Cardinal Trade Value

[shrink]

I was discussing what PHI would need to include in a deal for Sam Dalembert last night, when I came to a realization that there are very few reasons we'd want to do a deal to move Cardinal's contract. I'll use Dalembert as an example.

Suppose the offer was Mike Miller (2 yr) + Cardinal (2 yr) for Dalembert (3 yr, expensive) + a decent value player.

We could do the deal now, but why? Dalembert's production, for this season, isn't going to make the difference between making the play-offs, or whatever goal we have. Our production goals begin in 2009-10. In fact, even if we thought Dalembert was the guy to get, i'd be in our best interests to wait until the off-season, where Cardinal (exp) + Madsen (exp), would be more than enough for his bad contract, and we could keep Miller, or use him elsewhere.

What this means is that the only reason to do a trade involving Cardinal early would be if there was increased value due to a time-sensitive asset. One of these still remains .. clearing cap space for 2009, either for free agency or for trade, is something that is a "use now" item. 2009 picks would be another. Or if a potential deal may not exist this Summer. However, using up trade value to add production for the rest of the season runs counter to our goals.

Sadly for many of you, this still means a Wally Szczerbiak + 1st deal would still be a legit use of Cardinal's contract. I'd also point out that if Odom's injury ends his season, the Lakers would also become a very realistic option in a similar deal. However, expirings like Shawn Marion should carry less weight, because we shouldn't pay for his current production. Multi-year players should certainly be waited on, until at least this summer.

Finally, waiting can only benefit us. Cardinal and Madsen's values can only go up, and I'd argue that the same could be said for Mike Miller. I think that a big trade that doesn't fit the previous parameters is unlikely.

[funkatron101]

Cardinal is the team's glue! You don't trade the glue!

[revprodeji]

I would not give up value to move Cardinal right now. Because he is being a glue guy. If he was part of a bigger deal I would consider moving him, but he is having a positive effect right now and I think his trade value will be crazy when he has an exp deal.

[PeeDee]

I'm sold on packaging Cardinal and Miller for expirings. Give me that 30 mil this off-season!

[revprodeji]

yea, I think that is the classic option.

[karch34]

We could do the deal now, but why? Dalembert's production, for this season, isn't going to make the difference between making the play-offs, or whatever goal we have. Our production goals begin in 2009-10. In fact, even if we thought Dalembert was the guy to get, i'd be in our best interests to wait until the off-season, where Cardinal (exp) + Madsen (exp), would be more than enough for his bad contract, and we could keep Miller, or use him elsewhere.

What this means is that the only reason to do a trade involving Cardinal early would be if there was increased value due to a time-sensitive asset. One of these still remains .. clearing cap space for 2009, either for free agency or for trade, is something that is a "use now" item. 2009 picks would be another. Or if a potential deal may not exist this Summer. However, using up trade value to add production for the rest of the season runs counter to our goals.

Great points. I agree that he has also been close to an ideal role player for the team.

[shrink]

Cardinal is the team's glue! You don't trade the glue!

But he's $6.3 mil this year, and $6.75 mil in 2009-10. That's too much for the Elmer's.

This summer he becomes positive value, so since he's helping here, I think I need to see something in a very tiny usefulness window. It shouldn't be too useful now, and it shouldn't be something that could be useful once trading reopens this summer.

I've been very happy with Cardinal lately, particularly his slick passing.

[funkatron101]

Who woulda thunk we would all be praising Cardinal and criticizing Miller after the trade went down?

[Wingman]

We need to keep Cardinal

You can't find his defensive intensity just anywhere.

[TheFranchise21]

Can we get him a headband, a clear mouthguard, and some chalk to throw in the air? He's wearing LeBron's shoes and if we can get him to look more like LeBron, maybe he can play more like him.

[funkatron101]

We need to keep Cardinal

You can't find his defensive intensity just anywhere.

See, Warrick is all like "I ain't scared of that" but really he's scared...he's scared.

[shrink]

I just wanted to point out that gaining cap space for Cardinal isn't a bad idea in the current economic climate. Moreover, MIN is in great shape financially to pluck talent. check out Abbot's article:

I don't know which team it will be. But a great team will, I predict, be built by an owner who is willing to spend in 2009.

This economic pain is broad and real, even for the billionaires who run NBA teams. Not only are teams themselves feeling the pinch -- would you want to be selling sponsorships or luxury boxes in this economy? -- but the owners' core incomes often come from currently miserable economic sectors like real estate investments, mortgages, construction or automobiles. On top of that, thanks to a fairly hard salary cap and guaranteed contracts, in the NBA (unlike in baseball or European soccer), big spending on player contracts can hurt a team, by tying up big dollars and precious roster spots with injured or underperforming players.

So I predict many, if not most, owners, will direct their GMs to cut salaries this year, where possible. They will acquire draft picks and cap space and retool when the economy is alive again.

Then it will be like the housing industry. If everyone's selling to raise cash ... boy, wouldn't it be a nice time to have some cash. It's bargain city out there.

I'm sure at least a handful of owners are ready to spend and will spend 2009 stalking the best of those contracts everyone else will be shedding. And of those teams spending more this year, in all likelihood, at least one will get the mix just right, and a great new team will be born of opportunism.

We got cash. We could get even more with a Cardinal trade.

[mg]

^^Exactly what I've been thinking but some people would rather keep Cardinal

[shrink]

This is good too, suggesting that with lower revenues, the lux is going to decrease:

The net effect, multiple league sources tell me, is that the cap is likely to increase little, if any, next season. Whether it increases will depend largely on team's walk-up sales the rest of the season.

That has huge implications league-wide because the luxury tax level moves in lockstep with the cap. Teams have built their salary structures on the assumption of a rising tax -- but instead, many teams are locked into salaries for next season that will increase 10 percent without any corresponding increase in the tax level.

The upshot is if the tax level doesn't rise, at least 12 teams are threatening to be over next season's tax level on current contracts alone -- including several teams that have been adamant about staying under it in the past.

Having raw cap space to trade for players is going to be incredibly valuable.

[C.lupus]

I just wanted to point out that gaining cap space for Cardinal isn't a bad idea in the current economic climate. Moreover, MIN is in great shape financially to pluck talent. check out Abbot's article:

I don't know which team it will be. But a great team will, I predict, be built by an owner who is willing to spend in 2009.

This economic pain is broad and real, even for the billionaires who run NBA teams. Not only are teams themselves feeling the pinch -- would you want to be selling sponsorships or luxury boxes in this economy? -- but the owners' core incomes often come from currently miserable economic sectors like real estate investments, mortgages, construction or automobiles. On top of that, thanks to a fairly hard salary cap and guaranteed contracts, in the NBA (unlike in baseball or European soccer), big spending on player contracts can hurt a team, by tying up big dollars and precious roster spots with injured or underperforming players.

So I predict many, if not most, owners, will direct their GMs to cut salaries this year, where possible. They will acquire draft picks and cap space and retool when the economy is alive again.

Then it will be like the housing industry. If everyone's selling to raise cash ... boy, wouldn't it be a nice time to have some cash. It's bargain city out there.

I'm sure at least a handful of owners are ready to spend and will spend 2009 stalking the best of those contracts everyone else will be shedding. And of those teams spending more this year, in all likelihood, at least one will get the mix just right, and a great new team will be born of opportunism.

We got cash. We could get even more with a Cardinal trade.

I would think Taylor (and Taylor Corp.) would be one of the least hit billionaires, also. People are still going to need wedding cards printed.

[niner2716]

sometimes winning games is more important than cap space.

The wolves are 5-1 with Cardinal in the rotation. This team could be a playoff team next year, better keep him.

[Iommi]

I wouldn't care if Cardinal averaged a triple double and shot fifty percent on three pointers. He's balding and balding people have no place in the NBA.

[shrink]

When he retires from basketball, he has a career waiting for him playing Russian mafia thugs in Jason Stratham movies

[niner2716]

When he retires from basketball, he has a career waiting for him playing Russian mafia thugs in Jason Stratham movies

lol good one.

I'm sure Brian has a pretty good chance to be a coach one day if he wanted too. At the very least, a commentator for a local fox sports station.