Would Memphis do a Zeebo for Paul Pierce trade?

robbie84 · Post #1 » by **robbie84** » Sun Jun 2, 2013 6:08 am

So lets say that Memphis owners want to get rid of Zeebo's deal. I mean you've got Ed Davis ready to step in and play.
Celtics need to get KG some help. Pierce and Zeebo are identical salaries. (almost)
Pierce has one year on his deal. Zeebo has two.

The Grizzlies can either use Pierce for one year to help Conley and Gasol as a go to scorer at the wing, because Prince was just pathetic for you guys.
Or they can just waive Pierce and clear 10 million of the books by paying out Pierce's 5 million guarantee.
Or it just speeds up Ed Davis development whilst Pierce helps on offense.
Not sure what pieces involved to get money right but something like:
Pierce+Jordan Crawford for Zeebo works money wise I think.

Starting unit for Memphis:

Conley
Allen
Pierce
Davis
Gasol

much more balanced scoring and slightly worse defense- although I'd argue Davis is a far superior defender than Zeebo. Still a very good defensive team.
Perhaps Pierce finishes his deal and re-signs with Memphis for cheap...or the money comes off the books.
WIn Win.

Thoughts?

dark-child · Post #2 » by **dark-child** » Mon Jun 3, 2013 1:52 am

very doubtful due to the salary, I have been advocating a Z-BO for Jeff Green and Courtney Lee deal but it
doesn't seem many have the stomach for it.

Snoopie · Post #3 » by **Snoopie** » Mon Jun 3, 2013 3:56 am

As far as I can see, the main reason our front office want to get rid of Z-Bo is to eliminate his big contract.. no point doing that if you're going to bring in someone with a similar sized contract..

The new front office have made it clear that winning is not entirely their top priority so that's even less of a reason why they would want to bring Paul Pierce in..

robbie84 · Post #4 » by **robbie84** » Mon Jun 3, 2013 6:51 am

Snoopie wrote:As far as I can see, the main reason our front office want to get rid of Z-Bo is to eliminate his big contract.. no point doing that if you're going to bring in someone with a similar sized contract..

The new front office have made it clear that winning is not entirely their top priority so that's even less of a reason why they would want to bring Paul Pierce in..

Well the point is they can keep him or they can waive him and fork out only 5 million. Would take 10 million off the books.
So you'd essentially be getting rid of Zeebo's 33 million deal over 2 years for 5 million on the cap for one season.
Pierce has only 5 million of his deal guaranteed this season.

Post #5 » by **SD2042** » Mon Jun 3, 2013 2:36 pm

Snoopie wrote:As far as I can see, the main reason our front office want to get rid of Z-Bo is to eliminate his big contract.. no point doing that if you're going to bring in someone with a similar sized contract..

The new front office have made it clear that winning is not entirely their top priority so that's even less of a reason why they would want to bring Paul Pierce in..

I doubt that Pierce will be a Grizzly anytime soon. Especially if this move is for salary reasons.

To your comment about the winning thing Snoopie, if winning is not entirely their top priority, what are the chances they could torpedo the team and rebuild again. That's not something I would look forward to.

Snoopie · Post #6 » by **Snoopie** » Mon Jun 3, 2013 11:30 pm

SD2042 wrote:
Snoopie wrote:As far as I can see, the main reason our front office want to get rid of Z-Bo is to eliminate his big contract.. no point doing that if you're going to bring in someone with a similar sized contract..

The new front office have made it clear that winning is not entirely their top priority so that's even less of a reason why they would want to bring Paul Pierce in..

I doubt that Pierce will be a Grizzly anytime soon. Especially if this move is for salary reasons.

To your comment about the winning thing Snoopie, if winning is not entirely their top priority, what are the chances they could torpedo the team and rebuild again. That's not something I would look forward to.

The only reason I say winning does not seem to be their top priority is because of the Rudy Gay trade earlier this season. Yes, the trade ended up working very well for us - we arguably advanced further in the playoffs than we would have with him - but no one could have possibly predicted that we would do so well without our leading scorer. By doing so, at that time, it was clear that the new front office was prioritising salary cap over wins; we had already stayed beneath the luxury tax for the season with the earlier Ellington/Speights trade so they could very well have given the team one shot at making the Finals together. They obviously didn't give them that chance so I guess that is the basis for my comment.

I'm with you though - I would not look forward to a rebuild, although I do think it would be hard to completely torpedo the team if Conley and Gasol are still around.

Snoopie · Post #7 » by **Snoopie** » Mon Jun 3, 2013 11:32 pm

robbie84 wrote:
Snoopie wrote:As far as I can see, the main reason our front office want to get rid of Z-Bo is to eliminate his big contract.. no point doing that if you're going to bring in someone with a similar sized contract..

The new front office have made it clear that winning is not entirely their top priority so that's even less of a reason why they would want to bring Paul Pierce in..

Well the point is they can keep him or they can waive him and fork out only 5 million. Would take 10 million off the books.
So you'd essentially be getting rid of Zeebo's 33 million deal over 2 years for 5 million on the cap for one season.
Pierce has only 5 million of his deal guaranteed this season.

That still doesn't make sense. We'd essentially be giving Randolph away for the right to pay Paul Pierce $5 million? I understand that clearing the salary cap is an important thing but if that is our aim, which I believe it is, then you would think that the proper business decision would be to trade Randolph away for draft picks/rookies. Not for someone who we then buy out...

jefe · Post #8 » by **jefe** » Tue Jun 4, 2013 2:48 am

robbie84 wrote:
Snoopie wrote:As far as I can see, the main reason our front office want to get rid of Z-Bo is to eliminate his big contract.. no point doing that if you're going to bring in someone with a similar sized contract..

The new front office have made it clear that winning is not entirely their top priority so that's even less of a reason why they would want to bring Paul Pierce in..

Well the point is they can keep him or they can waive him and fork out only 5 million. Would take 10 million off the books.
So you'd essentially be getting rid of Zeebo's 33 million deal over 2 years for 5 million on the cap for one season.
Pierce has only 5 million of his deal guaranteed this season.

If the motivation is a salary dump, the Grizz can just amnesty Zbo - and it's Zbo, not Zeebo - where have you ever seen it spelled "Zeebo"?

Snoopie · Post #9 » by **Snoopie** » Tue Jun 4, 2013 3:00 am

I know you were just speaking hypothetically, but I wouldn't be too surprised if we amnestied Prince.

His $7 million could be much better spent in other places..

GrizzledGrizzFan · Post #10 » by **GrizzledGrizzFan** » Tue Jun 4, 2013 3:58 am

Amnesty doesn't fit the new ownership's MO either. Even though a player's salary is "off the books" when amnestied, it's for salary cap purposes only. The team still has to pay the salary owed. So, using that logic, the Pierce deal would save the Grizz $28 million. Pay Pierce $5 and he goes away and is off the books. Amnesty Zbo and, yeah he's off the cap, but you still have to pay him PLUS you'd pay whoever it is that you sign to replace him.

Bottom line, the purpose of the Amnesty clause was to open up cap space for teams that were desperately over the cap. The only reason the union agreed to it is that the players still get paid.

GrizzledGrizzFan · Post #11 » by **GrizzledGrizzFan** » Tue Jun 4, 2013 4:03 am

Snoopie wrote:I know you were just speaking hypothetically, but I wouldn't be too surprised if we amnestied Prince.

His $7 million could be much better spent in other places..

The Grizz can't amnesty Prince. The amnesty clause only covers players that are still under contract (and under the same contract) with the team that signed them when the new CBA went into play. Zach and Conley are the only two Grizz that meet that definition. Marc's deal was done after the last CBA was signed.

Snoopie · Post #12 » by **Snoopie** » Tue Jun 4, 2013 4:09 am

Ahh.. see I didn't know that. I should probably look into what constitutes a valid amnesty a bit more... :lol:

robbie84 · Post #13 » by **robbie84** » Tue Jun 4, 2013 12:54 pm

Snoopie wrote:Ahh.. see I didn't know that. I should probably look into what constitutes a valid amnesty a bit more...

Yeah that's why I thought that Pierce would be attractive. Perhaps Pierce and our 16th or Pierce and Avery Bradley for Zeebo and Pondexter...

dark-child · Post #14 » by **dark-child** » Tue Jun 4, 2013 4:37 pm

Furthermore, we have to remember that we are now dealing with a front office that will quibble about a few million, so the likelihood that they would EVER amnesty anyone and eat multi millions is out of the question. Our owner may live in Silicon Valley & Taiwan, but he does not have Google/Facebook type of cheddar.

Furthermore, (I love this word) Z-BO is a huge asset and someone you can get a nice return on so there is no need to eve think about the amnesty provision regarding him. You may not like the deal completely that you get for him but it would be palatable with giving you more versatility roster and financially wise.

Call me crazy but I think Prince is movable for a three that can hit an outside shot and is not afraid to take the three. Don't kill me as I am only throwing these out there in terms of who could be available.

My top choice - Landry Fields,
Second choice - Andre Kirilenko (if he doesn't opt out)
Third choice - Michael Beasley (this will probably draw the most ire)

jefe · Post #15 » by **jefe** » Wed Jun 5, 2013 1:24 am

dark-child wrote:Furthermore, we have to remember that we are now dealing with a front office that will quibble about a few million, so the likelihood that they would EVER amnesty anyone and eat multi millions is out of the question. Our owner may live in Silicon Valley & Taiwan, but he does not have Google/Facebook type of cheddar.

Furthermore, (I love this word) Z-BO is a huge asset and someone you can get a nice return on so there is no need to eve think about the amnesty provision regarding him. You may not like the deal completely that you get for him but it would be palatable with giving you more versatility roster and financially wise.

Call me crazy but I think Prince is movable for a three that can hit an outside shot and is not afraid to take the three. Don't kill me as I am only throwing these out there in terms of who could be available.

My top choice - Landry Fields,
Second choice - Andre Kirilenko (if he doesn't opt out)
Third choice - Michael Beasley (this will probably draw the most ire)

To be fair, we have always had that - or do you not remember Heisley's negotiation of Xavier Henry's rookie deal?

robbie84 · Post #16 » by **robbie84** » Wed Jun 5, 2013 11:26 am

dark-child wrote:Furthermore, we have to remember that we are now dealing with a front office that will quibble about a few million, so the likelihood that they would EVER amnesty anyone and eat multi millions is out of the question. Our owner may live in Silicon Valley & Taiwan, but he does not have Google/Facebook type of cheddar.

Furthermore, (I love this word) Z-BO is a huge asset and someone you can get a nice return on so there is no need to eve think about the amnesty provision regarding him. You may not like the deal completely that you get for him but it would be palatable with giving you more versatility roster and financially wise.

Call me crazy but I think Prince is movable for a three that can hit an outside shot and is not afraid to take the three. Don't kill me as I am only throwing these out there in terms of who could be available.

My top choice - Landry Fields,
Second choice - Andre Kirilenko (if he doesn't opt out)
Third choice - Michael Beasley (this will probably draw the most ire)

getting out of a 33 million dollar contract for 5 million is a pretty good deal. Any businessman will agree with this. If they want to shed his deal and collect assets they can do this potentially with a 3 team deal for Pierce and ZBo.
The salary has to be filled somehow it's just whether they'd rather have Pierce for one year or cut him and get assets back with some short term bad deals for the future.

GrizzledGrizzFan · Post #17 » by **GrizzledGrizzFan** » Wed Jun 5, 2013 12:42 pm

getting out of a 33 million dollar contract for 5 million is a pretty good deal.

IF and only if, the $33 million deal is a bad deal.

Which many of us in Memphis do not believe is the case.

The $28 million question is does the new front office think that this is the case. I just don't know how much you are going to be able to improve upon what Zach is giving you.

Snoopie · Post #18 » by **Snoopie** » Thu Jun 6, 2013 2:03 am

I can understand bringing Pierce in for Z-Bo if we wanted to run with Pierce. He is a good player, even at his age (although it will never happen because they are on similar sized contracts so what's the point?) and he knocks down threes. That is probably the best reason to favour Pierce over Z-Bo.

I cannot for the life of me understand bringing in Pierce just to end his contract. If we trade Z-Bo then for $5 million we could get a couple of decent rookies/draft picks and maybe a role player too. I would think that that is much better than trading Z-Bo away for the opportunity to pay Pierce $5 million.. it just doesn't add up.

dark-child · Post #19 » by **dark-child** » Thu Jun 6, 2013 4:13 pm

Snoopie, please don't dwell on it too much. To the rest of the league, the Grizz organization is code for financial trades that are completely one sided. We normally cut them a little slack since our front office has historically perpetuated this notion.

Snoopie · Post #20 » by **Snoopie** » Thu Jun 6, 2013 11:53 pm

Haha.. so you're saying that you actually wouldn't be surprised if something like that happened?

It's a real shame when the fans of a team come to expect crappy trades because that is the way their front office operates. I guess I'll just hold out hope that if we do trade out Z-Bo it will be for something that our team actually needs and not something that will just sending screaming back to the lottery..