how about a sign and trade using Spree ?

[MajorDad]

I was just thinking. Spree hasn't officially retired yet. has big Dog officially retired? Did Mickey Davis or paul Mokeski retire? Joe Barry Carrol? Washburn? VIn baker?

What's stopping the bucks from signing one of these guys and then trading him for J O'neal or Vince Carter?

We all saw how willing Van Horn was to accept being paid for 30 days. I' m quite sure baker, Spree and Big Dog would all be more than willing to take home a $5 million check and then be traded as an expiring contract. We need to show Davis stern that two teams can play the same game and how absurd his allowing the Mavs to sign and trade VAn horn really was.

I know the Big O retired. Did Bobby Dandridge retire? Surely he's worth a caron butler. or how about signing Scotty May and trading him for his son?

there has to be somebody out there we could sign and then trade. where's anthony mason when you really need him?

[ReasonablySober]

I was just thinking. Spree hasn't officially retired yet. has big Dog officially retired? Did Mickey Davis or paul Mokeski retire? Joe Barry Carrol? Washburn? VIn baker?

What's stopping the bucks from signing one of these guys and then trading him for J O'neal or Vince Carter?

We all saw how willing Van Horn was to accept being paid for 30 days. I' m quite sure baker, Spree and Big Dog would all be more than willing to take home a $5 million check and then be traded as an expiring contract. We need to show Davis stern that two teams can play the same game and how absurd his allowing the Mavs to sign and trade VAn horn really was.

I know the Big O retired. Did Bobby Dandridge retire? Surely he's worth a caron butler. or how about signing Scotty May and trading him for his son?

there has to be somebody out there we could sign and then trade. where's anthony mason when you really need him?

Dallas was able to sign KVH because they still had his rights. We don't have Spree's.

[fam3381]

FYI you can't S/T other teams' free agents.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#76

[MickeyDavis]

If we can't use Spree we can use Anthony Mason or Caffey.

[MajorDad]

so we could sign and trade mason and Caffey for randolph? or marbury?

What about that lithuanian guy we drafted one year, but never signed? SDon't we have several other second round piks playing in Europe we could sign? how about that guy from uw green Bay? or that second rounder from UNC Charlotte? Surely we could sign one of them and then trade him .

how about all of these guys packaged together for Artest?

[fam3381]

You would need to still have Bird rights on guys like Caffey and Mason to re-sign them for more than the min, since we are over the cap. However, I don't know of any way we could have signed, for instance, Simmons in '05 or Mason/Voskuhl last summer if we still had any major cap holds left from five or six years ago. We would have had to renounce our rights to use our cap space.

I don't know much about the KVH situation, but my guess is they never renounced their rights to him since they were so far over the cap that they didn't have traditional cap space anyway. So it really wouldn't matter if they renounced KVH's cap hold since they only had the MLE anyway. And the cap hold is just a cap thing, not actual money they would have had to pay him.

While I'll defer to GAD for final judgment on this, off the top of my head I don't see how the Bucks could do anything similar to this.

[EastSideBucksFan]

MajorDad I've seen you post this before and I ask myself "What the hell are you talking about?"


Latrell Sprewell has never been a member of the Bucks.

Why would we have his rights?



And I don't think David Stern is going to allow every team to take a look in their vault of "unretired" players and look to sign them to feux contracts acting like expirers so teams can acquire players.


IIRC there was an ESPN article that listed there was only 4 such "unretired" players that would serve that purpose currently and KVH was one of them.

[MajorDad]

my thoughts are that in the best interest of basketball, David stern should never have allowed the Bibby, Gashol and Kidd trades to ever take place. basically, all three were just traded for money. The grixxlies are not going to be able to sign a player as good as gashol with all that new cap room, because no elite player is going to want to play for them. they'll end up using that money to sign a middle tier type player like Simmons. the same is true for Sac and possibly NJ.

Spreewell has never publically retired. reggie miller hasn't retired. the celtics almost signed reggie Miller as a FA without having to give Indiana anything. So what's preventing the Bucks from signing reggie miller and then trading him back to the pacers for O'neal? What's preventing the Bucks from signing one of these guys outside of the NBA and then trading him? How can a guy like harris pass a physical? Obviously, he didn't, but the trade was still allowed. how can Van Horn pass a physical? If Van Horn ca n pass a physical, surely Anthony Mason could as well. as could tractor traylor.

yes, a deal like this would place the Bucks over the salary cap, but the bucks have been over the cap before.

You could say i'm tired of NBA owners finding loopholes and taking advantage of them while Stern does nothing to stop them. and I' m disapointed that the bucks don't also try to take advantage of these creative loopholes. So why can't the Bucks sign Spree and then trade him? Does any team have his rights? I also think Spree is probably better than at least 6 bucks currently being paid.

it's kind of obvious we don't have very many out of the box thinkers here.

[MickeyDavis]

We can sign any free agent but since we are over the cap we can only offer the minimum.

[GrandAdmiralDan]

my thoughts are that in the best interest of basketball, David stern should never have allowed the Bibby, Gashol and Kidd trades to ever take place. basically, all three were just traded for money. The grixxlies are not going to be able to sign a player as good as gashol with all that new cap room, because no elite player is going to want to play for them. they'll end up using that money to sign a middle tier type player like Simmons. the same is true for Sac and possibly NJ.

Spreewell has never publically retired. reggie miller hasn't retired. the celtics almost signed reggie Miller as a FA without having to give Indiana anything. So what's preventing the Bucks from signing reggie miller and then trading him back to the pacers for O'neal? What's preventing the Bucks from signing one of these guys outside of the NBA and then trading him? How can a guy like harris pass a physical? Obviously, he didn't, but the trade was still allowed. how can Van Horn pass a physical? If Van Horn ca n pass a physical, surely Anthony Mason could as well. as could tractor traylor.

yes, a deal like this would place the Bucks over the salary cap, but the bucks have been over the cap before.

You could say i'm tired of NBA owners finding loopholes and taking advantage of them while Stern does nothing to stop them. and I' m disapointed that the bucks don't also try to take advantage of these creative loopholes. So why can't the Bucks sign Spree and then trade him? Does any team have his rights? I also think Spree is probably better than at least 6 bucks currently being paid.

it's kind of obvious we don't have very many out of the box thinkers here.

I come up with out of the box ideas all the time when it comes to trades.

There is a difference between out of the box thinking and ignoring reality.
There ARE rules. You cannot just ignore them. What Dallas did was within those rules.
Things you are suggesting are absolutely not.

fam even went over most of it, and yet you completely ignored that information and made this post anyway.

I have an idea too. Let's call up LeBron and just ask him to start playing for us from now on instead of the Cavs. Who cares if that wouldn't be possible under the CBA? I'm thinking outside of the box!


Regarding physicals, a team can waive the physical requirement if they so choose. Or they can do a physical with certain stipulations. They probably checked Devin Harris with the caveat that they wouldn't be failing him due to anything related to his recent injury.

Anyway, everything that fam mentions applies to the Bucks and none of your ideas here are possible.
You have to have bird rights (non, early, or full) on a player in order to S&T them. That means that player is your own FA. You can't just pick some random FA like Sprewell or Reggie Miller. You can't use the MSE, BAE, MLE, or DPE to S&T a player anyway.

And the other unique thing about the Dallas situation was that KVH's prior salary was so large that they were able to give him the salary they did without him instantly becoming a BYC player in that S&T.

[MajorDad]

GAD -you are the rain on the parade. throwing in that 4 letter word - reality !

So playing by the rules and reality, the Bucks still own the rights to Ersan. correct? couldn't we trade him to somebody much the same way we traded the rights to rashard griffith to orlando for a second round pick? We did do that. That was a legal, by the rules trade. Don't the Bucks own the rights to any other draft picks? like that great PF from Lithuania we could trade for maybe a lowry or watson or ridenour?

or couldn't we package the rights to ersan with half of our guaranteed contracted bench to Sacremento for Artest and then allow SAC to then waive all those losers? and then we could resign them all after 30 days? nobody in the NBA would care if we traded gadz, Simmons, Storey and the like and then watched as they got waived and then resigned them. isn't that exactly what Dallas had planned to do with Stackhouse?

if it's in the rules for what Dallas planned to do with Stackhouse, why can't the Bucks do something just as creative? Couldn't the Bucks trade Simmons to the pacers for O'neal only to see the pacers waive Simmons and then have the Bucks pick him up again?

GAD, can't you try some of these creative trade ideas with your friends in inside places? You have rules, you know those rules, you should be knowledgeable of how to get around those rules. it doesn't appear as if David Stern cares about any rules. GAD, can't you think of one creative trade? the deadline is tommorow.

Couldn't we trade erson for that other Euro guy from last year's draft who refused to sign? something? anything?

[GrandAdmiralDan]

So playing by the rules and reality, the Bucks still own the rights to Ersan. correct?

Ersan is an RFA for us as long as we choose to tender him his QO and as long as he doesn't accept that QO when he is allowed to (at which point he'd be under contract with us for a year).
We have his early bird rights and he also have Gilbert Arenas Provision protection on him.

couldn't we trade him to somebody much the same way we traded the rights to rashard griffith to orlando for a second round pick? We did do that. That was a legal, by the rules trade. Don't the Bucks own the rights to any other draft picks? like that great PF from Lithuania we could trade for maybe a lowry or watson or ridenour?

No, you are confusing bird rights and the RFA rights with draft rights to unsigned draft picks. Two totally different things.
Draft rights can simply be traded without having to sign that player.
Ersan can only be traded right now via S&T, but we are limited tot he EBE as far as what kind of contract we can give him. And he would instantly become a BYC player which would complicate that S&T.

with half of our guaranteed contracted bench to Sacremento for Artest and then allow SAC to then waive all those losers? and then we could resign them all after 30 days? nobody in the NBA would care if we traded gadz, Simmons, Storey and the like and then watched as they got waived and then resigned them.

Sure. We can do that. Why would Sacramento do that though? Do you realize how much guaranteed salary that Sacramento would be eating? That doesn't make sense at all.

isn't that exactly what Dallas had planned to do with Stackhouse?

No. First of all, what Stackhouse is still owed pales in comparison to what Simmons and Gadz are still owed combined. And Stackhouse was going to be bought out possibly at a reduced amount and/or be re-signed by Dallas at an amount large enough to significantly increase the right of set-off the Nets would get. Plus the Mavs were sending $3 mil cash to reimburse the Nets for some of that.

Couldn't the Bucks trade Simmons to the pacers for O'neal only to see the pacers waive Simmons and then have the Bucks pick him up again?

No.

GAD, can't you try some of these creative trade ideas with your friends in inside places?

Some of THOSE ideas? No.
Some of my own creative ideas that would actually be allowed and/or make sense? Yes. And I do, from time to time. However, the Bucks front office is where good ideas go to die, often with Senator Kohl, Ron Walter, Mike Burr, etc. wielding the axe. So I for the most part don't even bother anymore.

You have rules, you know those rules, you should be knowledgeable of how to get around those rules.

Correct.

it doesn't appear as if David Stern cares about any rules.

Incorrect.

GAD, can't you think of one creative trade?

Of course.

Couldn't we trade erson for that other Euro guy from last year's draft who refused to sign? something? anything?

No.
But we could do a trade with the principle pieces being an S&T'd Ersan and the draft rights to Fran Vasquez. Other things than those two pieces would have to be involved in order to get that to work, and of course Ersan would have to want to do that too.

[MajorDad]

GAd, can you explain how and why brent Barry gets traded to Seattle, and now Seattle is going to buy out his contract so they can trade him to the Suns? this is what is currently being proposed, so it must be within the NBA rules.

I don't really want to know how it's done. what i really want to know is how can Seattle be so creative, and the Bucks do nothing?

[NeedsMoreCheese]

GAd, can you explain how and why brent Barry gets traded to Seattle, and now Seattle is going to buy out his contract so they can trade him to the Suns? this is what is currently being proposed, so it must be within the NBA rules.

I don't really want to know how it's done. what i really want to know is how can Seattle be so creative, and the Bucks do nothing?

They cant buy him out and then trade him to the Suns. They could either buy him out OR trade him.
If the suns wanted to save some money and at the same time convince seattle to let them have Barry theyd likely do some seperate trade involving like some 2nd round pick or something (since they already gave the sonics some firsts i dont know if they have any left to trade or if they even would) and cash for the rights to some guy seattle is never gonna sign or some pick. Then have the Sonics waive Barry (well it could be done in either order really) and then have the suns sign him to a lower contract. Between the setoff, and the cash the suns gave the sonics in the trade this would be worth seattles while. The suns would do it to save on lux tax. Anything they pay Barry is doubled since theyre already over.

[MajorDad]

but the thing is, the Suns and seattle are trying to figure out a way to make this impossibility happen. while the Bucks seem paralyzed and unwilling to try to work any creative financial deals. that is what gets my goat. other teams make crerative deals all the time. and the Bucks make straight forward no brainer boring type of deals. from watching the Bucks, it seems like they always have the position of it can't be done and here's why. And while the Bucks tell us the here's why it can't be done, other teams are doing it.

The Bucks have zero creativity.

My guess is that because the Bucks won tonight, they will feel no need to make a trade. We are great! We beat the Pistons wahoo. we don't need to shake up this team! yehaa. We have righted the ship. we are play off bound. i feel another 40 point loss coming up the day after the trade deadline.

[jerrod]

how do you know what the bucks are trying to do?

this isn't some crazy genius move that a mavs executive dreamed up one night after too much peyote.

it's just an extremely uncommon situation that they happened to be in and could use. we are not in that situation. what's the problem?