Enough HOU/UTA/MIN Deals, Shrink!

shrink · Post #1 » by **shrink** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:11 pm

People on the trade board asked if Battier can bring back an expiring and a pick/prospect. A solid UTA poster said they would, if they still owned their pick. MIN can make that happen.

UTA GIVES: Harpring + removes protections on UTA pick
UTA GETS: Battier

HOU GIVES: Battier + Barry
HOU GETS: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins

MIN GIVES: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Damian Wilkins
MIN GETS: Harpring + Barry + removes protections on UTA pick

UTA gets the deal they want. Battier is the perfect attitude for Sloan -- I could see him trying to adopt Battier.

MIN pays $4.5 mil to get the protections removed from the UTA pick (Top 15-17 for next four years)

HOU does this for big savings. They are about $5.5 mil over the lux, and this gets them close enough to save mega-money. Atkins partially-guaranteed deal gets them half-way there in 2009 dollars.

HOU SAVES:
$1.82 trade
$2.72 Atkins
$4.54 lux penalties recovered
$9.08 MILLION SAVINGS

Expiring + $9 million >> expiring + late 1st

Then HOU waives unguaranteed James White ($875,000) and jiggles only another $100,000 off to get under the lux, for an additional $5 million

$1.00 (Waive + jiggle)
$1.00 lux penalties recovered
$3.00 lux share recovered (estimate)
$5.00 MILLION

This deal (Atkins, actually) is the gateway to saving $14 million, plus $7.4 mil more for Battier's second year. It also solves HOU's problem of having to buy out players to get down to 15 on the roster. Personally, I think HOU should probably toss in their late 1st for $14 mil in davings, but the deal works without it.

Marc · Post #2 » by **Marc** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:22 pm

HEY, pretty sure Jazz would prefer Atkins and Wilkins instead of Battier and Rockets would not give Battier just to dump salaries.

UTA GIVES: Harpring + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick
UTA GETS: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins

MIN GIVES: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Damian Wilkins
MIN GETS: Harpring + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick

That makes sense for both teams. Jazz ends up saving over $2M and get a player than can play.

funkatron101 · Post #3 » by **funkatron101** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:23 pm

I don't like this deal.

1. Utah doesn't appear to be lottery bound any time soon. So MN is paying $4.5 million for a gamble. We are likely getting the pick this year, even with the restrictions. I just don't think it is a wise investment.

2. I don't think that is enough for Houston. Battier is a solid player, and they wouldn't be getting any talent back.

3. Utah is giving up peanuts in this deal.

shrink · Post #4 » by **shrink** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:49 pm

Marc wrote:HEY, pretty sure Jazz would prefer Atkins and Wilkins instead of Battier and Rockets would not give Battier just to dump salaries.

UTA GIVES: Harpring + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick
UTA GETS: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins

MIN GIVES: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Damian Wilkins
MIN GETS: Harpring + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick

That makes sense for both teams. Jazz ends up saving over $2M and get a player than can play.

And double the $2.11 because UTA is over the lux, and it would save them $4.22

$3 mil in cash nets a late 1st, so $4.22 would be better, plus Wilkins > Harpring, both on the floor and on the books. Unfortunately, I don't think that would be enough to get a pick swap with the UTA/NYK pick.

Would we pay $2.11 if it was for the clarity, and possible upside of removing the protections? I think we would. Would UTA do it for $4.11 and Wilkins? Maybe.

Post #5 » by **C.lupus** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:50 pm

funkatron101 wrote:1. Utah doesn't appear to be lottery bound any time soon. So MN is paying $4.5 million for a gamble. We are likely getting the pick this year, even with the restrictions. I just don't think it is a wise investment.

This was my first thought.

shrink · Post #6 » by **shrink** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:55 pm

C.lupus wrote:
funkatron101 wrote:1. Utah doesn't appear to be lottery bound any time soon. So MN is paying $4.5 million for a gamble. We are likely getting the pick this year, even with the restrictions. I just don't think it is a wise investment.

This was my first thought.

I question that as well, and its hard to put a price on these mid-picks. You could very well be right - I don't know. But let me point two things out for consideration.

1. By removing the protection of the pick, we guarantee we get it this year. That certainty has value, and allows us to make more concrete plans, and it would have more value if we wanted to trade it elsewhere.

2. Utah is no conference finals lock. Looking at the possible standings, there are several teams in the West that I feel are far better than the Jazz. I think if they stay healthy, they are competing for the 7-9 spot in the conference. An injury could drop them into the lottery. I think with developing Deron Williams and Paul Milsap, this may be the year that the pick has its best value -- if we get past the protections.

Marc · Post #7 » by **Marc** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:09 pm

Didn't Sloan miss the playoffs like only 3 times? I think Jazz will have a good season if they keep the team they have now. Think about it. Most players are in their prime age and all starters-key bench players know each other for 2-3 years.

Marc · Post #8 » by **Marc** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:16 pm

shrink wrote:
Marc wrote:HEY, pretty sure Jazz would prefer Atkins and Wilkins instead of Battier and Rockets would not give Battier just to dump salaries.

UTA GIVES: Harpring + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick
UTA GETS: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins

MIN GIVES: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Damian Wilkins
MIN GETS: Harpring + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick

That makes sense for both teams. Jazz ends up saving over $2M and get a player than can play.

And double the $2.11 because UTA is over the lux, and it would save them $4.22

$3 mil in cash nets a late 1st, so $4.22 would be better, plus Wilkins > Harpring, both on the floor and on the books. Unfortunately, I don't think that would be enough to get a pick swap with the UTA/NYK pick.

Would we pay $2.11 if it was for the clarity, and possible upside of removing the protections? I think we would. Would UTA do it for $4.11 and Wilkins? Maybe.

I think they would take the deal i proposed for some reasons. 1st, they would save some good money while getting better for this season. 2nd, Sloan has 1 or 2 years left of coaching. I seriously doubt, they are counting on the Knicks pick to make wonders for them.

As how i see it, Jazz is all about "right now" solutions. And saving some money is a must for them because they can not afford a payroll of $96M.

So here is the thing, if you can find a way to save Jazz a lot of money they will have up the rights to switch picks between their pick and Knicks'

shrink · Post #9 » by **shrink** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:30 pm

Marc wrote: So here is the thing, if you can find a way to save Jazz a lot of money they will have up the rights to switch picks between their pick and Knicks'

That's not so hard. Rumor has it that relations between the Boozer and the Jazz are so bad that they will deal him for any small pick or prospect that is mostly some financial relief. Add in Harpring, and the $20 mil in salary could be matched with $16 mil. If it included Atkins, the Jazz would save about $13 mil -- which SHOULD be enough to get the Knicks pick on its own (though the board may disagree).

We could handle the finances, since we'd probably pay the $6.5 mil for the Knicks pick. However, we need to be a third team, because we definitely do not need Carlos Boozer.

Alternatively, any deal that moves Kirilenko's monumentally bad contract should be very appealing to the Jazz as well, since the only big contracts for 2010 would be to their three guys for the future, Deron, Okur and Milsap.

Marc · Post #10 » by **Marc** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:31 pm

UTA GIVES: Harpring + Korver + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick
UTA GETS: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins + Brewer

MIN GIVES: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins + Brewer
MIN GETS: Harpring + Korver + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick

That deal works salary wise and Jazz would save around $8.5M (including taxes) but not sure if fans would like it for TWolves.

Korver is expiring and Brewer has a TO of $3,703,472 for next season. I think Korver would re-sign for less than $3,7M as starting salary so i don't think that's bad.

shrink · Post #11 » by **shrink** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:34 pm

That's really good Marc. I have very high hopes for Brewer, but if losing him meant we'd get the Utah pick and a look at the local Korver, I'd make that swap. There's no guarantee Brewer will perform well enough to get a contract in 2010 as it is.

Incidentally, this is similar to a trade I tossed around a few weeks ago that got some favorable reviews from UTA fans:

Harpring + Korver for Atkins + Songalia + Opec

Would UTA do a pick swap for similar savings, but instead of Songalia's 2-year deal, they pick up another Brewer?

TDWOLVESFAN · Post #12 » by **TDWOLVESFAN** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:01 pm

Marc wrote:UTA GIVES: Harpring + Korver + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick
UTA GETS: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins + Brewer

MIN GIVES: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins + Brewer
MIN GETS: Harpring + Korver + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick

That deal works salary wise and Jazz would save around $8.5M (including taxes) but not sure if fans would like it for TWolves.

Korver is expiring and Brewer has a TO of $3,703,472 for next season. I think Korver would re-sign for less than $3,7M as starting salary so i don't think that's bad.

This sounds good except that would leave Utah with a bunch of alcoholics Brewer, Brewer and Boozer. Is that a good thing in Utah?

Post #13 » by **revprodeji** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:01 am

No. It has to be the NY/Jazz pick swap for me to be interested.

Marc · Post #14 » by **Marc** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:38 am

revprodeji wrote:No. It has to be the NY/Jazz pick swap for me to be interested.

So, what about the last idea i posted?

Post #15 » by **revprodeji** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:14 am

I am not ready to give up on Brewer. I would like to give him a chance. Exchange him for another expiring.

Marc · Post #16 » by **Marc** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:21 am

revprodeji wrote:I am not ready to give up on Brewer. I would like to give him a chance. Exchange him for another expiring.

It would be Brewer or Ellington and Pecherov for salaries to work. That or you would need a 3rd team involved.

Post #17 » by **revprodeji** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:31 am

Pecherov works perfectly.

Brewer fits the prototype of a kid that is under everyones radar but could surprise us.

-High draft pick from successful college program
-has a clear role that he should be able to fill given the tools he has
-struggled his rookie year (not uncommon) with a horrible coach
-missed his whole soph year with the injury but has been working.

He could surprise many.

Marc · Post #18 » by **Marc** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:45 am

HEY! I got a 3-ways deal that works:

UTA GIVES: Harpring + Korver + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick
UTA GETS: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins + Law

MIN GIVES: Atkins (partially guaranteed) + Wilkins + Cardinal
MIN GETS: Harpring + Korver + Claxton + rights to swap UTA/NYK pick

GSW GIVES: Claxton + Law
GSW GETS: Cardinal

Jazz end up saving more money. Warriors do the deal to save money and Cardinal adds experience to their team.

Post #19 » by **revprodeji** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:50 am

Yes, In a second. But I doubt it gets done because we really do not give up much and we have all expirings coming back that can go out in a deal for a legit player.

Marc · Post #20 » by **Marc** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:02 am

revprodeji wrote:Yes, In a second. But I doubt it gets done because we really do not give up much and we have all expirings coming back that can go out in a deal for a legit player.

I don't think Jazz and Warriors are willing to add long term contracts.

Warriors are massively **** up long-term. And with Sloan retiring i doubt they are looking to add more players with big long term contracts.