Good idea? Bad idea?

Narf · Post #1 » by **Narf** » Sat Dec 3, 2011 9:25 pm

I put this on the trade board as well.

Minnesota trades:
Darko Millic, Martel Webster, and Brad Miller (salary paid by insurance, and he's non-guaranteed next year).
Sacramento trades:
John Salmons, 2 2nd round picks, and cap space

Why for Sacramento:
Money mostly. They are one of the teams hurting financially, and it's a lot of money to amnesty Salmons. They get up to the minimum salary a little easier with an insurance paid contract (Miller), a reasonably priced defensive/shot blocking center that can come off the bench or start next to Cousins ala Dalemburt, and replace Salmons with Martel Webster who is a solid 2-way player when healthy.....and has a non-guaranteed contract next year if he's not healthy.

Why for Minnesota:
Cap space. They add an overpaid veteran in Salmons, but then have the cap space to offer Marc Gasol or DeAndre Jordan a monster contract with a $50 million signing bonus making it hard for the other teams to match it, or just sign Nene outright if they want. Plus Sacramento's 2nd round picks are going to be decent the next 2 years, which makes up for a little bit of Salmon's overpaid salary.

Just a thought.

Post #2 » by **The J Rocka** » Sat Dec 3, 2011 9:36 pm

Bad. Darko isn't THAT bad of a contract and Webster & Miller are non-guaranteed in their final year under contract (I believe so).

Adding Salmons would only get in the way of developing our young players and would take a chunk of minutes away from Johnson. Not to mention, his contract isn't the greatest, 3 years over 24 million.

This years FA class isn't all that. Good players will be taken and mediocre players will get paid more than what they're worth. If we can't pickup Gasol, Chandler, Jordan, Nene tier of centers, we can wait for 2012.

Easy pass for me.

Narf · Post #3 » by **Narf** » Sat Dec 3, 2011 9:44 pm

The J Rocka wrote:Bad. Darko isn't THAT bad of a contract and Webster & Miller are non-guaranteed in their final year under contract (I believe so).

Adding Salmons would only get in the way of developing our young players and would take a chunk of minutes away from Johnson. Not to mention, his contract isn't the greatest, 3 years over 24 million.

This years FA class isn't all that. Good players will be taken and mediocre players will get paid more than what they're worth. If we can't pickup Gasol, Chandler, Jordan, Nene tier of centers, we can wait for 2012.

Easy pass for me.

This is assuming we can.

So basically this is:
Darko/Webster/Miller
for
Nene/Salmons/2 Sacramento 2nd round picks

And I see no reason why Salmons can't come off the bench for Johnson.

Nene/Randolph/Pekovic
Love/Tolliver
Beasley/Williams
Johnson/Salmons/Ellington
Rubio/Ridnour/Lee

Narf · Post #4 » by **Narf** » Sat Dec 3, 2011 9:54 pm

Could we pay Sacramento $3 mil to take Darko off our hands for cap space?
I don't know if they'd take it.

Edit:
I made a thread in the sacto room asking if they liked the idea or not
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=1139915

Swish4 · Post #5 » by **Swish4** » Sat Dec 3, 2011 10:09 pm

It's not a bad idea but I think Sacramento can find better options than this. Plus I think Gasol and Jordan won't be nearly worth what they'll get. Personally I'd wait and let some of our young guys gain trade value and see where we are at the deadline or the offseason.

shrink · Post #6 » by **shrink** » Sun Dec 4, 2011 1:03 am

I like the general idea, but I'm not a fan of the specifics.

Salmons deal is just too long for me. With him turning 32 next week, a deal that runs

$8,500,000
$8,083,000
$7,583,000
$7,000,000 ($1,000,000)

.. can turn into a bad deal fast.

I also don't think Darko is a bad contract. For a guy his size, he's paid like a back-up, and I think we can get at least back-up production out of him.

That said, I like the idea of buying some extra cap space. Is there anyone on the second year of an MLE deal that's a little rough that we could toss Webster, Miller, and maybe Hayward at? Or some kind of three-way?

Post #7 » by **Basti** » Sun Dec 4, 2011 1:23 am

If we could amnesty Salmons after the deal, I'd probably do it but the amnesty rule only allows teams to cut players they've had for two years and/or were signed as Free Agents, right?

moss_is_1 · Post #8 » by **moss_is_1** » Sun Dec 4, 2011 2:38 am

I like the potential of adding Salmons because he's a solid defender, ball handler, passer, and shooter and also a vet....but he makes just a little more money then I'd be comfortable with(about $6 is what I'd pay him) and it's about 2 years too long. We are giving up basically nothing though.

Narf · Post #9 » by **Narf** » Mon Dec 5, 2011 5:46 am

I figured Salmons was overpaid, and I agree Darko is worth his salary. But we are going to have to pay Sacramento something to get their cap space. I think our best move is to overpay for one of the free agent centers then use that as leverage to resign Love. I'm open to better cap cutting ideas.

younggunsmn · Post #10 » by **younggunsmn** » Mon Dec 5, 2011 7:14 am

Just awful. Awful, awful. No way I want 4 years of old man salmons' albatross on our books.
If we want capspace there are 2 easy options:
1. amnesty one of miller/pek/darko/webster
2. dump beasley/randolph for capspace + a pick.

shrink · Post #11 » by **shrink** » Mon Dec 5, 2011 12:31 pm

I think sending Brad Miller to a poor team that is trying to meet it's new raised salary floor, is a good idea. I don't think we can get cap space back from it though, because at this point, teams are dreaming of getting better-than-market value from it in the amnesty auction. Miller though, with his guaranteed salary that will be mostly paid by insurance, is a financial asset if Glen Taylor is willing to spend the money, giving up a virtually unpaid guy with zero production for a reasonably paid guy with reasonable production. I could see him moved once the season starts, but with all the uncertainty over the value of cap space right now, I think we'd have to wait.