Granger Trade Idea
Moderators: pacers33granger, Grang33r, pacerfan, Jake0890, boomershadow
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Wizop
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,437
- And1: 5,111
- Joined: Jun 15, 2003
- Location: Indianapolis, IN
- Contact:
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Green wasn't nearly as helpful as we'd hoped but he wasn't a distraction either. I don't want to pay a high price just to move him. that would be particular true of a deal that moved Granger too. the only harm I see Green causing other than money is taking up a sport on the active 13 that we need for Granger.
Please edit long quotes to only show what puts your new message into context.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 44,789
- And1: 14,062
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
xBulletproof wrote:Also, I saw no restrictions on the ability to extend 30% of the cap to only one guy per team, and Durant wasn't signed under the Rose exception list. So Westbrook didn't get the Rose bonus to 30%, but he was their 5 year designation that they're only allowed one of. I'm not sure how Westbrook isn't getting the 30% max based on the ability for the floating number extended to guys coming off rookie contracts. An agent screw up maybe?
Well, we're both kind of right. The 5 year designation was given to Westbrook, solely because Durant was grandfathered in as he had signed before the new CBA. However, that was also a reason they traded Harden, as they were unable to offer him a 5 year as they had already designated Westbrook the "Rose" guy. Each team is allowed one designation. It's been casually mentioned in all kinds of articles, but I remember it definitively mentioned by Larry Coon in a CBA agreement chat back in 2011.
Ultimately, Westbrook didn't meet the 30% criteria, but was given the 5 year designation. Harden is eligible for the 30%, but hasn't met it yet, and apparently can have his contract upgraded to it when he does, according to ShamSports. However, Harden did get the 5 year designation in Houston.
Blake Griffin and Derrick Rose are the other 5 year designees. I would assume that Hibbert didn't get the designation out of saving it for George. Also, there's a thought that Kahn was saving the 5 year designation for Rubio in Minnesota, and thus why Love didn't get it.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 44,789
- And1: 14,062
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Boneman2 wrote:Bottom line, it would be very stupid to give away the 23rd pick just to save 3.5m. I really feel Green can be flipped for a veteran with a similar contract, whether it be a disgruntled player or a player buried on the bench.
Ultimately, he is an expiring next season and I don't want to throw away another pick. This is very counterproductive when you are a team that builds through the draft. I remember a similar deal where we gave ATL a first to absorb Al Harrington's albatross contract. Green is peanuts.
If you're looking for a swap, the candidates (in differing amounts of value) would be Sessions, Miller, Blake, Arthur, Udoh, Ridnour, Camby, Kleiza, and maybe Vesely? Obviously, guys like Sessions, Miller, Arthur, Ridnour, and possibly Udoh (and others) would take additional value on our part. It's possible you could net a guy like Kleiza, Camby, Blake, or Vesely straight up if you catch their GM at the right time or sell them on saving some salary this year, in exchange for taking on the additional year of Green.
I mean, would Toronto do a Kleiza for Green + 2nd deal? Possibly. Knicks for Camby? Possibly. You just never know.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 44,789
- And1: 14,062
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Boneman2 wrote: I remember a similar deal where we gave ATL a first to absorb Al Harrington's albatross contract.
We traded Harrington to ATL for Stephen Jackson straight up at first. Then, after he expired, we negotiated a S&T where we used the Peja TPE (from his S&T to New Orleans), John Edwards, and our 1st to trade for Harrington. We then traded Harrington to Golden State with Jackson, Josh Powell, and Jasikevicius for Murphy, Dunleavy, Diogu, and McLeod.
We used value in the past (Brad Miller S&T to Sacramento) to dump Ron Mercer's bad contract. I can't think of when we gave up a 1st to dump a bad contract.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Wizop
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,437
- And1: 5,111
- Joined: Jun 15, 2003
- Location: Indianapolis, IN
- Contact:
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
I hear Toronto's new management is considering blowing it up completely. I understand why a new management would want a clean slate, but I liked how they were playing at the end of the year.
Please edit long quotes to only show what puts your new message into context.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Jake0890
- Forum Mod - Pacers
- Posts: 5,983
- And1: 807
- Joined: Jul 12, 2012
- Location: Indianapolis, IN
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Wizop wrote:I hear Toronto's new management is considering blowing it up completely. I understand why a new management would want a clean slate, but I liked how they were playing at the end of the year.
Where do they go from here though? Not good enough to win anything, not bad enough to win the lotto. They're in the worst position possible with some HORRIBLE contracts. If Ujiri blows it up, he should be GMOTY for 2 years straight.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,314
- And1: 1,665
- Joined: Jul 07, 2003
- Location: Indy
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Scoot McGroot wrote:Boneman2 wrote: I remember a similar deal where we gave ATL a first to absorb Al Harrington's albatross contract.
We traded Harrington to ATL for Stephen Jackson straight up at first. Then, after he expired, we negotiated a S&T where we used the Peja TPE (from his S&T to New Orleans), John Edwards, and our 1st to trade for Harrington. We then traded Harrington to Golden State with Jackson, Josh Powell, and Jasikevicius for Murphy, Dunleavy, Diogu, and McLeod.
We used value in the past (Brad Miller S&T to Sacramento) to dump Ron Mercer's bad contract. I can't think of when we gave up a 1st to dump a bad contract.
That's right... your mind is a lock trap. I just remember wasting a first on that transaction (12th overall).
"A man who fears suffering is already suffering from what he fears." -Michel de Montaigne
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 44,789
- And1: 14,062
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Boneman2 wrote:Scoot McGroot wrote:Boneman2 wrote: I remember a similar deal where we gave ATL a first to absorb Al Harrington's albatross contract.
We traded Harrington to ATL for Stephen Jackson straight up at first. Then, after he expired, we negotiated a S&T where we used the Peja TPE (from his S&T to New Orleans), John Edwards, and our 1st to trade for Harrington. We then traded Harrington to Golden State with Jackson, Josh Powell, and Jasikevicius for Murphy, Dunleavy, Diogu, and McLeod.
We used value in the past (Brad Miller S&T to Sacramento) to dump Ron Mercer's bad contract. I can't think of when we gave up a 1st to dump a bad contract.
That's right... your mind is a lock trap. I just remember wasting a first on that transaction (12th overall).
Eh, it just turned out to be Acie Earl IV. He's had a decent career in Europe, but we didn't lose anything there.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 8,314
- And1: 1,665
- Joined: Jul 07, 2003
- Location: Indy
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Yeah, That draft was weak and we probably would've taken Acie too.
I just don't like to gamble on any of our picks because you never know what you'll get (Lance/Kawhi/George/Hibbert/ Granger) and the early 20's have been a hot spot in recent years. Take a guy like Shroder, I hear his workouts have not been great, maybe he drops to 23. I'd also consider Gobert, Mitchell, Hardaway, and a few others.
Our team is a team that depends almost exclusively on the draft, unless we entrap a player like Hill. Plus it's nice to fill out the roster with nice small three-year deals ranging from 600k to 960k roughly. This allows us to grow our players into our system and not force what is now a $7million dollar mistake.
I'd actually like to have an additional pick.
Sorry for hijacking
I just don't like to gamble on any of our picks because you never know what you'll get (Lance/Kawhi/George/Hibbert/ Granger) and the early 20's have been a hot spot in recent years. Take a guy like Shroder, I hear his workouts have not been great, maybe he drops to 23. I'd also consider Gobert, Mitchell, Hardaway, and a few others.
Our team is a team that depends almost exclusively on the draft, unless we entrap a player like Hill. Plus it's nice to fill out the roster with nice small three-year deals ranging from 600k to 960k roughly. This allows us to grow our players into our system and not force what is now a $7million dollar mistake.
I'd actually like to have an additional pick.
Sorry for hijacking
"A man who fears suffering is already suffering from what he fears." -Michel de Montaigne
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 44,789
- And1: 14,062
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Boneman2 wrote:Yeah, That draft was weak and we probably would've taken Acie too.
I just don't like to gamble on any of our picks because you never know what you'll get (Lance/Kawhi/George/Hibbert/ Granger) and the early 20's have been a hot spot in recent years. Take a guy like Shroder, I hear his workouts have not been great, maybe he drops to 23. I'd also consider Gobert, Mitchell, Hardaway, and a few others.
Our team is a team that depends almost exclusively on the draft, unless we entrap a player like Hill. Plus it's nice to fill out the roster with nice small three-year deals ranging from 600k to 960k roughly. This allows us to grow our players into our system and not force what is now a $7million dollar mistake.
I'd actually like to have an additional pick.
Sorry for hijacking
Oh, no worries. You know that I'm a "keep the draft picks" kind of guy unless it just makes complete sense. I vaguely recall being on with that 1st for Harrington deal because we felt pretty good of our chances in the playoffs and wanted a now piece, and we were really not happy with that draft.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Fahrenhait
- Sophomore
- Posts: 110
- And1: 12
- Joined: Feb 01, 2013
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Tyreke Evans and Thompson would be nice, Evans still has a high ceiling despite struggling on a cancerous team.
Re: Granger Trade Idea
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 44,789
- And1: 14,062
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: Granger Trade Idea
Fahrenhait wrote:Tyreke Evans and Thompson would be nice, Evans still has a high ceiling despite struggling on a cancerous team.
We'd have to let Paul George walk next year or let West walk this offseason, neither of which we'd want to do.
Good value though. If we take on future salary, we have to move Green and/or Mahinmi.