Official Trade Thread - Part XXXI

[Dat2U]

To me, the goal should always be the same -- contend for a title. I don't see how this group ever gets there. If I say instead the goal for me as a fan is to have a more interesting team to watch, a team as good lets say as we were a couple of years ago, which I remind you was never in the top 4 in the EC, never a team w/ a R1 home court advantage in the playoffs -- for that it's not necessary to do a complete reset.

But 3 things -- 1) that kind of team has no path to contending for a title either, it's too dependent on being lucky (Pierce being available, Sessions actually playing well, Butler having an outlier 1/3 season, etc.), 2) Ernie had to do a complete reset to wind up w/ that kind of team, and 3) a good GM doesn't have to aim that low.

There's only two teams with a path towards contending for the next few years unless there's a major injury. That's the Warriors & the Cavs. So should the other 28 teams blow it up and rebuild?

In the East the gap b/w Cleveland & every one else is pretty wide despite the record. I guess the Raps look pretty good record wise but I think their quite beatable.

I recognize the Wizards, as currently constructed, aren't going anywhere. But I still maintain one or two moves are what separates us from challenging anyone else outside of Cleveland in the East. And if Cleveland suffers an injury or two, anything is possible.

Again, I see little reason to blow things up because we don't have a bench. Your exercise a few posts up shows how big a difference a couple of decent NBA players would make to our roster. Starting from scratch just makes no sense when your core is 26, 23, 23 & 21.

[gambitx777]

I was thinking of this trade,
WAS Gets: knight
Suns get : Mahinmi, MCW, Gibson, second round pick from was
Bulls get Chandler.
Something around that, Maybe we have to tweak the deal but I really think that trade works? The suns ditch chandler's contract and get Mahinmi and gibson to bolster their front. And they get a cheaper back up PG
The bulls fix a need at backup center, and they move MCW and gibson, 2 players that they do not need, MCW has not played for them much and They have enough front court players to not have to worry about losing gibson.
We add a much needed scoring back up point guard that would be an improvement over our bench
This deal is assuming that we make another trade somewhere for a back up center and maybe another pf or shooter. But this would be a solid deal.

[Meliorus]

I was thinking of this trade,
WAS Gets: knight
Suns get : Mahinmi, MCW, Gibson, second round pick from was
Bulls get Chandler.
Something around that, Maybe we have to tweak the deal but I really think that trade works? The suns ditch chandler's contract and get Mahinmi and gibson to bolster their front. And they get a cheaper back up PG
The bulls fix a need at backup center, and they move MCW and gibson, 2 players that they do not need, MCW has not played for them much and They have enough front court players to not have to worry about losing gibson.
We add a much needed scoring back up point guard that would be an improvement over our bench
This deal is assuming that we make another trade somewhere for a back up center and maybe another pf or shooter. But this would be a solid deal.

Let's see how Manhimi does. His previous coach Frank Vogel called him one of the best defenders at the center position.

[Kings2013]

I said 3 players. One quality starter at PF and two solid bench players. Would you disagree with this?

I was responding to Faze not you, Dat.

A starter and two good bench guys could amount to almost 6000 minutes of PT. That's 30% of the total. There is no question that it would be possible to plug in the names of 3 guys who could make us a lot better!

But, whom do you have in mind? I.e. plug in the 3 guys and remove (I assume) Nicholson, Smith and Burke.

Keep in mind that at least 2 of our starters would be playing fewer minutes. That's good of course; it's hard to imagine those guys getting through the season w/o injury at this rate. But it also means that lower production players will be taking those minutes.

Ok as a hypothetical trade let's say you got:
Cousins at PF moving Morris to the bench.
Temple at SG replacing Beal.
Casspi at SF replacing Oubre.
Lawson at PG replacing Burke.

So:
Gortat / Mahinmi / Smith
Cousins / Morris / Nicholson
Porter / Casspi / House
Temple / Thornton / McClellan
Wall / Lawson / Satoransky

How many games would this team win? How would they compare to the better teams in the East outside of Cleveland? Would they make the playoffs and are the capable of winning a series or two?

But it's not realistic. If you added George at the 4 and some of the Pacers role players for Beal package I'm sure that team could compete too.

Obviously I don't think Cousins is going anywhere, but even in the wild theoretical they aren't adding value to him, and it wouldnt be for a questionable Beal when the Kings have Bogdanovic coming over and Richardson looks good.

Beal's contract will offer hesitancy to anyone you try to trade him to though he's a good player. A lot of money and he's still considered somewhat a risk

[payitforward]

To me, the goal should always be the same -- contend for a title. I don't see how this group ever gets there. If I say instead the goal for me as a fan is to have a more interesting team to watch, a team as good lets say as we were a couple of years ago, which I remind you was never in the top 4 in the EC, never a team w/ a R1 home court advantage in the playoffs -- for that it's not necessary to do a complete reset.

But 3 things -- 1) that kind of team has no path to contending for a title either, it's too dependent on being lucky (Pierce being available, Sessions actually playing well, Butler having an outlier 1/3 season, etc.), 2) Ernie had to do a complete reset to wind up w/ that kind of team, and 3) a good GM doesn't have to aim that low.

There's only two teams with a path towards contending for the next few years unless there's a major injury. That's the Warriors & the Cavs. So should the other 28 teams blow it up and rebuild?

In the East the gap b/w Cleveland & every one else is pretty wide despite the record. I guess the Raps look pretty good record wise but I think their quite beatable.

I recognize the Wizards, as currently constructed, aren't going anywhere. But I still maintain one or two moves are what separates us from challenging anyone else outside of Cleveland in the East. And if Cleveland suffers an injury or two, anything is possible.

Again, I see little reason to blow things up because we don't have a bench. Your exercise a few posts up shows how big a difference a couple of decent NBA players would make to our roster. Starting from scratch just makes no sense when your core is 26, 23, 23 & 21.

I wasn't being clear enough (as usual!). You're saying that there are only two teams that can contend for a title right now. I might disagree and say the number is three, or even four. But the teams that can contend now are not relevant to what I was saying I thought our goal should be (or, really, the goal of any franchise in any sport).

"A path to contention" to me means that you have the players, other assets & skills that offer you a chance to be in the next group of two-to-four teams that are contending. Not that we should always have the goal to contend this season, or even next season. But you want to be on a path where it's not inconceivable that you contend two seasons from now, and it's very likely that you are a h#ll of a lot closer to doing it at that point than you are now.

That's what "I don't see" for "this group." I remind you that two years ago when we won 46 games and got to R2 of the playoffs, I said that I thought the team had peaked, and that we'd be worse not better in the next two years. I got tons of flack for that, of course, but in fact I was right. It was obvious to me that we'd been propelled to 19-6 by a lucky accident (Rasual Butler with a superman cape on). We went 27-30 the rest of the season. The following year we won 41 games and gave up some future assets for the privilege. This year we are worse yet.

Plus we've tied our hands salary-wise in a horrible way. So those "one or two moves" you mention aren't likely -- i.e. they aren't in that "path" I was talking about. Not to mention that I think "one or two moves" getting us past 10 teams to where we're right behind the Cavaliers... that's fantasy. Especially since other teams too are capable of making one or two moves!

And, anyway, what are those one or two moves? I mean, if we've moved from "Kevin Durant is the savior and will drop from the sky to play here because this is where he's from and he likes his Mother's cooking," which always seemed like pure fantasy to me, to some other such scenario (perhaps involving Cousins: "...savior... drop from sky... cuz can't be happy w/o playing w/ John Wall....") you can be sure I'm not buying that stock.

Finally, to be on such a path, we'd need leadership that has any idea what path we're on at all ever! We don't have that. We have leadership that acquired Jason Smith, Andrew Nicholson & Trey Burke because those three guys were going to help us be in the playoffs. Then added Marcus Thornton as our #1 SG option off the bench and gave Mahinmi $16m a year because... because... well, just because! Then filled out the roster with three guys who it isn't clear are even D-League level standouts.

[deneem4]

I was thinking of this trade,
WAS Gets: knight
Suns get : Mahinmi, MCW, Gibson, second round pick from was
Bulls get Chandler.
Something around that, Maybe we have to tweak the deal but I really think that trade works? The suns ditch chandler's contract and get Mahinmi and gibson to bolster their front. And they get a cheaper back up PG
The bulls fix a need at backup center, and they move MCW and gibson, 2 players that they do not need, MCW has not played for them much and They have enough front court players to not have to worry about losing gibson.
We add a much needed scoring back up point guard that would be an improvement over our bench
This deal is assuming that we make another trade somewhere for a back up center and maybe another pf or shooter. But this would be a solid deal.

How about we take Gibson as well and offer 2 2nds?

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

To me, the goal should always be the same -- contend for a title. I don't see how this group ever gets there. If I say instead the goal for me as a fan is to have a more interesting team to watch, a team as good lets say as we were a couple of years ago, which I remind you was never in the top 4 in the EC, never a team w/ a R1 home court advantage in the playoffs -- for that it's not necessary to do a complete reset.

But 3 things -- 1) that kind of team has no path to contending for a title either, it's too dependent on being lucky (Pierce being available, Sessions actually playing well, Butler having an outlier 1/3 season, etc.), 2) Ernie had to do a complete reset to wind up w/ that kind of team, and 3) a good GM doesn't have to aim that low.

There's only two teams with a path towards contending for the next few years unless there's a major injury. That's the Warriors & the Cavs. So should the other 28 teams blow it up and rebuild?

In the East the gap b/w Cleveland & every one else is pretty wide despite the record. I guess the Raps look pretty good record wise but I think their quite beatable.

I recognize the Wizards, as currently constructed, aren't going anywhere. But I still maintain one or two moves are what separates us from challenging anyone else outside of Cleveland in the East. And if Cleveland suffers an injury or two, anything is possible.

Again, I see little reason to blow things up because we don't have a bench. Your exercise a few posts up shows how big a difference a couple of decent NBA players would make to our roster. Starting from scratch just makes no sense when your core is 26, 23, 23 & 21.

Minnesota has the talent to challenge in a year or two. Milwaukee is one trade for a solid guard away. Detroit has some talent.

It's early in the season.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

To me, the goal should always be the same -- contend for a title. I don't see how this group ever gets there. If I say instead the goal for me as a fan is to have a more interesting team to watch, a team as good lets say as we were a couple of years ago, which I remind you was never in the top 4 in the EC, never a team w/ a R1 home court advantage in the playoffs -- for that it's not necessary to do a complete reset.

But 3 things -- 1) that kind of team has no path to contending for a title either, it's too dependent on being lucky (Pierce being available, Sessions actually playing well, Butler having an outlier 1/3 season, etc.), 2) Ernie had to do a complete reset to wind up w/ that kind of team, and 3) a good GM doesn't have to aim that low.

There's only two teams with a path towards contending for the next few years unless there's a major injury. That's the Warriors & the Cavs. So should the other 28 teams blow it up and rebuild?

In the East the gap b/w Cleveland & every one else is pretty wide despite the record. I guess the Raps look pretty good record wise but I think their quite beatable.

I recognize the Wizards, as currently constructed, aren't going anywhere. But I still maintain one or two moves are what separates us from challenging anyone else outside of Cleveland in the East. And if Cleveland suffers an injury or two, anything is possible.

Again, I see little reason to blow things up because we don't have a bench. Your exercise a few posts up shows how big a difference a couple of decent NBA players would make to our roster. Starting from scratch just makes no sense when your core is 26, 23, 23 & 21.

I wasn't being clear enough (as usual!). You're saying that there are only two teams that can contend for a title right now. I might disagree and say the number is three, or even four. But the teams that can contend now are not relevant to what I was saying I thought our goal should be (or, really, the goal of any franchise in any sport).

"A path to contention" to me means that you have the players, other assets & skills that offer you a chance to be in the next group of two-to-four teams that are contending. Not that we should always have the goal to contend this season, or even next season. But you want to be on a path where it's not inconceivable that you contend two seasons from now, and it's very likely that you are a h#ll of a lot closer to doing it at that point than you are now.

That's what "I don't see" for "this group." I remind you that two years ago when we won 46 games and got to R2 of the playoffs, I said that I thought the team had peaked, and that we'd be worse not better in the next two years. I got tons of flack for that, of course, but in fact I was right. It was obvious to me that we'd been propelled to 19-6 by a lucky accident (Rasual Butler with a superman cape on). We went 27-30 the rest of the season. The following year we won 41 games and gave up some future assets for the privilege. This year we are worse yet.

Plus we've tied our hands salary-wise in a horrible way. So those "one or two moves" you mention aren't likely -- i.e. they aren't in that "path" I was talking about. Not to mention that I think "one or two moves" getting us past 10 teams to where we're right behind the Cavaliers... that's fantasy. Especially since other teams too are capable of making one or two moves!

And, anyway, what are those one or two moves? I mean, if we've moved from "Kevin Durant is the savior and will drop from the sky to play here because this is where he's from and he likes his Mother's cooking," which always seemed like pure fantasy to me, to some other such scenario (perhaps involving Cousins: "...savior... drop from sky... cuz can't be happy w/o playing w/ John Wall....") you can be sure I'm not buying that stock.

Finally, to be on such a path, we'd need leadership that has any idea what path we're on at all ever! We don't have that. We have leadership that acquired Jason Smith, Andrew Nicholson & Trey Burke because those three guys were going to help us be in the playoffs. Then added Marcus Thornton as our #1 SG option off the bench and gave Mahinmi $16m a year because... because... well, just because! Then filled out the roster with three guys who it isn't clear are even D-League level standouts.

The one move could be to trade Beal and to get the draft rights to Harry Giles and Jawun Evans. Get Josh Hart in round 2.

That's all you need.

[Dat2U]

I wasn't being clear enough (as usual!). You're saying that there are only two teams that can contend for a title right now. I might disagree and say the number is three, or even four. But the teams that can contend now are not relevant to what I was saying I thought our goal should be (or, really, the goal of any franchise in any sport).

"A path to contention" to me means that you have the players, other assets & skills that offer you a chance to be in the next group of two-to-four teams that are contending. Not that we should always have the goal to contend this season, or even next season. But you want to be on a path where it's not inconceivable that you contend two seasons from now, and it's very likely that you are a h#ll of a lot closer to doing it at that point than you are now.

That's what "I don't see" for "this group." I remind you that two years ago when we won 46 games and got to R2 of the playoffs, I said that I thought the team had peaked, and that we'd be worse not better in the next two years. I got tons of flack for that, of course, but in fact I was right. It was obvious to me that we'd been propelled to 19-6 by a lucky accident (Rasual Butler with a superman cape on). We went 27-30 the rest of the season. The following year we won 41 games and gave up some future assets for the privilege. This year we are worse yet.

Plus we've tied our hands salary-wise in a horrible way. So those "one or two moves" you mention aren't likely -- i.e. they aren't in that "path" I was talking about. Not to mention that I think "one or two moves" getting us past 10 teams to where we're right behind the Cavaliers... that's fantasy. Especially since other teams too are capable of making one or two moves!

And, anyway, what are those one or two moves? I mean, if we've moved from "Kevin Durant is the savior and will drop from the sky to play here because this is where he's from and he likes his Mother's cooking," which always seemed like pure fantasy to me, to some other such scenario (perhaps involving Cousins: "...savior... drop from sky... cuz can't be happy w/o playing w/ John Wall....") you can be sure I'm not buying that stock.

Finally, to be on such a path, we'd need leadership that has any idea what path we're on at all ever! We don't have that. We have leadership that acquired Jason Smith, Andrew Nicholson & Trey Burke because those three guys were going to help us be in the playoffs. Then added Marcus Thornton as our #1 SG option off the bench and gave Mahinmi $16m a year because... because... well, just because! Then filled out the roster with three guys who it isn't clear are even D-League level standouts.

So tell me who's beating that Curry, Thompson, Durant & Green lineup in the next two years? Maybe Cleveland or the LA Clippers if they keep everyone would have an outside shot but who else? Should the other 27 franchises break up their cores because they have little chance of contending?

As far as the Wizards, the core of the team that you continue to build with consists of four guys aged 26 to 21. There's no reason to tear down that core. It's the other 11 guys that are the problem. Of course we need new leadership, that goes without saying. But a draft pick here and an acquistion there makes a big difference. Nearly anyone we acquire that puts Burke, Thornton & Smith on the bench makes us better.

In your exercise you added Thad Young, Garrett Temple & DeWayne Dedmon to our lineup and it nearly doubled our win total. That's just an indication of how bad our bench is at the moment. Nice guys for sure but I wouldn't consider any of these guys to be real difference makers, big names or guys you'd have to sacrifice a great deal to acquire. And you certainly shouldn't have to rebuild and tank to get such players.

That's what I'm saying... Were 2-3 guys away from challenging for the 2nd best team in the East. And were not talking elite players either. 2 or 3 solid role players. Guys you could either draft or acquire for the MLE or maybe even trade for. Maybe even a guy like Sato or McClellan develops. Maybe Ian can have two healthy knees at once and all of the sudden the need to play Jason Smith or Andrew Nicholson at C disappears. To me going that road is far easier and realistic than trading a 26 yr old all-star or dealing a solid 23 yr old because we had a bad off-season.

Of course this all becomes immenently more feasible if Ted we move on from Ernie Grunfeld and if he doesnt, were likely in bad shape no matter what route we take.

[Dat2U]

I was responding to Faze not you, Dat.

A starter and two good bench guys could amount to almost 6000 minutes of PT. That's 30% of the total. There is no question that it would be possible to plug in the names of 3 guys who could make us a lot better!

But, whom do you have in mind? I.e. plug in the 3 guys and remove (I assume) Nicholson, Smith and Burke.

Keep in mind that at least 2 of our starters would be playing fewer minutes. That's good of course; it's hard to imagine those guys getting through the season w/o injury at this rate. But it also means that lower production players will be taking those minutes.

Ok as a hypothetical trade let's say you got:
Cousins at PF moving Morris to the bench.
Temple at SG replacing Beal.
Casspi at SF replacing Oubre.
Lawson at PG replacing Burke.

So:
Gortat / Mahinmi / Smith
Cousins / Morris / Nicholson
Porter / Casspi / House
Temple / Thornton / McClellan
Wall / Lawson / Satoransky

How many games would this team win? How would they compare to the better teams in the East outside of Cleveland? Would they make the playoffs and are the capable of winning a series or two?

But it's not realistic. If you added George at the 4 and some of the Pacers role players for Beal package I'm sure that team could compete too.

Obviously I don't think Cousins is going anywhere, but even in the wild theoretical they aren't adding value to him, and it wouldnt be for a questionable Beal when the Kings have Bogdanovic coming over and Richardson looks good.

Beal's contract will offer hesitancy to anyone you try to trade him to though he's a good player. A lot of money and he's still considered somewhat a risk

I didn't post it for realism, I posted it as an exercise. I'm sure your commentary will be appreciated somewhere but shouldn't you have better things to do than scan various message board trade threads to comment on suggestions you don't like?

[gambitx777]

I was thinking of this trade,
WAS Gets: knight
Suns get : Mahinmi, MCW, Gibson, second round pick from was
Bulls get Chandler.
Something around that, Maybe we have to tweak the deal but I really think that trade works? The suns ditch chandler's contract and get Mahinmi and gibson to bolster their front. And they get a cheaper back up PG
The bulls fix a need at backup center, and they move MCW and gibson, 2 players that they do not need, MCW has not played for them much and They have enough front court players to not have to worry about losing gibson.
We add a much needed scoring back up point guard that would be an improvement over our bench
This deal is assuming that we make another trade somewhere for a back up center and maybe another pf or shooter. But this would be a solid deal.

How about we take Gibson as well and offer 2 2nds?

Well I posted this in conjunction with a nuggets trade i posted that would net us freid, jotic/nurkic and harris.
IF those situations collided
we would be putting out a rotation of
Wall/Knight
Beal/Harris
Otto/Kelley
Morris/Friead
Gortat/Jokic or Nurkic
that would be a killer 10 man rotation.

[Dat2U]

I was thinking of this trade,
WAS Gets: knight
Suns get : Mahinmi, MCW, Gibson, second round pick from was
Bulls get Chandler.
Something around that, Maybe we have to tweak the deal but I really think that trade works? The suns ditch chandler's contract and get Mahinmi and gibson to bolster their front. And they get a cheaper back up PG
The bulls fix a need at backup center, and they move MCW and gibson, 2 players that they do not need, MCW has not played for them much and They have enough front court players to not have to worry about losing gibson.
We add a much needed scoring back up point guard that would be an improvement over our bench
This deal is assuming that we make another trade somewhere for a back up center and maybe another pf or shooter. But this would be a solid deal.

How about we take Gibson as well and offer 2 2nds?

Well I posted this in conjunction with a nuggets trade i posted that would net us freid, jotic/nurkic and harris.
IF those situations collided
we would be putting out a rotation of
Wall/Knight
Beal/Harris
Otto/Kelley
Morris/Friead
Gortat/Jokic or Nurkic
that would be a killer 10 man rotation.

Looking at RPM, there's two PGs in the entire league with a lower RPM than Trey Burke. One of them Brandon Knight. And historically his teams have been much much better with Knight OFF the floor. When considering his salary, its just a very bad idea to go in that direction. His rep is that he forces shots, freezes out teammates, stagnates offense & is a turnstile on defense. Even as a 3rd guard off the bench. So yes in way, he would contribute to a 'killer' rotation because he kills his own team.

Secondly the Nuggets are not dealing Nurkic and especially Jokic for any deal involving Jason Smith AND Andrew Nicholson. There's no realism being exercised in this suggestion.

[Kings2013]

:D

Ok as a hypothetical trade let's say you got:
Cousins at PF moving Morris to the bench.
Temple at SG replacing Beal.
Casspi at SF replacing Oubre.
Lawson at PG replacing Burke.

So:
Gortat / Mahinmi / Smith
Cousins / Morris / Nicholson
Porter / Casspi / House
Temple / Thornton / McClellan
Wall / Lawson / Satoransky

How many games would this team win? How would they compare to the better teams in the East outside of Cleveland? Would they make the playoffs and are the capable of winning a series or two?

But it's not realistic. If you added George at the 4 and some of the Pacers role players for Beal package I'm sure that team could compete too.

Obviously I don't think Cousins is going anywhere, but even in the wild theoretical they aren't adding value to him, and it wouldnt be for a questionable Beal when the Kings have Bogdanovic coming over and Richardson looks good.

Beal's contract will offer hesitancy to anyone you try to trade him to though he's a good player. A lot of money and he's still considered somewhat a risk

I didn't post it for realism, I posted it as an exercise. I'm sure your commentary will be appreciated somewhere but shouldn't you have better things to do than scan various message board trade threads to comment on suggestions you don't like?

I enjoy discussing the game, and unfortunate reality is that the most interesting point of interest for me regarding my team this year are the rumors about the best players on my team. There are a few 'hot spots' where Cousins seems to be of greater interest, so I don't have to scan far. I don't know if the point of a teams message board on RealGM necessarily is to foster only likeminded convo from likeminded fans, but I try not to over saturate it. I only really respond to the trades I see (if I happen to be reading some other teams board) that I feel are particularly over the top in terms of unattractiveness towards the team.

[gambitx777]

Looking at RPM, there's two PGs in the entire league with a lower RPM than Trey Burke. One of them Brandon Knight. And historically his teams have been much much better with Knight OFF the floor. When considering his salary, its just a very bad idea to go in that direction. His rep is that he forces shots, freezes out teammates, stagnates offense & is a turnstile on defense. Even as a 3rd guard off the bench. So yes in way, he would contribute to a 'killer' rotation because he kills his own team.

Secondly the Nuggets are not dealing Nurkic and especially Jokic for any deal involving Jason Smith AND Andrew Nicholson. There's no realism being exercised in this suggestion.

Here is the thing about brandon knight, if you just need him to score of the bench he is not a terrible player. he would fit here, there are players that just need to find a fit, im open to other players I am. for sure. But who.
On the denver deal they do that for the unprotected pick in what might be the best draft in years from what people are saying. It would be a high pick too. They don't want unprotected picks are not given out for just anyone, (unless your EG, and thats another story altogether) . Maybe we don't talk hem in to jokic or nurkic but its possible. because they are dumping faried for two smaller more manageable deals. they are getting a first out of the deal and but for smith and nicholson and 2017 unprotected first, faried and harris are not out of the question, the question is if we can make the deal with one of the centers in it. even if we can't swing that some how. faried and harris, for smith nicholson and 2017 first does a lot of good things for this team. It fixes those deals, fixes two positions of weakness with young talent. maybe we say hey instead how about you give us Petr Cornelie and we will toss you some cash or something. Cuz that kid is looking pretty good in france. They might be willing to do that with the young centers on their team.

[pcbothwel]

Looking at RPM, there's two PGs in the entire league with a lower RPM than Trey Burke. One of them Brandon Knight. And historically his teams have been much much better with Knight OFF the floor. When considering his salary, its just a very bad idea to go in that direction. His rep is that he forces shots, freezes out teammates, stagnates offense & is a turnstile on defense. Even as a 3rd guard off the bench. So yes in way, he would contribute to a 'killer' rotation because he kills his own team.

Secondly the Nuggets are not dealing Nurkic and especially Jokic for any deal involving Jason Smith AND Andrew Nicholson. There's no realism being exercised in this suggestion.

Here is the thing about brandon knight, if you just need him to score of the bench he is not a terrible player. he would fit here, there are players that just need to find a fit, im open to other players I am. for sure. But who.
On the denver deal they do that for the unprotected pick in what might be the best draft in years from what people are saying. It would be a high pick too. They don't want unprotected picks are not given out for just anyone, (unless your EG, and thats another story altogether) . Maybe we don't talk hem in to jokic or nurkic but its possible. because they are dumping faried for two smaller more manageable deals. they are getting a first out of the deal and but for smith and nicholson and 2017 unprotected first, faried and harris are not out of the question, the question is if we can make the deal with one of the centers in it. even if we can't swing that some how. faried and harris, for smith nicholson and 2017 first does a lot of good things for this team. It fixes those deals, fixes two positions of weakness with young talent. maybe we say hey instead how about you give us Petr Cornelie and we will toss you some cash or something. Cuz that kid is looking pretty good in france. They might be willing to do that with the young centers on their team.

Well...He has a TS of 48% and its only that high because he is averaging his highest FT% (85%) and highest FTA. His efg is 42%

To put that in perspective, I did a quick search or Guards over the last 25 years who played 15+MPG, with a TS below 43% and DRtg above 113 (His is 114 this year).

I see Ricky Davis, Deshawn Stevenson, a 36 y/o Kevin Ollie, etc.

Knight is bad...real bad.

Our individual defenders are really good (Wall, Otto, Oubre, Morris, etc.), but we have terrible communication. Mahinmi is going to be a great QB in the paint defensively and it will be apparent

[payitforward]

So tell me who's beating that Curry, Thompson, Durant & Green lineup in the next two years? Maybe Cleveland or the LA Clippers if they keep everyone would have an outside shot but who else? Should the other 27 franchises break up their cores because they have little chance of contending?

As so often happens in online exchanges, our differences are being highlighted, even exaggerated, rather than our areas of agreement.

Leaving aside the other 26 of those franchises, I'm not suggesting we should make a radical decision right now to take the team apart totally. I'm just noting that I can't see a path to contention in this group of guys. (Actually... you seem to agree w/ that in the para above!)

As far as the Wizards, the core of the team that you continue to build with consists of four guys aged 26 to 21. There's no reason to tear down that core. It's the other 11 guys that are the problem. Of course we need new leadership, that goes without saying. But a draft pick here and an acquisition there makes a big difference....

Those 4 guys, sure -- w/ the slight caveat that Beal has not proven he is worth the $$ he's making (or anywhere near it). He may be, but that's still to see. For that matter, I'd add Gortat who is playing well and has a contract that would make him pretty easy to trade.

But I don't look at the problem side as "guys" -- I look at it as "contracts." In that sense, I'm a little more positive than you on the one hand, and a little more negative on the other. I.e. I'm not worried about Thornton, McClellan, Ochefu, House or even Burke -- all those contracts can be jettisoned at no cost next off-season. I'm not worried about Satoransky either. It's no surprise that he's going through a painful adjustment to the NBA game. If he establishes himself, great. If not, I'd be willing to bet he goes back to Europe where he can make more $$, be at home or near home, be a star, etc.

We have $36m+ a year in 4 guaranteed multi-year contracts that are complete boat anchors: they can't be traded away except for an equally big problem: Mahinmi, Morris, Nicholson & Smith. And we have an enormously expensive contract for Beal who, as I say hasn't proven he's worth it. Right now I'd say his contract is also untradable except for someone else's problem. That's 5 guys/$60m. Add another $35m+ for Wall, Gortat, Oubre & Satoransky. To me, at this point those are fixed costs for next year -- $95m for 9 guys. Of whom there are 3 (Wall, Gortat, Oubre) we can be sure we'll want and 2 (Beal, Mahinmi) of whom we hope that's true.

That's going to make it hard to max Porter -- and he will command a max salary. But, lets assume we do max Porter. We'll also have a high R1 pick to add to our roster and (I would hope) a high R2 pick as well. That's 12 guys for North of $120m.

In your exercise you added Thad Young, Garrett Temple & DeWayne Dedmon to our lineup and it nearly doubled our win total.

Yup. Only given the above, we certainly wouldn't be able to add 3 guys like Thad Young, Garrett Temple & DeWayne Dedmon -- total salary @$24m/year. And that's the problem. Yes, my abstract exercise kind of showed that...

We're 2-3 guys away from challenging for the 2nd best team in the East.

... but it's not obvious how we can acquire them.

[nate33]

We have $36m+ a year in 4 guaranteed multi-year contracts that are complete boat anchors: they can't be traded away except for an equally big problem: Mahinmi, Morris, Nicholson & Smith. And we have an enormously expensive contract for Beal who, as I say hasn't proven he's worth it. Right now I'd say his contract is also untradable except for someone else's problem. That's 5 guys/$60m. Add another $35m+ for Wall, Gortat, Oubre & Satoransky. To me, at this point those are fixed costs for next year -- $95m for 9 guys. Of whom there are 3 (Wall, Gortat, Oubre) we can be sure we'll want and 2 (Beal, Mahinmi) of whom we hope that's true.

That's going to make it hard to max Porter -- and he will command a max salary. But, lets assume we do max Porter. We'll also have a high R1 pick to add to our roster and (I would hope) a high R2 pick as well. That's 12 guys for North of $120m.

The luxtax threshold next year will be in the neighborhood of $130M

We're 2-3 guys away from challenging for the 2nd best team in the East.

... but it's not obvious how we can acquire them.

If Mahinmi gets healthy and Oubre continues to improve, we will be 7-deep in legitimate NBA-caliber players next year. Indeed, we may have 7 starting-caliber players (although Morris and Mahinmi may only be borderline starting caliber). Hopefully, Sato will emerge as another decent rotation player as well. If we find one vet-minimum guard who is a worthwhile 2nd stringer, we should have a respectable 9-man rotation when everyone is healthy. And we'll also have our 2017 first round pick who probably won't be all that useful next year, but could be useful the year after.

One other hope would be to trade a guy like Nicholson for an overpaid but worthwhile rotation-caliber guard. A 3rd string PF might be worth a 2nd string guard in the abstract if the contracts match.

The bottom line is that it would be easier to fix the bench than to blow it up and rebuild from scratch.

[Meliorus]

So tell me who's beating that Curry, Thompson, Durant & Green lineup in the next two years? Maybe Cleveland or the LA Clippers if they keep everyone would have an outside shot but who else? Should the other 27 franchises break up their cores because they have little chance of contending?

As so often happens in online exchanges, our differences are being highlighted, even exaggerated, rather than our areas of agreement.

Leaving aside the other 26 of those franchises, I'm not suggesting we should make a radical decision right now to take the team apart totally. I'm just noting that I can't see a path to contention in this group of guys. (Actually... you seem to agree w/ that in the para above!)

As far as the Wizards, the core of the team that you continue to build with consists of four guys aged 26 to 21. There's no reason to tear down that core. It's the other 11 guys that are the problem. Of course we need new leadership, that goes without saying. But a draft pick here and an acquisition there makes a big difference....

Those 4 guys, sure -- w/ the slight caveat that Beal has not proven he is worth the $$ he's making (or anywhere near it). He may be, but that's still to see. For that matter, I'd add Gortat who is playing well and has a contract that would make him pretty easy to trade.

But I don't look at the problem side as "guys" -- I look at it as "contracts." In that sense, I'm a little more positive than you on the one hand, and a little more negative on the other. I.e. I'm not worried about Thornton, McClellan, Ochefu, House or even Burke -- all those contracts can be jettisoned at no cost next off-season. I'm not worried about Satoransky either. It's no surprise that he's going through a painful adjustment to the NBA game. If he establishes himself, great. If not, I'd be willing to bet he goes back to Europe where he can make more $$, be at home or near home, be a star, etc.

We have $36m+ a year in 4 guaranteed multi-year contracts that are complete boat anchors: they can't be traded away except for an equally big problem: Mahinmi, Morris, Nicholson & Smith. And we have an enormously expensive contract for Beal who, as I say hasn't proven he's worth it. Right now I'd say his contract is also untradable except for someone else's problem. That's 5 guys/$60m. Add another $35m+ for Wall, Gortat, Oubre & Satoransky. To me, at this point those are fixed costs for next year -- $95m for 9 guys. Of whom there are 3 (Wall, Gortat, Oubre) we can be sure we'll want and 2 (Beal, Mahinmi) of whom we hope that's true.

That's going to make it hard to max Porter -- and he will command a max salary. But, lets assume we do max Porter. We'll also have a high R1 pick to add to our roster and (I would hope) a high R2 pick as well. That's 12 guys for North of $120m.

In your exercise you added Thad Young, Garrett Temple & DeWayne Dedmon to our lineup and it nearly doubled our win total.

Yup. Only given the above, we certainly wouldn't be able to add 3 guys like Thad Young, Garrett Temple & DeWayne Dedmon -- total salary @$24m/year. And that's the problem. Yes, my abstract exercise kind of showed that...

We're 2-3 guys away from challenging for the 2nd best team in the East.

... but it's not obvious how we can acquire them.

Is it really that hard to dump Smith and Nicholson's contracts? Is there any chance that they won't be on the team after trade deadline? Will Ernie package one of them with a 1st round pick and trade for player who is actually worth his salary?

Morris is a great contract, he's getting paid peanuts. You have to assume that if Manhimi plays like last year's Manhimi, we keep him and trade Gortat.

[nate33]

Is it really that hard to dump Smith and Nicholson's contracts? Is there any chance that they won't be on the team after trade deadline? Will Ernie package one of them with a 1st round pick and trade for player who is actually worth his salary?

At the moment, they are completely unmovable without incentives. What team would want them at those salaries?

I advise patience. Nobody wants those guys now because they have played so poorly. But things change. Maybe there are injuries that thrust Nicholson into a primary role where he can pad his stats. It seems to me to be likely that Nicholson will be worth more at some future date than he is worth now (because, right now, he has negative worth).

[JAR69]

If Mahinmi gets healthy and Oubre continues to improve, we will be 7-deep in legitimate NBA-caliber players next year. Indeed, we may have 7 starting-caliber players (although Morris and Mahinmi may only be borderline starting caliber). Hopefully, Sato will emerge as another decent rotation player as well. If we find one vet-minimum guard who is a worthwhile 2nd stringer, we should have a respectable 9-man rotation when everyone is healthy. And we'll also have our 2017 first round pick who probably won't be all that useful next year, but could be useful the year after.

One other hope would be to trade a guy like Nicholson for an overpaid but worthwhile rotation-caliber guard. A 3rd string PF might be worth a 2nd string guard in the abstract if the contracts match.

The bottom line is that it would be easier to fix the bench than to blow it up and rebuild from scratch.

Don't we also have the MLE? We could be getting close to the lux tax line, but I thought you get the full MLE up until the lux tax apron, which I think is $4 million above the lux tax line. Though I'm not sure of any of this.