Trade Ideas Thread

[MagicBagley18]

Assuming these picks stay static (14, 27, 30, 47) is that enough to pry say #5 away from Detroit? Detroit are basically starting from scratch, aside from the Griffin contract. Would they be interested in having multiple bites at the cherry vs one shot at someone more elite at the top end?

I’d say more likely to maybe get you in the top 10, 9 , 8 range no lower

[SMTBSI]

Spoiler:

Yabusele (Dead Money) 1,039,080
Jackson (Dead Money) 92,857
1) Kemba Walker 34,379,100
2) Gordon Hayward 28,000,000
3) Jaylen Brown 23,883,929
4) Marcus Smart 13,446,428
5) Jayson Tatum 9,897,120
6) Daniel Theis 5,000,000
7) Romeo Langford 3,631,200
8) #17 Pick 2,964,840
9) Grant Williams 2,498,760
10) Robert Williams 2,029,920
11) DJ Augustine 1,445,697 *
12) Mason Plumlee 1,445,697 *
13) Tremont Waters 898,310 **
14) Tacko Fall 898,310 **
15) #38 pick 898,310 **

Not intending necessarily to reopen this conversation - I was just playing around with some numbers and something sprang to mind I wanted to double-check.

Waters and Fall will both be credited with a year of service this year. If a two-way spends a single day on the parent club's active roster, they are credited with a full year of service. So Fall and Waters' year 1 minimum salaries are 1.445,697 mil if the cap stays flat. This adds 1.094774 mil to your ledger.

Also, the 2nd year min max tax liability for multi-year vets would be 1.620564 if the cap stays flat, adding another 0.349734. (2x 2YOS min only saves you 0.672312 over simply rostering the #27 and #30 pick.)

Not unovercomable, just something to add to your models.


Also worth remembering that there is no requirement to roster 15 players. You incur an empty roster charge equal to the 0YOS minimum for every slot you are under 12, but teams can and do enter seasons with roster space.

Here's an example of a 13-man roster that just ducks a flat tax, without giving away quite so many assets (really any at all), hinging on your assumption of a renegotiated Hayward:

Spoiler:

Assumptions:
- Hayward renegotiates
- Kanter declines option
- #30 is draft-and-stashed
- Poirier is dumped with #47 and cash for a fake future 2nd
- Wanamaker, Green, Waters, and Fall are let go


34.379100 - Walker
27.500000 - Hayward
23.883928 - Brown
13.446428 - Smart
9.897120 - Tatum
5.000000 - Theis
3.631200 - Langford
3.458400 - '20 #14
2.498760 - G.Williams
2.029920 - R.Williams
1.977000 - '20 #27
1.752950 - Ojeleye
1.517981 - Edwards

1.039080 - Yabusele
0.092857 - Jackson

132.104724 - Total
-23.104724 - Capspace
0.395276 - Taxspace


Walker / Smart / [#27-or-#14] / Edwards
Brown / Langford
Hayward
Tatum / Williams / Ojeleye
Theis / Wiliams / [#14-or-#27]


This team likely regresses a bit on regular season wins without Kanter and Wanamaker, but might not fair much worse in the playoffs.

Ideally I'd like to find a way to squeeze a 14th body in there. Really needs another C. Though I suppose a two-way player could fill that true emergency depth role.

And, I don't think we'd do this. It's just an academic exercise, I guess.

[SMTBSI]

Assuming these picks stay static (14, 27, 30, 47) is that enough to pry say #5 away from Detroit? Detroit are basically starting from scratch, aside from the Griffin contract. Would they be interested in having multiple bites at the cherry vs one shot at someone more elite at the top end?

I’d say more likely to maybe get you in the top 10, 9 , 8 range no lower

Bulls fans on the T&T board, and their home board, have expressed willingness to trade out of #7. Fans are not the front office obviously, but still, who knows.

[100proof]

Assuming these picks stay static (14, 27, 30, 47) is that enough to pry say #5 away from Detroit? Detroit are basically starting from scratch, aside from the Griffin contract. Would they be interested in having multiple bites at the cherry vs one shot at someone more elite at the top end?

I’d say more likely to maybe get you in the top 10, 9 , 8 range no lower

Bulls fans on the T&T board, and their home board, have expressed willingness to trade out of #7. Fans are not the front office obviously, but still, who knows.

14, 25 and Poirier for number 7.

I think thats a fair deal.

[hugepatsfan]

Spoiler:

Yabusele (Dead Money) 1,039,080
Jackson (Dead Money) 92,857
1) Kemba Walker 34,379,100
2) Gordon Hayward 28,000,000
3) Jaylen Brown 23,883,929
4) Marcus Smart 13,446,428
5) Jayson Tatum 9,897,120
6) Daniel Theis 5,000,000
7) Romeo Langford 3,631,200
8) #17 Pick 2,964,840
9) Grant Williams 2,498,760
10) Robert Williams 2,029,920
11) DJ Augustine 1,445,697 *
12) Mason Plumlee 1,445,697 *
13) Tremont Waters 898,310 **
14) Tacko Fall 898,310 **
15) #38 pick 898,310 **

Not intending necessarily to reopen this conversation - I was just playing around with some numbers and something sprang to mind I wanted to double-check.

Waters and Fall will both be credited with a year of service this year. If a two-way spends a single day on the parent club's active roster, they are credited with a full year of service. So Fall and Waters' year 1 minimum salaries are 1.445,697 mil if the cap stays flat. This adds 1.094774 mil to your ledger.

Also, the 2nd year min max tax liability for multi-year vets would be 1.620564 if the cap stays flat, adding another 0.349734. (2x 2YOS min only saves you 0.672312 over simply rostering the #27 and #30 pick.)

Not unovercomable, just something to add to your models.


Also worth remembering that there is no requirement to roster 15 players. You incur an empty roster charge equal to the 0YOS minimum for every slot you are under 12, but teams can and do enter seasons with roster space.

Here's an example of a 13-man roster that just ducks a flat tax, without giving away quite so many assets (really any at all), hinging on your assumption of a renegotiated Hayward:

Spoiler:

Assumptions:
- Hayward renegotiates
- Kanter declines option
- #30 is draft-and-stashed
- Poirier is dumped with #47 and cash for a fake future 2nd
- Wanamaker, Green, Waters, and Fall are let go


34.379100 - Walker
27.500000 - Hayward
23.883928 - Brown
13.446428 - Smart
9.897120 - Tatum
5.000000 - Theis
3.631200 - Langford
3.458400 - '20 #14
2.498760 - G.Williams
2.029920 - R.Williams
1.977000 - '20 #27
1.752950 - Ojeleye
1.517981 - Edwards

1.039080 - Yabusele
0.092857 - Jackson

132.104724 - Total
-23.104724 - Capspace
0.395276 - Taxspace


Walker / Smart / [#27-or-#14] / Edwards
Brown / Langford
Hayward
Tatum / Williams / Ojeleye
Theis / Wiliams / [#14-or-#27]


This team likely regresses a bit on regular season wins without Kanter and Wanamaker, but might not fair much worse in the playoffs.

Ideally I'd like to find a way to squeeze a 14th body in there. Really needs another C. Though I suppose a two-way player could fill that true emergency depth role.

And, I don't think we'd do this. It's just an academic exercise, I guess.

Interesting, appreciate the added info and I'll update my spreadsheets for any future "offseason plan" calcs.

My "trump card" would be a 4th year partial guarantee on Hayward. Give him a 4th year on the deal for like $35M but only partially guaranteed for like $9M. That lets you shift money from my 3 year deal into a year 4 buyout or he just gets to take a 4 year deal with tons extra money. That would lower the cap number for '20-21 by whatever we need extra space for.

[hugepatsfan]

Assuming these picks stay static (14, 27, 30, 47) is that enough to pry say #5 away from Detroit? Detroit are basically starting from scratch, aside from the Griffin contract. Would they be interested in having multiple bites at the cherry vs one shot at someone more elite at the top end?

I’d say more likely to maybe get you in the top 10, 9 , 8 range no lower

Bulls fans on the T&T board, and their home board, have expressed willingness to trade out of #7. Fans are not the front office obviously, but still, who knows.

Saw that. Not sure the Bulls GM would feel the same though. Their new GM comes from the Nuggets and that Bulls fan was talking about how he comes with a reputation for drafting stars late. So he seems to think their new GM would just snap his fingers and draft great players at all 3 slots.

I imagine their actual GM would recognize that it's not quite that simple. And on a Bulls team that already has a fairly well stocked depth chart of guys worth giving minutes to, I think that'd be a tough sell.

If we do move up I think CHA is the best bet. They have such a bad depth chart so I think they'd be most likely to give up a top 10 pick for multiple selections as there's most room on the roster and in the rotation for it.

[hugepatsfan]

Spoiler:

Two-way deals don't count against the salary cap, as far as I know. I'm not sure Augustine or Plumlee get more than the vet min but you might be right. Lots of teams will face similar tax crunches as us due to COVID so I'm thinking lots more guys will be forced into vet min deals but we'll see.

I hate the idea of giving up picks and flexibility. I'm sure Ainge would as well. I just think if it comes down it, keeping Hayward is more valuable than late 1sts and/or bringing partial guarantees to camp. All that stuff is peanuts to an elephant for me. You mentioned our top 6 of Tatum/Brown/Kemba/Hayward/Smart/Theis and then I think Rob Williams, Romeo Langford, Grant Williams and the MEM pick are all worth keeping for development. Everything else is roster fodder for me. I have zero reservation dumping any of it if that's what it takes to make the financials of the top of our roster work. That's not to say I want to but it's a tradeoff I'm willing to make if staying under the tax is the difference between keeping Hayward or not.

I'm with you 100% on being willing to part with any and all of the flotsam in service of the bigger picture. My point was that while ducking the tax is part of the bigger picture, so is the trade deadline season. I'm loth to give away matchable salary and value in picks/youth because it materially damages one of our primary avenues for improvement, not because I care about the flotsam itself. (For example, I actually see us resigning Wanamaker on a 1/5 to serve the same kind of trade ballast role as Zeller/Jerebko back in the day.)

Interesting idea/perspective. Haven't thought of that with Wanamaker. I think it's one thing to be a little over the tax but if we're serious about getting under then it will take at least starting it in the offseason. You don't want to be in a scenario where you have to dump $10M of salary to get under.

If the plan is to just pay whatever tax is needed to keep Hayward though, then I like your Wanamaker idea a lot to help facilitate future deals.

[Captain_Caveman]

Assuming these picks stay static (14, 27, 30, 47) is that enough to pry say #5 away from Detroit? Detroit are basically starting from scratch, aside from the Griffin contract. Would they be interested in having multiple bites at the cherry vs one shot at someone more elite at the top end?

Nope.

[hugepatsfan]

Not really a "trade idea" because it's not something that would come to fruition until years down the line, but wouldn't surprise me if Donovan Mitchell ends up here at some point post-Kemba. Seems to be boys with Tatum/Brown. I think Ainge will set himself up to make a run at a max FA post Kemba/Hayward era to go with Brown/Tatum. Or acquire one via trade. Whether that's Mitchell or Booker through trade or Beal, Embiid or Jokic through FA.

I've been very adament that we shouldn't extend Hayward past the '22-23 season. That's 3 more years after this. Very important to me that we line up max cap space in the '23 offseason. I know that's far out, but we always have to have in the back of our minds that Tatum could be getting recruited by players (or tampering teams/agents) to play elsewhere. He'll sign his max extension this offseason, but his next FA decision after that will be dictated not by this Kemba/Hayward group, but what Ainge replaces them with down the road. Maintaining flexibility to land a 3rd star down the line to go with Tatum/Brown needs to be factored into any long-term decision.

[MagicBagley18]

Not really a "trade idea" because it's not something that would come to fruition until years down the line, but wouldn't surprise me if Donovan Mitchell ends up here at some point post-Kemba. Seems to be boys with Tatum/Brown. I think Ainge will set himself up to make a run at a max FA post Kemba/Hayward era to go with Brown/Tatum. Or acquire one via trade. Whether that's Mitchell or Booker through trade or Beal, Embiid or Jokic through FA.

I've been very adament that we shouldn't extend Hayward past the '22-23 season. That's 3 more years after this. Very important to me that we line up max cap space in the '23 offseason. I know that's far out, but we always have to have in the back of our minds that Tatum could be getting recruited by players (or tampering teams/agents) to play elsewhere. He'll sign his max extension this offseason, but his next FA decision after that will be dictated not by this Kemba/Hayward group, but what Ainge replaces them with down the road. Maintaining flexibility to land a 3rd star down the line to go with Tatum/Brown needs to be factored into any long-term decision.

Totally...Tatum has pull with his peers I believe

[djFan71]

Baseline approach is probably:

Trade 30 for future protected first (top 20) that converts to 2 2nds.
Pick 14 & 27.
Let everyone without a guarantee go (including Green who has $100k guaranteed).

You're at ~$143M with 14 spots. (I believe you have to roster 14). In order of money, picks last:

Hayward, Kemba, Brown, Smart, Tatum
Kanter, Theis, Langford, Poirier, G Williams
R Williams, Edwards, #14, #27

You cram 2 of #47, Waters, Fall into 2 way slot. If you can't get Waters/Fall to do another 2-way, oh well, they leave. If you're not willing to give them slot 15, it's not a huge loss. Stash 47 if there's someone worth stashing.

Assume you don't fill slot 15. If you can renegotiate with Hayward (save $6-7M), you are down to $136M. That's within dumping Kanter/Poirier for vet mins of the lux tax line depending on exactly where it falls.

But, honestly, the only true reason to duck it is for the repeater tax (since we didn't duck last year). The tax on it would be pretty inconsequential this year (says guy not paying it).

You haven't improved the team, other than internal development. If you decide you're going to get under, that's pretty much it. If you decide you don't care about the repeater, you grab a vet min (or Semi) for the last roster spot.

That seems to be the most likely trajectory to me.

[djFan71]

Poirier/Edwards/30 for Reggie Bullock/39.

Good vet depth piece. Stash or 2-way #39. Basically a wash salary-wise, but we do add a free spot to pick up a vet min. So total salary would increase by that.

[djFan71]

If James Ennis picks up his option, I'd do the same with ORL. Poirier/Edwards/30 for Ennis/future 2nd.
That one save money, which then gets taken up again by the vet min.

EDIT: not sure I love this one. Last thing ORL needs is another center. And Ennis ain't worth 30. Would rather just stretch Poirier if it came down to it.

[Floody100]

Don’t worry about trading for him, he can come join his buddies JT & JB when he’s a free agent.

Read on Twitter

[Higgs Boston]

The only thing for sure is that we need to extend Hayward regardless of if we keep him or not, we need contracts to have the chance to do a S&T for Giannis or other stars.

[snowman]

The only thing for sure is that we need to extend Hayward regardless of if we keep him or not, we need contracts to have the chance to do a S&T for Giannis or other stars.

I agree that he needs to be resigned, and the way he has played this season, he deserves to be resigned. However, the future of the team comes first. If I were Danny, I would ask him to opt out, and sign a 3 year deal (ending the same time as Kimba) starting at 28m this next season, increasing to 30m in 21/22 and 32m in 22/23. 3/90m but saving us 6m off the cap this coming season. If he doesn't go for it, and opts in then my offer goes down to 25m per for 2 years. I do not off to extend past 22/23 season. I doubt any team is going to offer that amount in years 2 and 3. If he pulls a Horford, then it will hurt, but we can sign someone with the full MLE to be our 3rd / 4th option.

[hugepatsfan]

The only thing for sure is that we need to extend Hayward regardless of if we keep him or not, we need contracts to have the chance to do a S&T for Giannis or other stars.

I agree that he needs to be resigned, and the way he has played this season, he deserves to be resigned. However, the future of the team comes first. If I were Danny, I would ask him to opt out, and sign a 3 year deal (ending the same time as Kimba) starting at 28m this next season, increasing to 30m in 21/22 and 32m in 22/23. 3/90m but saving us 6m off the cap this coming season. If he doesn't go for it, and opts in then my offer goes down to 25m per for 2 years. I do not off to extend past 22/23 season. I doubt any team is going to offer that amount in years 2 and 3. If he pulls a Horford, then it will hurt, but we can sign someone with the full MLE to be our 3rd / 4th option.

I'm like a million percent on board with your 3 year limit. Might be willing to go with a 4th year partial guarantee at up to maybe like $9M just to pump up the 3 year value if that's what it takes. You'd waive and stretch Hayward at that $9M guarantee so he'd only be counting $3M on the '23 offseason cap. So you can still get that max cap space. Just a creative way to maybe add a little extra money on the 3 year deal while still lowering his cap number in '20-21 and preserving max cap space in the '23 offseason. I have my eyes on Embiid or Jokic that offseason, but obviously way too soon to talk specifics since so much can/will change. In general though, I want that flexibility.

[hugepatsfan]

Some players I think would work here if we do pursue talent upgrade with our back-end roster contracts and later 1sts

Bjelica in SAC... They seem to be intent on pushing for playoffs so doubt they'd move him for fair value but he'd be awesome here IMO.

Kennard in DET... Young player we'd get bird rights on who fits a bench scorer role and can play off our starters from 3.

Snell in DET... Salary dump but a quality 3&D player on expiring deal.

Reddick in NO... Same role as Kennard though more proven, albeit older and more expensive. NO might want to clear some salary for Ingram/Favors and they have Josh Hart ready for bigger role.

Satoransky in CHI... Bigger point guard who can play both guard spots. Upgrade over Wanamaker, CHI might want to clear his buyout next year.

Thad Young in CHI... Same as Sato above for CHI's motivation to move. He'd be a nice bench 4 here on both ends.

Just some names I think would work here for relatively cheap pieces. Expiring money + later 1sts, if even that.

[100proof]

In relation to Hayward opting out and signing for less. I cannot see any way that makes sense for him, and if I was his agent I wouldn't let him do it. Terrible business for him.

He almost had his career ended not long ago, he has not forgotten that, and knowing it can all end in an instant, and having multiple young children and a wife, etc, he needs to insure that he protects his future financial as much as possible. Be moronic to do any other.

Him opting out is an absolute, him resigning at a discount is not going to happen.
Atlanta, Knicks, Detroit, Charlotte, Heat can all offer more money that the starting 28 mill suggested by some posters. And because Boston cannot really offer more than 3 years in an opt out resign, any of those teams can offer the 4th year as well. the extra year is the key.

So with boston, opt out of 34 million with boston, resign at 28, 30, 32 = 90 million
Opt out of Boston, resign with any of the above teams at 28, 30, 32, 34 = 124 million.

No one gives up the opportunity for 34 million dollars. no one.

If he singed with any other team with capspace he could, if health stood (aged 34 at this point), sign another 2 year deal at say MLE (10 mill per season 2 years)

If he signed in Boston he would be 33 and would need to sign another contract for 3 years and 54 million dollars to come out even to the above scenario. How many 34 year old get 3 year deals for 54 million?


But good news, if Hayward opts out (why wouldn't he?) and he doesnt resign with the Celtics (why would he?) Celtics would be at 95 mill guaranteed, plus Theis team option of 5 mill, so the Celtics MIGHT have just a smidge below full MLE to help nab the best player in that market.

Also, since Danny does make them happen, a sign and trade could be possible, returning a player of around 15 mill in salary.

[hugepatsfan]

In relation to Hayward opting out and signing for less. I cannot see any way that makes sense for him, and if I was his agent I wouldn't let him do it. Terrible business for him.

He almost had his career ended not long ago, he has not forgotten that, and knowing it can all end in an instant, and having multiple young children and a wife, etc, he needs to insure that he protects his future financial as much as possible. Be moronic to do any other.

Him opting out is an absolute, him resigning at a discount is not going to happen.
Atlanta, Knicks, Detroit, Charlotte, Heat can all offer more money that the starting 28 mill suggested by some posters. And because Boston cannot really offer more than 3 years in an opt out resign, any of those teams can offer the 4th year as well. the extra year is the key.

So with boston, opt out of 34 million with boston, resign at 28, 30, 32 = 90 million
Opt out of Boston, resign with any of the above teams at 28, 30, 32, 34 = 124 million.

No one gives up the opportunity for 34 million dollars. no one.

If he singed with any other team with capspace he could, if health stood (aged 34 at this point), sign another 2 year deal at say MLE (10 mill per season 2 years)

If he signed in Boston he would be 33 and would need to sign another contract for 3 years and 54 million dollars to come out even to the above scenario. How many 34 year old get 3 year deals for 54 million?


But good news, if Hayward opts out (why wouldn't he?) and he doesnt resign with the Celtics (why would he?) Celtics would be at 95 mill guaranteed, plus Theis team option of 5 mill, so the Celtics MIGHT have just a smidge below full MLE to help nab the best player in that market.

Also, since Danny does make them happen, a sign and trade could be possible, returning a player of around 15 mill in salary.

I think you can cross a few of those teams off the list.

Let's start with Detroit. They don't really have the cap space you say they do. https://www.spotrac.com/nba/detroit-pistons/cap/2020/ They're at $70.4M before signing their draft pick (projected #5) and filling out the empty roster holds. That's probably going to add at least $10M. So they're at $80M. The optimisitc projection is that the cap stays flat to this year at $109M. So that gives them $29M to spend total. Problem is, they don't have Bird Rights on Christian Wood who broke out in a big way. Can't see them letting him walk to sign Hayward when they're so far away from competing. Don't see them as a threat to offer the type of deal you're suggesting.

Onto Miami... https://www.spotrac.com/nba/miami-heat/cap/2020/ They're at $83.4M in salaries & dead money charges. They also have a 1st and some roster holds. So let's say they're at about $89M. That gives $20M to spend... not enough to offer a deal like you suggested. There's also reports they're going as far as not extending Adebayo now and putting it off until next year to preserve cap for a run at Giannis and/or Oladipo. Seems unlikely they'd do a multi-year deal for Hayward. If they miss on those guys next year, then they're a huge threat to poach Hayward if he opts in and plays out the option so a FA next year though.

CHA... https://www.spotrac.com/nba/charlotte-hornets/cap/2020/. They're at about $81.0M before their pick and roster holds. So call it $85M. That's only about $24M to spend. So wouldn't be able to get up to the total you suggest.

The Knicks and the Hawks are the only teams there that seem legit threats to have the cap for a deal you suggest. For Atlanta, that would mean spending all their pre-extension-for-young-players-cap-space on Hayward. He'd be eating up their cap while Young/Collins/Reddish/Hunter/Huerter are on rookie deal and Capela is on his current deal. Hayward wouldn't interfere with giving those guys new deals at the money you suggested, but he'd prevent them from using the money on younger guys that fit with that core. I just find it unlikely they want to go to the level you suggest for Hayward.

That really leaves the Knicks. IDK, he doesn't seem like a guy they'd pursue at this stage but you never know.

Ultimately, I don't think there's a significant threat of Hayward getting that 4 year deal you suggest. I think the obstacle to signing him to a 3 year deal would be just that he can get more by opting in and hitting FA next year. In theory at least. Remember, there's likely to be lingering COVID impact on next year and thus the future salary cap. It's also expected money is borrowed in future years to support the cap not dropping this offseason. That reduces money available for him in future years.

If Hayward opts in then he'll play out '20-21 and then hit FA going into his age 31 season. I have a hard time seeing him getting a 4 year deal at that age in the current environment and not being a star player. The target I've had in mind is Gallinari's last deal of 3 years $65M deal. He signed that at age 27, 4 years younger than Hayward will be. That puts his 4 year payout if he signs that after playing out the option at about $100M. So if he can lock in $90M over 3 years with the Celtics version of the deal you suggest above, I think that's enough to justify. He just has to be a MLE player in the year after that to reach the same total, and he eliminates the risk of getting hurt or struggling next year.

The Celtics could also add a 4th year to your proposed deal, but with a partial guarantee. So the 4th year for $34M but let's say $9M is guaranteed. Then he gets $99M over 3 years when we buy him out. We stretch the guarantee so he's at $3M dead money and we still get the cap space.

Ultimately it comes down to I just don't see the 4th year you think is out there for him. Not with such limited cap space and uncertain financial times.