Batum and Zeller to Sacramento+ incentive, for Barnes

blind prophet · Post #1 » by **blind prophet** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:13 pm

Well the Hornets would like to find a taker for Batum so they don't have to stretch him, Kings take the opportunity to help with that

Hawks out
Zeller
Batum

Lotto protected first for 4 years then becomes two seconds.

Kings out
Barnes
Parker

Parker is stretched for a hit of 2,166,667 a year instead of Batums's stretch of 9,043,478 a year saving them 6,876,811 a year cap hit of Batum's stretch to get Hayward.

This also frees up 18,163,588 in salary for the Hawks this year to sign Hayward.

Kings hope to get a mid grade pick eventually to help them out, and get out of long term money obligations.

kalenclayton · Post #2 » by **kalenclayton** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:33 pm

I like this better for both teams if we switch Barnes to Buddy. Buddy makes more sense next to Ball, Graham, and Hayward imo. I also think the Hornets can change the pick to lotto protected for 2 years and then 2nds.

Post #3 » by **BullyKing** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:34 pm

I'm honestly not sure which way the incentive should go but the idea that the Kings get a 1st out of this seems really unbalanced to me.

Edit: And no, I'm not interested in hearing that this is fair because the Kings have all the leverage.

blind prophet · Post #4 » by **blind prophet** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:36 pm

kalenclayton wrote:I like this better for both teams if we switch Barnes to Buddy. Buddy makes more sense next to Ball, Graham, and Hayward imo. I also think the Hornets can change the pick to lotto protected for 2 years and then 2nds.

I think if Buddy does well it will be easier for him to recoup some value later, but either or.

blind prophet · Post #5 » by **blind prophet** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:37 pm

BullyKing wrote:I'm honestly not sure which way the incentive should go but the idea that the Kings get a 1st out of this seems really unbalanced to me.

Edit: And no, I'm not interested in hearing that this is fair because the Kings have all the leverage.

Ok

Without the first do you think the trade is doable for the Hornets?

Post #6 » by **BullyKing** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:43 pm

blind prophet wrote:
BullyKing wrote:I'm honestly not sure which way the incentive should go but the idea that the Kings get a 1st out of this seems really unbalanced to me.

Edit: And no, I'm not interested in hearing that this is fair because the Kings have all the leverage.

Ok

Without the first do you think the trade is doable for the Hornets?

Honestly it's hard to say without knowing what else is out there. Like I like it better than stretching Batum for three years so I'd probably do it if there's no better way to dump Batum. The question then becomes whether it is worth a 1st to dump Batum for expiring contracts rather than having to take on Barnes. That's a closer question to me.

Post #7 » by **Texas Chuck** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:49 pm

Send whatever incentive Boston is willing to give the Hornets for making Hayward a S&T to the Kings and it seems fine. Barnes is a good player and when you deduct the dead Batum money he's not overpaid at all. Kings can't make the playoffs in this West barring just some massive unseen jumps so creating more future flexibility is good.

But I'd go one further--I'd make it Bjelica or Holmes instead of Parker but send Monk to the Kings as well and then the Hornets keep the incentive from the Celtics. Now the Hornets have another solid veteran in their lineup and the Kings take a flier on Monk.

Post #8 » by **Texas Chuck** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 6:55 pm

Really smart concept by the OP here. As shrink talks about a lot the best trades are those where value is increased in a deal by getting players to more useful spots. Barnes is more valuable to the Hornets right now than he is the Kings so value is added to both sides by his inclusion.

OGSactownballer · Post #9 » by **OGSactownballer** » Wed Nov 25, 2020 8:53 pm

Posted this as its own thread.

To CHA - Hayward (S & T 4/120)

To BOS - Barnes; Beljica (7.9 exp) or CoJo (12.5 exp with cheap buyout)

To SAC - Batum + whatever other salary BOS wants to offload to clear the tax up to 125% of Hayward; ‘24 FRP (top 3 protected) from CHA OR a FRP from BOS (whatever seems the fairest or who should be paying)

For CHA - get the guy they want without having to sit on Batum dead money for three seasons. Realistically nine million per is the equivalent of a needed role player and is unmovable as dead money.

For BOS - get a player that fills the role perfectly between Brown and Tatum and doesn’t demand high usage. He’s cheaper and descending so your cap hit reduces. Fill in Beli if you want a solid b/u bug who stretches the floor at a 40% three point clip OR CoJo if you want a solid b/u PG. both expire. And they can dump anything extra to Kings to avoid the tax.

For SAC - absorb Batum to make the other teams deals work and provide the salary relief needed to make it go. Players are solid but no longer fit our timeline and we get a pick as payment. Can cut Batum outright if needed to make a roster spot open for a young guy from the draft.

Vanderbilt_Grad · Post #10 » by **Vanderbilt_Grad** » Thu Nov 26, 2020 2:12 am

Neither Charlotte nor Boston will trade a first round pick to make this deal happen.

The fallback for Charlotte is to just stretch Batum and as bad as that it, it's better than trading a FRP.

For Boston this is just about getting a TPE and, while they want that, they don't want it FRP bad.