Trade Idea Post and Discuss Trade Ideas for the 2019-20 Season (5 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
blazerfan11 said:
Help the team much ? Who's the starting SF next season? I'm assuming Batum can play SF as well as PF. Who is our backup PF next season?

I don't know what roster you have in your mind. You have to complete that puzzle so others can see who else you have helping the team.
Click to expand...
Don't let last night fool you, Batum is terrible. The Blazers would be better off with 2nd round picks and the MLE at SF until Hood is back. Hood at 75% is better than Batum now.

You don't just take a salary like that back without getting heavily compensated for it.
 
wizenheimer said:
they won't be competing for a title with Batum or Otto Porter either

as far as the tax ramifications, initially the NBA was projecting a 139-140M cap, Then Morey opened his mouth, China went ballistic, and that was after revenues were already falling. So, it may be 140M and may be 130M. The last I heard the NBA sent out a memo saying that 140M projection might be too high. If I add Porter's salary to Portland's guaranteed and dead salary next season, it's around 126M, and that's only for 10 players, and that includes Hezonja, Trent, & Little. That might be low enough to stay under the tax line, but it's going to be an incredibly thin roster with the same problems it has now. It also includes Hood coming off a ruptured Achilles, and he might not even be back when the season starts; and he will struggle...we know that. And it includes only 2 bigs over 6'8, and both of those are injured right now

I get the idea of trying to maintain some trade-worthy contracts. But somebody like Batum will have no positive value
Click to expand...
Most of the thinking of 2016 was to have contracts big enough to make a big trade. It failed miserably but without trading for a guy under contract next year that makes a decent amount you basically make it impossible to make any trades this summer or next season other than small salary ones.
 
blazerfan11 said:
Who exactly will be they be competing for a title with? I'd like you to say exactly who that player is. Then spell out how the Blazers get that player.
Unless someone specifically says such-and-such a player is going to get the Blazers a title, I assume they do not imply that.
Click to expand...

what are you talking about??? I was responding rhetorically to this post:

hoopsjock said:
First of all, taking on Batum or Otto Porter doesn't necessarily guarantee they're in the tax.
The problem with a "reset" of the finances basically ensures we won't compete for a title in the Dame and CJ era.
Click to expand...

I didn't pull the names of Batum and Porter, or the part about competing for a title out of my colon
 
hoopsjock said:
Most of the thinking of 2016 was to have contracts big enough to make a big trade. It failed miserably but without trading for a guy under contract next year that makes a decent amount you basically make it impossible to make any trades this summer or next season other than small salary ones.
Click to expand...

I understand that HJ; and I understand the wish of at least getting something out of those contracts since they did so very little positive for Portland, but cost so damn much. But throwing good money after bad can be a real think when there's a strong motivation to 'use it or lose it. A bloated salary is a bloated salary. Just exchanging bloated salaries for the purpose of punting them down the road further, while paying that salary and tax, and hoping for some trade opportunity to pop up is an awful expensive waiting game for team with a payroll as high as Portland's

like I said, I'll be a little shocked if Portland brings back any contract as big as Love's, or Aldridge's, or Porter's. I could see a hypothetical trade of Whiteside or Bazemore for a couple of players, one on an expiring and another with a MLE-level contract

I guess my main take on this is in order to have trade-able contracts, you need actual attractive contracts, not bloated ones, and a lot of these trade I see around here miss that mark
 
wizenheimer said:
I guess my main take on this is in order to have trade-able contracts, you need actual attractive contracts, not bloated ones, and a lot of these trade I see around here miss that mark
Click to expand...
I don't think enough people understand this.
You have to have good players on good contracts. It's not just about the $ of the contract
 
wizenheimer said:
I understand that HJ; and I understand the wish of at least getting something out of those contracts since they did so very little positive for Portland, but cost so damn much. But throwing good money after bad can be a real think when there's a strong motivation to 'use it or lose it. A bloated salary is a bloated salary. Just exchanging bloated salaries for the purpose of punting them down the road further, while paying that salary and tax, and hoping for some trade opportunity to pop up is an awful expensive waiting game for team with a payroll as high as Portland's

like I said, I'll be a little shocked if Portland brings back any contract as big as Love's, or Aldridge's, or Porter's. I could see a hypothetical trade of Whiteside or Bazemore for a couple of players, one on an expiring and another with a MLE-level contract

I guess my main take on this is in order to have trade-able contracts, you need actual attractive contracts, not bloated ones, and a lot of these trade I see around here miss that mark
Click to expand...
tester551 said:
I don't think enough people understand this.
You have to have good players on good contracts. It's not just about the $ of the contract
Click to expand...
I do understand the value of the player versus the value of the contract but lets take this example for what I'm talking about.

Lets say Minnesota struggles again next year and KAT demands a trade (just go with it). They tell Portland that they don't want CJ because they are rebuilding but would definitely do a deal revolving around Simons, Collins, Little, and 3 1sts. Portland would be unable to realistically make that trade only because they don't have the right contracts.

Unlike some of the previous times stars have become available Portland has young players and picks available. It would be a shame if they didn't have the contracts.
 
wizenheimer said:
I understand that HJ; and I understand the wish of at least getting something out of those contracts since they did so very little positive for Portland, but cost so damn much. But throwing good money after bad can be a real think when there's a strong motivation to 'use it or lose it. A bloated salary is a bloated salary. Just exchanging bloated salaries for the purpose of punting them down the road further, while paying that salary and tax, and hoping for some trade opportunity to pop up is an awful expensive waiting game for team with a payroll as high as Portland's

like I said, I'll be a little shocked if Portland brings back any contract as big as Love's, or Aldridge's, or Porter's. I could see a hypothetical trade of Whiteside or Bazemore for a couple of players, one on an expiring and another with a MLE-level contract

I guess my main take on this is in order to have trade-able contracts, you need actual attractive contracts, not bloated ones, and a lot of these trade I see around here miss that mark
Click to expand...
I know you won't like this but if Olshey manages to save Jody from paying any tax this season when she thinks she is going to have to pay for this crap then it could buy him some good will towards going into the tax next time there is an opportunity to improve the team. If they got out of the tax this season they'd only have been in it once in the last 4 years so they could still go All-In one more season in the next two without triggering the repeater tax.

If the Blazers did the trade I suggested earlier they'd have 10 players under contract (if Hood and Hezonja opt in plus Dame, CJ, Nurk, Batum, Collins, Simons, Little, and Trent). The salary would be at $126,521,910. Then they'd have their 1st round pick and up to 3 2nd rounders (in theory the cheapest possible contracts). If we estimate that the 1st round pick will be around $4 million and the 2nd rounders around $1 million then like you said it just kind of depends on what the final cap number ends up being from the NBA. This year it was over $132 million. I would seriously doubt it would go down from that number. Either way it will be difficult to stay under unless it's closer to $140 million like originally projected. If that's the case they could possibly even use the Tax-MLE to add another big to the mix or re-sign Skal using his bird rights. Very unlikely all this happens but it is possible but to your point I don't think that's a championship contender. Porter and Batum's contracts are pretty similar so the numbers don't change much substituting him in instead. This goes back to my first statement in this post where if we ducked the tax this year maybe this summer if we ended up with say the 12th pick then Minnesota would be willing to ship Covington to us for it without having to take back salary and Jody would be fine dipping back into the tax. If the season goes well then she maybe would be fine paying it. If the season turns to crap you move Batum for another player(s) with another year left but duck the tax again.

It takes a lot of creativity but I'm afraid if we just let Whiteside and Bazemore expire to reset the cap deck we restrict the avenues of building a contender too much.
 
hoopsjock said:
I do understand the value of the player versus the value of the contract but lets take this example for what I'm talking about.

Lets say Minnesota struggles again next year and KAT demands a trade (just go with it). They tell Portland that they don't want CJ because they are rebuilding but would definitely do a deal revolving around Simons, Collins, Little, and 3 1sts. Portland would be unable to realistically make that trade only because they don't have the right contracts.

Unlike some of the previous times stars have become available Portland has young players and picks available. It would be a shame if they didn't have the contracts.
Click to expand...

KAT makes 29M next season. I forget what trade rule applies if Portland is over the cap but well under the tax line. If it's 175%, then all the Blazers would have to come up with is 16.7M; if it's 125% then the floor if 23.3M

if Portland doesn't do something stupid and somehow parlays just one of the expiring contracts into an 8-12M player while being close to the cap then, uses the MLE this summer, they'd have:

CJ - 29.3M
Nurkic - 12M
traded-in player - 11M
MLE - 9M
Hood - 6M
Zach - 5.4M

that's 73M in salaries right there, and they could add to that by re-signing Skal for 3-5M. For chrissakes, if CJ is still fucking untouchable next year when KAT is 'available', Olshey should be fired on the spot. And for damn sure, the Blazers shouldn't be sweating missing out on any player that has less talent and impact than CJ.

I don't see the problem that you do, but then I view CJ as a player that should be available whenever an elite player is on the market, and his contract solves the concern about having a big trade-able salary on the books
 
wizenheimer said:
KAT makes 29M next season. I forget what trade rule applies if Portland is over the cap but well under the tax line. If it's 175%, then all the Blazers would have to come up with is 16.7M; if it's 125% then the floor if 23.3M

if Portland doesn't do something stupid and somehow parlays just one of the expiring contracts into an 8-12M player while being close to the cap then, uses the MLE this summer, they'd have:

CJ - 29.3M
Nurkic - 12M
traded-in player - 11M
MLE - 9M
Hood - 6M
Zach - 5.4M

that's 73M in salaries right there, and they could add to that by re-signing Skal for 3-5M. For chrissakes, if CJ is still fucking untouchable next year when KAT is 'available', Olshey should be fired on the spot. And for damn sure, the Blazers shouldn't be sweating missing out on any player that has less talent and impact than CJ.

I don't see the problem that you do, but then I view CJ as a player that should be available whenever an elite player is on the market, and his contract solves the concern about having a big trade-able salary on the books
Click to expand...
Because you completely glossed over this statement in my post: "They tell Portland that they don't want CJ because they are rebuilding" you just went on a tangent that didn't have to be.

Obviously there are ways to make a trade work, but an MLE signing wouldn't be trade eligible until Dec 15th. The Blazers also have to have a team still after trading for KAT in this example and the likelihood that Minnesota could take a 5 for 1 type trade would be slim.
 
perkinsfor3 said:
How are Jordan Bell and Damion Jones looking right now?
Click to expand...

If a late first and a second rounder are your best examples of their misses they’re doing something right. Jones is a solid rotational big btw.
 
Is it possible Love could end up here if they sweeten the pot?

Love certainly could help the Blazers, or Pacers, or Rockets. But that contract is hard to match up in a way that makes sense for Cleveland, which understandably is asking for a lot in return. “I don’t think Kevin has a lot of value,” a Western Conference executive said Monday. “The contract is obvious, but you know he is going to miss games with the toll on his body… I don’t see teams taking Kevin on (without) at least taking back a first-round draft pick or multiple seconds.”

– via David Aldridge @ The Athletic
Top Rumors, Trade, Kevin Love, Cleveland Cavaliers
 
Hoopguru said:
Is it possible Love could end up here if they sweeten the pot?

Love certainly could help the Blazers, or Pacers, or Rockets. But that contract is hard to match up in a way that makes sense for Cleveland, which understandably is asking for a lot in return. “I don’t think Kevin has a lot of value,” a Western Conference executive said Monday. “The contract is obvious, but you know he is going to miss games with the toll on his body… I don’t see teams taking Kevin on (without) at least taking back a first-round draft pick or multiple seconds.”

– via David Aldridge @ The Athletic
Top Rumors, Trade, Kevin Love, Cleveland Cavaliers
Click to expand...

Yeah that’s probably where the hold up is. Cavs obviously value him as their franchise guy, so attaching a first to get rid of him is probably not something they want to do. On the other hand, other teams don’t want that shitty contract. So I don’t know what kind of compromise it'll come to.
 
Scalma said:
Yeah that’s probably where the hold up is. Cavs obviously value him as their franchise guy, so attaching a first to get rid of him is probably not something they want to do. On the other hand, other teams don’t want that shitty contract. So I don’t know what kind of compromise it'll come to.
Click to expand...
What WC exec do you think that is? I'd say Morey.
 
Scalma said:
Hopefully Olshey lol.
Click to expand...
It's out of left field, CLE giving up a pick to get rid of Love is ludicrous, even with that contract. Love isn't Blake Griffin-- dude is still playing at a relatively high level and is only 30.

Seems like a Morey thing to say.
 
Scalma said:
Yeah that’s probably where the hold up is. Cavs obviously value him as their franchise guy, so attaching a first to get rid of him is probably not something they want to do. On the other hand, other teams don’t want that shitty contract. So I don’t know what kind of compromise it'll come to.
Click to expand...
The compromise is that Love will stay in Cleveland for another year or two before being moved.

Cavs are not financially motivated to move him... They have plenty of cap flexibility. They have no justification to add assets to move him now.... so they'll wait it out.

It's kind of like the Blazers with the ET contract. You keep him on the team until you can move him in a nutural trade.
 
tester551 said:
The compromise is that Love will stay in Cleveland for another year or two before being moved.

Cavs are not financially motivated to move him... They have plenty of cap flexibility. They have no justification to add assets to move him now.... so they'll wait it out.

It's kind of like the Blazers with the ET contract. You keep him on the team until you can move him in a nutural trade.
Click to expand...

The difference between ET and Love is Love obviously wants out of there, and in those situations teams usually oblige sooner rather than later. I’d be surprised if Love was on the Cavs on opening night next season.
 
Scalma said:
Yeah that’s probably where the hold up is. Cavs obviously value him as their franchise guy, so attaching a first to get rid of him is probably not something they want to do. On the other hand, other teams don’t want that shitty contract. So I don’t know what kind of compromise it'll come to.
Click to expand...

It's a real knotty problem when your franchise player is an albatross around your neck.
 
hoopsjock said:
Because you completely glossed over this statement in my post: "They tell Portland that they don't want CJ because they are rebuilding" you just went on a tangent that didn't have to be.
Click to expand...

yeah, I "glossed" over it because, IMO, you are narrowing the parameters of an opportunity so much it's becoming kind of crazy. I get you are real invested in the notion that Portland HAS to trade Whiteside and/or Bazemore otherwise they are wasting the last chance to generate something positive from those 2016 contracts...and in turn that limits their future

I just don't agree....there was never much of a chance they were going to salvage anything substantial from those 2016 contracts because they were bad contracts. No silk purses from those sow's ears. The way to salvage anything is to not take on any more garbage contracts. Learn the damn lesson and be smarter. Kevin Love has a bad contract; so does Blake Griffin. And with Otto Porter's foot issue, he may have a bad contract.

and of course the biggest issue I see is that the Blazers very likely couldn't make any of these trades unless they attached assets or take on long-term salary, and probably both. I don't see any of these trade ideas that are both realistic and worth the cost
 
Scalma said:
If a late first and a second rounder are your best examples of their misses they’re doing something right. Jones is a solid rotational big btw.
Click to expand...
Barely. On one of the worst teams with one of the worst center rotations. Chriss is horrible dude.
 
wizenheimer said:
yeah, I "glossed" over it because, IMO, you are narrowing the parameters of an opportunity so much it's becoming kind of crazy. I get you are real invested in the notion that Portland HAS to trade Whiteside and/or Bazemore otherwise they are wasting the last chance to generate something positive from those 2016 contracts...and in turn that limits their future

I just don't agree....there was never much of a chance they were going to salvage anything substantial from those 2016 contracts because they were bad contracts. No silk purses from those sow's ears. The way to salvage anything is to not take on any more garbage contracts. Learn the damn lesson and be smarter. Kevin Love has a bad contract; so does Blake Griffin. And with Otto Porter's foot issue, he may have a bad contract.

and of course the biggest issue I see is that the Blazers very likely couldn't make any of these trades unless they attached assets or take on long-term salary, and probably both. I don't see any of these trade ideas that are both realistic and worth the cost
Click to expand...

Porter has a bad contract with or without his foot injury. The injury just makes it even worse. He gives about the same production that Covington does at about twice the amount per year.
 
wizenheimer said:
yeah, I "glossed" over it because, IMO, you are narrowing the parameters of an opportunity so much it's becoming kind of crazy. I get you are real invested in the notion that Portland HAS to trade Whiteside and/or Bazemore otherwise they are wasting the last chance to generate something positive from those 2016 contracts...and in turn that limits their future

I just don't agree....there was never much of a chance they were going to salvage anything substantial from those 2016 contracts because they were bad contracts. No silk purses from those sow's ears. The way to salvage anything is to not take on any more garbage contracts. Learn the damn lesson and be smarter. Kevin Love has a bad contract; so does Blake Griffin. And with Otto Porter's foot issue, he may have a bad contract.

and of course the biggest issue I see is that the Blazers very likely couldn't make any of these trades unless they attached assets or take on long-term salary, and probably both. I don't see any of these trade ideas that are both realistic and worth the cost
Click to expand...
See there is the problem. You think I'm crazy for stating that a team trading a 24 year old star big would want to take on a 29 year old CJ for 4 more seasons? You can't just play the Olshey won't trade CJ card here because it doesn't make sense from Minnesota's POV.
 
hoopsjock said:
See there is the problem. You think I'm crazy for stating that a team trading a 24 year old star big would want to take on a 29 year old CJ for 4 more seasons? You can't just play the Olshey won't trade CJ card here because it doesn't make sense from Minnesota's POV.
Click to expand...

no that's not it...I'm saying it's crazy because you're trying to justify Portland taking on another bad contract because Minnesota might look to trade KAT in the next 2 seasons; and they might be interested in Simons and the collection of mediocre 1sts Portland could offer, ALONG with that bad contract (rather than CJ); and that Portland's offer might be better than any other teams making offers for KAT.....well by the time you get to the end of that chugging train of mights, you're not left with anything close to realistic. In fact, somewhere in that string of mights, try this one: Portland trades CJ to a 3rd team that sends some assets to Minny including some salary and cap savings. Why is that not more realistic than the notion Minny would accept Portland's bad contract?

here's the chain of events you seem to want:

cap-space ---> Evan Turner ---> Kent Bazemore ---> high salary mediocre player ---> hope and prayer

I'm suggesting the best option is to break that chain ASAP
 
Last edited:
So it seems like the Hood DPE doesn’t actually equal an extra roster spot. Blazers only have one spot open.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top