Official Trade Thread XV: 12/22/10 - 5/3/11

[LyricalRico]

Btw, pass on Marvin. Don't tie up cap room for 3 years on him.

FWIW, I was actually saying Dallas should trade Haywood for Marvin. IMO that would be better than helping the Lakers.

[nuposse04]

I must be doing something wrong so I can't confirm this trade in the checker, but I was thinking of something along the lines of this...not Sure If all parties would like it but here it is:

Wiz trades:
AB, Hinrich, Thornton
Get: Jordan Hill, Lee, LA 1st

Houston trades: Hill, Lee, Brooks
Get: Bynum, Hinrich

Lakers trade: Bynum, Brown, 1st
Get: Brooks, AB, Thornton

...probably wishful thinking...

[LyricalRico]

^ Yeah, you've got Houston taking on like $20M in salary but only giving up a fraction of that. Did you mean to send Yao's expiring to the Lakers?

[verbal8]

I must be doing something wrong so I can't confirm this trade in the checker, but I was thinking of something along the lines of this...not Sure If all parties would like it but here it is:

Wiz trades:
AB, Hinrich, Thornton
Get: Jordan Hill, Lee, LA 1st

Houston trades: Hill, Lee, Brooks
Get: Bynum, Hinrich

Lakers trade: Bynum, Brown, 1st
Get: Brooks, AB, Thornton

...probably wishful thinking...

Houston is taking on way too much salary. It does work if the Wizards take Yao Ming.

[nuposse04]

I must be doing something wrong so I can't confirm this trade in the checker, but I was thinking of something along the lines of this...not Sure If all parties would like it but here it is:

Wiz trades:
AB, Hinrich, Thornton
Get: Jordan Hill, Lee, LA 1st

Houston trades: Hill, Lee, Brooks
Get: Bynum, Hinrich

Lakers trade: Bynum, Brown, 1st
Get: Brooks, AB, Thornton

...probably wishful thinking...

Houston is taking on way too much salary. It does work if the Wizards take Yao Ming.

I'm not sure what we'd give for Ming in return...I'm not to keen on giving them McGee as there is no guarantee Ming will be healthy...Might require another team to be brought into the picture.. :/

[verbal8]

I'm not sure what we'd give for Ming in return...I'm not to keen on giving them McGee as there is no guarantee Ming will be healthy...Might require another team to be brought into the picture.. :/

In any trade Ming is merely salary filler at this point. He definitely does not warrant giving up McGee.

[nuposse04]

I'm not sure what we'd give for Ming in return...I'm not to keen on giving them McGee as there is no guarantee Ming will be healthy...Might require another team to be brought into the picture.. :/

In any trade Ming is merely salary filler at this point. He definitely does not warrant giving up McGee.

Ok, I'd take a chance on Ming, I'm just kind of hoping th rockets have given up enough on him to make this trade and let us have a go.

[mhd]

Just posted on the trade board: Blatche for Nocioni+2012 1st rounder (15-18 range). Maybe we get a chance to take Faried if he slips there.

[LyricalRico]

Just posted on the trade board: Blatche for Nocioni+2012 1st rounder (15-18 range). Maybe we get a chance to take Faried if he slips there.

Of course, sign me up. But would Philly do that when they already have Brand and Speights? I guess they could play Blatche in the middle, but that's certainly not ideal.

[mhd]

Just posted on the trade board: Blatche for Nocioni+2012 1st rounder (15-18 range). Maybe we get a chance to take Faried if he slips there.

Of course, sign me up. But would Philly do that when they already have Brand and Speights? I guess they could play Blatche in the middle, but that's certainly not ideal.

Blatche certainly has the length to play center (I actually think that is his better position). Anyways, a deal I just thought of. Two respected mods liked the deal and thought the Wiz should be getting an expiring like Songaila back instead.

[LyricalRico]

^ Hey, I think Blatche stinks at any position. But if Philly wants to play him at C, it's their business. And I was also thinking about an expiring, instead of Noc.

Hmmm...what about adding Blatche-for-Noc to nate's previous suggestion of a 3-way with LA and DAL?

Wizards trade: Blatche, Hinrich, and Thornton
Wizards receive: Blake, Nocioni, Kapono, Speights, and PHI first

Sixers trade: Nocioni, Kapono, Speights, and 2011 first
Sixers receive: Bynum

Lakers trade: Bynum and Blake
Lakers receive: Hinrich and Haywood

Mavs trade: Haywood
Mavs receive: Blatche and Thornton

TRADE ID 5853634

It's essentially the same for Dallas and LAL as nate's earlier posts. Philly does it because of Bynum's upside, and also because his contract fits into their longterm cap situation (his deal ends the same year as Brand and Lou Williams). And since they aren't giving up crucial pieces of their rotation, they shouldn't mind giving up the pick to improve their playoff chances.

For the Wiz, I think I'd rather have Speights+pick than Bynum because of the injury concerns. I expect some to disagree with that, and I can see their point of view.

McGee/Seraphin
Speights/Booker
Lewis/Howard/Nocioni
Young/Kapono
Wall/Blake

That's a pretty balanced lineup that finally has a young low post scorer, also decent defense and lots of 3pt shooting. We can buyout both Lewis and Noc early, and Kapono's deal is expiring. Blake is also a capable backup PG who can't be used at SG like Hinrich can.

Thoughts?

[dangermouse]

I doubt LA go for it. I think if you add Artest for Iggy into that deal (dont know if it works), they might bite.

However, many are saying with the new CBA that LA are going to want to, nay, HAVE to cut payroll, so they may be more interested in recieving expiring deals with hinrich.

[LyricalRico]

I doubt LA go for it. I think if you add Artest for Iggy into that deal (dont know if it works), they might bite.

However, many are saying with the new CBA that LA are going to want to, nay, HAVE to cut payroll, so they may be more interested in recieving expiring deals with hinrich.

Well, Hinrich has only one year left compared with 3 for Blake. Haywood makes less than Bynum but I guess Bynum's team option in 2012 sort of trumps that. The numbers are probably big enough that somebody could at least take Walton off their hands.

[dangermouse]

If they can move Walton, i think they would consider it.

[nate33]

^ Hey, I think Blatche stinks at any position. But if Philly wants to play him at C, it's their business. And I was also thinking about an expiring, instead of Noc.

Hmmm...what about adding Blatche-for-Noc to nate's previous suggestion of a 3-way with LA and DAL?

Wizards trade: Blatche, Hinrich, and Thornton
Wizards receive: Blake, Nocioni, Kapono, Speights, and PHI first

Sixers trade: Nocioni, Kapono, Speights, and 2011 first
Sixers receive: Bynum

Lakers trade: Bynum and Blake
Lakers receive: Hinrich and Haywood

Mavs trade: Haywood
Mavs receive: Blatche and Thornton

TRADE ID 5853634

It's essentially the same for Dallas and LAL as nate's earlier posts. Philly does it because of Bynum's upside, and also because his contract fits into their longterm cap situation (his deal ends the same year as Brand and Lou Williams). And since they aren't giving up crucial pieces of their rotation, they shouldn't mind giving up the pick to improve their playoff chances.

For the Wiz, I think I'd rather have Speights+pick than Bynum because of the injury concerns. I expect some to disagree with that, and I can see their point of view.

McGee/Seraphin
Speights/Booker
Lewis/Howard/Nocioni
Young/Kapono
Wall/Blake

That's a pretty balanced lineup that finally has a young low post scorer, also decent defense and lots of 3pt shooting. We can buyout both Lewis and Noc early, and Kapono's deal is expiring. Blake is also a capable backup PG who can't be used at SG like Hinrich can.

Thoughts?

This is stupid. You managed to get Haywood by trading Blatche and Thornton to Dallas. And then you take Haywood and Hinrich and turn them into Bynum + Blake. You should stop there. We've got a starting center for the next decade plus a good backup PG to replace Hinrich. Why squander that for a mid first round pick plus a bunch of bad contracts?

It doesn't matter. LA won't do it.

[no D in Hibachi]

Looking in my crystal ball during the off-season...

Wiz get top 3 pick with chance for Kyrie Irving.

Javale McGee also ends season with 10/8/2.5 averages making it appear he's on the cusp of "getting it"

First Trade:
Wiz trade: Pick (Irving) and Blatche
Lakers trade: Bynum

Second Trade:
Wiz trade: Hinrich and Javale McGee
Hawks trade: Josh Smith

Wiz end up:

Wall, Shakur
Young, Martin
Lewis, FA (2nd pick)
Smith, Booker
Bynum, Seraphin

They'd have a pretty depleted bench, but honestly their bench is basically garbage and raw talent + Hinrich right now. However, they'd have arguably the best defensive front court who also has pretty good offensive talent.

[LyricalRico]

At first glance we drastically overpay for Bynum and then turn around and underpay for Josh Smith, so I guess from a Wiz perspective it evens out. But I don't see the Hawks giving up Smith for that package. Maybe Lewis+McGee for Smith+Marvin? They at least get another contract off their books.

Either way, though, our bench is extremely thin and we'll be counting on Wall taking another step forward in order for us to be really good. And Bynum's knees will be overshadowing everything IMO.

In my final analysis, I'd rather keep the pick than acquire Bynum. But I'd still go after Smith and try to acquire a center in another scenario.

[jivelikenice]

I'm sorry but I would never trade a top 3 pick for Bynum. His injury history alone dictates that. 35, 50, 65...Those are his games played the last three seasons! Sorry, he talented but you can't rick a potential top 3 pick on a such an injury prone player. This pick or who we're able to land for this pick is critical towards determining this team's upside and future prospects and Bynum is too much of a gamble.

[gesa2]

From Simmons' trade value column:

A list of the most memorable centers and power forwards of the past 35 years organized by their first six regular seasons for "games played," "games missed" and "number of seasons in which they played 90 percent of the games."

Dwight Howard: 489 --- 3 --- 6
Karl Malone: 489 --- 3 --- 6
Tim Duncan: 451 --- 9 --- 5
David Robinson: 475 --- 17 --- 5
Kevin McHale: 475 --- 17 --- 5
Charles Barkley: 472 --- 20 --- 6
Dikembe Mutombo: 471 --21 -- 5
Robert Parish: 469 --- 23 --- 5
Hakeem Olajuwon: 468 --- 24 --- 5
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 467 --- 25 --- 5
Dirk Nowitzki: 444 --- 48 --- 5
Kevin Garnett: 442 --- 50 --- 5
Patrick Ewing: 438 --- 54 --- 4
Moses Malone: 428 --- 66 --- 4
Alonzo Mourning: 409 --- 83 --- 2
Shaquille O'Neal: 408 --- 84 --- 2
Yao Ming: 404 -- 88 --- 3
Ralph Sampson: 395 --- 97 --- 3
Chris Webber: 329 --- 131 --- 1
Andrew Bynum: 309 --- 169 --- 1
Bill Walton: 223 --- 269 --- 0
Sam Bowie: 207 --- 285 --- 1
Greg Oden: 82 --- 266 --- 0

What jumps out? First, the durable guys remained durable throughout their careers, with just one exception: McHale, who ruined the second half of his career by bravely (and some would say foolishly) playing on a broken foot in the 1987 playoffs. Second, anyone who missed more than 80 games and couldn't play in 90 percent of the games in at least four of their first six seasons went on to have injury-plagued careers. (That includes Shaq, who played more than 68 games in a season just six times and missed an average of 18 games per season.) And third, if you can't stay on the court at your youngest/healthiest/freshest/most energetic, it's a pretty safe bet that things won't change as you get older. It's straight DNA: Some dudes are structurally built for 82-game NBA seasons, others aren't. So if you make the argument "If Bynum can stay healthy, he's a franchise center," just make sure you also mention that we have 35 years of evidence that there's a tipping point when "If he can stay healthy …" becomes "… he's not going to stay healthy." We're there with Andrew Bynum. He's not going to stay healthy. If I were the Lakers, I would trade him right now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ons/110217

[nate33]

From Simmons' trade value column:

A list of the most memorable centers and power forwards of the past 35 years organized by their first six regular seasons for "games played," "games missed" and "number of seasons in which they played 90 percent of the games."

Dwight Howard: 489 --- 3 --- 6
Karl Malone: 489 --- 3 --- 6
Tim Duncan: 451 --- 9 --- 5
David Robinson: 475 --- 17 --- 5
Kevin McHale: 475 --- 17 --- 5
Charles Barkley: 472 --- 20 --- 6
Dikembe Mutombo: 471 --21 -- 5
Robert Parish: 469 --- 23 --- 5
Hakeem Olajuwon: 468 --- 24 --- 5
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 467 --- 25 --- 5
Dirk Nowitzki: 444 --- 48 --- 5
Kevin Garnett: 442 --- 50 --- 5
Patrick Ewing: 438 --- 54 --- 4
Moses Malone: 428 --- 66 --- 4
Alonzo Mourning: 409 --- 83 --- 2
Shaquille O'Neal: 408 --- 84 --- 2
Yao Ming: 404 -- 88 --- 3
Ralph Sampson: 395 --- 97 --- 3
Chris Webber: 329 --- 131 --- 1
Andrew Bynum: 309 --- 169 --- 1
Bill Walton: 223 --- 269 --- 0
Sam Bowie: 207 --- 285 --- 1
Greg Oden: 82 --- 266 --- 0

What jumps out? First, the durable guys remained durable throughout their careers, with just one exception: McHale, who ruined the second half of his career by bravely (and some would say foolishly) playing on a broken foot in the 1987 playoffs. Second, anyone who missed more than 80 games and couldn't play in 90 percent of the games in at least four of their first six seasons went on to have injury-plagued careers. (That includes Shaq, who played more than 68 games in a season just six times and missed an average of 18 games per season.) And third, if you can't stay on the court at your youngest/healthiest/freshest/most energetic, it's a pretty safe bet that things won't change as you get older. It's straight DNA: Some dudes are structurally built for 82-game NBA seasons, others aren't. So if you make the argument "If Bynum can stay healthy, he's a franchise center," just make sure you also mention that we have 35 years of evidence that there's a tipping point when "If he can stay healthy …" becomes "… he's not going to stay healthy." We're there with Andrew Bynum. He's not going to stay healthy. If I were the Lakers, I would trade him right now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ons/110217

Wow. That's a convincing argument. Forget Bynum. Or at least, forget overpaying for Bynum.