Chi-OKC

[pipfan]

Horford for Porter/WCarter Jr-plus OKC throws in one of their future picks (not sure which one is fair)

OKC dumps future $ and gets a young big with solid potential. Plus, with Carter out at the moment, they lose more games
Chi wants to make the playoffs, gets a MUCH needed vet now (who strong ties to Donovan) who hopefully won't fall off too quickly. Plus we add a pick. Bulls would still have max cap space this summer, I think

[Jack Dempsey]

But the OKC traded an expiring for Horford to get some picks. I don't think they are desperate to dump his contract at all, especially not now since he played better in the last couple of games. I doubt they would trade him for an expiring straight up, let alone add value to get rid of him. If they like WCJ they might do it but without sending out a pick.

[jbk1234]

Teams with guards who are not good defenders are going to be very disappointed if they trade for Horford.

[ChettheJet]

To turn your logic around, the Bulls take on future $ (on an aging big man) and give up a big with solid potential. CHI wins a few more games to make the playoffs for a 1st round sweep and miss out on the lottery. Horford just isn't in line with the timeline of Williams, White, Carter, maybe Markkanen and even Lavine.

[Texas Chuck]

But the OKC traded an expiring for Horford to get some picks. I don't think they are desperate to dump his contract at all, especially not now since he played better in the last couple of games. I doubt they would trade him for an expiring straight up, let alone add value to get rid of him. If they like WCJ they might do it but without sending out a pick.

So your theory is that OKC should get to dump the over $40M in future money due Horford and get a young C with talent and give up nothing?

Why would Chicago ever consider this?

We have to look at deals from both sides or what are we doing?

[sonictecture]

But the OKC traded an expiring for Horford to get some picks. I don't think they are desperate to dump his contract at all, especially not now since he played better in the last couple of games. I doubt they would trade him for an expiring straight up, let alone add value to get rid of him. If they like WCJ they might do it but without sending out a pick.

So your theory is that OKC should get to dump the over $40M in future money due Horford and get a young C with talent and give up nothing?

Why would Chicago ever consider this?

We have to look at deals from both sides or what are we doing?

The player with the 40m in future salary is dependable and productive and the young C talent is oft injured and unproductive.

It seems OKC gives up something and gets back nothing.

When did your parameters of value become the standard for the whole board?

[Texas Chuck]

When did your parameters of value become the standard for the whole board?

I guess just now when you declared it because I certainly have never suggested such a thing.

Horford doesn't have positive trade value and OKC would certainly rather have his money off the books so they can use that space to collect more assets/talent. And since he is playing reasonably well it would be nice to help the tank to have him gone. WCS still holds some value if not a lot.

Not sure why this board has decided that every time I express an opinion I'm declaring myself king. I'm allowed my opinion as much as anyone even if fans of the teams involved don't like hearing their player is negative value.

This is especially ironic since nobody has championed Horford outside Thunder fans more than me.

[sonictecture]

When did your parameters of value become the standard for the whole board?

I guess just now when you declared it because I certainly have never suggested such a thing.

Horford doesn't have positive trade value and OKC would certainly rather have his money off the books so they can use that space to collect more assets/talent. And since he is playing reasonably well it would be nice to help the tank to have him gone. WCS still holds some value if not a lot.

Not sure why this board has decided that every time I express an opinion I'm declaring myself king. I'm allowed my opinion as much as anyone even if fans of the teams involved don't like hearing their player is negative value.

This is especially ironic since nobody has championed Horford outside Thunder fans more than me.

The OP suggests a Horford for Porter Jr. WCJ is offered for a pick. The OP is a Chicago fan and understands the value of WCJ.

Tell me where the value is off?

[Texas Chuck]

When did your parameters of value become the standard for the whole board?

I guess just now when you declared it because I certainly have never suggested such a thing.

Horford doesn't have positive trade value and OKC would certainly rather have his money off the books so they can use that space to collect more assets/talent. And since he is playing reasonably well it would be nice to help the tank to have him gone. WCS still holds some value if not a lot.

Not sure why this board has decided that every time I express an opinion I'm declaring myself king. I'm allowed my opinion as much as anyone even if fans of the teams involved don't like hearing their player is negative value.

This is especially ironic since nobody has championed Horford outside Thunder fans more than me.

The OP suggests a Horford for Porter Jr. WCJ is offered for a pick. The OP is a Chicago fan and understands the value of WCJ.

Tell me where the value is off?

I responded to a post suggesting that OKC get both juniors for Horford straight up. That is where I found the value to be off. Which was clear since I quoted that post and not the OP.

[Jack Dempsey]

But the OKC traded an expiring for Horford to get some picks. I don't think they are desperate to dump his contract at all, especially not now since he played better in the last couple of games. I doubt they would trade him for an expiring straight up, let alone add value to get rid of him. If they like WCJ they might do it but without sending out a pick.

So your theory is that OKC should get to dump the over $40M in future money due Horford and get a young C with talent and give up nothing?

Why would Chicago ever consider this?

We have to look at deals from both sides or what are we doing?

I never said Chicago should do it.

The goal of the GM's around the league isn't to find fair value for the pieces they are trading away. They are looking for the best possible deal for their franchises. For example, Team A is looking to trade a certain player with average efficiency and they receive two offers. Team B is offering a FRP and Team C just a SRP. They certainly won't say - you know what, a FRP would be nice but we think our player is worth just a SRP so we gonna take that offer. Everybody's gonna take the best possible offer.

Trade value of a player is determined by his production and by the leverage the trading teams have. In this case, Chicago wants Horford and Presti has no need to get rid of him. He's playing well, he's no cancer in the lockerroom and they don't need the capspace in the offseason at all. I mean it's not that Oklahoma is a top FA destination anyway. If they trade him for an expiring, they'd have to hit the floor next season anyway so why not just keep him unless someone offers good value for him. WCJ is a nice prospect but he's not a player I'd die for.
Ont he other hand, last offseason the competing Philadelphia was desperate to get his contract off the books since they realized he's a bad fit next to Embiid and Presti had the luxury to take on him if the Sixers added some value. They did and that's why that trade happened.

Here's another example from their last year in Seattle: Sarver was cheap again and wanted to save some bucks. So the Sonics offered them to take Kurt Thomas off their books if they gave them 2 FRP. And since no other team had enough capspace to take on his contract, the Suns had to take their offer. Thomas was still a good player and played well for the rebuilding Sonics and at the deadline the Spurs had to give up a FRP to get him. So they got 3 FRP for nothing than pure cap space just because they had the leverage at that time.

[sonictecture]

I guess just now when you declared it because I certainly have never suggested such a thing.

Horford doesn't have positive trade value and OKC would certainly rather have his money off the books so they can use that space to collect more assets/talent. And since he is playing reasonably well it would be nice to help the tank to have him gone. WCS still holds some value if not a lot.

Not sure why this board has decided that every time I express an opinion I'm declaring myself king. I'm allowed my opinion as much as anyone even if fans of the teams involved don't like hearing their player is negative value.

This is especially ironic since nobody has championed Horford outside Thunder fans more than me.

The OP suggests a Horford for Porter Jr. WCJ is offered for a pick. The OP is a Chicago fan and understands the value of WCJ.

Tell me where the value is off?

I responded to a post suggesting that OKC get both juniors for Horford straight up. That is where I found the value to be off. Which was clear since I quoted that post and not the OP.

Is it laughable and disgusting?

[Tony Snell]

I dont think this is a direction that the Bulls should consider at all. I am very down on WCJ (although he was starting to play better before he got hurt), but I don't think Hosford makes any sense for the Bulls to give up positive value for.

[letsgobulls23]

The OP is missing a huge part of the trade - what pick is OKC giving up? Taking on Horford for OPJ + WCJ makes no sense for CHI realistically, so the pick is crucial.

[sonictecture]

The OP is missing a huge part of the trade - what pick is OKC giving up? Taking on Horford for OPJ + WCJ makes no sense for CHI realistically, so the pick is crucial.

What is the value of WCJ?

[Dez]

But the OKC traded an expiring for Horford to get some picks. I don't think they are desperate to dump his contract at all, especially not now since he played better in the last couple of games. I doubt they would trade him for an expiring straight up, let alone add value to get rid of him. If they like WCJ they might do it but without sending out a pick.

So your theory is that OKC should get to dump the over $40M in future money due Horford and get a young C with talent and give up nothing?

Why would Chicago ever consider this?

We have to look at deals from both sides or what are we doing?

The player with the 40m in future salary is dependable and productive and the young C talent is oft injured and unproductive.

It seems OKC gives up something and gets back nothing.

When did your parameters of value become the standard for the whole board?

Incorrect, quite incorrect actually.

[Kurt Heimlich]

The pick is too vague to make this proposition worth considering. 20M cap space plus a talented young player like WCJ is much more tangible in actual value.

[pipfan]

Yes, I am not sure which pick is fair. Ideally, it would be 2 picks-one of the ones that looks to be a late pick, and another with a bit more potential
this deal also saves the Bulls $ this year

[letsgobulls23]

The OP is missing a huge part of the trade - what pick is OKC giving up? Taking on Horford for OPJ + WCJ makes no sense for CHI realistically, so the pick is crucial.

What is the value of WCJ?

It's hard to say imo. He hasn't been able to stay healthy consistently, and his rookie deal is almost up. But he's still only 21 and has shown flashes of really good potential when healthy.

Based on the OP, I'd want a pretty valuable pick for taking on Horford's contract.

[letsgobulls23]

Yes, I am not sure which pick is fair. Ideally, it would be 2 picks-one of the ones that looks to be a late pick, and another with a bit more potential
this deal also saves the Bulls $ this year

Lol, that's pretty irrelevant considering Horford is owed 27.5M this year, 27M next year, and 26M the year after...

[ThunderBolt]

Yes, I am not sure which pick is fair. Ideally, it would be 2 picks-one of the ones that looks to be a late pick, and another with a bit more potential
this deal also saves the Bulls $ this year

Lol, that's pretty irrelevant considering Horford is owed 27.5M this year, 27M next year, and 26M the year after...

Horford’s final year is partially guaranteed. Obviously Chicago still taking on more money but not as much.