Wiz trade Shard and 2nd rounder for Okafor and Ariza

[verbal8]

Now that the Hornets have used their cap space to do a sign and trade with Orlando for Ryan, I think I now officially hate this trade.

Yup. And the Nets are working on a trade for Dwight Howard that they couldn't do unless they had cap space (not saying the Wiz could have made that trade - but it points to the value of cap space).

It will be interesting to see the incentives to presumably the Cavs and the deal that Kris Humphries gets. That is something that almost definitely would have been available to the Wizards.

[Hoopalotta]

I'm 99% sure that the Nets aren't going to use cap space to (maybe) make the Howard trade, but rather are using bird rights on Blook Ropez and Mr.Kardashian.

Obviously it's the July Bermuda triangle time on cap space, but I don't see how they aren't tapped out once you account for the incoming guys and the cap holds.

Actually, that's 99.9% sure if I'm remembering correctly and they're using the MLE on that Euro forward.

[montestewart]

I'm 99% sure that the Nets aren't going to use cap space to (maybe) make the Howard trade, but rather are using bird rights on Blook Ropez and Mr.Kardashian.

Obviously it's the July Bermuda triangle time on cap space, but I don't see how they aren't tapped out once you account for the incoming guys and the cap holds.

Actually, that's 99.9% sure if I'm remembering correctly and they're using the MLE on that Euro forward.

Yes, but a trade partner with cap space to absorb the salary was needed. Like Okafor and Ariza, Humphries has some value, but if you're doing another team a favor by absorbing large (too large?) salaries, why not get an incentive, rather than paying a 2nd for the privilege?

[gesa2]

I'm confused as to how the Cavs are helping this trade by signing a free agent from the Nets. because the Nets are over the cap, the only way they can trade for Howard is to sign and trade Humphries as part of the deal, but Orlando didn't want him? Is that it? If so, it'll be interesting to see if they had to pay him more than a market contract to make the deal work, and what they get in return for it. Seems weird for the Cavs a year after drafting Tristan Thompson. If they wanted another rebounder you think they would have just drafted Robinson.

[fishercob]

Now that the Hornets have used their cap space to do a sign and trade with Orlando for Ryan, I think I now officially hate this trade.

I'd like to see this in one of nates handy dandy spreadsheets that I don't know how to post, but here are the two scenarios:

A -- Okafor/Ariza trade
12-13: Okafor $13.5M, Ariza $7.3M
13-14: Okafor $14.5M, Ariza $7.7M (player option)

B -- no trade, but we do the RYan Anderson S&T
12-13: Lewis $13.7M, Anderson approx $8.5M (final number not out yet)
13-14: Anderson approx $8.5M
14-15: Anderson approx $8.5M
15-16: Anderson approx $8.5M
*minus whatever asset we would have had to give up to replicate Ayon's value
** plus pick #46

Pro's for A: Okafor is a center and allows Nene to play PF, where I expect he'll be most effective. Anderson gives the teams lots of bigs, but no true defensive center. Ariza is a better defensive wing than no one. His worth as a player is the subject of debate, but I'd rather have him than not, especially on a short term deal. We keep whatever asset we'd have to give Orlando. I know the stat guys love Ayon despite his age. I have no idea if Booker alone would have gotten this done. Booker and Crawford?

Pro's for B: Anderson is 24 and signed to a very reasonable deal. We get the prime of his career; very good value. Very efficient, excellent shooter, good rebounder. We also keep pick #46, where we theoretically could have taken Satoransky, and taken a SF at 32 (Crowder? Draymond Green? Q Miller?) Lewis's dead money comes off the cap after one year and we'd head into next summer with big room, especially if we amnesty Blatche.

I prefer the fit of scenario A, and yet B seems like the obviously better option to me, assuming all we were giving up was Booker. We're still not good enough that we should be overly worried about fit. Anderson at his deal would have been a nice asset. Going in to the draft with both 2nd rounders would have provided some options. Ah well.

[nate33]

I made a post on the Discussing Other Teams thread, but I'll expand here. First of all, I'm assuming that under the Ryan Anderson scenario, we would have waived Lewis and traded Booker for Ryan Anderson. I'm also assuming that we would have utilized our #32 pick for a warm body since we would have more roster spots

So under the current scenario we have:

PG Wall/Mack
SG Beal/Crawford
SF Ariza/Singleton
PF Nene/Vesely/Booker
C Okafor/Seraphin/Blatche

We have no cap room for the foreseeable future assuming Wall and Seraphin are retained for market value in 2014.

Under the Ryan Anderson Hypothetical, our lineup would be:

PG Wall/Mack
SG Beal/Crawford/M.Denmon
SF C.Singleton/Q.Miller
PF Anderson/Vesely
C Nene/Seraphin/Blatche

We would have about $8M in cap room next year when Lewis' buyout comes off the books (assuming we amnesty Blatche as well). We also have a roster spot to convince J.Singleton to play with us as a 5th big. The SF position is horribly weak and we would have relinquished the MLE to get the cap room to absorb Anderson, but the rest of the roster is pretty good and very complementary to Wall.

[MDStar]

We have no cap room for the foreseeable future assuming Wall and Seraphin are retained for market value in 2014.

Nate can you expand on this? I thought at the end of 2013/2014 season, we would have Nene at 13 mil, Wall's QO of around 10 mil and then everyone else with on rookie contracts or much lower QO's than Walls. My assumption was that we would have maximum flexibility at that point to either continue building around those guys (Seraphin, Vesley, Booker, Singleton, Crawford) or jettison out with the cap space to do so.

By adding a guy like Anderson, Ilysova (sp?) or Batum we would be adding a long term contract which would significantly reduce our flexibility during that off-season. So the contract may be of "decent" value, i just question is now the time to commit long term to this squad as constructed?

[nate33]

We have no cap room for the foreseeable future assuming Wall and Seraphin are retained for market value in 2014.

Nate can you expand on this? I thought at the end of 2013/2014 season, we would have Nene at 13 mil, Wall's QO of around 10 mil and then everyone else with on rookie contracts or much lower QO's than Walls. My assumption was that we would have maximum flexibility at that point to either continue building around those guys (Seraphin, Vesley, Booker, Singleton, Crawford) or jettison out with the cap space to do so.

In Summer 2014, our cap situation looks something like this (assuming Blatche is amnestied at some point):

Nene: $13M
Wall: $14M (cap hold)
Beal: $4.9M
Vesely: $4.2M
2013 1st: $2.5M
2014 1st: $2.0M
Total $40M

In addition, we have a team option on C.Singleton, and we have cap holds for Seraphin, Booker and Crawford:

C.Singleton: $2.4M (TO)
Seraphin: $6.9M (CH)
Booker: $5.8M (CH)
Crawford: $5.4M (CH)
Total: $20.5M

So that's a total cap number of $60.5M if we plan to retain Booker, Seraphin, Crawford and Singleton. We could dump Singleton, Crawford and Booker and get down to about $47M, giving us $9M in cap room. (I'm assuming Crawford won't be a priority over potential free agents so I didn't include his cap hold.)

[verbal8]

We have no cap room for the foreseeable future assuming Wall and Seraphin are retained for market value in 2014.

Nate can you expand on this? I thought at the end of 2013/2014 season, we would have Nene at 13 mil, Wall's QO of around 10 mil and then everyone else with on rookie contracts or much lower QO's than Walls. My assumption was that we would have maximum flexibility at that point to either continue building around those guys (Seraphin, Vesley, Booker, Singleton, Crawford) or jettison out with the cap space to do so.

In Summer 2014, our cap situation looks something like this (assuming Blatche is amnestied at some point):

Nene: $13M
Wall: $14M (cap hold)
Beal: $4.9M
Vesely: $4.2M
2013 1st: $2.5M
2014 1st: $2.0M
Total $40M

In addition, we have a team option on C.Singleton, and we have cap holds for Seraphin, Booker and Crawford:

C.Singleton: $2.4M (TO)
Seraphin: $6.9M (CH)
Booker: $5.8M (CH)
Crawford: $5.4M (CH)
Total: $20.5M

So that's a total cap number of $60.5M if we plan to retain Booker, Seraphin, Crawford and Singleton. We could dump Singleton, Crawford and Booker and get down to about $47M, giving us $9M in cap room. (I'm assuming Crawford won't be a priority over potential free agents so I didn't include his cap hold.)

It depends how the cap changes, but a couple of 5% increases and the Wizards would be very close to a max spot with a cap number of $47M. Also the cap holds for future picks would be lower if the Wizards improve quickly.

[MDStar]

We have no cap room for the foreseeable future assuming Wall and Seraphin are retained for market value in 2014.

Nate can you expand on this? I thought at the end of 2013/2014 season, we would have Nene at 13 mil, Wall's QO of around 10 mil and then everyone else with on rookie contracts or much lower QO's than Walls. My assumption was that we would have maximum flexibility at that point to either continue building around those guys (Seraphin, Vesley, Booker, Singleton, Crawford) or jettison out with the cap space to do so.

In Summer 2014, our cap situation looks something like this (assuming Blatche is amnestied at some point):

Nene: $13M
Wall: $14M (cap hold)
Beal: $4.9M
Vesely: $4.2M
2013 1st: $2.5M
2014 1st: $2.0M
Total $40M

In addition, we have a team option on C.Singleton, and we have cap holds for Seraphin, Booker and Crawford:

C.Singleton: $2.4M (TO)
Seraphin: $6.9M (CH)
Booker: $5.8M (CH)
Crawford: $5.4M (CH)
Total: $20.5M

So that's a total cap number of $60.5M if we plan to retain Booker, Seraphin, Crawford and Singleton. We could dump Singleton, Crawford and Booker and get down to about $47M, giving us $9M in cap room. (I'm assuming Crawford won't be a priority over potential free agents so I didn't include his cap hold.)

Unless I'm misinterpreting the information, those numbers confirm what I was thinking. At the end of 2014, we would have around 40 mil in guaranteed contracts. At that point we could decide to continue to build around those guys (Singleton, Seraphin, Booker, Crawford) or renounce them all and go into that offseason with 15-18 mil in space and an expiring 13 mil contract in Nene. I see that as maximum flexibility.

Now using your numbers, let's plug in the Anderson squad.

Nene: $13M
Wall: $14M (cap hold)
Anderson: $9M
Beal: $4.9M
Vesely: $4.2M
2013 1st: $2.5M
2014 1st: $2.0M
Total $49M

C.Singleton: $2.4M (TO)
Seraphin: $6.9M (CH)
Crawford: $5.4M (CH)
Total: $14.7M

While yes, that would be a more balanced team for the next 2 years. I just believe a move like that locks this current version of the Wizards in for a lot longer than 2 years, whether the team is good or bad.

[nate33]

Unless I'm misinterpreting the information, those numbers confirm what I was thinking. At the end of 2014, we would have around 40 mil in guaranteed contracts. At that point we could decide to continue to build around those guys (Singleton, Seraphin, Booker, Crawford) or renounce them all and go into that offseason with 15-18 mil in space and an expiring 13 mil contract in Nene. I see that as maximum flexibility

While that sounds good when you say it, I think it's highly unlikely that Seraphin would be considered expendable for cap flexibility. We're talking about a team that has only a 32-year Nene at center and no backup. Seraphin will be retained unless there is a Dwight Howard type of free agent available (and even then, Seraphin's rights will probably be more valuable in a S&T than raw cap space). For maximum flexibility, let's assume Crawford, Singleton and Booker will be dumped, but not Seraphin.

So under the status quo, we will have $9M in cap room in 2014, maybe $10-11 million if there are larger cap increases and/or we land later picks with smaller rookie salaries.

Under the Ryan Anderson scenario, we would have Ryan Anderson plus about $8M in cap room in 2013 (when Lewis' buyout comes off the books but before Wall and Seraphin must be extended).

The Ryan Anderson scenario looks better to me, assuming Anderson isn't totally useless without Howard alongside him.

[Ruzious]

I'm 99% sure that the Nets aren't going to use cap space to (maybe) make the Howard trade, but rather are using bird rights on Blook Ropez and Mr.Kardashian.

Obviously it's the July Bermuda triangle time on cap space, but I don't see how they aren't tapped out once you account for the incoming guys and the cap holds.

Actually, that's 99.9% sure if I'm remembering correctly and they're using the MLE on that Euro forward.

You're 100.1% correct. I'm recently back from vacation and just catching up on all of the Nets' moves. What they are doing is the definition of going all in - and I congratulate them for it. They've made some mistakes, but they might overcome them because they have a vision to become a championship contender - rather than a contender for the 8th playoff spot in their conference.

[LyricalRico]

^ Well, it's probably somewhat easier to have a "vision" when the top center in the league says "I only want to play for you".

[Ruzious]

^ Well, it's probably somewhat easier to have a "vision" when the top center in the league says "I only want to play for you".

Part of that is communication. And if a Russian can do that in the US, I would hope that Ted the Communicator could.

Who wouldn't want to play in... Brooklyn?

[LyricalRico]

^ Also, don't forget that the original "vision" for the Nets was to get in on the LeBron James sweepstakes. It was only after striking out there that they decided to make an unexpected move on Deron Williams. Then they had to trade for and overpay Wallace, plus take on the worst contract in the NBA (Joe Johnson) just to get Williams to stay. That doesn't scream "vision" to me.

Yes, adding Howard to that would make them a contender. But I don't think that this is what they saw a couple years ago when they were clearing space for LeBron. And I don't think anybody would have faulted them for acquring a few overpaid vets to help them at least compete for the playoffs the last couple years while they waited for another opportunity to present itself.

[sashae]

I have to admit, as much as the "slow and patient" model of building a team seems appealing, the Nets are going to be a LOT more interesting to watch next year if they swing this triumverate in Brooklyn, Joe Johnson being overpaid or not.

[fishercob]

^ Well, it's probably somewhat easier to have a "vision" when the top center in the league says "I only want to play for you".

Who wouldn't want to play in... Brooklyn?

Is that a joke?

[Ruzious]

^ Also, don't forget that the original "vision" for the Nets was to get in on the LeBron James sweepstakes. It was only after striking out there that they decided to make an unexpected move on Deron Williams. Then they had to trade for and overpay Wallace, plus take on the worst contract in the NBA (Joe Johnson) just to get Williams to stay. That doesn't scream "vision" to me.

Yes, adding Howard to that would make them a contender. But I don't think that this is what they saw a couple years ago when they were clearing space for LeBron. And I don't think anybody would have faulted them for acquring a few overpaid vets to help them at least compete for the playoffs the last couple years while they waited for another opportunity to present itself.

Really? You don't think going after Lebron James shows that they were trying to build a championship team? And going after Deron Williams wasn't just to go after Deron Williams. It was to help attract someone like... say... I dunno... Dwight S Howard. And while I thought the Wallace debacle was foolish at best, it could work out because they really are trying to build a championship contender. I think you're staring at a bunch of trees and don't notice there's a forest - much like your avatar.

[Ruzious]

^ Well, it's probably somewhat easier to have a "vision" when the top center in the league says "I only want to play for you".

Who wouldn't want to play in... Brooklyn?

Is that a joke?

I was all out of green ink when I wrote it.

[nate33]

I'm going to lock this thread. I don't really see a need to make a Part II so I won't do so. If somebody else wants to start a second thread to continue to look at wouldda shouldda couldda's, I won't stop them.