Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXVI

[pcbothwel]

Again, I try to balance my opinion/way forward, organizational needs (Ted/EG/Bottom Line), and League landscape when making these types of posts.
If we win 50 games this year and take a team like Boston to 7 games, I have a hard time seeing the FO selling out a year early...especially if Boston loses Kyrie next summer.

Also, whatever positive you gain by dealing Beal early, you lose by trying to keep salary low to sign a FA.
If we take back 10-15M in salary, then we recoup that value. That is why I mentioned taking on an expiring filler like Snell, Fournier, Schroder, etc.

[Shanghai Kid]

Just to note, wrong or right, both realGM and SI have now ranked Wall as a top 24 player currently.

[payitforward]

Again, I try to balance my opinion/way forward, organizational needs (Ted/EG/Bottom Line), and League landscape when making these types of posts.
If we win 50 games this year and take a team like Boston to 7 games, I have a hard time seeing the FO selling out a year early...especially if Boston loses Kyrie next summer....

Oh, I agree -- I have a hard time seeing them doing it under any circumstances. Not the trading Beal part but having the imagination even to see this configuration.

OTOH, although I know you provided a scenario, I don't believe things are likely to fall into place to keep us under the tax next year -- & it just gets harder after that. If I look at it from Ted's perspective, I think it would be a big surprise if Wall/Beal/Otto are all on the roster a year from today.

Leaving everything else aside, it'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

Also, whatever positive you gain by dealing Beal early, you lose by trying to keep salary low to sign a FA.
If we take back 10-15M in salary, then we recoup that value. That is why I mentioned taking on an expiring filler like Snell, Fournier, Schroder, etc.

I don't know why, but I just don't follow this last bit. Whether we deal Beal for nothing coming back or for an expiring salary coming back, the next off season the situation is the same, no?

[payitforward]

Btw...

... with a tax level of 131M and ...at 128.5M with 12 players

...There is ... buffer in here for another 1M for each Sato and Kieff if necessary....

is clearly incorrect. We need two more players for 14. Even 2 veteran minimum players would take us into tax territory. & any extra cost for one of the first 12 would essentially make it impossible to stay under the tax.

Edit: My point here is not about "right" / "wrong" -- & certainly not about whether I am right and you are wrong. All these scenarios are speculative, & obviously none of them would unroll exactly as either you or I have speculated -- that's too unlikely for anyone to be worried about it.

What I'm getting at is that a scenario of the kinds we're proposing have to be subjected to sensitivity analysis, & if a trivial change in assumptions (e.g. $.5m more in salary to someone) drastically changes the possibility of it, then that's usually an indicator that one should start over.

[Rafael122]

It just seems like the only year where there is a cap crunch is this upcoming season, but that could be handled with a Mahinmi plus a lotto protected first trade into a team's cap space.

Projected cap/luxury tax:
2019-2020: $109 million/$132 million
2020-2021: $116 million/$141 million

[pcbothwel]

Btw...

... with a tax level of 131M and ...at 128.5M with 12 players

...There is ... buffer in here for another 1M for each Sato and Kieff if necessary....

is clearly incorrect. We need two more players for 14. Even 2 veteran minimum players would take us into tax territory. & any extra cost for one of the first 12 would essentially make it impossible to stay under the tax.

Edit: My point here is not about "right" / "wrong" -- & certainly not about whether I am right and you are wrong. All these scenarios are speculative, & obviously none of them would unroll exactly as either you or I have speculated -- that's too unlikely for anyone to be worried about it.

What I'm getting at is that a scenario of the kinds we're proposing have to be subjected to sensitivity analysis, & if a trivial change in assumptions (e.g. $.5m more in salary to someone) drastically changes the possibility of it, then that's usually an indicator that one should start over.

My plan includes getting out of the tax this year, but going in next all the way to the apron (About 139M) in order to use the Full MLE

[pcbothwel]

It just seems like the only year where there is a cap crunch is this upcoming season, but that could be handled with a Mahinmi plus a lotto protected first trade into a team's cap space.

Projected cap/luxury tax:
2019-2020: $109 million/$132 million
2020-2021: $116 million/$141 million

Agreed. I would think we need to do 1 of 2 things
1) Trade Oubre with Mahinmi. Use 1st, Sato, and Brown as bench
2) Trade 1st with Mahinmi. Resign Oubre and Sato, but trade Beal or Otto in reboot.

There is a path for us to stay competitive and get younger with either scenario...comes down to execution.

I really think a Oubre to NOP trade is PERFECT. Assuming he doesnt regress or breakout to star level, NOP NEEDS to make a run over the next 3 years before AD bolts and have cap space aspirations.

We trade Oubre and Smith to them (Oubre traded for TPE) for tax relief and pick (And low level prospect like Diallo).
We then have 2 first and can use one of them to move Mahinmi.

They can retain either Mirotic or Randle next year along with Oubre, and use MLE on SG.

Jrue
Tyreke (Or KCP)
Oubre
AD
Randle

VERY interesting team...

[payitforward]

Btw...

... with a tax level of 131M and ...at 128.5M with 12 players

...There is ... buffer in here for another 1M for each Sato and Kieff if necessary....

is clearly incorrect. We need two more players for 14. Even 2 veteran minimum players would take us into tax territory. & any extra cost for one of the first 12 would essentially make it impossible to stay under the tax.

Edit: My point here is not about "right" / "wrong" -- & certainly not about whether I am right and you are wrong. All these scenarios are speculative, & obviously none of them would unroll exactly as either you or I have speculated -- that's too unlikely for anyone to be worried about it.

What I'm getting at is that a scenario of the kinds we're proposing have to be subjected to sensitivity analysis, & if a trivial change in assumptions (e.g. $.5m more in salary to someone) drastically changes the possibility of it, then that's usually an indicator that one should start over.

My plan includes getting out of the tax this year, but going in next all the way to the apron (About 139M) in order to use the Full MLE

Ah, ok -- got it.

Hence, for 2021, with Wall, Beal, Porter, Brown, 2019 rookie, Sato, Kieff & the 2019 MLE guy - 9 players - we'd be somewhere @ $124m.

[payitforward]

I'd like to mention as well that the tone of this discussion has gotten much more pleasant. Oh, and...

Spoiler:

...would someone pass the bong please?

[payitforward]

Moving this here....

That is a really good question - I wonder if there are other teams that would want Sato enough to also take Mahimni or even Smith.

I don't understand why you'd be willing to trade Satoransky. He makes $3.1m this year & is a good player.

Above all it wouldn't be worth trading him so that we can dump Smith.

Plus, we have 14 guaranteed players, which is the minimum. If we trade Sato & either Mahinmi or Smith, we will need to take 2 players back or sign 2 other players.

Yet, it's not obvious how we can get under the tax unless we trade Mahinmi. The only way we'll be able to trade Mahinmi is by including a R1 pick -- & a trade is doubtful in any case. If he were expiring, no problem.

We could trade Morris & either Smith or Meeks -- sending $$ along to pay their salaries. But, then we'd have to add 2 guys to replace them, & that would take us right back into the tax.

If we replaced all 3 of those guys w/ vet min players, that might just do it. But what is the incentive for anyone to do this for us? We'd have to give a pick -- & probably make it Sato instead of Meeks as well.

Of course, actually, it's quite clear how we can get under the tax: trade one of Wall/Beal/Porter.

That's one of the reasons I think it's pretty likely -- either Beal or Porter but more likely Porter.

[dckingsfan]

Moving this here....

That is a really good question - I wonder if there are other teams that would want Sato enough to also take Mahimni or even Smith.

I don't understand why you'd be willing to trade Satoransky. He makes $3.1m this year & is a good player.

Above all it wouldn't be worth trading him so that we can dump Smith.

Plus, we have 14 guaranteed players, which is the minimum. If we trade Sato & either Mahinmi or Smith, we will need to take 2 players back or sign 2 other players.

Yet, it's not obvious how we can get under the tax unless we trade Mahinmi. The only way we'll be able to trade Mahinmi is by including a R1 pick -- & a trade is doubtful in any case. If he were expiring, no problem.

We could trade Morris & either Smith or Meeks -- sending $$ along to pay their salaries. But, then we'd have to add 2 guys to replace them, & that would take us right back into the tax.

If we replaced all 3 of those guys w/ vet min players, that might just do it. But what is the incentive for anyone to do this for us? We'd have to give a pick -- & probably make it Sato instead of Meeks as well.

Of course, actually, it's quite clear how we can get under the tax: trade one of Wall/Beal/Porter.

That's one of the reasons I think it's pretty likely -- either Beal or Porter but more likely Porter.

This is a pretty good analysis of what is going to happen. Mine question was more speculative on the value of Sato from other teams.

But yes, (IMO) to trading Beal + Mahimni to get under the cap. Or... we let this season play out and pay the repeater and see how good this team is... if they don't go well over 50 wins - you do the trade.

[pcbothwel]

Moving this here....

That is a really good question - I wonder if there are other teams that would want Sato enough to also take Mahimni or even Smith.

I don't understand why you'd be willing to trade Satoransky. He makes $3.1m this year & is a good player.

Above all it wouldn't be worth trading him so that we can dump Smith.

Plus, we have 14 guaranteed players, which is the minimum. If we trade Sato & either Mahinmi or Smith, we will need to take 2 players back or sign 2 other players.

Yet, it's not obvious how we can get under the tax unless we trade Mahinmi. The only way we'll be able to trade Mahinmi is by including a R1 pick -- & a trade is doubtful in any case. If he were expiring, no problem.

We could trade Morris & either Smith or Meeks -- sending $$ along to pay their salaries. But, then we'd have to add 2 guys to replace them, & that would take us right back into the tax.

If we replaced all 3 of those guys w/ vet min players, that might just do it. But what is the incentive for anyone to do this for us? We'd have to give a pick -- & probably make it Sato instead of Meeks as well.

Of course, actually, it's quite clear how we can get under the tax: trade one of Wall/Beal/Porter.

That's one of the reasons I think it's pretty likely -- either Beal or Porter but more likely Porter.

PIF,
I really have a hard time predicting. Obviously trading Beal or Porter at the deadline for expiring, lux savings, and assets would be an avenue. But If we are a top 4-5 seed, I dont see how EG sells that to Ted and the fan base.
It would have to be a Shaq to Miami type trade where we get cheaper assets instead of picks. I.E.
Beal to LAL for KCP & Ingram

Again, if we flounder then all bets are off, but hard to see a way in which we move the big 3 anytime soon.

[payitforward]

I don't think it would be Ernie selling it to Ted. I think it would be Ted telling Ernie what to do.

There is no way we can get under the tax next year w/o one of those guys going. If we can't get under the tax *this* year, we'd be 3 year repeaters next year. On top of which it's hard to see how we get under the tax in 2020-21 either.

Ted's not p#ssing away hundreds of million of dollars, b/c we manage to be a "4-5" seed in the East. He'd have to be nuts to do that.

[pcbothwel]

I don't think it would be Ernie selling it to Ted. I think it would be Ted telling Ernie what to do.

There is no way we can get under the tax next year w/o one of those guys going. If we can't get under the tax *this* year, we'd be 3 year repeaters next year. On top of which it's hard to see how we get under the tax in 2020-21 either.

Ted's not p#ssing away hundreds of million of dollars, b/c we manage to be a "4-5" seed in the East. He'd have to be nuts to do that.

Couldnt agree more about Ted demanding we get under the tax. But I do think a combo of Oubre and Rivers gets it done.
I can lay out a number of ways, but I think getting a 1st for Oubre while unloading Smith will save us 5-6M of the 12M we need to drop.
The rest of the way wont be hard with 2 1st round picks and Rivers. We dont NEED to trade Mahinmi, but it just makes next year a little more complicated. Though I prefer that over having to overpay to dump Mahinmi.

Again, start with with NOP about Oubre and go from there.

[payitforward]

I get the feeling that some of you think not paying the luxury tax is a sign of an owner who's "weak" or who "doesn't care." As if a guy with cojones would step up and pay.

That's completely wrong. The luxury tax was designed so that no team can pay it repeatedly.

Any team can pay it once in a while, but paying it 3 years in a row, for example, would endanger Monumental Sports, would be unacceptable to Ted's partners in the company, & could potentially threaten to undermine his net worth.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Moving this here....

That is a really good question - I wonder if there are other teams that would want Sato enough to also take Mahimni or even Smith.

I don't understand why you'd be willing to trade Satoransky. He makes $3.1m this year & is a good player.

Above all it wouldn't be worth trading him so that we can dump Smith.

Plus, we have 14 guaranteed players, which is the minimum. If we trade Sato & either Mahinmi or Smith, we will need to take 2 players back or sign 2 other players.

Yet, it's not obvious how we can get under the tax unless we trade Mahinmi. The only way we'll be able to trade Mahinmi is by including a R1 pick -- & a trade is doubtful in any case. If he were expiring, no problem.

We could trade Morris & either Smith or Meeks -- sending $$ along to pay their salaries. But, then we'd have to add 2 guys to replace them, & that would take us right back into the tax.

If we replaced all 3 of those guys w/ vet min players, that might just do it. But what is the incentive for anyone to do this for us? We'd have to give a pick -- & probably make it Sato instead of Meeks as well.

Of course, actually, it's quite clear how we can get under the tax: trade one of Wall/Beal/Porter.

That's one of the reasons I think it's pretty likely -- either Beal or Porter but more likely Porter.

PIF,
I really have a hard time predicting. Obviously trading Beal or Porter at the deadline for expiring, lux savings, and assets would be an avenue. But If we are a top 4-5 seed, I dont see how EG sells that to Ted and the fan base.
It would have to be a Shaq to Miami type trade where we get cheaper assets instead of picks. I.E.
Beal to LAL for KCP & Ingram

Again, if we flounder then all bets are off, but hard to see a way in which we move the big 3 anytime soon.

Thank you for posting such an interesting idea. I forgot all about the Lakers' Shaq trade.

I found a terrific link

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/07/10/legendary-moments-shaquille-oneal-trade-lakers-heat

On July 14, 2004, the Los Angeles Lakers traded superstar Shaquille O'Neal to the Miami Heat for Lamar Odom, Caron Butler, Brian Grant and a future first-round pick

O'Neal was a three-time Finals MVP with the Lakers as he helped Kobe Bryant and L.A. win back-to-back-to-back championships from 2000-02. At the time of the trade, O'Neal was an 11-time All-Star with career averages of 27.1 points, 12.1 rebounds, 2.9 

Alongside Dwyane Wade in Miami, O'Neal guided the Heat to victory over the Dallas Mavericks in the 2006 NBA Finals.

The Miami Heat retired Shaq's jersey that article goes on to say.

The really cool part is that Miami isn't the only team that went on to win another championship after the Shaquille trade. The Lakers won two in a row just a few years later.

Wikipedia has a really great Lakers history if you want to read that but I found an even better link about the trade I'm glad you posted!

Here is an article from 2017.

https://www.silverscreenandroll.com/2016/12/23/14070934/la-lakers-trade-shaquille-oneal-miami-heat

The Lakers and Heat both won the Shaquille O’Neal trade
.
.
.
From there the Lakers went on to win two more titles while Shaq bounced around the league before retiring, leaving Kobe & Co. our victors despite an early deficit. I suppose that’s appropriate. On paper the trade still looks lopsided. The haul the Lakers brought in doesn’t stack up to Shaq, but nobody could (or can). Butler and Grant never really provided much for LA. Butler’s crowning achievement became being the guy who was traded for the guy who was traded for Pau Gasol. I guess that’s something. Odom, however, became a key cog in back-to-back title teams, embracing his role in LA and thriving as the team’s bench leader, winning Sixth Man of the Year in ‘11

That future first-round draft pick also happened to turn into Jordan Farmar, who proved more than capable of being the backup point guard on back-to-back title winning teams – no easy feat...

In addition to trading for Pau, drafting Bynum and Ariza, as well as Kobe maturing after the Colorado incident and all his drama... the Lakers ended up with a far better team.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Kwame Brown was the guy the Wizards traded. Chucky Brown came to the Wizards along with Caron.

Without a doubt that is Ernie Grunfeld's best trade... unless you want to include Rashard Lewis for an injured Gilbert taking off a year of salary after Ernie foolishly awarded injured Gil.

I remember not liking the trade of big for a little. I was upset when they traded Kwame but I was wrong

Sent from my LG-TP260 using RealGM mobile app

[payitforward]

I don't think it would be Ernie selling it to Ted. I think it would be Ted telling Ernie what to do.

There is no way we can get under the tax next year w/o one of those guys going. If we can't get under the tax *this* year, we'd be 3 year repeaters next year. On top of which it's hard to see how we get under the tax in 2020-21 either.

Ted's not p#ssing away hundreds of million of dollars, b/c we manage to be a "4-5" seed in the East. He'd have to be nuts to do that.

Couldnt agree more about Ted demanding we get under the tax. But I do think a combo of Oubre and Rivers gets it done.
I can lay out a number of ways, but I think getting a 1st for Oubre while unloading Smith will save us 5-6M of the 12M we need to drop.
The rest of the way wont be hard with 2 1st round picks and Rivers. We dont NEED to trade Mahinmi, but it just makes next year a little more complicated. Though I prefer that over having to overpay to dump Mahinmi.

Again, start with with NOP about Oubre and go from there.

Fair enough, I understand that you think it won't be all that difficult to get under the tax this year. & you may be right that NOP will give us a 2019 R1 pick for Oubre.

But, in truth, I don't think so. If I'm doing a deal with a guy who has his back against the wall, I extract the most value I can. Why am I giving the Wizards a R1 pick? They can't afford to keep Oubre next year anyway. If I take him for nothing I'm doing them a favor. I'll keep my pick, thanks.

As to Rivers, I suppose there must be a team with room to absorb his salary, but again... I'm not sure of that. You seem to have Sac'to in mind. But everyone with something to get rid of will have them in mind! & everybody knows that Austin Rivers is a terrible player.

If anything, I'd say that having Rivers will make it easier for Ernie to trade Beal. Then, when it doesn't work out, we'll hear the usual "it's all a crap shoot."

Even if it works the way you suggest, it likely costs both those R1 picks. We'd go into next year with an extremely unpromising roster & no way to get better. If Howard doesn't re-up, we'd have 7 players at $117m, 3 of them being Mahinmi, the 20-year-old Troy Brown, & Thomas Bryant.

You can't simply assume all the most positive things will happen & declare "no problem." One little failed assumption screws us. What if Troy Brown isn't an above average, or even average NBA player at 20 years old? What if Howard would rather play for more money? What if Bryant doesn't develop quickly?

It would be far less risky to trade Beal & get back multiple future assets.

Not saying that'll happen. Or that your scenario won't happen. But if I'm Ted, I'm looking for ways to get into a more conservative, stabler position right now. But... I'm not. So we'll wait and see.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

The big idea of that Shaq trade is the Wizards could do the same thing.

I really believe they need to trade John Wall to the Lakers for something like Lonzo Ball and a first-rounder and a talented player. John Wall is by far the best player on this team but they can win 50 games with far less talent at PG.

The Lakers might give up ball and Ingram for John Wall because they know they can win a championship this year with John Wall

[payitforward]

The big idea of that Shaq trade is the Wizards could do the same thing.

I really believe they need to trade John Wall to the Lakers for something like Lonzo Ball and a first-rounder and a talented player. John Wall is by far the best player on this team but they can win 50 games with far less talent at PG.

The Lakers might give up ball and Ingram for John Wall because they know they can win a championship this year with John Wall

That would be absolutely great, & I'd do that trade in a minute -- esp. (obviously!) if it's Ball, a R1 pick, & one of their young players -- Josh Hart being my first choice.

At that point the next thing I'd do, as quick as I could, is trade Beal. For young players & picks. Rebuild over. We've just dropped salary by $56m.

But... alas... I don't think they'd make that trade. Too many years of too much money.