Schroder to Memphis

[Scoot McGroot]

Cleveland only has a 2032 Sacramento 2nd and their own 2033 2nd. There's just not a lot of flexibility in other ways to pay off teams.

But also, they already have a 2nd in 2033. I doubt they'd want their return to focus on 2 more 2nds in 2033? Would probably want them more balanced around the books in terms of years?

[jbk1234]

The underlying point is fine, yeah. I do think "just stretch waive him" is a little dangerous for a team with no clear line of sight to a clean cap. You ought to be willing to pay something meaningful - even if it's not a protected first - for the extra option value of not having that salary on your cap for the remainder of this incarnation of the team.

I think "Shroder is more valuable than you realize because you can play him north of $4m not to play in year two" and "someone will be interested in acquiring Schroder without requiring compensation" is wildly contradictory. You have him as more than $4m overpaid - the buyout option is a big deal - but also a team interested in adding him. Maybe the Hornets place more value on him then Memphis (who I think would like him as an expiring earning +/- half his salary), but that value is going to be negative, particularly when the season is partly over. You're not ditching him for pure cap without incentive.

I would personally trade Schroder and a second because I think the Cavs need to force feed Proctor minutes to see what they have before the deadline and next summer.

I don't think a random Cavs 2nd would get you out of the $4.xm in year two. If that's your ceiling, fine, just stretch him, but I would also be willing to give up more than a 2nd to avoid that as well.

Teams with cap are paying a second or two to acquire guys like Isiahs Joe and Stewart, or Wiggins. Obviously you can still ditch slightly bad money for 2nds, but I think the price is higher than it used to be, and a random (ie not especially likely to be in the 30s) 2nd doesn't buy you all that much. What are the comparable straight cost cutting deals, I guess?

The price is higher at the start F.A. when teams still have plans for the extra cap space. The only reason there's even a discussion is because there are still two free agents who want to be signed and traded. Eventually, Watson will sign the Q.O. and Kuminga will get his cap hold waived. Again, I think the Grizzlies are right to ask for more than the a second with any of the Bucks, Cavs, or Laker right now, I just wouldn't pay it. If the reporting is to be believed, the Bucks won't part with a first to get Watson and the Lakers have none to send.

[Prospect Dong]

I would personally trade Schroder and a second because I think the Cavs need to force feed Proctor minutes to see what they have before the deadline and next summer.

I don't think a random Cavs 2nd would get you out of the $4.xm in year two. If that's your ceiling, fine, just stretch him, but I would also be willing to give up more than a 2nd to avoid that as well.

Teams with cap are paying a second or two to acquire guys like Isiahs Joe and Stewart, or Wiggins. Obviously you can still ditch slightly bad money for 2nds, but I think the price is higher than it used to be, and a random (ie not especially likely to be in the 30s) 2nd doesn't buy you all that much. What are the comparable straight cost cutting deals, I guess?

The price is higher at the start F.A. when teams still have plans for the extra cap space. The only reason there's even a discussion is because there are still two free agents who want to be signed and traded. Eventually, Watson will sign the Q.O. and Kuminga will get his cap hold waived. Again, I think the Grizzlies are right to ask for more than the a second with any of the Bucks, Cavs, or Laker right now, I just wouldn't pay it. If the reporting is to be believed, the Bucks won't part with a first to get Watson and the Lakers have none to send.

Not if part of your pitch is "this guy is a useful player who will help your team". That part of the package sinks in value if you wait past the start of training camp. I do think Schroder has on-court value for the Griz (and maybe the Hornets), partly depending on Pippen's health - I think lacking a true PG is a risk with a young, rebuilding team. But I still think that means you're asking us to eat, like $12-13m over two years.

[jbk1234]

I don't think a random Cavs 2nd would get you out of the $4.xm in year two. If that's your ceiling, fine, just stretch him, but I would also be willing to give up more than a 2nd to avoid that as well.

Teams with cap are paying a second or two to acquire guys like Isiahs Joe and Stewart, or Wiggins. Obviously you can still ditch slightly bad money for 2nds, but I think the price is higher than it used to be, and a random (ie not especially likely to be in the 30s) 2nd doesn't buy you all that much. What are the comparable straight cost cutting deals, I guess?

The price is higher at the start F.A. when teams still have plans for the extra cap space. The only reason there's even a discussion is because there are still two free agents who want to be signed and traded. Eventually, Watson will sign the Q.O. and Kuminga will get his cap hold waived. Again, I think the Grizzlies are right to ask for more than the a second with any of the Bucks, Cavs, or Laker right now, I just wouldn't pay it. If the reporting is to be believed, the Bucks won't part with a first to get Watson and the Lakers have none to send.

Not if part of your pitch is "this guy is a useful player who will help your team". That part of the package sinks in value if you wait past the start of training camp. I do think Schroder has on-court value for the Griz (and maybe the Hornets), partly depending on Pippen's health - I think lacking a true PG is a risk with a young, rebuilding team. But I still think that means you're asking us to eat, like $12-13m over two years.

Part of me thinks both Schroder and Strus might have better trade value at the deadline as useful players on expiring contracts. If all the other pieces work in a Watson deal, I don't think one or two seconds really rates. They probably toss in their second and get Watson. If the Grizzlies or Hornets want a vet backup to help solidify their floor they shouldn't hang up the deal by insisting on an additional second. I don't think the Cavs pay 2 seconds to dump a player a player they don't have to dump though.

[Prospect Dong]

The price is higher at the start F.A. when teams still have plans for the extra cap space. The only reason there's even a discussion is because there are still two free agents who want to be signed and traded. Eventually, Watson will sign the Q.O. and Kuminga will get his cap hold waived. Again, I think the Grizzlies are right to ask for more than the a second with any of the Bucks, Cavs, or Laker right now, I just wouldn't pay it. If the reporting is to be believed, the Bucks won't part with a first to get Watson and the Lakers have none to send.

Not if part of your pitch is "this guy is a useful player who will help your team". That part of the package sinks in value if you wait past the start of training camp. I do think Schroder has on-court value for the Griz (and maybe the Hornets), partly depending on Pippen's health - I think lacking a true PG is a risk with a young, rebuilding team. But I still think that means you're asking us to eat, like $12-13m over two years.

Part of me thinks both Schroder and Strus might have better trade value at the deadline as useful players on expiring contracts. If all the other pieces work in a Watson deal, I don't think one or two seconds really rates. They probably toss in their second and get Watson. If the Grizzlies or Hornets want a vet backup to help solidify their floor they shouldn't hang up the deal by insisting on an additional second. I don't think the Cavs pay 2 seconds to dump a player a player they don't have to dump though.

I think some teams might want Schroder. But I don't think anyone is going to want him for $20m. You're leveraging some lever of willingness to pay - I've said +/- $8m, but I didn't exactly science that figure, dipping slightly over the course of the season, because those teams aren't really bringing him in for the playoffs.

If you want to dump him, you need to close that gap with assets, and it's not a "couple of bad 2nds" sized gap, IMO. The OP has it as "bad 1st minus two 2nds" - I think that's light. "We'll just stretch him" is obviously an alternative, and maybe the right one at a 1st round price, but you should definitely be willing to go north of two bad 2nds to avoid that...

[jbk1234]

Not if part of your pitch is "this guy is a useful player who will help your team". That part of the package sinks in value if you wait past the start of training camp. I do think Schroder has on-court value for the Griz (and maybe the Hornets), partly depending on Pippen's health - I think lacking a true PG is a risk with a young, rebuilding team. But I still think that means you're asking us to eat, like $12-13m over two years.

Part of me thinks both Schroder and Strus might have better trade value at the deadline as useful players on expiring contracts. If all the other pieces work in a Watson deal, I don't think one or two seconds really rates. They probably toss in their second and get Watson. If the Grizzlies or Hornets want a vet backup to help solidify their floor they shouldn't hang up the deal by insisting on an additional second. I don't think the Cavs pay 2 seconds to dump a player a player they don't have to dump though.

I think some teams might want Schroder. But I don't think anyone is going to want him for $20m. You're leveraging some lever of willingness to pay - I've said +/- $8m, but I didn't exactly science that figure, dipping slightly over the course of the season, because those teams aren't really bringing him in for the playoffs.

If you want to dump him, you need to close that gap with assets, and it's not a "couple of bad 2nds" sized gap, IMO. The OP has it as "bad 1st minus two 2nds" - I think that's light. "We'll just stretch him" is obviously an alternative, and maybe the right one at a 1st round price, but you should definitely be willing to go north of two bad 2nds to avoid that...

I mean this isn't entirely an abstract discussion. The Cavs don't have a plethora of draft capital to choose from (they do have the Kings second) and Watson obviously has in own trade value that exists independent of the additional costs of clearing the space needed to trade for him. If everyone involved wants to extract maximum value, then trade likely no longer makes sense and just won't happen. I suspect that calculus gets even more clear-eyed with Kuminga who may end up having to settle for exception money whether he goes to Cleveland or elsewhere.