Summary/Analysis of the CP3 Fiasco...

questionmark · Post #41 » by **questionmark** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:17 am

Bobbcats wrote:I think the point was it doesn't hurt the Hornets salary-wise which is the dumb stance Gilbert and many of the trade critics are taking.

And I agree with you the Hornets have no shot of rebuilding via FA. But with these guys on contracts that aren't bad, they should be able to make trades for picks and young players. I'm sure a good team would give them at least a pick and a prospect for both scola and odom as the playoffs approach, and if a team like the Bulls feels like they need a shooter for the playoffs, they might trade their low 1st round pick and something for Martin.They could really restock on young players by next year without having to go crazy on FA's with 5 year ridiculous contracts just to get through this season.

You are completely out of your mind if you think any of those players has real trade value anymore. Under the new CBA even contenders can not afford to aquire overpaid role players just for one playoff-run. If its a short time rental of an expiring contract, they screw up their future by giving up draft picks and maybe some decent young players and if they decide to resign those guys, they kill their payroll and get in danger of paying very heavy tax penalties for some players noone really wants or needs AND will probably lose their MLE for years to come. Every halfway sane GM will not make a trade for any of those guys.
There is a reason why everybody said the middle class of the NBA-players got screwed in the new CBA, cause now those once overpayed but still exceptable contracts are pure poison to any teams payroll.

All those people arguing against this logic have not really understood what the consequences of this new CBA are. The league will change and only those teams will stay competetive, that understand those consequences. Thats also why Cuban refused to resign Butler and Chandler to huge contracts, despite their contribution to a Championship-Team. It is now way way more important to be a good team and still be under the cap, cause all those players like Turkoglu, Boozer, Scola etc. will become a lot cheaper in the future, cause teams will not be abled to pay their 3rd and 4th best player that much money and some will even have to settle for the MLE.

Bobbcats · Post #42 » by **Bobbcats** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:19 am

Ok, but individually what are Martin or Odom or Scola worth when not packaged in this trade? I doubt you can get an A-level prospect for any of those players or a top 10 pick.

What I meant was individually they could get a pick and a prospect. I meant late first rounders obviously since these are playoff teams. And most good teams have some rookie or sophomore on the bench that they don't. Let's say you're a 2 or 3 seed whose only weakness is at SF or PF. You've got a rookie who still hasn't broken into the rotation, an injured or old bench expirer, and a late late first rounder for next year. Certainly there is an argument to be made for trading them for Odom. I'm sure there'll be a couple teams in a similar situation at year's end. The Hornets themselves used a first rounder last year on Jarret Jack. A lot of decent teams don't really value first rounders that much. The Hornets should go all in in this draft, which should be fairly loaded, with their lottery pick, the pick they get from this trade directly, and then as many others as they can get their hands on with their assets.

Then next year even if they're terrible they will be very exciting for fans and have a decent future.

Kabookalu · Post #43 » by **Kabookalu** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:21 am

demcanes26 wrote:Because they all have resonable contracts that can be easily moved. The Mavs just got a hugh trade exception from Chandler. You don't think they would give up a first rounder to get Odom. Especially knowing that can decline his team option and still have cap space?

Last time I checked Odom and Scola don't play the most starved position in basketball, they're both older than Chandler, one is an average PF and the other is above average but plays better when he's like the third option or coming off the bench. Chandler can legitimately anchor a championship winning defense.

Bobbcats · Post #44 » by **Bobbcats** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:23 am

if they decide to resign those guys

It's not about resigning, it's about winning the title Dallas-style this year. I'm talking about teams that already have a core, these guys would just be brought in to finish the job. Using one year or playoff rentals don't make winning a title any less sweet. When you have a core that's almost at the top of the league, the picks become less important because you can get into the player churn and get veterans for cheap. Here are two very good veterans that can be had with a first rounder and change, which'll be way more valuable to the Hornets

demcanes26 · Post #45 » by **demcanes26** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:25 am

Choker wrote:
demcanes26 wrote:U right, FA will not come to those teams, but the cap space allows you to trade for good players already under contracts. The Boston trade doesn't even provide NO with players they need. Don't get me wrong, they are good players, but they trade for those players, they still have to go out and sign a 2 guard, and a starting pf. So Rondo makes 11 million. You give Jeff Green 7 million. You sign Jamal Crawford for another 8 million, and you then sign someone like David West for another 7 million. You sign all those guys to contracts that are going to longer than any contract the Hornets would have traded for Paul. How is the Boston trade better?

Why are the Hornets going to do these things again to purposely put themselves in a bad position?

Because the Hornets have to SIGN SOMEONE even if they trade for Rondo and Green just to meet the 85% requirement that the CBA requires. Do you really think they can sign someone on a 1 year deal. I mean, are they going to go out and get Vince Carter, so they don't have to sign Jamal Crawford to a multy year deal? What starting PF is going to sign with the Hornets for 1 year? People don't think about stuff like that.

Kabookalu · Post #46 » by **Kabookalu** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:31 am

demcanes26 wrote:Because the Hornets have to SIGN SOMEONE even if they trade for Rondo and Green just to meet the 85% requirement that the CBA requires. Do you really think they can sign someone on a 1 year deal. I mean, are they going to go out and get Vince Carter, so they don't have to sign Jamal Crawford to a multy year deal? What starting PF is going to sign with the Hornets for 1 year? People don't think about stuff like that.

Thinking about stuff like that, like purposely signing aged veterans to large contracts? I mean why the hell Jamal Crawford and David West?

demcanes26 · Post #47 » by **demcanes26** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:32 am

Choker wrote:
demcanes26 wrote:Because they all have resonable contracts that can be easily moved. The Mavs just got a hugh trade exception from Chandler. You don't think they would give up a first rounder to get Odom. Especially knowing that can decline his team option and still have cap space?

Last time I checked Odom and Scola don't play the most starved position in basketball, they're both older than Chandler, one is an average PF and the other is above average but plays better when he's like the third option or coming off the bench. Chandler can legitimately anchor a championship winning defense.

Do you really think Odom has no trade value? Seriously dude. The guy won the six man award, and is basically an expiring contact. You don't think a contending team wouldn't be willing to give up a pick for a guy that help them, and know that they don't have to pay him past this season. Veteran players on expiring contracts get traded at the deadline all the time, for picks.

Kabookalu · Post #48 » by **Kabookalu** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:35 am

demcanes26 wrote:Do you really think Odom has no trade value? Seriously dude. The guy won the six man award, and is basically an expiring contact. You don't think a contending team wouldn't be willing to give up a pick for a guy that help them, and know that they don't have to pay him past this season. Veteran players on expiring contracts get traded at the deadline all the time, for picks.

Who said I said he had no trade value? I'm saying he doesn't have as much trade value as you think.

questionmark · Post #49 » by **questionmark** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:37 am

Bobbcats wrote:
if they decide to resign those guys
It's not about resigning, it's about winning the title Dallas-style this year. I'm talking about teams that already have a core, these guys would just be brought in to finish the job. Using one year or playoff rentals don't make winning a title any less sweet. When you have a core that's almost at the top of the league, the picks become less important because you can get into the player churn and get veterans for cheap. Here are two very good veterans that can be had with a first rounder and change, which'll be way more valuable to the Hornets

So you are trying tell me, that Odom, Martin and Scola are actually of worth for a contender come tradedeadline? Odom may be a good player for a championship run, but if you are a contender chances are, that you are over the cap, so you have to give back salary in exchange. Now as long as there is not a contender with lots of useless salary IN EXPIRINGS, their is no way a trade would benefit the Hornets.
Scola is absolutely untradeble, cause of the length of his contract that is just the kind of teamkilling poinson i talked about.
Martin has no use whatsoever for a contender, cause he has never played on a really good team and is more than likely going to mess up your already contending teams chemistry and you'll have the same issues as with Odom.

Youre whole argument is incredibly flawed. If Stern had let this trade go through he should have been fired.

demcanes26 · Post #50 » by **demcanes26** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:38 am

Choker wrote:
demcanes26 wrote:Because the Hornets have to SIGN SOMEONE even if they trade for Rondo and Green just to meet the 85% requirement that the CBA requires. Do you really think they can sign someone on a 1 year deal. I mean, are they going to go out and get Vince Carter, so they don't have to sign Jamal Crawford to a multy year deal? What starting PF is going to sign with the Hornets for 1 year? People don't think about stuff like that.

Thinking about stuff like that, like purposely signing aged veterans to large contracts? I mean why the hell Jamal Crawford and David West?

Ok, buddy. Boston trades for Green and Rondo. They now need a SG and PF. You can name whomever you like. Please tell me who they can sign on a one year deal to play those positions.

Tave · Post #51 » by **Tave** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:39 am

Scola just came off a career year going 18/8 with 2-1/2 dimes per.
Odom was just voted 6th Man of the year.
Kevin Martin just averaged 23 ppg last season and is only 28
Dragic is only 26, plays good minutes, and has probably the best energy in the league.

Yeah, plenty of teams will take a one or two year shot at that, who wouldn't?

Kabookalu · Post #52 » by **Kabookalu** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:40 am

demcanes26 wrote:Ok, buddy. Boston trades for Green and Rondo. They now need a SG and PF. You can name whomever you like. Please tell me who they can sign on a one year deal to play those positions.

lol like I know I'm not the GM, but it's like you're already assuming they're going to sign mediocre aging veterans and using that to justify why getting the steaming pile of crap they were getting from Houston and LA to be good.

demcanes26 · Post #53 » by **demcanes26** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:43 am

Choker wrote:
demcanes26 wrote:Do you really think Odom has no trade value? Seriously dude. The guy won the six man award, and is basically an expiring contact. You don't think a contending team wouldn't be willing to give up a pick for a guy that help them, and know that they don't have to pay him past this season. Veteran players on expiring contracts get traded at the deadline all the time, for picks.

Who said I said he had no trade value? I'm saying he doesn't have as much trade value as you think.

Dude Kurt Thomas got traded for a first roud pick at the deadline. You telling me a guy that is a top 50-60 player doesn't have value? A guy that's a top 50-60 player on a expiring contract.

Kabookalu · Post #54 » by **Kabookalu** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:55 am

demcanes26 wrote:Dude Kurt Thomas got traded for a first roud pick at the deadline. You telling me a guy that is a top 50-60 player doesn't have value? A guy that's a top 50-60 player on a expiring contract.

You fail to realize that not every situation is going to be the same. A team would need to add another salary with the first round pick assuming he's going to a contender to make the trade actually work. First you would need to find such a team, it's hardly a guarantee.

demcanes26 · Post #55 » by **demcanes26** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:57 am

Choker wrote:
demcanes26 wrote:Ok, buddy. Boston trades for Green and Rondo. They now need a SG and PF. You can name whomever you like. Please tell me who they can sign on a one year deal to play those positions.

lol like I know I'm not the GM, but it's like you're already assuming they're going to sign mediocre aging veterans and using that to justify why getting the steaming pile of crap they were getting from Houston and LA to be good.

lol. I figure that. You are saying the Lakers and Hou deal is bad, so I gave you the Boston deal. You can't name one SG or PF who would take a 1 year deal. I am not assuming anything, I am using common sense. The reason you can't name one is because they don't exist. There is not a starting SG or PF they can sign because they have multiple teams bidding on them, so they have OPTIONS. If the Hornets want a Jamal Crawford they have to give him a multy year contract. If they don't want to do that, they can sign Vince Carter.

arkknight1988 · Post #56 » by **arkknight1988** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:58 am

haven't read this thread but are people still blind to this trade? It clears capspace for the lakers to either sign dwight outright or force the magic to take bynum after dwight demands to be traded to la. This has been the plan all along. Notice how la lets shannon brown walk? walton is also going to retire. they will amnesty artest and trade away gasols huge contract. Its terrible.

Kabookalu · Post #57 » by **Kabookalu** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:00 am

demcanes26 wrote:lol. I figure that. You are saying the Lakers and Hou deal is bad, so I gave you the Boston deal. You can't name one SG or PF who would take a 1 year deal. I am not assuming anything, I am using common sense. The reason you can't name one is because they don't exist. There is not a starting SG or PF they can sign because they have multiple teams bidding on them, so they have OPTIONS. If the Hornets want a Jamal Crawford they have to give him a multy year contract. If they don't want to do that, they can sign Vince Carter.

So common sense is assuming that the Hornets are already set on signing mediocre aging veterans to big contracts?

idajazz · Post #58 » by **idajazz** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:01 am

that deal was awful for NO, the only people that argue otherwise are Laker fan boys

arkknight1988 · Post #59 » by **arkknight1988** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:03 am

everyone protest this robbery of a trade. The media is trying to talk this up but c'mon open ur eyes people. think about this trade for a minute

Kabookalu · Post #60 » by **Kabookalu** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:05 am

arkknight1988 wrote:everyone protest this robbery of a trade. The media is trying to talk this up but c'mon open ur eyes people. think about this trade for a minute

People seldom think these days, they only listen to what they hear on twitter.