Pelicans-Pistons

[zimpy27]

Pelicans get Ivey, Stewart, $13m TPE
Murray, CJ, Herb, Zion, Stewart -- Alvarado, Ivey, Hawkins, TM3, Theis
Pelicans get a stretch big to start with Zion. They also get a young guard that can take over from CJ one day.

Pistons get Ingram
Cade, Ausar, Ingram, Harris, Duren -- Sasser, THJ, Simone, Holland, Reed
Ingram gives Pistons another scoring threat, I think they try get to the play-in this season. They just got Reed so I think moving Stew is a good option. Their signings suggest they are looking to compete.

[MotownMadness]

This would probably be the deal if it were to happen

[Whole Truth]

NO's guard situation is over crowded to be adding Ivey without moving off CJ. Trading Bi for a backup C & guard depth where it's not needed, is failure.

SG Herb - Hawkins - (CJ)
PG Murray - Jose - (Ivey)

I'd sooner trade CJ for Stewart, cap space & sign Tyus Jones.

Herb - Hawkins
Murray - (FA) Jones - Jose

[zimpy27]

NO's guard situation is over crowded to be adding Ivey without moving off CJ. Trading Bi for a backup C & guard depth where it's not needed, is failure.

SG Herb - Hawkins - (CJ)
PG Murray - Jose - (Ivey)

I'd sooner trade CJ for Stewart, cap space & sign Tyus Jones.

Interesting.. maybe CJ for Stew+Ivey..
Would need a pick from Pels but seems like a good fit too.

[Whole Truth]

NO's guard situation is over crowded to be adding Ivey without moving off CJ. Trading Bi for a backup C & guard depth where it's not needed, is failure.

SG Herb - Hawkins - (CJ)
PG Murray - Jose - (Ivey)

I'd sooner trade CJ for Stewart, cap space & sign Tyus Jones.

Interesting.. maybe CJ for Stew+Ivey..
Would need a pick from Pels but seems like a good fit too.

Had the discussion with a Detroit mod it would have taken the Lakers 25 pick with some lotto protection to do that deal. (A pick with some projection in the teens).

[YayBasketball]

I get that Pistons want to start to create some winning culture for Cade- but would they really want to take themselves out of a top 5 pick in this loaded draft? Ingram is just good enough to keep you in the late lotto.

For the Pels, I get that most fans and media are this low on Ingram, but I think Griffin is stubborn in his asking price valuation for Ingram. He will want good value, picks included if these kinds of players are coming back-- or take Ingram into the season and see what how some teams get desperate or hopeful enough to trade for Ingram (or CJ) for real value.

[zeebneeb]

NO's guard situation is over crowded to be adding Ivey without moving off CJ. Trading Bi for a backup C & guard depth where it's not needed, is failure.

SG Herb - Hawkins - (CJ)
PG Murray - Jose - (Ivey)

I'd sooner trade CJ for Stewart, cap space & sign Tyus Jones.

Interesting.. maybe CJ for Stew+Ivey..
Would need a pick from Pels but seems like a good fit too.

Yeah, it would have to include a damn good pick for the Pistons to move off of Stewart who is on a very reasonable contract, and Ivey for an aging SG owed 60+million.

Hard pass, unless its a hell of a pick.

[theBigLip]

NO's guard situation is over crowded to be adding Ivey without moving off CJ. Trading Bi for a backup C & guard depth where it's not needed, is failure.

SG Herb - Hawkins - (CJ)
PG Murray - Jose - (Ivey)

I'd sooner trade CJ for Stewart, cap space & sign Tyus Jones.

Interesting.. maybe CJ for Stew+Ivey..
Would need a pick from Pels but seems like a good fit too.

Yeah, it would have to include a damn good pick for the Pistons to move off of Stewart who is on a very reasonable contract, and Ivey for an aging SG owed 60+million.

Hard pass, unless its a hell of a pick.

CJ’s contract is just too much. Maybe THJ+Ivey for CJ and a FRP. But Pistons need BI, not an older CJ.

[A_dub06]

Don’t want BI for the Pistons, the contract he’s going to command along with not taking enough 3’s creating spacing is not ideal for this team.

As I have said in other threads, I find it doubtful that Langdon being the previous GM of the Pelicans who was wanting to trade him and not pay him, would now as the Pistons POBO would want to trade for him and pay him, doesn’t make any sense given he’s said he doesn’t want to cut corners and wants to accumulate assets. Trading for it signing BI to a large deal is announcing to the rest of the league you’re aiming to be a play-in team at absolute best, and that doesn’t fit with anything Langdon has said.

[Mr Peanut]

i'd consider it if BI signed for a bit less than his max, and 4 years with a TO on the last year.

I feel like Stew would be in any deal, but what about a protected 2029 first instead of Ivey? It's the earliest first we can trade due to our current owed pick to NY.

[Whole Truth]

Don’t want BI for the Pistons, the contract he’s going to command along with not taking enough 3’s creating spacing is not ideal for this team.

As I have said in other threads, I find it doubtful that Langdon being the previous GM of the Pelicans who was wanting to trade him and not pay him, would now as the Pistons POBO would want to trade for him and pay him, doesn’t make any sense given he’s said he doesn’t want to cut corners and wants to accumulate assets. Trading for it signing BI to a large deal is announcing to the rest of the league you’re aiming to be a play-in team at absolute best, and that doesn’t fit with anything Langdon has said.

You are not looking at it situationally. Every team has different needs & requirements that require different decision making.

In NO's after trading for & extending CJ they had 3 max contracts under the old CBA that put them in tax territory. Where in the new CBA it becomes a bigger issue. Every stat says the team is better when they don't play all 3 max contracts together in the starting lineup. Zion is considered the franchise, so it comes down to BI or CJ max being moved for more financial stability.

The reason NO's are considering moving off of BI more than CJ, is not just contract but the fact Murphy is up for extension & ready to start having the best chemistry fit with ZIon. It would be a talent down grade but a fit upgrade while shedding salary. If there was no Murphy NO's already extend BI.

Langdon wasn't open to trading BI because he thought he was no good. As a matter of fact I'm in the minority but CJ is the one I'd trade because his defense doesn't compliment Zion despite the elite spacing. BI was more capable defensively. Where IMO to build with ZIon you need 2 way players, not just spacers.

[zimpy27]

i'd consider it if BI signed for a bit less than his max, and 4 years with a TO on the last year.

I feel like Stew would be in any deal, but what about a protected 2029 first instead of Ivey? It's the earliest first we can trade due to our current owed pick to NY.

Ivey makes sense on the Pelicans. He's a young scoring guard that would complement Zion and the defensive wings the Pels have.

Don't think Pistons need Ivey with Cade, BI and Sasser anyway.

[A_dub06]

Don’t want BI for the Pistons, the contract he’s going to command along with not taking enough 3’s creating spacing is not ideal for this team.

As I have said in other threads, I find it doubtful that Langdon being the previous GM of the Pelicans who was wanting to trade him and not pay him, would now as the Pistons POBO would want to trade for him and pay him, doesn’t make any sense given he’s said he doesn’t want to cut corners and wants to accumulate assets. Trading for it signing BI to a large deal is announcing to the rest of the league you’re aiming to be a play-in team at absolute best, and that doesn’t fit with anything Langdon has said.

You are not looking at it situationally. Every team has different needs & requirements that require different decision making.

In NO's after trading for & extending CJ they had 3 max contracts under the old CBA that put them in tax territory. Where in the new CBA it becomes a bigger issue. Every stat says the team is better when they don't play all 3 max contracts together in the starting lineup. Zion is considered the franchise, so it comes down to BI or CJ max being moved for more financial stability.

The reason NO's are considering moving off of BI more than CJ, is not just contract but the fact Murphy is up for extension & ready to start having the best chemistry fit with ZIon. It would be a talent down grade but a fit upgrade while shedding salary. If there was no Murphy NO's already extend BI.

Langdon wasn't open to trading BI because he thought he was no good. As a matter of fact I'm in the minority but CJ is the one I'd trade because his defense doesn't compliment Zion despite the elite spacing. BI was more capable defensively. Where IMO to build with ZIon you need 2 way players, not just spacers.

The reason the Pelicans want to trade BI is because they can’t afford his contract whether it he max or just below, and they realise that will cripple them. This is also without stating the obvious that BI misses on average 25% of the season.

People need to stop looking trades only thinking about what THEIR teams needs, and instead thinking about what the trade does for the opposite team when considering fairness of a trade. Detroits core is pretty much 21-22, trading for BI who missed a quarter of the season and wants to be the highest paid player on the team is bad business and if he has any more injury issues which history shows he will, you will need to attach significant assets to get off that contract.

The other component you are clearly ignoring is the fact that BI is an expiring contract and can simply bolt if he doesn’t like Detroit for whatever reason. Risk VS reward, this trade has far too many variables making this too risky and not worth the minor upside it will provide.

[Whole Truth]

Don’t want BI for the Pistons, the contract he’s going to command along with not taking enough 3’s creating spacing is not ideal for this team.

As I have said in other threads, I find it doubtful that Langdon being the previous GM of the Pelicans who was wanting to trade him and not pay him, would now as the Pistons POBO would want to trade for him and pay him, doesn’t make any sense given he’s said he doesn’t want to cut corners and wants to accumulate assets. Trading for it signing BI to a large deal is announcing to the rest of the league you’re aiming to be a play-in team at absolute best, and that doesn’t fit with anything Langdon has said.

You are not looking at it situationally. Every team has different needs & requirements that require different decision making.

In NO's after trading for & extending CJ they had 3 max contracts under the old CBA that put them in tax territory. Where in the new CBA it becomes a bigger issue. Every stat says the team is better when they don't play all 3 max contracts together in the starting lineup. Zion is considered the franchise, so it comes down to BI or CJ max being moved for more financial stability.

The reason NO's are considering moving off of BI more than CJ, is not just contract but the fact Murphy is up for extension & ready to start having the best chemistry fit with ZIon. It would be a talent down grade but a fit upgrade while shedding salary. If there was no Murphy NO's already extend BI.

Langdon wasn't open to trading BI because he thought he was no good. As a matter of fact I'm in the minority but CJ is the one I'd trade because his defense doesn't compliment Zion despite the elite spacing. BI was more capable defensively. Where IMO to build with ZIon you need 2 way players, not just spacers.

The reason the Pelicans want to trade BI is because they can’t afford his contract whether it he max or just below, and they realise that will cripple them. This is also without stating the obvious that BI misses on average 25% of the season.

People need to stop looking trades only thinking about what THEIR teams needs, and instead thinking about what the trade does for the opposite team when considering fairness of a trade. Detroits core is pretty much 21-22, trading for BI who missed a quarter of the season and wants to be the highest paid player on the team is bad business and if he has any more injury issues which history shows he will, you will need to attach significant assets to get off that contract.

The other component you are clearly ignoring is the fact that BI is an expiring contract and can simply bolt if he doesn’t like Detroit for whatever reason. Risk VS reward, this trade has far too many variables making this too risky and not worth the minor upside it will provide.

First off, I wouldn't trade BI for a backup C. BI to Detroit is not my interest.

2nd, while it is a financial solution. NO's can just as easily trade CJ if Murphy wasn't ready to start.

3rd, I would sooner trade CJ with the required pick compensation for Stewart, cap space & keep BI

[Kalamazoo317]

CJ to Detroit is a non-starter. Just not what we're looking at.

I'd do the trade in the OP as a pure value proposition. I think we'd have to know we had a pretty good chance of extending BI if we made such a move (and Langdon should have the back channels to figure that out, I'd think).

If I were NO, I probably wouldn't do it for that cost, so if Detroit pulled off the move in the OP, I'd consider it a win.

[Whole Truth]

CJ to Detroit is a non-starter. Just not what we're looking at.

I'd do the trade in the OP as a pure value proposition. I think we'd have to know we had a pretty good chance of extending BI if we made such a move (and Langdon should have the back channels to figure that out, I'd think).

If I were NO, I probably wouldn't do it for that cost, so if Detroit pulled off the move in the OP, I'd consider it a win.

If NO's give Detroit a pick with CJ for Stewart & cap space. (Detroit values the pick).

Detroit can turn around & flip CJ to a contender for preferred value. At 30m 2yrs he should make sense to a contender in need of spacing.

A backup C is a talent downgrade, the price being paid is for cap space & because NO's would be leaving player value on the table for cap space, Detroit can take their time to flip that value.

If Raptors were willing, I'd do (CJ, pick) for (Poeltl cap space) & they could look to flip CJ.

[7r5ur]

CJ to Detroit is a non-starter. Just not what we're looking at.

I'd do the trade in the OP as a pure value proposition. I think we'd have to know we had a pretty good chance of extending BI if we made such a move (and Langdon should have the back channels to figure that out, I'd think).

If I were NO, I probably wouldn't do it for that cost, so if Detroit pulled off the move in the OP, I'd consider it a win.

If NO's give Detroit a pick with CJ for Stewart & cap space. (Detroit values the pick).

Detroit can turn around & flip CJ to a contender for preferred value. At 30m 2yrs he should make sense to a contender in need of spacing.

A backup C is a talent downgrade, the price being paid is for cap space & because NO's would be leaving player value on the table for cap space, Detroit can take their time to flip that value.

If Raptors were willing, I'd do (CJ, pick) for (Poeltl cap space) & they could look to flip CJ.

If I'm Detroit, I'd want CJ sent to this 3rd team you're referring to here as a built-in part of the deal. Don't take on CJ at all and then hope to flip him later. If the Pels can find a 3rd team that will send Detroit another late 1st and expirings then maybe. I just don't think you're getting that for CJ. I think he's closer to negative value at his age/contract.

[Billl]

I get that NO would like to move off of CJ, but detroit isn't going to want him.

Also, the "no place for more guards with CJ around" is a legit concern for the roster overall. However, the conclusion should be "we need to move CJ pretty soon too" not "don't trade for any guard prospects." If you don't like ivey as a prospect, I get that. But fit with CJ shouldn't be part of the equation.

[theBigLip]

CJ to Detroit is a non-starter. Just not what we're looking at.

I'd do the trade in the OP as a pure value proposition. I think we'd have to know we had a pretty good chance of extending BI if we made such a move (and Langdon should have the back channels to figure that out, I'd think).

If I were NO, I probably wouldn't do it for that cost, so if Detroit pulled off the move in the OP, I'd consider it a win.

If NO's give Detroit a pick with CJ for Stewart & cap space. (Detroit values the pick).

Detroit can turn around & flip CJ to a contender for preferred value. At 30m 2yrs he should make sense to a contender in need of spacing.

A backup C is a talent downgrade, the price being paid is for cap space & because NO's would be leaving player value on the table for cap space, Detroit can take their time to flip that value.

If Raptors were willing, I'd do (CJ, pick) for (Poeltl cap space) & they could look to flip CJ.

If I'm Detroit, I'd want CJ sent to this 3rd team you're referring to here as a built-in part of the deal. Don't take on CJ at all and then hope to flip him later. If the Pels can find a 3rd team that will send Detroit another late 1st and expirings then maybe. I just don't think you're getting that for CJ. I think he's closer to negative value at his age/contract.

Good post. The new CBA has made negative contracts a lot more obvious. Pay someone $20M per, no problem. Getting up over $30M per, that player has to perform to expectations otherwise it really hurts your team. Detroit should not want CJ on their roster at all without serious compensation.

[Whole Truth]

If NO's give Detroit a pick with CJ for Stewart & cap space. (Detroit values the pick).

Detroit can turn around & flip CJ to a contender for preferred value. At 30m 2yrs he should make sense to a contender in need of spacing.

A backup C is a talent downgrade, the price being paid is for cap space & because NO's would be leaving player value on the table for cap space, Detroit can take their time to flip that value.

If Raptors were willing, I'd do (CJ, pick) for (Poeltl cap space) & they could look to flip CJ.

If I'm Detroit, I'd want CJ sent to this 3rd team you're referring to here as a built-in part of the deal. Don't take on CJ at all and then hope to flip him later. If the Pels can find a 3rd team that will send Detroit another late 1st and expirings then maybe. I just don't think you're getting that for CJ. I think he's closer to negative value at his age/contract.

Good post. The new CBA has made negative contracts a lot more obvious. Pay someone $20M per, no problem. Getting up over $30M per, that player has to perform to expectations otherwise it really hurts your team. Detroit should not want CJ on their roster at all without serious compensation.

CJ to a 3rd team where NO's & Detroit split taking back salary filler. NO's give a pick for x amount of cap space.

Detroit net 2 picks for Stewart & taking on half the salary.

Frame work

NO's trade - (CJ, FRP) for (Stewart, 1 unwanted contract)
3rd team trade - (2 unwanted contracts, FRP) for (CJ)
Detroit trade - (Stewart, cap space) for (1 unwanted contract, 2 FRP's)