nate33 wrote:Kanyewest wrote:nate33 wrote:How is a playoff team going to pay Pierce $15M to be a "shooter off the bench"? Playoff teams don't have those types of expendable contracts to send out as filler. Any team that is sitting around with $15M in useless filler contracts probably isn't a playoff team.
I'm not necessarily advising these teams to go through with getting Pierce but these teams certainly have the expirings to get the deal done and would be in the playoffs if the regular season ended today.
The Pacers have Danny Granger.
The Suns have Emeka Okafor.
The Wizards have Trevor Ariza and fillers (Vesely, Singleton, Seraphin, Booker)
Charlotte has Ben Gordon
Detroit has Rodney Stuckey and fillers
Phoenix, Charlotte and Detroit aren't going to sacrifice any assets to make a playoff run when they have no chance at all to actually contend. They could trade the guys you mentioned in straight up deals, but they wouldn't include any serious incentive.
The Wizards would be downgrading if they traded Ariza for Pierce.
The only trade that even remotely makes sense is Granger for Pierce, and that's only if Granger never returns to form. And even then, I don't see Indy giving up much incentive - maybe a 2nd rounder.
The point is, Pierce isn't really a trade asset. He can be moved because he is an expiring contract, but Brooklyn isn't going to get any real value in return unless they take on a long contract.
I agree with this philosophy but I'm not sure how many owners and teams abide by it. For instance, Phoenix held on to Steve Nash longer than it should have and remained mediocre. The team most likely to make this move is the Charlotte Bobcats because they have made a lot of short-sighted moves in the past. I agree it is unlikely that Indiana trades Granger.