Abdel Nader Traded to OKC for Rodney Purvis

[slick_watts]

Tax I calculated end of season though.

are we getting out of it by then? the 450k is dead salary if he's waived. the only way tax isn't applied to that 450k is if the thunder get below the tax threshold. ain't happening...

I'm not sure on the math, David could correct it, but even if your doomsday scenario is true he may like Nader more than a random second rounder. Also looks like dy4asty may have answered a bit too. Plus cutting Singler would figure in. And no idea how ainge is whatever now.

it's not a doomsday scenario, it's puzzling. it's not the first time sam has gone bonkers for fringe prospects before. we all remember semaj christon getting a roster spot over ronnie price (who was paid for two seasons to not be here). or josh huestis. this just seems another in a long tradition that's difficult to make sense of. it's not the end of the world, it's just bizarre and outwardly inexplicable.

cutting singler? now that would be astonishing.

I don't think stretching. Singler would be shocking. And you seem to be remarkably pessimistic about a guy owed next to nothing who's a fringe prospect traded for a guy owed nothing who was a fringe prospect. It's a nothing trade. And given they don't have much on the way of young players adding one is whatever. Maybe he plays for the Blue.

my pals in the backgammon league call me the 'b.s. detector'. i'm impossible to bluff. when things don't make sense to me i want to sniff out the clues and get to the truth.

the money changing hands from dakari to purvis to nader just doesn't make sense with the facts on hand. the trade makes no sense. i think david might agree with me unless the twitter verse has poisoned him with hot takes. one of the qualities i prioritize for leaders is that they do things that make sense.

[bondom34]

are we getting out of it by then? the 450k is dead salary if he's waived. the only way tax isn't applied to that 450k is if the thunder get below the tax threshold. ain't happening...



it's not a doomsday scenario, it's puzzling. it's not the first time sam has gone bonkers for fringe prospects before. we all remember semaj christon getting a roster spot over ronnie price (who was paid for two seasons to not be here). or josh huestis. this just seems another in a long tradition that's difficult to make sense of. it's not the end of the world, it's just bizarre and outwardly inexplicable.

cutting singler? now that would be astonishing.

I don't think stretching. Singler would be shocking. And you seem to be remarkably pessimistic about a guy owed next to nothing who's a fringe prospect traded for a guy owed nothing who was a fringe prospect. It's a nothing trade. And given they don't have much on the way of young players adding one is whatever. Maybe he plays for the Blue.

my pals in the backgammon league call me the 'b.s. detector'. i'm impossible to bluff. when things don't make sense to me i want to sniff out the clues and get to the truth.

the money changing hands from dakari to purvis to nader just doesn't make sense with the facts on hand. the trade makes no sense. i think david might agree with me unless the twitter verse has poisoned him with hot takes. one of the qualities i prioritize for leaders is that they do things that make sense.

I think you overanalyzing a trade int showing you sniffing anything out. It's just random sniffing.

Also chroom elsewhere about the financials. But if he likes Nader more than a random min player, even assuming it's more expensive, it still makes sense. You're reaching way way way hard here.

[slick_watts]

I don't think stretching. Singler would be shocking. And you seem to be remarkably pessimistic about a guy owed next to nothing who's a fringe prospect traded for a guy owed nothing who was a fringe prospect. It's a nothing trade. And given they don't have much on the way of young players adding one is whatever. Maybe he plays for the Blue.

my pals in the backgammon league call me the 'b.s. detector'. i'm impossible to bluff. when things don't make sense to me i want to sniff out the clues and get to the truth.

the money changing hands from dakari to purvis to nader just doesn't make sense with the facts on hand. the trade makes no sense. i think david might agree with me unless the twitter verse has poisoned him with hot takes. one of the qualities i prioritize for leaders is that they do things that make sense.

I think you overanalyzing a trade int showing you sniffing anything out. It's just random sniffing.

Also chroom elsewhere about the financials. But if he likes Nader more than a random min player, even assuming it's more expensive, it still makes sense. You're reaching way way way hard here.

until facts come to light that suggest otherwise, i'm categorizing this trade with all the other puzzling sam presti head-scratchers for fringe players which includes:

- signing semaj christon and paying ronnie price not to be here for two seasons.
- signing grant jerrett to a guaranteed contract.
- the whole josh huestis fiasco.
- signing sebastian telfair to a guaranteed contract, using the injury roster exception on ish smith, then waiving telfair in november and paying him to stay home.

this is odd behavior. does any other gm do this with such regularity? i'm not sure. sam presti, if nothing else, is certainly one of a kind.

[Dn4sty]

this trade makes absolutely no sense unless the money involved in the dakari move and this move are really weird or if for some godforsaken reason sam presti likes abdel nader.

I mean you can be pessimistic about almost every deal, it’s your thing. Or this

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Read on Twitter

?s=21

And this

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Or they could have just waived Purvis and stayed at the minimum requirement of 13 players on the roster after the trade, saving close to 8 million in the process.

This only makes sense if they're planning to to send out multiple players in a trade in the following weeks and plan to keep Nader as a cheap(er) fill-in because they need to fill the roster spot. Otherwise, this is spending money on a guy who's not gonna be part of the rotation.

There is very little chance they carry less than 14 players. So if 14 is the number you basically can carry Nader cheaper than another rookie.

[Andre Roberstan]

The entire rationale for the Celtics trade hinges on how much cash they sent. I'm presuming Nader is staying on the books, but if he's not, Boston presumably sent enough cash for the cap hit and the tax he'd incur if waived (about $3mil).

One of those "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" things. Celtics probably trying to hold off the clock on the repeater as long as possible—they're probably going to dump Yabusele and maybe Morris next.

[slick_watts]

There is very little chance they carry less than 14 players. So if 14 is the number you basically can carry Nader cheaper than another rookie.

this only applies to a 0-year veteran (rookie) who is undrafted. the thunder could have signed diallo or any of their 2nd round picks for less than 3/4 the price and tax hit (832k) of acquiring nader. this is what everyone kind of assumed was happening after the dakari trade.

[bondom34]

my pals in the backgammon league call me the 'b.s. detector'. i'm impossible to bluff. when things don't make sense to me i want to sniff out the clues and get to the truth.

the money changing hands from dakari to purvis to nader just doesn't make sense with the facts on hand. the trade makes no sense. i think david might agree with me unless the twitter verse has poisoned him with hot takes. one of the qualities i prioritize for leaders is that they do things that make sense.

I think you overanalyzing a trade int showing you sniffing anything out. It's just random sniffing.

Also chroom elsewhere about the financials. But if he likes Nader more than a random min player, even assuming it's more expensive, it still makes sense. You're reaching way way way hard here.

until facts come to light that suggest otherwise, i'm categorizing this trade with all the other puzzling sam presti head-scratchers for fringe players which includes:

- signing semaj christon and paying ronnie price not to be here for two seasons.
- signing grant jerrett to a guaranteed contract.
- the whole josh huestis fiasco.
- signing sebastian telfair to a guaranteed contract, using the injury roster exception on ish smith, then waiving telfair in november and paying him to stay home.

this is odd behavior. does any other gm do this with such regularity? i'm not sure. sam presti, if nothing else, is certainly one of a kind.

See DB's post above. That's basically what it was. There's literally nothing to analyze. It's not that deep.

[slick_watts]

See DB's post above. That's basically what it was. There's literally nothing to analyze. It's not that deep.

if the celtics are covering the entirety of nader's cap and tax hit then it makes more sense. this is what i meant by facts coming to light.

but that's a steep price to pay for boston in my opinion, and snoopy and i disagree on the likelihood of boston being so desperate. i could be wrong, but i suspect ainge sent somewhat less than that and a portion of sam's rationale is that he likes nader as a prospect. which is the baffling part of the trade.

[bondom34]

[gfycat][/gfycat]

See DB's post above. That's basically what it was. There's literally nothing to analyze. It's not that deep.

if the celtics are covering the entirety of nader's cap and tax hit then it makes more sense. this is what i meant by facts coming to light.

but that's a steep price to pay for boston in my opinion, and snoopy and i disagree on the likelihood of boston being so desperate. i could be wrong, but i suspect ainge sent somewhat less than that and a portion of sam's rationale is that he likes nader as a prospect. which is the baffling part of the trade.

I assume Snoopy is David? But Boston seems pretty motivated to duck the tax from everything they've shown.

[slick_watts]

I assume Snoopy is David? But Boston seems pretty motivated to duck the tax from everything they've shown.

the arrow of time will reveal the truth to us.

nader having two additional non-guaranteed seasons remaining leads me to believe that this isn't a balance the books kind of move by sam, though. for boston, the motivation is abundantly clear.

[bondom34]

I assume Snoopy is David? But Boston seems pretty motivated to duck the tax from everything they've shown.

the arrow of time will reveal the truth to us.

nader having two additional non-guaranteed seasons remaining leads me to believe that this isn't a balance the books kind of move by sam, though. for boston, the motivation is abundantly clear.

I don't think there's a motivation for OKC. I think it's exactly what David said. It's nothing. And you're way overanalyzing.

[slick_watts]

I assume Snoopy is David? But Boston seems pretty motivated to duck the tax from everything they've shown.

the arrow of time will reveal the truth to us.

nader having two additional non-guaranteed seasons remaining leads me to believe that this isn't a balance the books kind of move by sam, though. for boston, the motivation is abundantly clear.

I don't think there's a motivation for OKC. I think it's exactly what David said. It's nothing. And you're way overanalyzing.

there's motive behind every action. nobody does anything for no reason. especially sam presti.

there's no such thing as over-analyzing. you sound like hardenASG13 and sleestak demeaning others for being curious and thoughtful.

[bondom34]

the arrow of time will reveal the truth to us.

nader having two additional non-guaranteed seasons remaining leads me to believe that this isn't a balance the books kind of move by sam, though. for boston, the motivation is abundantly clear.

I don't think there's a motivation for OKC. I think it's exactly what David said. It's nothing. And you're way overanalyzing.

there's motive behind every action. nobody does anything for no reason. especially sam presti.

there's no such thing as over-analyzing. you sound like hardenASG13 and sleestak demeaning others for being curious and thoughtful.

The motivation is a you scrtch my back I scratch yours deal. It's no harm, and two guys who won't see NBA minutes.

[slick_watts]

I don't think there's a motivation for OKC. I think it's exactly what David said. It's nothing. And you're way overanalyzing.

there's motive behind every action. nobody does anything for no reason. especially sam presti.

there's no such thing as over-analyzing. you sound like hardenASG13 and sleestak demeaning others for being curious and thoughtful.

The motivation is a you scrtch my back I scratch yours deal. It's no harm, and two guys who won't see NBA minutes.

it makes no sense for that to be the sole motivation, or even the primary one. from okc's perspective.

[bondom34]

there's motive behind every action. nobody does anything for no reason. especially sam presti.

there's no such thing as over-analyzing. you sound like hardenASG13 and sleestak demeaning others for being curious and thoughtful.

The motivation is a you scrtch my back I scratch yours deal. It's no harm, and two guys who won't see NBA minutes.

it makes no sense for that to be the sole motivation, or even the primary one. from okc's perspective.

If it's cash neutral it does. Or if it's close and Presti likes Nader slightly more. Itmakes no sense to nalyze this trade this much either.

[slick_watts]

The motivation is a you scrtch my back I scratch yours deal. It's no harm, and two guys who won't see NBA minutes.

it makes no sense for that to be the sole motivation, or even the primary one. from okc's perspective.

If it's cash neutral it does. Or if it's close and Presti likes Nader slightly more. Itmakes no sense to nalyze this trade this much either.

if it's cash neutral, yes, that would satisfy my curiosity. if not, then i think it's another in long line of odd fringe spends by sam. and those are always odd.

what else are we going to analyze? i think a lot of interesting things came out of this analysis. i don't think many people knew the luxury tax rule on undrafted free agents playing for league minimum, for example.

[bondom34]

it makes no sense for that to be the sole motivation, or even the primary one. from okc's perspective.

If it's cash neutral it does. Or if it's close and Presti likes Nader slightly more. Itmakes no sense to nalyze this trade this much either.

if it's cash neutral, yes, that would satisfy my curiosity. if not, then i think it's another in long line of odd fringe spends by sam. and those are always odd.

what else are we going to analyze? i think a lot of interesting things came out of this analysis. i don't think many people knew the luxury tax rule on undrafted free agents playing for league minimum, for example.

Honestly, anything. Neither of these guys will send a minute in the NBA.

[Sun_Tzu]

I assume Snoopy is David? But Boston seems pretty motivated to duck the tax from everything they've shown.

the arrow of time will reveal the truth to us.

nader having two additional non-guaranteed seasons remaining leads me to believe that this isn't a balance the books kind of move by sam, though. for boston, the motivation is abundantly clear.

I don't think there's a motivation for OKC. I think it's exactly what David said. It's nothing. And you're way overanalyzing.

Isn't there always a motivation? If there is no motive behind an action, what's the point of the action? Random trades for the sake of doing something seem unlikely for Presti. This particular move has no clear motive and on the surface appears to run counter to our expectation that we are trying to cut salary; therefore, I am intrigued.
In this case, I think the most obvious solution is that Presti is, and has been, accumulating long-athletic wings in the hopes that one or more will develop into a solid 3 and D guy (Huestis, Ferguson, Diallo, Hall, TLC, Nadar).

[bondom34]

the arrow of time will reveal the truth to us.

nader having two additional non-guaranteed seasons remaining leads me to believe that this isn't a balance the books kind of move by sam, though. for boston, the motivation is abundantly clear.

I don't think there's a motivation for OKC. I think it's exactly what David said. It's nothing. And you're way overanalyzing.

Isn't there always a motivation? If there is no motive behind an action, what's the point of the action? Random trades for the sake of doing something seem unlikely for Presti. This particular move has no clear motive and on the surface appears to run counter to our expectation that we are trying to cut salary; therefore, I am intrigued.
In this case, I think the most obvious solution is that Presti is, and has been, accumulating long-athletic wings in the hopes that one or more will develop into a solid 3 and D guy (Huestis, Ferguson, Diallo, Hall, TLC, Nadar).

I think it's what David said above. A back scratching.

[slick_watts]

If it's cash neutral it does. Or if it's close and Presti likes Nader slightly more. Itmakes no sense to nalyze this trade this much either.

if it's cash neutral, yes, that would satisfy my curiosity. if not, then i think it's another in long line of odd fringe spends by sam. and those are always odd.

what else are we going to analyze? i think a lot of interesting things came out of this analysis. i don't think many people knew the luxury tax rule on undrafted free agents playing for league minimum, for example.

Honestly, anything. Neither of these guys will send a minute in the NBA.

i started to work on a reply to your post in the Around the NBA thread re: russell westbrook. is that a preferable topic?