NBA Trade Thread #2

[sco]

The story popped up that the Bucks were interested in adding Chris Paul, keeping Giannis and Middleton while OKC retools rather than rebuilds.

So the question is there a way the Bulls jump in as the third wheel, maybe get Bledsoe, maybe DiVincenzo, a FRP MIL has #24 and adding another huge contract don't need the guaranteed FRP, as MIL sheds payroll. The Bulls get their own retool underway helping those two teams move Paul's big contract? Young, Porter, Satroansky, even Felicio, and smaller contracts like Valentine, Dunn.

Not a huge Bledsoe fan, but I like him plus Divincenzo plus #24 if it only costs us Young, Sato and Felicio and we keep Otto.

[StunnerKO]

Bucks gonna go after cp3 for sure prob something like this

[dougthonus]

Say the 76ers wanted to swap Paul for Harris but the OKC Thunder prefer cap relief to Harris's deal, would you be willing to be the 3rd team?

76ers: Paul
Bulls: Harris
Thunder: Porter + Felicio (both expiring and near the minimum salary they can take back for Paul)

Harris is expensive relative to his value on the court, but boy would the Bulls look a lot better (if healthy) if you swap him and Porter. Question is really around whether he's a SF at this point in his career or not as he's lined up mostly at PF.

[Andi Obst]

Say the 76ers wanted to swap Paul for Harris but the OKC Thunder prefer cap relief to Harris's deal, would you be willing to be the 3rd team?

76ers: Paul
Bulls: Harris
Thunder: Porter + Felicio (both expiring and near the minimum salary they can take back for Paul)

Harris is expensive relative to his value on the court, but boy would the Bulls look a lot better (if healthy) if you swap him and Porter. Question is really around whether he's a SF at this point in his career or not as he's lined up mostly at PF.

Hell no. Harris is terribly overpaid. Why waste so much flexibility on a player who has never been a differrence-maker?

[dougthonus]

Say the 76ers wanted to swap Paul for Harris but the OKC Thunder prefer cap relief to Harris's deal, would you be willing to be the 3rd team?

76ers: Paul
Bulls: Harris
Thunder: Porter + Felicio (both expiring and near the minimum salary they can take back for Paul)

Harris is expensive relative to his value on the court, but boy would the Bulls look a lot better (if healthy) if you swap him and Porter. Question is really around whether he's a SF at this point in his career or not as he's lined up mostly at PF.

Hell no. Harris is terribly overpaid. Why waste so much flexibility on a player who has never been a differrence-maker?

Yeah, kind of feel the same, but at the same time, makes your team much better than it is now potentially, because the guys you are trading are dead salary, you're effectively paying him for 3 years of service instead of 4 on the deal. Maybe I'm just skeptical overall of the FA process, but feels like we would be unlikely to get a better player in FA, and Harris should still be young enough at the end of this deal to avoid a notable dip in performance.

It is a move that threatens to cap you, but also one that improves you a good amount.

[Andi Obst]

Yeah, kind of feel the same, but at the same time, makes your team much better than it is now potentially, because the guys you are trading are dead salary, you're effectively paying him for 3 years of service instead of 4 on the deal. Maybe I'm just skeptical overall of the FA process, but feels like we would be unlikely to get a better player in FA, and Harris should still be young enough at the end of this deal to avoid a notable dip in performance.

I don't think Tobias Harris is better than healthy OPJ (if that player still exists). Don't think he makes us much better. I would need a ton of draft picks to even consider Harris, he's a gigantic negative asset in my book.

[dougthonus]

I don't think Tobias Harris is better than healthy OPJ (if that player still exists). Don't think he makes us much better. I would need a ton of draft picks to even consider Harris, he's a gigantic negative asset in my book.

Harris has outscored Porter's career best season in each of the past six years and is probably better at every single facet of the game outside of three point shooting and doesn't give you a bunch of health concerns. Don't think there is much of an argument than healthy OPJ is better than Harris even if healthy OPJ existed, which the past three seasons would indicate he does not.

Not to say that this means we should do the trade. I agree with some of your concerns around Harris, but I think you undervalue him a bit.

[Andi Obst]

I don't think Tobias Harris is better than healthy OPJ (if that player still exists). Don't think he makes us much better. I would need a ton of draft picks to even consider Harris, he's a gigantic negative asset in my book.

Harris has outscored Porter's career best season in each of the past six years and is probably better at every single facet of the game outside of three point shooting and doesn't give you a bunch of health concerns. Don't think there is much of an argument than healthy OPJ is better than Harris even if healthy OPJ existed, which the past three seasons would indicate he does not.

Not to say that this means we should do the trade. I agree with some of your concerns around Harris, but I think you undervalue him a bit.

Maybe, but Harris is just such an uninspiring player to me. Porter gives you better spot up shooting and better overall defense, Harris is the far better creator. But do you really want Tobias Harris to create offense for your team? I sure wouldn't. Harris is okay I guess, he just isn't very good or even elite at anything and gets paid like a superstar.

[TheSuzerain]

Say the 76ers wanted to swap Paul for Harris but the OKC Thunder prefer cap relief to Harris's deal, would you be willing to be the 3rd team?

76ers: Paul
Bulls: Harris
Thunder: Porter + Felicio (both expiring and near the minimum salary they can take back for Paul)

Harris is expensive relative to his value on the court, but boy would the Bulls look a lot better (if healthy) if you swap him and Porter. Question is really around whether he's a SF at this point in his career or not as he's lined up mostly at PF.

Hell no. Harris is terribly overpaid. Why waste so much flexibility on a player who has never been a differrence-maker?

Yeah, kind of feel the same, but at the same time, makes your team much better than it is now potentially, because the guys you are trading are dead salary, you're effectively paying him for 3 years of service instead of 4 on the deal. Maybe I'm just skeptical overall of the FA process, but feels like we would be unlikely to get a better player in FA, and Harris should still be young enough at the end of this deal to avoid a notable dip in performance.

It is a move that threatens to cap you, but also one that improves you a good amount.

I doubt it improves us much. Harris doesn't really fix what ails us most (the complete lack of any perimeter playmaking talent).

[dougthonus]

Maybe, but Harris is just such an uninspiring player to me. Porter gives you better spot up shooting and better overall defense, Harris is the far better creator. But do you really want Tobias Harris to create offense for your team? I sure wouldn't. Harris is okay I guess, he just isn't very good or even elite at anything and gets paid like a superstar.

Not sure which Otto Porter you're watching, but Harris is definitely the better defender and creator of the two. I wouldn't want Harris being my primary creator, but he'd be better at it than Porter, whom has virtually no ability at it at all. Porter's defense over the past few seasons has been pretty poor. Maybe at one point when he was younger he projected into a good defensive player, but whatever injuries he has had make him look like an old man on the court even when "healthy".

[dougthonus]

I doubt it improves us much. Harris doesn't really fix what ails us most (the complete lack of any perimeter playmaking talent).

I think what ails us the most is lack of talent. A 20ppg two way player that replaces some combination of Porter, Hutchison, Shaq, Dunn, or Valentine (depending on their health since only Shaq seems able to stay on the floor for any length of time) seems like a pretty massive step up. Of course, this assumes Harris could play SF full time, I'm not sure if that's really true or not.

[Ccwatercraft]

Say the 76ers wanted to swap Paul for Harris but the OKC Thunder prefer cap relief to Harris's deal, would you be willing to be the 3rd team?

76ers: Paul
Bulls: Harris
Thunder: Porter + Felicio (both expiring and near the minimum salary they can take back for Paul)

Harris is expensive relative to his value on the court, but boy would the Bulls look a lot better (if healthy) if you swap him and Porter. Question is really around whether he's a SF at this point in his career or not as he's lined up mostly at PF.

Hell no. Harris is terribly overpaid. Why waste so much flexibility on a player who has never been a differrence-maker?

Yeah, kind of feel the same, but at the same time, makes your team much better than it is now potentially, because the guys you are trading are dead salary, you're effectively paying him for 3 years of service instead of 4 on the deal. Maybe I'm just skeptical overall of the FA process, but feels like we would be unlikely to get a better player in FA, and Harris should still be young enough at the end of this deal to avoid a notable dip in performance.

It is a move that threatens to cap you, but also one that improves you a good amount.

Setting next season aside, and knowing harris would cost 36 mil climbing to 40 mil over the following 2 years, I'm of the belief that with a smart front office we could spend that money well enough.

I don't like the idea that with the list of players out there that the best possible outcome would he harris @110 over 3 years, especially if there is a measurable salary cap cut, his contract would be toxic.

[dougthonus]

Setting next season aside, and knowing harris would cost 36 mil climbing to 40 mil over the following 2 years, I'm of the belief that with a smart front office we could spend that money well enough.

I don't like the idea that with the list of players out there that the best possible outcome would he harris @110 over 3 years, especially if there is a measurable salary cap cut, his contract would be toxic.

Yeah, those 3 years are definitely rough, you basically get next year for free because of whom you'd give up to get him. Will be interesting to see how the cap goes, I think the expectation is that it will only dip for one year, but that may not be the reality.

Either way, from a perspective of would I sign Harris for 4/150 this off-season given the choice, I guess the answer is probably not.

[sco]

Hell no. Harris is terribly overpaid. Why waste so much flexibility on a player who has never been a differrence-maker?

Yeah, kind of feel the same, but at the same time, makes your team much better than it is now potentially, because the guys you are trading are dead salary, you're effectively paying him for 3 years of service instead of 4 on the deal. Maybe I'm just skeptical overall of the FA process, but feels like we would be unlikely to get a better player in FA, and Harris should still be young enough at the end of this deal to avoid a notable dip in performance.

It is a move that threatens to cap you, but also one that improves you a good amount.

Setting next season aside, and knowing harris would cost 36 mil climbing to 40 mil over the following 2 years, I'm of the belief that with a smart front office we could spend that money well enough.

I don't like the idea that with the list of players out there that the best possible outcome would he harris @110 over 3 years, especially if there is a measurable salary cap cut, his contract would be toxic.

I hate his deal, but I'm doubting your premise that there is a better option for that the FO. I worry that the Bulls won't be a player destination the next 2 offseasons and the FO might feel pressure to overpay an even lesser talent.

[Ccwatercraft]

Setting next season aside, and knowing harris would cost 36 mil climbing to 40 mil over the following 2 years, I'm of the belief that with a smart front office we could spend that money well enough.

I don't like the idea that with the list of players out there that the best possible outcome would he harris @110 over 3 years, especially if there is a measurable salary cap cut, his contract would be toxic.

Yeah, those 3 years are definitely rough, you basically get next year for free because of whom you'd give up to get him. Will be interesting to see how the cap goes, I think the expectation is that it will only dip for one year, but that may not be the reality.

Either way, from a perspective of would I sign Harris for 4/150 this off-season given the choice, I guess the answer is probably not.

This my opinion as well.

[HomoSapien]

Say the 76ers wanted to swap Paul for Harris but the OKC Thunder prefer cap relief to Harris's deal, would you be willing to be the 3rd team?

76ers: Paul
Bulls: Harris
Thunder: Porter + Felicio (both expiring and near the minimum salary they can take back for Paul)

Harris is expensive relative to his value on the court, but boy would the Bulls look a lot better (if healthy) if you swap him and Porter. Question is really around whether he's a SF at this point in his career or not as he's lined up mostly at PF.

Hell no. Harris is terribly overpaid. Why waste so much flexibility on a player who has never been a differrence-maker?

Yeah, kind of feel the same, but at the same time, makes your team much better than it is now potentially, because the guys you are trading are dead salary, you're effectively paying him for 3 years of service instead of 4 on the deal. Maybe I'm just skeptical overall of the FA process, but feels like we would be unlikely to get a better player in FA, and Harris should still be young enough at the end of this deal to avoid a notable dip in performance.

It is a move that threatens to cap you, but also one that improves you a good amount.

Honestly, I'm not opposed to just making an offer for Paul. We could send expiring contracts and a future protected first. We've seen first hand how much Paul accelerated OKC's rebuild. Maybe he could do the same for us? Plus, I have to think that a great passing point guard would really bump up Lauri and Wendell's confidence and value.

[ChettheJet]

Say the 76ers wanted to swap Paul for Harris but the OKC Thunder prefer cap relief to Harris's deal, would you be willing to be the 3rd team?

76ers: Paul
Bulls: Harris
Thunder: Porter + Felicio (both expiring and near the minimum salary they can take back for Paul)

Harris is expensive relative to his value on the court, but boy would the Bulls look a lot better (if healthy) if you swap him and Porter. Question is really around whether he's a SF at this point in his career or not as he's lined up mostly at PF.

Here's the thing, if Markkanen becomes a contributing PF, just very good not even great, with White, Lavine, Carter they don't need a huge production out of the SF, just similar to Lauri, very good not even great. People want to denigrate Lavine as not #1 guy, well Harris isn't now and wouldn't be for the Bulls. They want to add talent and build next year possibly a SF at #4. So when Porter, Felicio, maybe Satoransky come off the books and Young is probably gone, isn't it likely they will have either drafted a SF who they hope will fill the starting role, or they can find one on a max deal that was their call or sign a very good not even great one to step right in. As a player Harris would be a great add but if he denies the Bulls any flexibility in drafting the next 2 years or in free agency when they have the money to spend he's not a big help.

[dougthonus]

Honestly, I'm not opposed to just making an offer for Paul. We could send expiring contracts and a future protected first. We've seen first hand how much Paul accelerated OKC's rebuild. Maybe he could do the same for us? Plus, I have to think that a great passing point guard would really bump up Lauri and Wendell's confidence and value.

I wouldn't give up a pick and pass on 21 FA for Paul. I think he gives you no sustained value. I might not mind trading Porter + Sato for him to speed up the rebuild because you aren't losing any sustained value just giving up on FA for a season. Even so I probably wouldn't do that either, but I don't think it's crazy.

[Chi town]

Say the 76ers wanted to swap Paul for Harris but the OKC Thunder prefer cap relief to Harris's deal, would you be willing to be the 3rd team?

76ers: Paul
Bulls: Harris
Thunder: Porter + Felicio (both expiring and near the minimum salary they can take back for Paul)

Harris is expensive relative to his value on the court, but boy would the Bulls look a lot better (if healthy) if you swap him and Porter. Question is really around whether he's a SF at this point in his career or not as he's lined up mostly at PF.

Hell no. Harris is terribly overpaid. Why waste so much flexibility on a player who has never been a differrence-maker?

This. I’d rather resign Otto at half of what Harris makes.

[Chi town]

Hell no. Harris is terribly overpaid. Why waste so much flexibility on a player who has never been a differrence-maker?

Yeah, kind of feel the same, but at the same time, makes your team much better than it is now potentially, because the guys you are trading are dead salary, you're effectively paying him for 3 years of service instead of 4 on the deal. Maybe I'm just skeptical overall of the FA process, but feels like we would be unlikely to get a better player in FA, and Harris should still be young enough at the end of this deal to avoid a notable dip in performance.

It is a move that threatens to cap you, but also one that improves you a good amount.

Honestly, I'm not opposed to just making an offer for Paul. We could send expiring contracts and a future protected first. We've seen first hand how much Paul accelerated OKC's rebuild. Maybe he could do the same for us? Plus, I have to think that a great passing point guard would really bump up Lauri and Wendell's confidence and value.

CP3 will return to mean and be injured next season and the one after. As you get older you need more rest. I think his body will pay for this past season the next two.