Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXVII

[NatP4]

Those unprotected picks could be nice but not enough. Why give up an all-star and a good (but overpaid) player for overpaid big, trash Wiggins and expiring Jones (well, RFA)?

I'm naive but I want to believe Grunfeld & Brooks are gone after this season. This would be my plan:


If things are not brighter next year then blow it up.

I think this will be the path going forward, everything except the fire EG part. Ariza and Morris clearly will not be on the roster next year. There is no reason whatsoever to retain them. They will be moved for luxtax relief and/or picks. It's merely a matter of finding the best deal. Sato, Geen and Dekker are conceivably cheap enough to be retained next year so trading them is optional depending on the return. Bryant and Brown are keepers.

Otto and Wall won't be traded while their values are depressed. Beal will only be traded if he quietly requests a trade.

Don't we have to trade Porter or Beal? (Wall being untradeable). With Beal/Wall/Porter/Brown/Mahinmi/Howard we're about 117M in salaries with luxury cap at 123M (this year). Our 1st round pick will be fairly high too with a substantial salary.

Bryant will definitely cost a lot to sign (8M, 10M?) and we have to try. Sato will want a raise, but if I were him I'd ask the Wizards not to match given the disrespect from Brooks. Then, there's filling out all the other roster spots.

they have to dump Wall somewhere. It won't be some blockbuster type deal with bigtime assets coming back, but they can move him in the offseason. Bryant and Sato are must re signs.

[Shanghai Kid]

There is no team that is going to trade for Wall when he's out with a 6-8 month injury. A HEALTHY Wall is considered overpaid. Nobody is trading for a 29 year old Wall coming off two seasons in a row where he missed significant time.

We have to move forward with the idea that Wall is here to stay. Its an absolute pipedream to think otherwise.

I know its a lot to handle for Beal/Otto lovers, but trading one of them is likely the only way out of cap hell if that is the aim.

[pcbothwel]

There is no team that is going to trade for Wall when he's out with a 6-8 month injury. A HEALTHY Wall is considered overpaid. Nobody is trading for a 29 year old Wall coming off two seasons in a row where he missed significant time.

We have to move forward with the idea that Wall is here to stay. Its an absolute pipedream to think otherwise.

I know its a lot to handle for Beal/Otto lovers, but trading one of them is likely the only way out of cap hell if that is the aim.

1) Wall will be fully healthy by July. I fully expect him to be in Miami working his butt off. He did last year, and I expect even more this year as he'll be antsy to get working and have no other lingering injuries

2) I think you'll get plenty of video and reports of healthy and slimmed down Wall in July/August. Combined with the high success rate of recovery for his injury, and plenty of teams will be keeping an eye on him... especially after, what I believe will be, a terrible FA period with a bunch of overpaid fringe starters.

3) We can get out from the tax by the deadline using Ariza, Green, and Morris. I have zero doubt about that. Doing so would allow us to keep all our RFA's and sign draft pick. While this might put us over the tax next year, it will only be by a couple Mil and we wont be repeat offenders. The following year (20/21) the increase in the cap along with mahinmi gone would put us back under the tax.

Therefore, we can quite easily keep this team together and NEVER pay the repeater tax in the foreseeable future. Thats not to say that we should, but that we dont need to make a trade from a position of weakness.

[Shanghai Kid]

There is no team that is going to trade for Wall when he's out with a 6-8 month injury. A HEALTHY Wall is considered overpaid. Nobody is trading for a 29 year old Wall coming off two seasons in a row where he missed significant time.

We have to move forward with the idea that Wall is here to stay. Its an absolute pipedream to think otherwise.

I know its a lot to handle for Beal/Otto lovers, but trading one of them is likely the only way out of cap hell if that is the aim.

1) Wall will be fully healthy by July. I fully expect him to be in Miami working his butt off. He did last year, and I expect even more this year as he'll be antsy to get working and have no other lingering injuries

2) I think you'll get plenty of video and reports of healthy and slimmed down Wall in July/August. Combined with the high success rate of recovery for his injury, and plenty of teams will be keeping an eye on him... especially after, what I believe will be, a terrible FA period with a bunch of overpaid fringe starters.

3) We can get out from the tax by the deadline using Ariza, Green, and Morris. I have zero doubt about that. Doing so would allow us to keep all our RFA's and sign draft pick. While this might put us over the tax next year, it will only be by a couple Mil and we wont be repeat offenders. The following year (20/21) the increase in the cap along with mahinmi gone would put us back under the tax.

Therefore, we can quite easily keep this team together and NEVER pay the repeater tax in the foreseeable future. Thats not to say that we should, but that we dont need to make a trade from a position of weakness.

I pretty much agree with everything. I'm actually of a minority belief that nobody was trading for Wall even if he was healthy.

[nate33]

Bryant will definitely cost a lot to sign (8M, 10M?) and we have to try. Sato will want a raise, but if I were him I'd ask the Wizards not to match given the disrespect from Brooks. Then, there's filling out all the other roster spots.

Nah. Bryant won't cost that much. Traditional big men are a dime-a-dozen these days, and there are a ton of them available in free agency. Bryant is solid, but he's not among the elite group of big men who can stay on the floor in crunch time in the playoffs. Those are the guys teams will pay for. I think Bryant will cost $4-6M.

And as pcbothwel pointed out, we should get under the tax this year, taking the repeater tax out of the equation next year. If necessary, they'll be able to exceed the tax for one year until Mahinmi is gone.

Also, Howard could opt out. Finally, there is the option to stretch Mahinmi.

[payitforward]

Yes, it's obvious that getting out of the tax is absolutely key to the team's next few years. &, of course, every potential trade partner will be aware of that fact.

Which means that every potential trade partner will know he can get more in a trade than he could if we didn't have the problem. Hence, you can look for us to have to give more picks away in order to jettison one of our expiring salaries.

[nate33]

Yes, it's obvious that getting out of the tax is absolutely key to the team's next few years. &, of course, every potential trade partner will be aware of that fact.

Which means that every potential trade partner will know he can get more in a trade than he could if we didn't have the problem. Hence, you can look for us to have to give more picks away in order to jettison one of our expiring salaries.

That works both ways. A contender looking to add a guy like Ariza or Green for a title run is not going to be bargaining from a position of strength either. Teams like LA or Philly aren't going to play games with us and risk losing the opportunity to add key talent.

[pcbothwel]

Yes, it's obvious that getting out of the tax is absolutely key to the team's next few years. &, of course, every potential trade partner will be aware of that fact.

Which means that every potential trade partner will know he can get more in a trade than he could if we didn't have the problem. Hence, you can look for us to have to give more picks away in order to jettison one of our expiring salaries.

That works both ways. A contender looking to add a guy like Ariza or Green for a title run is not going to be bargaining from a position of strength either. Teams like LA or Philly aren't going to play games with us and risk losing the opportunity to add key talent.

Exactly. Good players on expiring contracts are easy to move. Any playoff team trading for Ariza and Green have just dramatically increased their IQ, shooting, athleticism, and defense.
A team like the Kings would be CRAZY not to take them for McLemore or Koufos
Morris & Green for Muscala also seems like a perfect fit.

[payitforward]

Yes, it's obvious that getting out of the tax is absolutely key to the team's next few years. &, of course, every potential trade partner will be aware of that fact.

Which means that every potential trade partner will know he can get more in a trade than he could if we didn't have the problem. Hence, you can look for us to have to give more picks away in order to jettison one of our expiring salaries.

That works both ways. A contender looking to add a guy like Ariza or Green for a title run is not going to be bargaining from a position of strength either. Teams like LA or Philly aren't going to play games with us and risk losing the opportunity to add key talent.

Exactly. Good players on expiring contracts are easy to move. Any playoff team trading for Ariza and Green have just dramatically increased their IQ, shooting, athleticism, and defense.
A team like the Kings would be CRAZY not to take them for McLemore or Koufos
Morris & Green for Muscala also seems like a perfect fit.

No question about it. But this doesn't invalidate my point in the slightest. We're not the only ones with veterans to deal. & if we have more of a need to sell them than another team, then we will get less for them than that other team.

That's how markets work. Period. No exceptions.

[dckingsfan]

That works both ways. A contender looking to add a guy like Ariza or Green for a title run is not going to be bargaining from a position of strength either. Teams like LA or Philly aren't going to play games with us and risk losing the opportunity to add key talent.

Exactly. Good players on expiring contracts are easy to move. Any playoff team trading for Ariza and Green have just dramatically increased their IQ, shooting, athleticism, and defense.
A team like the Kings would be CRAZY not to take them for McLemore or Koufos
Morris & Green for Muscala also seems like a perfect fit.

No question about it. But this doesn't invalidate my point in the slightest. We're not the only ones with veterans to deal. & if we have more of a need to sell them than another team, then we will get less for them than that other team.

That's how markets work. Period. No exceptions.

Unless you are another team negotiating with EG - hereby know of Grunfeld's Law of Negotiation.

[pcbothwel]

That works both ways. A contender looking to add a guy like Ariza or Green for a title run is not going to be bargaining from a position of strength either. Teams like LA or Philly aren't going to play games with us and risk losing the opportunity to add key talent.

Exactly. Good players on expiring contracts are easy to move. Any playoff team trading for Ariza and Green have just dramatically increased their IQ, shooting, athleticism, and defense.
A team like the Kings would be CRAZY not to take them for McLemore or Koufos
Morris & Green for Muscala also seems like a perfect fit.

No question about it. But this doesn't invalidate my point in the slightest. We're not the only ones with veterans to deal. & if we have more of a need to sell them than another team, then we will get less for them than that other team.

That's how markets work. Period. No exceptions.

Agreed. Other teams will want assets, not cut salary. No other seller will be over the tax.

Example: Suppose Ariza was on another team. They would want matching expirings and either a future 1st, or multiple 2nds
OTOH, we would prefer cheaper expirings and 1 2nd, if any at all.

[nate33]

The key with Ariza is that he has a large contract, allowing us to leverage the 150% exception so that even teams without cap room can offer us as much as $5M in savings. We are no longer dealing with a market of one (Sacramento). Any under-the-tax team can be a trade partner. That means LA, Philly, New Orleans, Sacramento, Indiana, and several others may have interest.

[payitforward]

We *should* want picks, for sure. But, this is Ernie. He places no value at all on R2 picks, infortunately. Fool that he is.

Anyway, especially this year, all that he will care about is getting under the tax.

He's already heaved his sigh of relief because the problem is over.

"We're doing badly b/c Wall & Howard are injured, Ted. We've had really bad luck; no one can control that. Oh, & how about this kid Bryant I found us! Isn't he terrific? & look at the way Dekker is playing for us. We gave 'nothing' (just a R2 pick) for him. & even this bad record has a silver lining -- we're going to have a really high draft pick next June, & I'll be able to deal it for a better veteran player than expected. With that guy, & John coming back, we should be really good next year...."

[payitforward]

The key with Ariza is that he has a large contract, allowing us to leverage the 150% exception so that even teams without cap room can offer us as much as $5M in savings. We are no longer dealing with a market of one (Sacramento). Any under-the-tax team can be a trade partner. That means LA, Philly, New Orleans, Sacramento, Indiana, and several others may have interest.

I know about the 125% exception -- there's a larger one as well? How does it work?

In our case, btw, the 125% exception is, in effect, worth 20% -- that is a team can give us $12m in salary while taking back Ariza's $15m salary by using the 25% exception.

[trast66]

The key with Ariza is that he has a large contract, allowing us to leverage the 150% exception so that even teams without cap room can offer us as much as $5M in savings. We are no longer dealing with a market of one (Sacramento). Any under-the-tax team can be a trade partner. That means LA, Philly, New Orleans, Sacramento, Indiana, and several others may have interest.

I know about the 125% exception -- there's a larger one as well? How does it work?

In our case, btw, the 125% exception is, in effect, worth 20% -- that is a team can give us $12m in salary while taking back Ariza's $15m salary by using the 25% exception.

Teams above the cap (or teams below the cap but would end up more than $100,000 over the cap following a trade) cannot acquire more than 125% plus $100,000 of the salary they trade away. Under the 2011 CBA, teams that remain below the luxury tax threshold even after the trade can acquire the lesser of 150% plus $100,000, or 100% plus $5 million, of the salary they trade away. There is no lower limit—teams may divest themselves of as much salary as they wish (or can convince another team to take on) in a trade.

Either way LA and NO I’m sure want him ASAP.

[dckingsfan]

"We're doing badly b/c Wall & Howard are injured, Ted. We've had really bad luck; no one can control that. Oh, & how about this kid Bryant I found us! Isn't he terrific? & look at the way Dekker is playing for us. We gave 'nothing' (just a R2 pick) for him. & even this bad record has a silver lining -- we're going to have a really high draft pick next June, & I'll be able to deal it for a better veteran player than expected. With that guy, & John coming back, we should be really good next year...."

[pcbothwel]

The key with Ariza is that he has a large contract, allowing us to leverage the 150% exception so that even teams without cap room can offer us as much as $5M in savings. We are no longer dealing with a market of one (Sacramento). Any under-the-tax team can be a trade partner. That means LA, Philly, New Orleans, Sacramento, Indiana, and several others may have interest.

I know about the 125% exception -- there's a larger one as well? How does it work?

In our case, btw, the 125% exception is, in effect, worth 20% -- that is a team can give us $12m in salary while taking back Ariza's $15m salary by using the 25% exception.

No, the 125% rule is only in effect for combined salary of 19.6M, or if the the team is in the tax. The rule for Ariza's salary is 5M so long as the team we trade him to is not in the tax(after the trade).

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q86

"Technically", we could get under the tax with an Ariza trade so long as we took back no more than about 10.1M and were sent 3 players. We could then waive Randle and Baker (1.8M). We'd have to thread the needle a little bit, but certainly doable.

I think the Pacers need better wing defenders and an Ariza for Evans trade seems like a great fit.
The Pelicans need a wing and have 10M in expiring filler... as do the Bucks

Or even a 3 way trade.
Make the Evans trade, but send Evans to a third team for about 10M in expiring salary. That would be within the 125% rule too, so any team could make that move.
Ariza to Pacers
Evans to Team X
Expirings from Team X to Wiz ... maybe also get a 2nd

[payitforward]

The key with Ariza is that he has a large contract, allowing us to leverage the 150% exception so that even teams without cap room can offer us as much as $5M in savings. We are no longer dealing with a market of one (Sacramento). Any under-the-tax team can be a trade partner. That means LA, Philly, New Orleans, Sacramento, Indiana, and several others may have interest.

I know about the 125% exception -- there's a larger one as well? How does it work?

In our case, btw, the 125% exception is, in effect, worth 20% -- that is a team can give us $12m in salary while taking back Ariza's $15m salary by using the 25% exception.

Teams above the cap (or teams below the cap but would end up more than $100,000 over the cap following a trade) cannot acquire more than 125% plus $100,000 of the salary they trade away. Under the 2011 CBA, teams that remain below the luxury tax threshold even after the trade can acquire the lesser of 150% plus $100,000, or 100% plus $5 million, of the salary they trade away. There is no lower limit—teams may divest themselves of as much salary as they wish (or can convince another team to take on) in a trade.

Either way LA and NO I’m sure want him ASAP.

Want Ariza, right...? What's a trade w/ NO that they would want to do, that works in the trade machine, & that moves us meaningfully towards being under the lux tax? I can't come up w/ one. Hill is their only expiring salary. Ariza can't be traded in combination w/ another player.

[pcbothwel]

I know about the 125% exception -- there's a larger one as well? How does it work?

In our case, btw, the 125% exception is, in effect, worth 20% -- that is a team can give us $12m in salary while taking back Ariza's $15m salary by using the 25% exception.

Teams above the cap (or teams below the cap but would end up more than $100,000 over the cap following a trade) cannot acquire more than 125% plus $100,000 of the salary they trade away. Under the 2011 CBA, teams that remain below the luxury tax threshold even after the trade can acquire the lesser of 150% plus $100,000, or 100% plus $5 million, of the salary they trade away. There is no lower limit—teams may divest themselves of as much salary as they wish (or can convince another team to take on) in a trade.

Either way LA and NO I’m sure want him ASAP.

Want Ariza, right...? What's a trade w/ NO that they would want to do, that works in the trade machine, & that moves us meaningfully towards being under the lux tax? I can't come up w/ one. Hill is their only expiring salary. Ariza can't be traded in combination w/ another player.

1) Hill isnt expiring, he has another year left on his deal
2) Johnson, Payton, Clark (or Williams) = 10 - 10.6M of expiring...
If they really want to keep Payton, then make it Johnson, Miller, Clark, and Williams

[payitforward]

Ooops, right -- oddly, the trade machine lists hill as expiring & mirotic w/ another year.... No, it's that it says Hill has "zero years" on his contract. I took that to mean expiring and assumed that all the guys listed w/ 1 year (mirotic, et. al.) were signed for next year.

That's wrong, obviously. Which means there are plenty of candidates to come expire w/ the Washington Wizards!!