Non-Varejao Trade Ideas

[narbar32]

With the Bobcats rumored to want Rudy Gay but wanting to keep salary cap flexibility to sign another max player and Memphis wanting a young player + salary relief here's my 2nd fantasy trade.

Bobcats get Rudy Gay // Grizzlies get MKG, Walton and Gibson + Pistons 1st round pick // Cavs get Ben Gordon, Tony Wroten + Right to swap 2013 heat pick with Bobcats Protected 13-30 this year if swap not executed Cavs would get Portland's 2013 pick protected top 12.

So that would be reverse protection for the Bobcats pick then? As in, we'd swap Miami's pick for that one if the Bobcats pick is from 1-12? Um... yes, please.

This would be an awesome haul for Memphis in exchange for Gay. This would also be a nice haul for Cleveland just for facilitating the main trade and taking on some salary for a year. Charlotte wouldn't shit right for a month, though. I guess if NBA scouts (Charlotte's in particular) are really feeling as it's been reported they're feeling about the 2013 draft, it could make sense, though.

[RTrees]

Sam Amico @SamAmicoFSO about 53 minutes ago

Lakers are said to have a strong interest in Cavs' Daniel Gibson, a natural in D'Antoni's system, but have nothing to offer.

How far into the future can future first rounders go? Is there a limit?

[AMC]

For those of you who won't wonder back to the 2nd page...here is Ben's recent trade idea:

With the Bobcats rumored to want Rudy Gay but wanting to keep salary cap flexibility to sign another max player and Memphis wanting a young player + salary relief here's my 2nd fantasy trade.

Bobcats get Rudy Gay // Grizzlies get MKG, Walton and Gibson + Pistons 1st round pick // Cavs get Ben Gordon, Tony Wroten + Right to swap 2013 heat pick with Bobcats Protected 13-30 this year if swap not executed Cavs would get Portland's 2013 pick protected top 12.

[wuck]

How far into the future can future first rounders go? Is there a limit?

Larry Coon describes a 7-year rule: "The "Seven Year Rule" allows teams to trade draft picks up to seven years into the future (for example, if this is the 2012-13 season, then a 2019 pick can be traded, but a 2020 pick cannot).

The Lakers owe their 2013, 2015, and 2017 picks (and the 2017 pick might not be transferred until 2019). Perhaps they could trade their 2019 pick with conditions attached relative to the 2017 pick?

I don't think Grant is going after that one, although he has traded for picks that may not vest for many, many years.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q85

[Randolphkeys]

How far into the future can future first rounders go? Is there a limit?

The Lakers could change some of the terms of the pick owed to the Cavs already, but I don't know if that is enough to make a trade worthwhile.

[wuck]

The Lakers could change some of the terms of the pick owed to the Cavs already, but I don't know if that is enough to make a trade worthwhile.

Doubtful since they have since traded the pick to the Suns. The right to swap with the Cavs is the only thing that applies, and I don't think the Suns would allow the Lakers to change anything about that (unless it was in the Suns favor). The Suns went into the deal with the swap in place, but I don't think the Lakers have any further control over that condition at this point. Sadly.

[kovanovich]

Ben's trade idea with the Warriors makes the most sense. I searched around for possible similar deals where the Cavs take back a big contract that expires in 2014 along with a #1 and the Warriors are the team that matches up the best.
I'd be willing to take back either Jefferson or Biedrins. I'd also be willing to accept a future lottery protected pick.
I'm not sure but I thought the Warriors pick goes to Utah this year from a past trade.

I think the trade does make sense. GS is into the luxury tax this year. Just slightly over the threshold, a bit less than $1M over. In other words, they don't need to cut anything close to Jefferson's $10M salary, but they might conclude that they might as well if another team is willing to take him off their hands. Jefferson has been playing only spot minutes, but jettisoning him would leave them pretty thin at the wings (Brandon Rush's ACL at the beginning of the year sapped their depth), so maybe we can send them back Casspi in the deal. Maybe that would entice them to trade the 2015 pick without protection. I think they would still insist on some protection. They would no doubt also try to get, at a minimum, one of the lesser assets the Cavs have accumulated, such as the 2014 Orlando second round pick.

Dumping Jefferson would also of course greatly increase GS's flexibility for 2013-14. They would be able to play the MLE game or take back additional salary in a trade, etc. If this trade doesn't happen before the deadline, it's worth exploring after the season, but I think GS should be motivated to deal now. If they don't want Casspi, they can find a cheap wing out there who can provide them what Jefferson does at a fraction of the cost, maybe on the buyout market.

I'm not sure that they can include the provisional 2013 pick (7-30 protected, because in that case it conveys to Utah), because doing so would potentially violate the Stepien rule, since at some point GS has to convey the pick to Utah. Of course, it's unlikely the Cavs would get the pick anyway since GS is currently sitting at 25-15. I mean, it's not inconceivable that GS not make the playoffs, and then move up to the top 3 in the lottery...So I do like the idea, but I just don't think it is legal.

[Randolphkeys]

While Biedrins isn't worth the contract, he is an important part of the rotation on a team planning to go to the playoffs. Golden State will be giving up their first rounder to Utah this year. Jefferson hasn't been that terrible the past two games, but his contract will be a problem as G.S. tries to make the next move. I liked the Casspi suggestion as an equalizer.

[mcfly]

With Indiana currently sitting at the 3rd seed in the East without Granger having played a minute this season, would anyone be interested in trading for Granger if he shows that he is healthy? Gee/Gibson/2013 top 10 protected CLE 1st for Granger. Essentially, Indiana continues to play George heavy minutes, gains a bench wing in Gee (his best role IMO) as well as a backup guard that can stretch the floor. This deal would give the Pacers a lot of cap flexibility this summer, where they could go after someone like Millsap, while still resigning West. The protected CLE 1st might be a bit too much, but we do have alternatives given our assortment of picks over the next couple of seasons.

Granger's contract is up after next season, so we would still maintain cap flexibility for 2014. Next season's roster:

Irving/Selby
Waiters/Ellington
Granger/Miles
Thompson/Speights
Varejao/Zeller

[Rob]

Indiana would never go for that. Top 10 protected? We will have a top 5 pick this year, easily.

[Scholar]

With Indiana currently sitting at the 3rd seed in the East without Granger having played a minute this season, would anyone be interested in trading for Granger if he shows that he is healthy? Gee/Gibson/2013 top 10 protected CLE 1st for Granger. Essentially, Indiana continues to play George heavy minutes, gains a bench wing in Gee (his best role IMO) as well as a backup guard that can stretch the floor. This deal would give the Pacers a lot of cap flexibility this summer, where they could go after someone like Millsap, while still resigning West. The protected CLE 1st might be a bit too much, but we do have alternatives given our assortment of picks over the next couple of seasons.

Granger's contract is up after next season, so we would still maintain cap flexibility for 2014. Next season's roster:

Irving/Selby
Waiters/Ellington
Granger/Miles
Thompson/Speights
Varejao/Zeller

So, you want to trade valuable assets in an attempt to acquire Granger so he can just leave us when his contract expires? I still can't get why so many of you try to hang your hats on the fact that a player can leave us in a year or two that you want to trade for. We don't need 1 or 2 year rentals. We are not in a position to challenge for an NBA title at this point in the rebuild. There is no reason to trade for Granger. Besides, he isn't really good enough to take to us to a title anyways.

I would have hoped that the Memphis trade would have enlightened some of you on the value of maintaining cap flexibility. We need to keep it available for the 2014 off season. The year we go shopping, either by free agent or trade. Stay the course.

[*L-Train*]

While Biedrins isn't worth the contract, he is an important part of the rotation on a team planning to go to the playoffs. Golden State will be giving up their first rounder to Utah this year. Jefferson hasn't been that terrible the past two games, but his contract will be a problem as G.S. tries to make the next move. I liked the Casspi suggestion as an equalizer.

i disagree about that part. Biedrins puts up 0.5 PPG and 3 RPG in 9 minutes off the bench. i don't think they would hesitate to get rid of him if there were any takers. now are they willing to give up a first round pick to trade him, i'm not sure about that...

[mcfly]

So, you want to trade valuable assets in an attempt to acquire Granger so he can just leave us when his contract expires? I still can't get why so many of you try to hang your hats on the fact that a player can leave us in a year or two that you want to trade for. We don't need 1 or 2 year rentals. We are not in a position to challenge for an NBA title at this point in the rebuild. There is no reason to trade for Granger. Besides, he isn't really good enough to take to us to a title anyways.

I would have hoped that the Memphis trade would have enlightened some of you on the value of maintaining cap flexibility. We need to keep it available for the 2014 off season. The year we go shopping, either by free agent or trade. Stay the course.

I think there is a lot to be said about winning, especially when you have a roster full of young guys. Would Granger make us a contender next season? No? Would Granger help get our young guys some playoff experience next season? Probably. Though Danny could leave us when his contract is up, why would he if we are a young team on the rise with money to spend? Plus, we would still have enough cap space to go after another big name free agent in 2014.

[Omar The Horse]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=aztmcsk

[Rob]

Purely speculation, but what would you guys think about dealing for Dwight? Not saying I want to, but I'm just curious how you all would feel about it. Seems like he may be on the block. Of course he would have to sign an extension with the trade for us to do it. I wonder how much it would cost. Probably too much.