CLE/PHX

[mjj0062]

I'm not sure how I feel about this trade. Morris has the capability to be a good role player, but he scares me as far as how he'll affect team chemistry. The dude is a proven cancer. Plus, we're pretty jam packed at the 4/5. What we really need is a backup SF who can defend and maybe hit an open three here and there.

I personally think they should do it. Im not sure how he fits the team though unless you want to cut Love's minutes. You can't really play them together but there is no denying his offensive talents. I think he may be an underrated defender too.

I think he matches up with Golden State's small ball lineup and as a defender against LMA I think he fares better then Love

[SideSwipe]

I know enough of the details to know that the OP's deal is totally legal. Again the NBA has rules allowing each team to structure a trade in the most favorable way for them. But this deal is so simple there are no loopholes needed. Sideswipe just got confused for a second I guess.

Actually, I believe you may be confused. For the OP to be considered, PHX would have to contribute an additional asset, typically in the form of a 2nd rounder. In every trade a team must contribute an asset.

To accomplish the OP in the manner you suggest would actually require the following to be true:

Trade #1 Morris for a 2nd rounder (slotting into CLE Haywood TPE)
then
Trade #2 Harris for.... what other asset?

PHX would have to kick in a protected 2nd (55+ protected maybe, but still a pick)- it's an asset not included in the OP. It's pretty simple- for two trades to happen each side must have at least two assets involved. A TPE is not a tradable asset. A TPE is only a mechanism for taking in imbalanced salary regardless of cap situation.

The OP doesn't work and this value is off. PHX will keep Morris and play it out if this is the offer. You can book it. They have less and less incentive to move him as time goes on, not more at this point. Trade deadline is looking more likely than ever- if you want him more than that, the price needs to be higher. The tough truth is there are several teams that would like him. He will be very good for a vet team as the 3rd guy-HOU, TOR, NYK, CHI...could all use him, with several already rumored to want him.

No, its entirely legal. You can look at it differently for different teams. Cleveland takes him into the TPE while PHX gets Harris.

You know of any examples of where this has happened? I can't think of any, and I can't think of a situation that jives with Larry Coon's explanation of it. 2 over the cap teams, with one over the apron receiving the higher salary into an exception, while sending out a player in the same trade.

Once Morris is in the TPE for a 2nd, CLE's Non-Simultaneous trade from earlier this year is completed. This leaves a 2nd trade for Harris that would need to be completed. 2nd trade, 2nd asset required. That's my read on it, and I can't think of any trades that refute that, and neither the Coon doc nor the NBA CBA doc show anything against that I've been able to find.

Do you know where to find the info for what you are basing this trades legality on? I second-checked the Coon faq under TPE's and Trades, and the entire NBA FAQ, and can't find anything that says otherwise. Let me know if you have a link or something. I'd like to check it out.

[bondom34]

Actually, I believe you may be confused. For the OP to be considered, PHX would have to contribute an additional asset, typically in the form of a 2nd rounder. In every trade a team must contribute an asset.

To accomplish the OP in the manner you suggest would actually require the following to be true:

Trade #1 Morris for a 2nd rounder (slotting into CLE Haywood TPE)
then
Trade #2 Harris for.... what other asset?

PHX would have to kick in a protected 2nd (55+ protected maybe, but still a pick)- it's an asset not included in the OP. It's pretty simple- for two trades to happen each side must have at least two assets involved. A TPE is not a tradable asset. A TPE is only a mechanism for taking in imbalanced salary regardless of cap situation.

The OP doesn't work and this value is off. PHX will keep Morris and play it out if this is the offer. You can book it. They have less and less incentive to move him as time goes on, not more at this point. Trade deadline is looking more likely than ever- if you want him more than that, the price needs to be higher. The tough truth is there are several teams that would like him. He will be very good for a vet team as the 3rd guy-HOU, TOR, NYK, CHI...could all use him, with several already rumored to want him.

No, its entirely legal. You can look at it differently for different teams. Cleveland takes him into the TPE while PHX gets Harris.

You know of any examples of where this has happened? I can't think of any, and I can't think of a situation that jives with Larry Coon's explanation of it. 2 over the cap teams, with one over the apron receiving the higher salary into an exception, while sending out a player in the same trade.

Once Morris is in the TPE for a 2nd, CLE's Non-Simultaneous trade from earlier this year is completed. This leaves a 2nd trade for Harris that would need to be completed. 2nd trade, 2nd asset required. That's my read on it, and I can't think of any trades that refute that, and neither the Coon doc nor the NBA CBA doc show anything against that I've been able to find.

Do you know where to find the info for what you are basing this trades legality on? I second-checked the Coon faq under TPE's and Trades, and the entire NBA FAQ, and can't find anything that says otherwise. Let me know if you have a link or something. I'd like to check it out.

For CLE it is:

Harris out with Morris to the TPE as one trade.

For PHX it is:

Morris out Harris in.

It is somewhat covered in the part on non-simultaneous trades. Also just trade checkering it works.

[SideSwipe]

No, its entirely legal. You can look at it differently for different teams. Cleveland takes him into the TPE while PHX gets Harris.

You know of any examples of where this has happened? I can't think of any, and I can't think of a situation that jives with Larry Coon's explanation of it. 2 over the cap teams, with one over the apron receiving the higher salary into an exception, while sending out a player in the same trade.

Once Morris is in the TPE for a 2nd, CLE's Non-Simultaneous trade from earlier this year is completed. This leaves a 2nd trade for Harris that would need to be completed. 2nd trade, 2nd asset required. That's my read on it, and I can't think of any trades that refute that, and neither the Coon doc nor the NBA CBA doc show anything against that I've been able to find.

Do you know where to find the info for what you are basing this trades legality on? I second-checked the Coon faq under TPE's and Trades, and the entire NBA FAQ, and can't find anything that says otherwise. Let me know if you have a link or something. I'd like to check it out.

For CLE it is:

Harris out with Morris to the TPE as one trade.

For PHX it is:

Morris out Harris in.

It is somewhat covered in the part on non-simultaneous trades. Also just trade checkering it works.

Harris out with Morris in has to be two different trades. Harris trade is a new trade. Morris in is part of the original TPE trade. I don't see it in the non-simultaneous trades. Player+TPE out....not allowed unless in parallel trades.... Anecdotally, ESPN TM doesn't allow it (though we all know the TM is far from perfect.)

[bondom34]

You know of any examples of where this has happened? I can't think of any, and I can't think of a situation that jives with Larry Coon's explanation of it. 2 over the cap teams, with one over the apron receiving the higher salary into an exception, while sending out a player in the same trade.

Once Morris is in the TPE for a 2nd, CLE's Non-Simultaneous trade from earlier this year is completed. This leaves a 2nd trade for Harris that would need to be completed. 2nd trade, 2nd asset required. That's my read on it, and I can't think of any trades that refute that, and neither the Coon doc nor the NBA CBA doc show anything against that I've been able to find.

Do you know where to find the info for what you are basing this trades legality on? I second-checked the Coon faq under TPE's and Trades, and the entire NBA FAQ, and can't find anything that says otherwise. Let me know if you have a link or something. I'd like to check it out.

For CLE it is:

Harris out with Morris to the TPE as one trade.

For PHX it is:

Morris out Harris in.

It is somewhat covered in the part on non-simultaneous trades. Also just trade checkering it works.

Harris out with Morris in has to be two different trades. Harris trade is a new trade. Morris in is part of the original TPE trade. I don't see it in the non-simultaneous trades. Player+TPE out....not allowed unless in parallel trades.... Anecdotally, ESPN TM doesn't allow it (though we all know the TM is far from perfect.)

ESPNs does actually if you use the TPE. RealGM's doesn't though now that I check.

OK, gonna see if Smitty can chime in here because i think it should but now I'm confused.

[bondom34]

Also if they were willing to trade Kieff for Harris, they probably would just trade him for a 2nd anyway and call it a day.

[SideSwipe]

From Coon:
•In all trades (no matter how many teams are involved), each team must send out and take back at least one of the following: ◦A player under contract.
◦A future draft pick. If a pick is protected (see question number 87), then no more than 55 picks in a single draft can be protected.
◦The draft rights to an "NBA prospect" -- a player with a reasonable chance of becoming an NBA player during his career, or a contributing player in a reputable professional league (as determined by the league office).
◦The right to swap unencumbered picks in a future draft.
◦$75,000 or more.

No matter how you slice it, this is really looking like it needs to be two trades, and two trades requires two assets. Also I tried Realgm trade checker and it does not allow a Morris for Harris swap either so far as I can tell.

[SideSwipe]

Also if they were willing to trade Kieff for Harris, they probably would just trade him for a 2nd anyway and call it a day.

Yeah, not really the question. My point was I didn't think this was legal under the CBA, and the value was too low anyway. I then proceeded to derail this to a CBA forum... I am not seeing how this could work as the OP suggests though. I think PHX would have to come up with an additional asset and complete this as two different trades. Morris for a 2nd into the TPE to complete the non-simultaneous trade, then a second trade for Harris for an asset. I could still be wrong, but that has been my understanding, and I haven't seen anything saying otherwise yet.

This new CBA is...

[mjj0062]

Also if they were willing to trade Kieff for Harris, they probably would just trade him for a 2nd anyway and call it a day.

Yeah, not really the question. My point was I didn't think this was legal under the CBA, and the value was too low anyway. I then proceeded to derail this to a CBA forum... I am not seeing how this could work as the OP suggests though. I think PHX would have to come up with an additional asset and complete this as two different trades. Morris for a 2nd into the TPE to complete the non-simultaneous trade, then a second trade for Harris for an asset. I could still be wrong, but that has been my understanding, and I haven't seen anything saying otherwise yet.

This new CBA is...

Last season, the cavs traded Denver 2 first round picks and a trade exception for Mozgov. No other contracts were moved. I don't know why they couldnt just move kieff for a tpe + pick and call it a day. I mean really what value does Joe Harris have around the league?

[mjj0062]

http://www.nba.com/cavaliers/releases/mozgov-trade-150107

[hcsilla]

Also if they were willing to trade Kieff for Harris, they probably would just trade him for a 2nd anyway and call it a day.

Yeah, not really the question. My point was I didn't think this was legal under the CBA, and the value was too low anyway. I then proceeded to derail this to a CBA forum... I am not seeing how this could work as the OP suggests though. I think PHX would have to come up with an additional asset and complete this as two different trades. Morris for a 2nd into the TPE to complete the non-simultaneous trade, then a second trade for Harris for an asset. I could still be wrong, but that has been my understanding, and I haven't seen anything saying otherwise yet.

This new CBA is...

Yes, that's correct.

Both teams add a future heavily protected 2nd rounder and the deal is OK technically.

[SideSwipe]

Also if they were willing to trade Kieff for Harris, they probably would just trade him for a 2nd anyway and call it a day.

Yeah, not really the question. My point was I didn't think this was legal under the CBA, and the value was too low anyway. I then proceeded to derail this to a CBA forum... I am not seeing how this could work as the OP suggests though. I think PHX would have to come up with an additional asset and complete this as two different trades. Morris for a 2nd into the TPE to complete the non-simultaneous trade, then a second trade for Harris for an asset. I could still be wrong, but that has been my understanding, and I haven't seen anything saying otherwise yet.

This new CBA is...

Last season, the cavs traded Denver 2 first round picks and a trade exception for Mozgov. No other contracts were moved. I don't know why they couldnt just move kieff for a tpe + pick and call it a day. I mean really what value does Joe Harris have around the league?

Yes, that could be done, but it's not worth it to PHX. Pick(s) for player is exactly how the TPE situation is typically done. Joe Harris' contract is what messes up the OP. My whole point, though was that the OP could not be completed as-is, in any case. So the OP is not doable, and the OP plus an additional asset from PHX to make it legal is not acceptable or sensible value-wise.

I think if CLE wants Morris it will be for a 2018 #1 plus another small asset.

Something like Morris into the TPE for CLE 2018 #1
then
Williams to PHX for a heavily protected 2nd.

[HartfordWhalers]

Yeah, not really the question. My point was I didn't think this was legal under the CBA, and the value was too low anyway. I then proceeded to derail this to a CBA forum... I am not seeing how this could work as the OP suggests though. I think PHX would have to come up with an additional asset and complete this as two different trades. Morris for a 2nd into the TPE to complete the non-simultaneous trade, then a second trade for Harris for an asset. I could still be wrong, but that has been my understanding, and I haven't seen anything saying otherwise yet.

This new CBA is...

Last season, the cavs traded Denver 2 first round picks and a trade exception for Mozgov. No other contracts were moved. I don't know why they couldnt just move kieff for a tpe + pick and call it a day. I mean really what value does Joe Harris have around the league?

Yes, that could be done, but it's not worth it to PHX. Pick(s) for player is exactly how the TPE situation is typically done. Joe Harris' contract is what messes up the OP. My whole point, though was that the OP could not be completed as-is, in any case. So the OP is not doable, and the OP plus an additional asset from PHX to make it legal is not acceptable or sensible value-wise.

I think if CLE wants Morris it will be for a 2018 #1 plus another small asset.

Something like Morris into the TPE for CLE 2018 #1
then
Williams to PHX for a heavily protected 2nd.

There really is no problem with including Joe Harris, your reading on that is wrong.

[bondom34]

Last season, the cavs traded Denver 2 first round picks and a trade exception for Mozgov. No other contracts were moved. I don't know why they couldnt just move kieff for a tpe + pick and call it a day. I mean really what value does Joe Harris have around the league?

Yes, that could be done, but it's not worth it to PHX. Pick(s) for player is exactly how the TPE situation is typically done. Joe Harris' contract is what messes up the OP. My whole point, though was that the OP could not be completed as-is, in any case. So the OP is not doable, and the OP plus an additional asset from PHX to make it legal is not acceptable or sensible value-wise.

I think if CLE wants Morris it will be for a 2018 #1 plus another small asset.

Something like Morris into the TPE for CLE 2018 #1
then
Williams to PHX for a heavily protected 2nd.

There really is no problem with including Joe Harris, your reading on that is wrong.

This is what I thought, but it doesn't work in the trade checker, which seemed odd.

[HartfordWhalers]

Yes, that could be done, but it's not worth it to PHX. Pick(s) for player is exactly how the TPE situation is typically done. Joe Harris' contract is what messes up the OP. My whole point, though was that the OP could not be completed as-is, in any case. So the OP is not doable, and the OP plus an additional asset from PHX to make it legal is not acceptable or sensible value-wise.

I think if CLE wants Morris it will be for a 2018 #1 plus another small asset.

Something like Morris into the TPE for CLE 2018 #1
then
Williams to PHX for a heavily protected 2nd.

There really is no problem with including Joe Harris, your reading on that is wrong.

This is what I thought, but it doesn't work in the trade checker, which seemed odd.

Realgm's trade checker allows:
Markieff for nothing
Joe Harris for nothing

But when both are combined it apparently tries to match salary and finds that Markieff is not within 125% of Joe Harris. Seems a bug, and the trade checker is not worried about minimum consideration in a trade for either of the one player trades, or in that case either but rather defaulting to not include the existing exception for some odd reason.

In contrast, ESPN's allows the joint trade (when you manually apply the TPE) http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=zke4jga
but ESPN's won't allow Harris for nothing via the minimum player exception.

So, all trade checkers have faults.

But for the minimum consideration, that just applies to the greater trade, which you can see as 1 trade from Phx's side as Morris for Harris.

[HartfordWhalers]

From Coon:
•In all trades (no matter how many teams are involved), each team must send out and take back at least one of the following: ◦A player under contract.
◦A future draft pick. If a pick is protected (see question number 87), then no more than 55 picks in a single draft can be protected.
◦The draft rights to an "NBA prospect" -- a player with a reasonable chance of becoming an NBA player during his career, or a contributing player in a reputable professional league (as determined by the league office).
◦The right to swap unencumbered picks in a future draft.
◦$75,000 or more.

No matter how you slice it, this is really looking like it needs to be two trades, and two trades requires two assets. Also I tried Realgm trade checker and it does not allow a Morris for Harris swap either so far as I can tell.

So, here is an example to help show how this only applies to the trade in the broad sense, and not how the matching is done within it.

Kirilenko, Guitterez, Right to swap Nets 2018 2nd with Cleveland's 2018 2nd, Nets 2020 second-round pick, and 1m cash for Brandon Davies.

Nets sent 5 things (2 players, 1 pick, 1 pick swap, 1 pile of cash), Philly sent 1 (player).

If the minimum consideration was applied to all sub-trades, then this would have to be viewed just as 1 trade.

However, the Nets viewed it as 3 trades:

Kirilenko for a TPE equal to his full salary
Guitterez for a TPE equal to his full salary
and then Davies taken via the minimum salary exception

The worry about minimum consideration only applies to the greater trade, with the question of how salary matching is done for the largest TPE's then ignoring it.

[bondom34]

There really is no problem with including Joe Harris, your reading on that is wrong.

This is what I thought, but it doesn't work in the trade checker, which seemed odd.

Realgm's trade checker allows:
Markieff for nothing
Joe Harris for nothing

But when both are combined it apparently tries to match salary and finds that Markieff is not within 125% of Joe Harris. Seems a bug, and the trade checker is not worried about minimum consideration in a trade for either of the one player trades, or in that case either but rather defaulting to not include the existing exception for some odd reason.

In contrast, ESPN's allows the joint trade (when you manually apply the TPE) http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=zke4jga
but ESPN's won't allow Harris for nothing via the minimum player exception.

So, all trade checkers have faults.

But for the minimum consideration, that just applies to the greater trade, which you can see as 1 trade from Phx's side as Morris for Harris.

OK, this was my thinking too, but it seemed weird b/c it works on ESPNs checker but not RealGMs, and I usually trust this one over ESPN. I was arguing it was legal until I realized that.

[SideSwipe]

From Coon:
•In all trades (no matter how many teams are involved), each team must send out and take back at least one of the following: ◦A player under contract.
◦A future draft pick. If a pick is protected (see question number 87), then no more than 55 picks in a single draft can be protected.
◦The draft rights to an "NBA prospect" -- a player with a reasonable chance of becoming an NBA player during his career, or a contributing player in a reputable professional league (as determined by the league office).
◦The right to swap unencumbered picks in a future draft.
◦$75,000 or more.

No matter how you slice it, this is really looking like it needs to be two trades, and two trades requires two assets. Also I tried Realgm trade checker and it does not allow a Morris for Harris swap either so far as I can tell.

So, here is an example to help show how this only applies to the trade in the broad sense, and not how the matching is done within it.

Kirilenko, Guitterez, Right to swap Nets 2018 2nd with Cleveland's 2018 2nd, Nets 2020 second-round pick, and 1m cash for Brandon Davies.

Nets sent 5 things (2 players, 1 pick, 1 pick swap, 1 pile of cash), Philly sent 1 (player).

If the minimum consideration was applied to all sub-trades, then this would have to be viewed just as 1 trade.

However, the Nets viewed it as 3 trades:

Kirilenko for a TPE equal to his full salary
Guitterez for a TPE equal to his full salary
and then Davies taken via the minimum salary exception

The worry about minimum consideration only applies to the greater trade, with the question of how salary matching is done for the largest TPE's then ignoring it.

Thanks for taking the time to put this together. I am still not seeing it, despite the assertion. Trade checkers don't account for picks trading hands (or other asset- cash, pick swap...), which is what I think the OP would require to complete.

The BKN example is different from the OP, in that it is the beginning of a non-simultaneous trade, not completing one.

Joe Harris is a non-minimum-salary player, which means any trade of him from CLE's and PHX's side (both over the cap) should meet the 125% + 100K rule. Strange things are afoot at the Circle K in the trade checkers, and this rule. Realgm trade checker should not allow Harris to be traded for nothing due to the listed rule- PHX would need to add salary to the deal to come within 125% + 100K- I'm thinking that maybe the realgm trade checker sees him as a minimum player-which he is not.

I am still not seeing anything in the rulebook FAQ's to support the completion of a non-simultaneous trade using an additional player from the original trading team. Any thoughts on a link to that? I'm not seeing it anywhere. So far everything I am seeing suggests otherwise.

[Texas Chuck]

sideswipe,

The important rule you keep missing is that each team can structure the deal separately. So for Phoenix it's really simple:

Morris for Harris. They take back less salary than they send out so they are legal.


It's only 2 simultaneous trades on the Cleveland side because they have to use the TPE to take on Morris' money. So for them its Morris for the 2nd and then Harris for nothing. But because they happen simultaneously Phoenix doesn't have to send them something else for Harris because Morris satisfies that obligation.

[HartfordWhalers]

From Coon:
•In all trades (no matter how many teams are involved), each team must send out and take back at least one of the following: ◦A player under contract.
◦A future draft pick. If a pick is protected (see question number 87), then no more than 55 picks in a single draft can be protected.
◦The draft rights to an "NBA prospect" -- a player with a reasonable chance of becoming an NBA player during his career, or a contributing player in a reputable professional league (as determined by the league office).
◦The right to swap unencumbered picks in a future draft.
◦$75,000 or more.

No matter how you slice it, this is really looking like it needs to be two trades, and two trades requires two assets. Also I tried Realgm trade checker and it does not allow a Morris for Harris swap either so far as I can tell.

So, here is an example to help show how this only applies to the trade in the broad sense, and not how the matching is done within it.

Kirilenko, Guitterez, Right to swap Nets 2018 2nd with Cleveland's 2018 2nd, Nets 2020 second-round pick, and 1m cash for Brandon Davies.

Nets sent 5 things (2 players, 1 pick, 1 pick swap, 1 pile of cash), Philly sent 1 (player).

If the minimum consideration was applied to all sub-trades, then this would have to be viewed just as 1 trade.

However, the Nets viewed it as 3 trades:

Kirilenko for a TPE equal to his full salary
Guitterez for a TPE equal to his full salary
and then Davies taken via the minimum salary exception

The worry about minimum consideration only applies to the greater trade, with the question of how salary matching is done for the largest TPE's then ignoring it.

Thanks for taking the time to put this together. I am still not seeing it, despite the assertion. Trade checkers don't account for picks trading hands (or other asset- cash, pick swap...), which is what I think the OP would require to complete.

The BKN example is different from the OP, in that it is the beginning of a non-simultaneous trade, not completing one.

Joe Harris is a non-minimum-salary player, which means any trade of him from CLE's and PHX's side (both over the cap) should meet the 125% + 100K rule. Strange things are afoot at the Circle K in the trade checkers, and this rule. Realgm trade checker should not allow Harris to be traded for nothing due to the listed rule- PHX would need to add salary to the deal to come within 125% + 100K- I'm thinking that maybe the realgm trade checker sees him as a minimum player-which he is not.

I am still not seeing anything in the rulebook FAQ's to support the completion of a non-simultaneous trade using an additional player from the original trading team. Any thoughts on a link to that? I'm not seeing it anywhere. So far everything I am seeing suggests otherwise.

You are mistaken.

1) Joe Harris is a minimum salary player. He is paid the minimum for a 2nd year player.
2) The Brooklyn example shows you can apportion salary for TPE's and not worry about the minimum consideration within the apportions. What matters is that you meet it for the entirely of the transaction that consists of the trade call.
3) Trade rules apply to the taking in of salary. Cleveland can take in Morris via their TPE. Phoenix can take on Harris either through the minimum player exception or via matching with Morris but
4) Even if Harris was not a minimum player, you can have the teams account for a trade differently. And all that matters is each team is adding the players they add legally in their accounting I.e.

If Cleveland trades Morris for Mo Williams it can be broken down:
-- Cleveland uses TPE from previous trade for Morris (and doesn't use Williams for matching but just trades him separately and who cares how Phoenix makes that legal or if it is illegal).
-- Phoenix uses Morris for matching for Williams getting a TPE equal to their difference (and doesn't care that smaller TPE + Williams or Morris is illegal for Cleveland)
Both teams have a legal trade from their perspective, even though the perspectives are entirely different.