You built some scenarios for getting Aldridge using Haywood and other pieces. Did no see any specific ones utilizing Tristan.
My point in that thread was a proof of concept; the feasibility of acquiring LaMarcus Aldridge in a sign-and-trade.
The reason for this is simple. If it cannot be done, then it simply isn't worth talking about. However, if it can be done, by some combination of moves, then, it surely is worth talking about; especially if the Big 3 can be retained.
Trading Tristan is not the important aspect in this regard; what is important is ending up below the apron.
To do so would likely require moving Anderson Varejao, Brendan Haywood, Tristan Thompson, and likely another piece (Mike Miller, Shump, Mozgov).
You also tried trading Andy to Portland. With his injury history, age, and contract, there's no way they want him now. Maybe in two years a team will value his ungaraunteed last year of the extension but finding a taker for him now?
If you mean as part of the thought experiment, then of course; because again, my point there, which I stated explicitly, was to demonstrate that it is surely possible for the Cavaliers to sign-and-trade LMA - which it is.
I stated several alternatives, including (1) trading Varejao and another team waiving him. Obviously they would only do this if we included cash and picks. And (2) simply using the stretch provision on him and waiving him - a
far more likely scenario.
Both situations work out with the Cavs being able to reduce salary.
He could also simply retire.
You also made mention of using the stretch provision on him.
Yes.
I know it bothers you to operate in the "please LeBron" mindset, but its a reality and stretching Andy is just not going to happen for that reason. And eventual retirement or buyout down the road, maybe.
Again, I'm not really buying this though.
I don't think LeBron would be so foolish as to force the Cavaliers to carry a $10M dead contract in the last years of his prime.
Sorry, but I can't believe that without hearing it from him.
Speculation in this regard stretches my belief to the point of breaking. So yeah, I do think LeBron would be open to trading/waiving Andy.
The other thing is this, once you execute a S&T to receive a player, you can not go over the apron that year.
Yes, I know.
The use of a S&T by a team over the salary cap locks them into having to have a hard cap set at the tax apron. So once you do that, trading out multiple guys, possibly stretching Andy, decreasing team depth, you're locked in to that 89 million for the year.
It's a bit more complicated than this, and it depends on the dates the trades are approved by the NBA.
I am pretty sure, however, that in general, Cleveland and Portland could agree to the framework of a deal, but would not officially complete that deal until Cleveland had enough time to add assets to it's roster moving forward.
Suffice it to say, I think we're getting overly bogged down in minutia rather than focusing on the fact that Cleveland
can sign-and-trade for LaMarcus Aldridge (or any other player for that matter). That really was my point.
Now, as to building a trade for Aldridge using Tristan, there's where it gets extra tricky. Because say you do Tristan and one of JR/Shump/or Moz to get Aldridge and stay under 89, what do you do with Haywood?
MirO, Haywood would've been traded to Portland in that deal as part of the payoff. This part is the least complicated.
Because Haywood counts as 10 million until we cut or trade him. But if we get Aldridge via a S&T in order to be at 89 million or below upon completion of the trade, we would have already had to just cut Haywood for nothing. The allure of Haywood for other teams is to send out a deal they no longer want on their books to then lower their salary cap number by waiving Haywood AND also not have to pay him. But since we'd be trying to execute a S&T, we'd be severely limited in what salary(if any) we could take back for him.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this, but the answer is pretty clear.
We don't have to waive Haywood prior to a deal, we can trade him either to Portland or in a 3-team trade sending picks to Portland. I'm not sure why you'd think we'd need to cut him first, since you count salary post-trade not pre-trade.
Again, the only stipulation on Cleveland would be that it ended up below $85M in salary after the trade, not before it.
I continue to acknowledge the truth that if you solely look at things from a contractual basis, there are ways to manuever and execute an incoming S&T for the Cavs, but not without severe ramifications on depth, chemistry, roster balance, and flexibility to add/replace lost depth.
I agree we lose depth. I disagree that we lose "balance."
I do agree that we lose flexibility.
So we agree on 2 out of 3 of your points. However, assuming we were to have kept Mozgov, a front court of Love/Aldridge/Mozgov/? would be a very interesting rotation to say the least.
Those are the very things that LeBron, Blatt, and Griffin are most likely to be preaching heading into year 2.
I disagree. I think if James and Griffin thought they could get LMA to willingly play center for more than half his minutes then they'd go for it.
I mean, frankly, we'll see... I doubt it happens, but if I were Griffin or James, I'd try to make this move.
