Trade Targets (postcript on yesterday-other teams)

[Chemthethriller]

I'd love the cap space if we are going to be acquiring bad contracts with 1st round picks attached. Otherwise there really isn't a point. Not a very good batch of free agents this year outside of Monroe, Millsap, Rondo, Gasol and Dragic if he opts out. And most of those players are up there in age looking to compete for rings now.

I like dragic and Gasol... now if we could pull both of them... Dragic/Mid/Giannas/Parker/Gasol...

I like getting a 1st also, but I was trying to be realistic in what we would receive if anyone at all would even take Sanders.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

im a big knight supporter but next year you give him 4/48, alongside sanders at 3/33, and ersan at 1/8..... then NOT making this deal is basically saying knight is worth paying 89 million over the next 4 years.... that's his money AND all the dead money we could dump by moving him.

id be seriously bummed losing knight but the prospect of having 32-34 million in free space next year for Hammond/kidd to burn in place of Brandon knight is tempting. anybody that's says it isn't is a homer and waaaaay too high on Brandon knight. and that's od considering that's ben what ive been accused of all year. id make this deal if kidd wants flexibility to recruit. simple as that.

Yeah, I want a team full of Bayless and Dudley, lets do it....

Trade Parker for David West and trade Giannis for Batum......CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I want a team of bayless and dudleys. I don't want to trade giannis or parker. and Im unwilling to spend 89 million for knight over the next for 4 years by turning down a deal that takes out all our bad paper in order to keep him.

and this makes me a damn fool by your standard I guess. wtf

[paulpressey25]

All the Synergy stats show him playing well in an off ball role.

Luke--we save $91 million dollars potentially in that deal. I don't care how high the cap is going, that's real money we can spend on better players than Brandon Knight. Do you want an off-ball shooting guard? Spend $50 of that on Wes Matthews or Dragic this summer, guys who while older than Knight, also are the ideal size for SG's.

[LUKE23]

I don't think I'd sign either of those guys with this team.

[Giannis Parker]

knight, ersan, sanders, and a 2nd for nothing is tempting

#OwnTheFuture

To bad you have no clue what it is....

don't be a dick. I don't deserve it

Was not directed towards you, just used quote to continue the discussion.

To me dumping assets to remove an asset is the same as "PUSH FOR 8TH SEED" it is a backwards move that keeps you in mediocrity.

Knight is really beginning to build good chemistry as our PG, I know people do not want to admit that, but the last two weeks he has looked very sound. I am willing to see this out because I feel that Knight, who is currently a borderline All-Star, is worth keeping around.

I know others have another view, but Knight is not the asset you should use to dump salary. Not when he in and of himself is a worthy player and 23 yrs old.

The assets we should use to dump salary in the past are guys like Monta Ellis, a then 27yr old SG who was clearly not part of our team, nor did he want to be. Monta had value in the league, and he could have been used to clear space if so desired.

I also do not think Ersan needs an asset attached to him to move him, as his buyout of 400k in 2 years is attractive to several teams, and his 7.9 cap paired with the Bucks 7.2m in cap space opens up plausible avenues of discussion as well.

In summary, this is just a terrible sell low on Knight.

[Giannis Parker]

All the Synergy stats show him playing well in an off ball role.

Luke--we save $91 million dollars potentially in that deal. I don't care how high the cap is going, that's real money we can spend on better players than Brandon Knight. Do you want an off-ball shooting guard? Spend $50 of that on Wes Matthews or Dragic this summer, guys who while older than Knight, also are the ideal size for SG's.

Save 91m for what? To do what?

You want Kidd in charge of 91m with David West lurking? I know I do not want that.

Honestly, the last thing we currently need to worry about is saving money.

[emunney]

Do people think Knight wouldn't help us off ball? I don't view him as a negative asset if that's his role. If the team thinks he's our future PG, I throw him into any deal.

I don't see any need to include assets to clear the vets that expire after next year though. Unless you are figuring we are going to be huge FA players this summer, why not just have a huge conglomerate of expirings next season if we can't unload those contracts without including assets?

The only way Knight's worth the money he's going to get is if he turns into a net positive as an on ball player. He is not going to be worth it if he's going to be playing a role that requires less of him, and that's without considering that we already have a guy in that role who plays it better than Knight in Middleton, and who will cost less.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

if there was no salary cap then moving assets to dump cash would be infuriating. but with a salary cap in place for all teams it changes everything.

this made up rule that under all circumstances salary clearing deals should not attach assets to facilitate them is just that. its made up. there is no rule for that. with a salary cap and budget it makes moves like this absolutely necessary from time to time. anybody can spend money to grow a business, but a true manager, truly the most special ones..... understand pruning a business is by far the more important art to sustain that growth.

[mlloyd10]

All the Synergy stats show him playing well in an off ball role.

Luke--we save $91 million dollars potentially in that deal. I don't care how high the cap is going, that's real money we can spend on better players than Brandon Knight. Do you want an off-ball shooting guard? Spend $50 of that on Wes Matthews or Dragic this summer, guys who while older than Knight, also are the ideal size for SG's.

Save 91m for what? To do what?

You want Kidd in charge of 91m with David West lurking? I know I do not want that.

Honestly, the last thing we currently need to worry about is saving money.

[averageposter]

If we are truly a couple of years away, and if folks were generally fine tanking and rebuilding for multi seasons, why in the hell is anyone in a hurry to get these contracts off the books. Losing Knight, no matter how you feel about him, for absolutely nothing other than salary relief, would be criminal.

Move Knight for another usuable player or pick but, salary relief, why? Where would you spend it? On what?

Parker lost an entire season, we'll need the next to know whether or not we have what we think we have, Giannis isn't close to as good as he'll be yet. Either those guys get to the point they carry the day and we add a third or your hitting the reset button, but big salary space doesn't seem necessary, enough to facilitate small deals sure.

Sanders is untradeable, but even if he were I think its just as likely that this stint in rehab breeds the same success the last one did. If he continues to get suspended you'd have to believe that contract will become voidable. He is claiming he can't play under these circumstances, his words, something has to give here. I'd let that play out a bit.

[Giannis Parker]

If we are truly a couple of years away, and if folks were generally fine tanking and rebuilding for multi seasons, why in the hell is anyone in a hurry to get these contracts off the books. Losing Knight, no matter how you feel about him, for absolutely nothing other than salary relief, would be criminal.

Move Knight for another usuable player or pick but, salary relief, why? Where would you spend it? On what?

Parker lost an entire season, we'll need the next to know whether or not we have what we think we have, Giannis isn't close to as good as he'll be yet. Either those guys get to the point they carry the day and we add a third or your hitting the reset button, but big salary space doesn't seem necessary, enough to facilitate small deals sure.

Sanders is untradeable, but even if he were I think its just as likely that this stint in rehab breeds the same success the last one did. If he continues to get suspended you'd have to believe that contract will become voidable. He is claiming he can't play under these circumstances, his words, something has to give here. I'd let that play out a bit.

They would rather try to find Knight in the D-League then just keep Knight. Seems to be the working principle of many here. Think it goes something like this:

"23yr old player with near All-Star talent, bah, let him go, market for him is around 12m per season, that is terrible value, what is a near All-Star anyways, we can find that in the D-League. If he is not a bonafide star, I want him gone!!!!!!!"

The issue I have with posters here is their unwavering ignorance in accounts to Knight. Knight is not the exact mold of player THEY want HIM to be, so they want him gone for marginal returns. That is just terrible business. If we pay Knight 12m, if we pay him 14m, whatever we pay him, he is a RFA and the market will dictate his going rate. He will not become this unmovable asset that many are worried about.

If Knight was currently 27 or 28 and this is what we got in him, I am willing to trade him, but at 23, still showing signs of improvement, while being 2-3 years away from his prime ball yet, yeah, we are better than that people.

To be honest, I think we could get much more value for Knight via sign and trade this offseason than we could even remotely hope to get at the deadline. I am fine moving him, but for pieces that likely will not be as good as him, no thanks. The lottery is the biggest fraud our country has ever witnessed, and people still continue to look at it like it is the solution.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

roster with salary going into 2015 if we did this deal

bayless(3) - marshall(2) - mpgfb(1)
middleton(8) - mayo(8) - inglis(1)
giannis (2) - Dudley(5)
parker (6) - JOB(1)
Henson(3) - zaza(5)

plus our picks..... that's 14 guys under contract with double max under the old cap available.

that scenario makes my mouth water a little.

[paulpressey25]

The only way Knight's worth the money he's going to get is if he turns into a net positive as an on ball player. He is not going to be worth it if he's going to be playing a role that requires less of him, and that's without considering that we already have a guy in that role who plays it better than Knight in Middleton, and who will cost less.

That's correct. To make Brandon a $50 million dollar player at off-guard is not a great solution. He's always going to be at a major size disadvantage at that position.

The other part which again I don't think people are appreciating is what $45 million in real cash saved means. LED are rich but not made of money. Regardless of whether we need the cap space now or won't need it for three years, that is real cash. We can easily "buy" a player as good or better than Knight with that money. And then still have the money we'd spend on Knight left over to use on other players.

In any event, this is all hypothetical since Sanders money is so dead, there is no way Toronto takes on that deal just to get BK.

[mlloyd10]

Knight for Holiday?

[Rockmaninoff]

How about a trade like this:

Bucks receive: Landry Fields, Stimesma (tor)
Raptors receive: Knight and Sanders
76ers receive: Ersan, Chuck Hayes, MKE 2nd, TOR 2nd

Salaries work out on trade machine. This trade is basically giving away Knight when his value is high enough to remove Sanders from our roster. TOR gets scoring, and takes Sanders on with a possibilty of talking him back into playing. 76ers take on salary and receive more draft picks. MKE receives cap relief for the next 4 years dumping larry, also avoids overpaying for a volume shooting medicore PG. We dump both Fields and Stim after this year opening up 34m (roughly) in cap room for this offseason.

Sign me up for this one.

We are dumping Sanders and Ersan ($41 million saved after this season) for Brandon Knight. And in the process we open up 3 roster spots on next years squad for rookies or FA's.

The problem with this deal is Sanders. I see no one taking that contract right now.

Sanders for JaVale McGee?

Sanders then makes case that he is a resident of a state with decriminalized marijuana laws, and that he needs it for medicinal purposes.

[breakchains]

Guys, that is horrific asset management. The need to get rid of Larry is simply not so grave that you flush other assets down the toilet to do it. You let this Larry thing play out. This is coming from a guy who dreads paying Knight a bunch of money. I just want to actually get value for him. Let Larry sit on the shelf for a while. Maybe he hits rock bottom and then comes back and becomes a valuable asset again. Maybe not, but it's way too soon and rash to make such a move.

Move Knight and Ersan in different deals to get value back.

[VooDoo7]

If we pay Knight 12m, if we pay him 14m, whatever we pay him, he is a RFA and the market will dictate his going rate. He will not become this unmovable asset that many are worried about.

And you know this how? Knight at 4/48 or 4/56 could easily become an unmovable asset.

[averageposter]

How much actual cash can you save with the salary floor? You can have room to operate under the floor but you can't save additional cash as you have to pay the scrubs you have at least up to the floor. Aren't we basically just above the floor this season of 56,000,000?

[Siefer]

That deal is sneaky good.

It clears a ton of cap which opens doors for us to make numerous aggressive, creative moves. Middleton is already better than Knight, and fits our core exceedingly well. As much as I'm on the "move Knight off the ball" train, I'm not willing to commit to that at the expense of a better option at the 2 in Middleton.

[WeekapaugGroove]

That's correct. To make Brandon a $50 million dollar player at off-guard is not a great solution. He's always going to be at a major size disadvantage at that position.

I don't know if he really has a major size disadvantage at the 2 in todays NBA. More teams than ever play small the majority of the game and it's not like the few big SG's we have today will just take small guys into the post and kill them like old school McGrady or Kobe used to do. He's just a little smaller than Dragic and watching him play the 2 (and even some 3 this yr) I never feel like his size is some big advantage for the opponent. Knight's standing reach is 1 1/2 inches shorter than Bradley Beal who most consider perfect SG size... does that 1 1/2 inch really matter that much?