Moderators: Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, MoneyTalks41890, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, BullyKing, Andre Roberstan, loserX, Trader_Joe
VCfor3 wrote:
Resistance wrote:VCfor3 wrote:
Sacramento needs a replacement for Ranadive that will give the FO clear instructions:
1. Properly tank and don't keep trying to be a fringe playoff team.
2. If/When given a chance for another Doncic versus Bagley decision, don't screw it up.
Dn4sty wrote:?s=21
Not the most reliable source but Thunder maybe looking to use cap space
Dn4sty wrote:?s=21
Not the most reliable source but Thunder maybe looking to use cap space
pacers33granger wrote:Resistance wrote:VCfor3 wrote:
Sacramento needs a replacement for Ranadive that will give the FO clear instructions:
1. Properly tank and don't keep trying to be a fringe playoff team.
2. If/When given a chance for another Doncic versus Bagley decision, don't screw it up.
If the team was seriously considering trading the 9th pick for JV, then there's really no hope.
pacers33granger wrote:Resistance wrote:VCfor3 wrote:
Sacramento needs a replacement for Ranadive that will give the FO clear instructions:
1. Properly tank and don't keep trying to be a fringe playoff team.
2. If/When given a chance for another Doncic versus Bagley decision, don't screw it up.
If the team was seriously considering trading the 9th pick for JV, then there's really no hope.
loserX wrote:pacers33granger wrote:Resistance wrote:
Sacramento needs a replacement for Ranadive that will give the FO clear instructions:
1. Properly tank and don't keep trying to be a fringe playoff team.
2. If/When given a chance for another Doncic versus Bagley decision, don't screw it up.
If the team was seriously considering trading the 9th pick for JV, then there's really no hope.
I assume the #17 would have gone back to Sacramento, as it did in New Orleans, but then the Pels upped the ante with the future pick.
Otherwise why on Earth would the Griz have taken the NOP offer.
pacers33granger wrote:Dn4sty wrote:pacers33granger wrote:I would hope Presti doesn't sign one of the top free agents just as an asset. Unless he never wants to get anyone worthwhile to sign without severely overpaying.
I wouldn’t necessarily say Jake Fisher is the most reliable. He walked back all the SGA being offered in a trade stuff
Yeah he's been throwing a ton out there lately, so I doubt it's true.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
loserX wrote:pacers33granger wrote:Resistance wrote:
Sacramento needs a replacement for Ranadive that will give the FO clear instructions:
1. Properly tank and don't keep trying to be a fringe playoff team.
2. If/When given a chance for another Doncic versus Bagley decision, don't screw it up.
If the team was seriously considering trading the 9th pick for JV, then there's really no hope.
I assume the #17 would have gone back to Sacramento, as it did in New Orleans, but then the Pels upped the ante with the future pick.
Otherwise why on Earth would the Griz have taken the NOP offer.
I was thinking earlier.Texas Chuck wrote:This may have been mentioned already but if not--Lowe is saying Buddy to the Lakers is probably dead because neither the Wiz or Kings want Dennis. Some chatter about the Wiz pursuing Dinwiddie and sending Kuz and/or Trez to the Nets. That makes a lot more sense if the Nets are willing to spend. Kuzma would be a good depth get for them albeit crazy expensive.
RipPizzaGuy wrote:I was thinking earlier.Texas Chuck wrote:This may have been mentioned already but if not--Lowe is saying Buddy to the Lakers is probably dead because neither the Wiz or Kings want Dennis. Some chatter about the Wiz pursuing Dinwiddie and sending Kuz and/or Trez to the Nets. That makes a lot more sense if the Nets are willing to spend. Kuzma would be a good depth get for them albeit crazy expensive.
Are the Lakers allowed to s&t 2 guys in 1 deal or is that against the cba?
Nobody wants Schroder at 20-25/year which makes sense. But at 13-15 he may be okay?
My thinking was
Wizards moving kuzma for Schroder on same salary
Kings moving buddy for Kuzma + THT (3/21-24)
Lakers s&t Schroder and THT for Buddy.
I figured this wasn't legal, but no idea.
Wizards need a pg, and at same price as kuz seems like a no Brainer.
Kings balance roster far better and take a chance with tht.
Sent from my SM-G988U1 using RealGM mobile app
The sign-and-trade rule allows teams to re-sign their own free agents for trading purposes. Under this rule the player is re-signed and immediately traded to another team. This is done by adding a clause to the contract stipulating that the contract is null and void if the trade to the specific team is not completed within 48 hours. A sign-and-trade is treated like a single, atomic transaction, and not two separate transactions between which one party can change its mind -- if the trade is not completed, then the signing is invalidated.
To qualify for a sign-and-trade, all of the following must be true:* The player must re-sign with his prior team -- a team cannot include another team's free agent in a sign-and-trade.
* The player must finish the preceding season with that team (deals are no longer allowed that sign-and-trade players who are out of the league, such as the sign-and-trade that sent Keith Van Horn from Dallas to New Jersey as part of the Jason Kidd trade in 2008).
* The player cannot be a restricted free agent who has signed an offer sheet with another team (see question number 42).
* The team receiving the player cannot be above the "Apron" (see question number 20) at the conclusion of the trade1, 2. A team above the Apron can receive a player in a sign-and-trade if the trade reduces the team's payroll and the team finishes the trade below the Apron.
* The team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season.1
* The trade must be completed prior to the first game of the regular season (sign-and-trades are not allowed once the season begins).
* The player cannot be signed using the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception, the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception, or any exception that cannot be used to offer a three-year contract (see question number 25).
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
I mean I think he's going to have a tough time getting more than 15/year.Godaddycurse wrote:RipPizzaGuy wrote:I was thinking earlier.Texas Chuck wrote:This may have been mentioned already but if not--Lowe is saying Buddy to the Lakers is probably dead because neither the Wiz or Kings want Dennis. Some chatter about the Wiz pursuing Dinwiddie and sending Kuz and/or Trez to the Nets. That makes a lot more sense if the Nets are willing to spend. Kuzma would be a good depth get for them albeit crazy expensive.
Are the Lakers allowed to s&t 2 guys in 1 deal or is that against the cba?
Nobody wants Schroder at 20-25/year which makes sense. But at 13-15 he may be okay?
My thinking was
Wizards moving kuzma for Schroder on same salary
Kings moving buddy for Kuzma + THT (3/21-24)
Lakers s&t Schroder and THT for Buddy.
I figured this wasn't legal, but no idea.
Wizards need a pg, and at same price as kuz seems like a no Brainer.
Kings balance roster far better and take a chance with tht.
Sent from my SM-G988U1 using RealGM mobile app
i think its legal but i doubt schroder will sign for so little
RipPizzaGuy wrote:I mean I think he's going to have a tough time getting more than 15/year.
Report is Washington likes Dinwiddie. Chicago likes ball.
Dallas/pelicans want Lowry and Schroder probably doesn't fit well with either team.
He doesn't have a ton more options. I'd be shocked if he sniffs 20. Team will have instant regret.
Maybe he signs for MLE 1+1 somewhere and attempts to increase his value but he's not coming off a great year
Sent from my SM-G988U1 using RealGM mobile app
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
Texas Chuck wrote:Pistons love their dead money. They waived Joseph and Sirvydis today which is $4M in dead money. Can still get to $16.3M in cap space if they waive McGruder as well.
Note: Waiving Joseph was obviously the correct decision. Just pointing out more dead money for a franchise with a ton of it over the years(and now).
Kilo wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:Pistons love their dead money. They waived Joseph and Sirvydis today which is $4M in dead money. Can still get to $16.3M in cap space if they waive McGruder as well.
Note: Waiving Joseph was obviously the correct decision. Just pointing out more dead money for a franchise with a ton of it over the years(and now).
Somehow can get to 22M cap space if Pistons used stretch provision on Joseph and Sirvydis cap hits.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
Texas Chuck wrote:Kilo wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:Pistons love their dead money. They waived Joseph and Sirvydis today which is $4M in dead money. Can still get to $16.3M in cap space if they waive McGruder as well.
Note: Waiving Joseph was obviously the correct decision. Just pointing out more dead money for a franchise with a ton of it over the years(and now).
Somehow can get to 22M cap space if Pistons used stretch provision on Joseph and Sirvydis cap hits.
I'd have to see the numbers. Was going on Bobby Marks and stretching $4M can't add $6M in cap space so if your number is right Marks is missing something.
Texas Chuck wrote:I agree. I could see a scenario where he is plan F or something for Dallas, but even then they are going to want to send out Powell/Burke almost certainly in that deal. Just burning cap space on him makes no sense since they still employ arguably the best offensive PG in the league and have a really solid backup in Brunson as well.
The idea of Lowry is he that he's still a very high level player and he fits really well on court with Luka. Dennis? Not nearly so much.
Return to Trades and Transactions