Okafor trade talk: Will he be traded by the deadline?

[sixers hoops]

most trades aren't known until they happen and they tend to be **** never even thought of.

none of us know ****.

I remember very clearly when we traded Larry Hughes for Kucoc The rumors on Hughes were as rampant as they have been on Noel and Okafor recently, but there was ZERO speculation that it could be for Kukoc.

The day of the trade Eskin said on the radio that Hughes was going to be traded that day for someone that nobody has talked about, and that turned out to be Kukoc.

There were lots and lots of rumors, but the real deal came out of left field.

So Okafor could be going anywhere really, but if I had to guess I would think it would be to the Pelicans, and that they reduced the protection demands on their pick. Just a guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Billy King confirmed a few years ago on Wip that he had a deal done with Toronto, Tracy Mcgrady for Larry Hughes. He said Stephen A Smith leaked the trade and Toronto got cold feet and pulled out of the deal. The Kukoc deal just came out of nowhere.

I forget exactly how it figured into the story, but they also said Larry Brown wanted a first included since McGrady could have been a few month rental.

[youngcrev]

Read on Twitter

Anjica to Chicago, Rondo to Philly?

I read that as these talks are further along than the talks with CHI or NOP were, not that it involves them. Maybe I'm wrong.

[ckchen]

why would the Lakers ever remove the protection off that pick? That's not happening without them getting more than just Jah back.. I'd say the same for Russell but perhaps he is enough of a twatlord in the lockeroom or something but even then....

Yeah I think the Lakers should be looking to have the protection increased to keep it this year. Since it means keeping their 2019 pick as well. If they are interested in Okafor there is potential to seriously increase the value in return for us doing that. It should be on the table at least.

This, I'm pretty sure we know for a fact is technically not possible. You can't add protections to a pick that isn't unprotected, or traded through another team.

[Sixerscan]

The Sixers don't need to pursue Russell. He'll pursue us when he becomes an UFA for a chance to play with The Process, Simmons, The Homie, RoCo, The 2nd best shot blocker in the NBA behind Embiid in Noel, and the most clutch player in NBA history, TJ McConnell.

in the new cba he will just take the money and enjoy getting chips on the lakers. like we are use too

Potato chips?

[ckchen]

Read on Twitter

Anjica to Chicago, Rondo to Philly?

what an awful trade. I hope thats not it.

Obviously a pick still coming from NOP, just moving the contract of Anjica for a smaller one next year (and more help getting to the floor).

I also read this as implying that the new trade talks didn't involve NOP or CHI, not that it was a renegotation of those talks.

[LongLiveHinkie]

The Sixers don't need to pursue Russell. He'll pursue us when he becomes an UFA for a chance to play with The Process, Simmons, The Homie, RoCo, The 2nd best shot blocker in the NBA behind Embiid in Noel, and the most clutch player in NBA history, TJ McConnell.

in the new cba he will just take the money and enjoy getting chips on the lakers. like we are use too

Potato chips?

The only chips that'll be in LA over the next decade are the ones that Swaggy brings home from the casino.

[the_process]

Gladly do Jah plus the OKC 1st for Ingram. I'll drive out and pick up Ingram myself. Don't see LA doing that, though.

But if they'd expand it, add Russell too... I'd eat Mozzie and give them their pick back as well as switch Okafor to Noel. They would have to take back Rodriguez to make salary work.

Yes, I might be the only one who would do that on either side; so be it.

Also, there's very little doubt that at the end of the season, Jeannie is coming down and sending her brother home and Mitch to the curb.

So that would be Noel, Sergio, the Lakers pick, and the OKC 1st for Ingram, Russell, and Mozgov? I really don't think you'd be the only one who would do that by a long shot, at least from this side.

A lot of people get very upset about possibly trading the Laker pick unless a star player is involved. (Note BigSleep's post above.)

[HartfordWhalers]

Read on Twitter

Anjica to Chicago, Rondo to Philly?

I read that as these talks are further along than the talks with CHI or NOP were, not that it involves them. Maybe I'm wrong.

I read it as Chicago is the third team.

Here was my trade board take before the latest news trying something like that:

Philly out: Okafor
Philly in: Rondo + NOP pick + Chi '18 2nd

Chi out: Rondo + '18 2nd
Chi in: Anjica + ~9m tpe

New Orleans out: Anjica + NOP pick
New orleans in: Okafor

Philly overshoots the floor by ~2m or so, but still maybe saves money. And instead of Anjica at ~5m have Rondo waived at 3m next year and nothing after that.

Chicago at just 2m cap space next year turns Rondo into an actual player they will keep, at a position where depth is needed. The '18 2nd is the extra cost but not so bad.

New Orleans is doing the same deal as before, just Chicago got roped in.

Now I would throw Moore in as he is sitting out, and then who knows what if anything else?

[spikeslovechild]

One of the things I would like to clarify is that people keep throwing out things like "removing the protection from a pick" - as if that's actually a thing. As far as I understand it, that's not actually something that can actually be done, right? I know you can only add protections to a pick if it's unprotected and traded directly by the team. First, this LAL pick came via Phoenix. I don't think "removing protection" is even a thing that can be done. And I don't think the Lakers can conditionally trade a pick that's technically already been traded (i.e., trying to trade their pick "only if it's #1-3).

Maybe it is possible, I don't know, but this has been bothering me for a while when I see hypothetical trades floated out there.

Of course it's possible. It's already being done by the Kings. The pick swap is 1-10. The 11-30 is covered by Chicago

[sixers hoops]

Read on Twitter

Anjica to Chicago, Rondo to Philly?

what an awful trade. I hope thats not it.

Obviously a pick still coming from NOP, just moving the contract of Anjica for a smaller one next year (and more help getting to the floor).

Whew! That makes more sense!

[HartfordWhalers]

in the new cba he will just take the money and enjoy getting chips on the lakers. like we are use too

Potato chips?

The only chips that'll be in LA over the next decade are the ones that Swaggy brings home from the casino.

You don't bring home chips from the casino -- Iverson.

[the_process]

what an awful trade. I hope thats not it.

Obviously a pick still coming from NOP, just moving the contract of Anjica for a smaller one next year (and more help getting to the floor).

I also read this as implying that the new trade talks didn't involve NOP or CHI, not that it was a renegotation of those talks.

This is exactly how I read it.

[WarriorsLakers]

The Sixers don't need to pursue Russell. He'll pursue us when he becomes an UFA for a chance to play with The Process, Simmons, The Homie, RoCo, The 2nd best shot blocker in the NBA behind Embiid in Noel, and the most clutch player in NBA history, TJ McConnell.

in the new cba he will just take the money and enjoy getting chips on the lakers. like we are use too

Potato chips?

like the one sixers have been eating since whenever?

[phiphan]

The Sixers don't need to pursue Russell. He'll pursue us when he becomes an UFA for a chance to play with The Process, Simmons, The Homie, RoCo, The 2nd best shot blocker in the NBA behind Embiid in Noel, and the most clutch player in NBA history, TJ McConnell.

in the new cba he will just take the money and enjoy getting chips on the lakers. like we are use too

Potato chips?

It's SoCal. My money is on tortilla chips.

[Ericb5]

One of the things I would like to clarify is that people keep throwing out things like "removing the protection from a pick" - as if that's actually a thing. As far as I understand it, that's not actually something that can actually be done, right? I know you can only add protections to a pick if it's unprotected and traded directly by the team. First, this LAL pick came via Phoenix. I don't think "removing protection" is even a thing that can be done. And I don't think the Lakers can conditionally trade a pick that's technically already been traded (i.e., trying to trade their pick "only if it's #1-3).

Maybe it is possible, I don't know, but this has been bothering me for a while when I see hypothetical trades floated out there.

I think it is possible though because they could clearly trade the pick if it is in the top 3 to another team, so why couldn't they basically agree to make that team the Sixers?

I mean the Kings pick this year is in a sense traded to two different teams. We can take it in a swap, and Chicago gets it if it is 11 or lower.

I don't remember protections ever being actually removed on a pick though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[the_process]

why would the Lakers ever remove the protection off that pick? That's not happening without them getting more than just Jah back.. I'd say the same for Russell but perhaps he is enough of a twatlord in the lockeroom or something but even then....

Yeah I think the Lakers should be looking to have the protection increased to keep it this year. Since it means keeping their 2019 pick as well. If they are interested in Okafor there is potential to seriously increase the value in return for us doing that. It should be on the table at least.

This, I'm pretty sure we know for a fact is technically not possible. You can't add protections to a pick that isn't unprotected, or traded through another team.

The only way for the Lakers to increase protection on the pick so they keep it is to involve ORL and compensate them and have them sign off on it.

It would be far easier for the Lakers to just trade for their pick back this year and let the 2019 1st go to ORL.

[ckchen]

One of the things I would like to clarify is that people keep throwing out things like "removing the protection from a pick" - as if that's actually a thing. As far as I understand it, that's not actually something that can actually be done, right? I know you can only add protections to a pick if it's unprotected and traded directly by the team. First, this LAL pick came via Phoenix. I don't think "removing protection" is even a thing that can be done. And I don't think the Lakers can conditionally trade a pick that's technically already been traded (i.e., trying to trade their pick "only if it's #1-3).

Maybe it is possible, I don't know, but this has been bothering me for a while when I see hypothetical trades floated out there.

I think it is possible though because they could clearly trade the pick if it is in the top 3 to another team, so why couldn't they basically agree to make that team the Sixers?

I mean the Kings pick this year is in a sense traded to two different teams. We can take it in a swap, and Chicago gets it if it is 11 or lower.

I don't remember protections ever being actually removed on a pick though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, I dunno, "protection removal" still sounds like something that trade board people have made up to me, but the pick swap point is a valid one though. I dunno, it's still not very clear, first because that's a pick swap, not technically a trade, and secondly, both of those trades were done directly with those teams. I think the fact that this pick has actually been traded through Phoenix puts more restrictions on it than if it were traded directly to Philly.

[the_process]

in the new cba he will just take the money and enjoy getting chips on the lakers. like we are use too

Potato chips?

like the one sixers have been eating since whenever?

And yet the Sixers are closer to a title than the Lakers are right now.

[WarriorsLakers]

Potato chips?

like the one sixers have been eating since whenever?

And yet the Sixers are closer to a title than the Lakers are right now.

based on?

[Jojothewhale]

I got curious and started digging a bit.

Read on Twitter

From that, it seems it is possible, but what I don't know is whether the Lakers owing the future pick to Orlando changes that.