- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Build your own Trade thread
Posted on 12/17/24 at 2:17 pm to brmark70816
Posted on 12/17/24 at 2:17 pm to brmark70816
quote:
It really doesn't make a ton of sense to target Johnson, while we still have Ingram, Murphy and Jones. It's not really a need, and he would be splitting time..
Why not?
what's wrong with having 4 guys in the 6'7"-6'9" range who are long, can shoot the 3, can get to the goal and finish, and can defend?
Is Boston having a hard time with finding playing time with Tatum/Brown/Jrue/White?
I'd absolutely like to see a lineup of Murray/Herb/BI/Trey/Cam.....with a coach who knows how to actually coach.
1
Posted on 12/17/24 at 2:25 pm to TeddyPadillac
I was listening to Shamit's latest podcast and he mentioned a Bobby Marks comment I hadn't seen. The rules say you have to have 14 players on the roster, but there's a 2 week window where you can be under 14 players. Once we hit January and 10 day contracts become available, the Pels can cut/dump 2 guys, say Theis and JRE, then go back and forth between the 2 week roster threshold window and a 10 day contract until the end of the season and convert Boston to a regular contract at the end of the cycle to get under the tax.
When they seemed to cut Elfrid out of nowhere when he was playing well I knew immediately it was tax numbers related. I guess this is why. Which means we don't HAVE to trade anybody. I still think they will, but having to get under the tax would have reduced leverage in trade talks.
When they seemed to cut Elfrid out of nowhere when he was playing well I knew immediately it was tax numbers related. I guess this is why. Which means we don't HAVE to trade anybody. I still think they will, but having to get under the tax would have reduced leverage in trade talks.
This post was edited on 12/17/24 at 2:28 pm
Posted on 12/17/24 at 2:54 pm to TigerinATL
How does that work though? Just b/c you cut a guy doens't mean you don't owe him that money and it still applies to the cap hit.. Theis and JRE's $2Mish salary counts towards the salary cap whether they finish the season with us or we cut them. Their contract for this year is guaranteed.
Or is there some special rule about cutting minimum salary players?
cutting and dumping are two completely different things in regards to how it affects the salary cap.
Or is there some special rule about cutting minimum salary players?
cutting and dumping are two completely different things in regards to how it affects the salary cap.
Posted on 12/17/24 at 2:55 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:
It really doesn't make a ton of sense to target Johnson, while we still have Ingram, Murphy and Jones. It's not really a need, and he would be splitting time..
BI, Herb, Trey, and Cam Johnson would be (3) starters and (1) 6th man.
We currently have BI, Herb, Zion, and Trey. Which is (3) starters and a 6th man.......and we wouldn't have CJ with the 1st group.
That post really doesn't make sense at all. It especially doesn't make sense when you account for injuries.
Posted on 12/17/24 at 3:17 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:
Just b/c you cut a guy doens't mean you don't owe him that money and it still applies to the cap hit
I said dump/cut. I think JRE's contract may be not fully guaranteed, so you can possibly cut him, but Thies or someone else would need to be dumped on another team.
Posted on 12/17/24 at 4:06 pm to TigerinATL
All contracts are fully guaranteed and the Pels are about $3.8M into the first apron. Plus the Pels have played approximately 35 percent of the season which needs to be factored into the equation.
Pels have to reduce payroll and a trade is the only option. Do not forget what happened with the Murray trade when you see that $3.8M!!
Pels have to reduce payroll and a trade is the only option. Do not forget what happened with the Murray trade when you see that $3.8M!!
Posted on 12/28/24 at 11:56 am to ErikGordan
Nets: Zion
Pistons: CJ, Theis, JG
Warriors: BI
1 of the 3 teams: Jose
Pels: Cam J, DFS, 2 1st, 1 swap
Pels: Stewart, 1 swap
Pels: Podz, Wiggins, Looney, 1 1st
Next year:
Murray/ Podz/ Reeves
Herb/ Hawk/ Boston
Trey/ Wiggins/
Cam J/ Karlo/
Missi/ Stewart/
No tax to pay.
If Murray declines his player option in 27-28 then we would have only Trey on the books with 29mil and these players ready to re-sign or move on:
Hawk
Karlo
Reeves
Podz
Herb
Missi
Murray
Cam Johnson
Andrew Wiggins
Pistons: CJ, Theis, JG
Warriors: BI
1 of the 3 teams: Jose
Pels: Cam J, DFS, 2 1st, 1 swap
Pels: Stewart, 1 swap
Pels: Podz, Wiggins, Looney, 1 1st
Next year:
Murray/ Podz/ Reeves
Herb/ Hawk/ Boston
Trey/ Wiggins/
Cam J/ Karlo/
Missi/ Stewart/
No tax to pay.
If Murray declines his player option in 27-28 then we would have only Trey on the books with 29mil and these players ready to re-sign or move on:
Hawk
Karlo
Reeves
Podz
Herb
Missi
Murray
Cam Johnson
Andrew Wiggins
Posted on 12/29/24 at 6:05 pm to Dantheman504
BI to Nuggets
MPJ, Cancar, Hawk to Pistons
THJ, Duren, Ivey, 6 of the 2nds Detroit has, 1 protected 1st from Denver to Pels
MPJ, Cancar, Hawk to Pistons
THJ, Duren, Ivey, 6 of the 2nds Detroit has, 1 protected 1st from Denver to Pels
This post was edited on 12/29/24 at 6:35 pm
Posted on 12/29/24 at 9:06 pm to Soggymoss
Why would Detroit do that?
Posted on 12/29/24 at 10:49 pm to ghost2most
Why would we do this? We finally have a franchise PG and a franchise C. We would trade our best asset for another PG and a C? While also trading away our best young guard shooter? I also don't think Detroit would do this.
Would much rather just do a CJ for Stewart trade.
Would much rather just do a CJ for Stewart trade.
Posted on 12/30/24 at 6:09 am to ghost2most
quote:
Why would Detroit do that?
Ivey is a 6th man bench guard, they replace him with Hawk to have a 6th man bench guard on a longer rookie deal, but if they don’t want to trade Ivey then send Beasley or another salary and take Hawk out of it. It’s mainly them getting a big 3/4 shooter to pair with Cade while not giving up much of anything in draft capital (they have 18 second round picks), and players drafted by the previous regime they may not want.
quote:
We finally have a franchise PG and a franchise C. We would trade our best asset for another PG and a C? While also trading away our best young guard shooter? I also don't think Detroit would do this.
Ivey is not a PG, he’s pretty much the same type of player as Hawk. Also you cannot play guys 48 minutes a game if you didn’t know that, you have to have backups to spell them. Having Missi and Duren as your 1-2 punch at the center spot shores up that position for years to come.
This post was edited on 12/30/24 at 6:11 am
Posted on 12/30/24 at 10:43 am to Soggymoss
quote:
Ivey is not a PG, he’s pretty much the same type of player as Hawk.
So if Hawk and Ivey are a wash then the trade is BI for Duren? I hate that. Especially considering we lose a starting SF and add a backup Center. There's no reason to make that trade when Stewart is on the same team with less cost.
quote:
Having Missi and Duren as your 1-2 punch at the center spot shores up that position for years to come
Having Missi and any backup with a pulse shores up that position for years to come. Duren is about to get paid, we aren't trading for a 10mil contract. So we would be losing a starting SF and adding a center that will be making 20+ soon and have to compete with out other center as the "starter". Absolutely terrible idea.
You can't look at Ivey/ Duren as cheap contracts they are both about to get paid. You are talking about trading our best SG and SF costing us 5mil next year for (2) players in positions we already have that will cost us possibly $40-$50mil. So we would be trading a starting SG/ SF for a backup PG/ C that will cost us an extra 30+mil
You are adding 2 players that can't be maximized on this roster and trading Hawk who is one of the few players we can maximize with this roster.
Murray
Hawk
Herb
Trey
Missi
We need to keep this group. Trade CJ, Zion, BI, Jose and get 1-2 starters + 1-2 bench players + picks.
This post was edited on 12/30/24 at 10:49 am
Posted on 12/31/24 at 5:09 am to Dantheman504
quote:
So if Hawk and Ivey are a wash then the trade is BI for Duren? I hate that.
And 6 2nd round picks and a 1st round pick from Denver, or are we just disregarding that part?
quote:
Especially considering we lose a starting SF
Do we? Considering we have Trey that will be starting in his spot? Seems like we move a guy to open up salary and minutes for a player that deserves to move up.
quote:
Trade CJ, Zion, BI, Jose and get 1-2 starters + 1-2 bench players + picks.
Trade literally moves BI and adds 2-3 bench players and 7 draft picks…
This post was edited on 12/31/24 at 7:49 am
Posted on 12/31/24 at 2:44 pm to Soggymoss
quote:
Seems like we move a guy to open up salary and minutes for a player that deserves to move up.
Uhh BI is a free agent and Ivey/ Duren are going to get $35mil-$50mil with their extensions combined. And you are trading Hawk who has the best comtract for the value. We are certainly NOT "opening up salary" with that move.
In theory Hawk/ BI cost us $12mil for the next 2 years and Ivey/ Duren will cost +$50mil for the next 2 years while both being put in essentially backup positions.
Assuming Zion/ CJ aren't on the roster you would have:
Murray/ Ivey/ Jose/ Reeves
Trey/
Missi/ Duren
You see those 2 empty positions? Even if you move Ivey to SG then you are very limited and I promise you it will not be a difference maker to win a championship.
On the other end you will have your (2) Centers competing against each other which we've learned is GREAT for moral and the team over the last 2 years......
And as I said before you are now "forced" to fill the roster voids with a CJ/ Zion trade instead of taking the best offer/ offer we want.
This post was edited on 12/31/24 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 12/31/24 at 2:50 pm to Dantheman504
If this was last year before we traded for a PG and found a possible franchise Center then I would be all for it. But now that move would cause way more headaches and makes a lot less sense.
Posted on 1/1/25 at 6:52 am to Dantheman504
quote:
Uhh BI is a free agent and Ivey/ Duren are going to get $35mil-$50mil with their extensions combined. And you are trading Hawk who has the best comtract for the value. We are certainly NOT "opening up salary" with that move. In theory Hawk/ BI cost us $12mil for the next 2 years and Ivey/ Duren will cost +$50mil for the next 2 years while both being put in essentially backup positions.
I’ve already said if you don’t want to swap Hawk for Ivey (don’t see why anyone wouldn’t), then take those two factors out of the trade.
The trade then becomes:
Out: BI
In: THJ, Duren, whatever salary from Detroit, 6 2nds, 1 protected 1st
Duren is under contract for next season already, so his extension wouldn’t kick in until CJ is off the books. THJ could either be bought out or attempt to flip him for more 2nds. So next season the only money you would have from the trade is Duren under contract for about 5 million, then going forward assuming he gets around MLE money which would be 15 million a year or so, the center position is shored up for around 20 million a year for the next 3-4 years.
Or we could just keep signing minimum salary vets as backups to Missi and have the center spot be a weakness for the next 3-4 years because Dan is scared of bringing in a young guy.
This post was edited on 1/1/25 at 6:53 am
Posted on 1/1/25 at 9:55 am to Soggymoss
quote:
Or we could just keep signing minimum salary vets as backups to Missi and have the center spot be a weakness for the next 3-4 years because Dan is scared of bringing in a young guy.
OR here me out.... We could trade for the other center on that team that would be more suited for a backup role and be cheaper or the same price for the life of the contract. AND we can do that without trading our best assets allowing us to make other trades.
You actually think my POV is "scared to bring in a young guy". We HAVE a young guy, that's the whole point you're missing. We can draft another young guy, we can trade for a young guy (for less assets), but no you want to waste one of our best assets to double up on something that may cause issues.
How about we bring in another young SF after the Trey/ BI debacle and let them battle for a starting spot. That would be great for Trey right??? Or are you just "scared to bring in a young guy"
Dumb argument bro
This post was edited on 1/1/25 at 9:57 am
Posted on 1/1/25 at 9:57 am to Soggymoss
quote:There was a time when I thought Duren had a bright future and maybe he still does because he is very young. When I watch him play though, he does not seem like a very smart player. Again, it is way too early in his career to write him off and maybe that his the best we can expect at this point from a BI trade.
I’ve already said if you don’t want to swap Hawk for Ivey (don’t see why anyone wouldn’t), then take those two factors out of the trade.
The trade then becomes:
Out: BI
In: THJ, Duren, whatever salary from Detroit, 6 2nds, 1 protected 1st
Duren is under contract for next season already, so his extension wouldn’t kick in until CJ is off the books. THJ could either be bought out or attempt to flip him for more 2nds. So next season the only money you would have from the trade is Duren under contract for about 5 million, then going forward assuming he gets around MLE money which would be 15 million a year or so, the center position is shored up for around 20 million a year for the next 3-4 years.
Or we could just keep signing minimum salary vets as backups to Missi and have the center spot be a weakness for the next 3-4 years because Dan is scared of bringing in a young guy.
Posted on 1/1/25 at 10:08 am to NOSHAU
Duren isn't some elite center that's unstoppable tho. We might as well trade for a Stewart/ WCJ type player that costs less or go after Claxton that will actually have a bigger impact.
I'm even less inclined to trade for Claxton with the emergence of Missi.
If we can get Stewart for CJ or something besides BI then id much rather send BI to GSW for Podz + Wiggins + 1st > Duren and a 1st.
That would give us a C, SG, and SF while still having Zion to trade.
I'm even less inclined to trade for Claxton with the emergence of Missi.
If we can get Stewart for CJ or something besides BI then id much rather send BI to GSW for Podz + Wiggins + 1st > Duren and a 1st.
That would give us a C, SG, and SF while still having Zion to trade.
This post was edited on 1/1/25 at 10:10 am
Posted on 1/3/25 at 8:21 am to Dantheman504
quote:
BI to GSW for Podz + Wiggins + 1st
You’re not getting that for BI. It would likely be Wiggins, Looney and a protected 1st at most, and a trade with GS keeps us in the tax meaning we have to ship out assets with a salary to get out.
You have to temper expectations on BI, an expiring salary with a backup 5 that can start if you need him to along with a bunch of 2nds and a 1st would be a great deal. You seem to forget about the 6 seconds I proposed in that deal also, and as has been shown the past 2 years 2nds are VERY valuable in the NBA now with the aprons.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News