move Bledsoe to get good picks in later drafts, you do it and don't think twice. You push the reset button on the PG position and build for 3-6 years from now instead of this season when Booker, Chriss, Bender, Warren, etc. are closer to their primes, leaving you with a much greater window and a much greater margin of error going forward.

Yeah, there are reasons to keep Bledsoe and there are reasons to trade him but the biggie, IMO, is that we simply aren't going to re-sign him in 2 years so why wait around for his value to decline. I'd feel pretty good about something like a Ulis/Jawun Evans pairing at the 1 even if we eventually decide that neither of them are quite good enough to be a full time starter.

I would agree with that - the most logical reason to trade Bledsoe as the value now makes sense and you don't want to pay him 20+ plus in two years. And with that thinking, if you could draft Fox and get back in the first round for a forward or draft the forward and come back with the French guy - it makes a lot of sense.

[AtheJ415]

Exactly this. And the same logic applies with trading Bledsoe. I keep reading here and on twitter that you can't trade him unless you are SURE the guy you are replacing him with is going to be better. I don't agree with that. If you have the opportunity to trade into the back of the lottery and pick up a great PG, or if Ball slips to 4 and you can move Bledsoe to get good picks in later drafts, you do it and don't think twice. You push the reset button on the PG position and build for 3-6 years from now instead of this season when Booker, Chriss, Bender, Warren, etc. are closer to their primes, leaving you with a much greater window and a much greater margin of error going forward.

Yeah, there are reasons to keep Bledsoe and there are reasons to trade him but the biggie, IMO, is that we simply aren't going to re-sign him in 2 years so why wait around for his value to decline. I'd feel pretty good about something like a Ulis/Jawun Evans pairing at the 1 even if we eventually decide that neither of them are quite good enough to be a full time starter.

I would agree with that - the most logical reason to trade Bledsoe as the value now makes sense and you don't want to pay him 20+ plus in two years. And with that thinking, if you could draft Fox and get back in the first round for a forward or draft the forward and come back with the French guy - it makes a lot of sense.

I'd go DSJ before Fox, and the French guy's career may be over. Take BPA regardless, which to me means you take Ball, Jackson, or Isaac (whoever is remaining at 4). We don't have to take a PG if we trade Bledsoe. If anything, it frees up the logjam and you can play Knight, maybe spurring him to be the player he once was, or Ulis, allowing him to develop faster.

[WeekapaugGroove]

Man what an insanely brutal spot the pacers find themselves in with George. Publicly saying hes leaving just submarines his value. They will be lucky to get 30 cents on the dollar for him. They **** up not dealing him at the deadline if something decent was on the table.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

[BobbieL]

Yeah, there are reasons to keep Bledsoe and there are reasons to trade him but the biggie, IMO, is that we simply aren't going to re-sign him in 2 years so why wait around for his value to decline. I'd feel pretty good about something like a Ulis/Jawun Evans pairing at the 1 even if we eventually decide that neither of them are quite good enough to be a full time starter.

I would agree with that - the most logical reason to trade Bledsoe as the value now makes sense and you don't want to pay him 20+ plus in two years. And with that thinking, if you could draft Fox and get back in the first round for a forward or draft the forward and come back with the French guy - it makes a lot of sense.

I'd go DSJ before Fox, and the French guy's career may be over. Take BPA regardless, which to me means you take Ball, Jackson, or Isaac (whoever is remaining at 4). We don't have to take a PG if we trade Bledsoe. If anything, it frees up the logjam and you can play Knight, maybe spurring him to be the player he once was, or Ulis, allowing him to develop faster.

That is an excellent point about Knight can start if you trade Bledsoe. Good thinking.

And yes, sucks for the Pacers - zero leverage for a trade. Granted, I can see the Cavs giving it one more try with George instead of Love.

[RaisingArizona]

Man what an insanely brutal spot the pacers find themselves in with George. Publicly saying hes leaving just submarines his value. They will be lucky to get 30 cents on the dollar for him. They **** up not dealing him at the deadline if something decent was on the table.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

He Dragic'd them!

[SideSwipe]

Man what an insanely brutal spot the pacers find themselves in with George. Publicly saying hes leaving just submarines his value. They will be lucky to get 30 cents on the dollar for him. They **** up not dealing him at the deadline if something decent was on the table.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

Ryan should be on the phone right now checking our chances. These are the chances he has said we wait for since becoming GM. Trade 1 for George, Trade 2 for Butler/ Hayward (S&T), then a good signing/signings in FA, maybe Paul or Griffin, or maybe Hayward. Or some combination of the aforementioned.

[Kerrsed]

Man what an insanely brutal spot the pacers find themselves in with George. Publicly saying hes leaving just submarines his value. They will be lucky to get 30 cents on the dollar for him. They **** up not dealing him at the deadline if something decent was on the table.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

Ryan should be on the phone right now checking our chances. These are the chances he has said we wait for since becoming GM. Trade 1 for George, Trade 2 for Butler/ Hayward (S&T), then a good signing/signings in FA, maybe Paul or Griffin, or maybe Hayward. Or some combination of the aforementioned.

He would have to pull off some miracle worker ****.

We would have to have all star pieces already in place before even approaching George. We would be one of the teams that would have to have a guarantee from him to re-sign before trading for him, and for him to even consider us, McD would have to make some major moves that would most likely piss off a lot of fans on this board.

[Zelaznyrules]

Man what an insanely brutal spot the pacers find themselves in with George. Publicly saying hes leaving just submarines his value. They will be lucky to get 30 cents on the dollar for him. They **** up not dealing him at the deadline if something decent was on the table.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

Ryan should be on the phone right now checking our chances. These are the chances he has said we wait for since becoming GM. Trade 1 for George, Trade 2 for Butler/ Hayward (S&T), then a good signing/signings in FA, maybe Paul or Griffin, or maybe Hayward. Or some combination of the aforementioned.

That was the plan but the plan has changed. And Paul George made it clear 4 months ago that he was only interested in LA or Indiana so even if Ryan wanted to return to that approach, this would be the wrong way to do it. The new TV deal has removed the financial impetus to compete as soon as possible, now they are trying to build more to be in the championship conversation than simply making the postseason and hoping for luck along the way. Both Sarver and Ryan have acknowledged their intention to build through player development and Ryan has stated that he'd only move assets for a player that fits our age group (something like 25 tops IIRC).

[TeamTragic]

Man what an insanely brutal spot the pacers find themselves in with George. Publicly saying hes leaving just submarines his value. They will be lucky to get 30 cents on the dollar for him. They **** up not dealing him at the deadline if something decent was on the table.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

Ryan should be on the phone right now checking our chances. These are the chances he has said we wait for since becoming GM. Trade 1 for George, Trade 2 for Butler/ Hayward (S&T), then a good signing/signings in FA, maybe Paul or Griffin, or maybe Hayward. Or some combination of the aforementioned.

That was the plan but the plan has changed. And Paul George made it clear 4 months ago that he was only interested in LA or Indiana so even if Ryan wanted to return to that approach, this would be the wrong way to do it. The new TV deal has removed the financial impetus to compete as soon as possible, now they are trying to build more to be in the championship conversation than simply making the postseason and hoping for luck along the way. Both Sarver and Ryan have acknowledged their intention to build through player development and Ryan has stated that he'd only move assets for a player that fits our age group (something like 25 tops IIRC).

We shouldn't be targeting PG. No chance he comes here therefore we need to stop beating a dead horse.

[Frank Lee]

yeah.... lets get back to trading Knight

[Sunsss]

LOL.

Read on Twitter

[Waylay13]

LOL.

Read on Twitter

I think the term is hell no.