Notice Should the Portland Trail Blazers trade for Tyreke Evans?

[PtldPlatypus]

A 1st round pick for an expiring contract and no chance of resigning...gtfo

FTFY

 

[Boob-No-More]

Neil better get on this quick or Evans is gone

Would you offer our 2018 first round pick (currently sitting at 21st), for what would likely be a short term rental of Evans?

I think Evans would be a great fit here, but we probably won't be able to re-sign him this summer. Makes giving up that pick kind of hard to justify.

BNM

 

[Chris Craig]

Would you offer our 2018 first round pick (currently sitting at 21st), for what would likely be a short term rental of Evans?

I think Evans would be a great fit here, but we probably won't be able to re-sign him this summer. Makes giving up that pick kind of hard to justify.

BNM

No, not if he was a rental.

 

[Chris Craig]

FTFY

 

[Boob-No-More]

No, not if he was a rental.

How would he not be? MEM doesn't hold his Bird Rights, or he probably would have been traded by now.

BNM

 

[DaLincolnJones]

going through all the pros and cons listed in the tread, I am in agreement that the only way is if we could get a verbal commitment that he would stay beyond this year. Love the guys size and he has good handles. Lets us shed a few pint sized players.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

A 1st round pick for an expiring contract and no guarantee of resigning...idk

Not sure why any team would do this.

 

[blazedanugz]

the only team thats going to give them a 1st rounder is cleveland and it wont be the brooklyn pick.

I bet we could get tyreke for a couple second rounders and maybe noah or baz

 

[blue9]

Report: Sixers interested in Tyreke Evans trade, but Grizzlies want first-round pick

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-sixers-interested-tyreke-evans-174147572.html

LOL! Ain't nobody giving up a 1st rounder for a 1-year expiring contract. Unless it's like the 29th-30th pick.

 

[Nikolokolus]

If the Blazers can jettison a bad contract for him, even if it requires sweetening the pot with a pick, then I don't have any objections to trading for him. If people think he's actually going to change this team's fortunes in terms of the playoffs, then I object a lot -- nothing more than a "shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic" level move, but he can improve their cap situation which might help out in a couple of years.

 

[tester551]

going through all the pros and cons listed in the tread, I am in agreement that the only way is if we could get a verbal commitment that he would stay beyond this year. Love the guys size and he has good handles. Lets us shed a few pint sized players.

It's not about a verbal commitment. It's a financial issue. Portland will only have the Tax MLE that they could pay him (around $6M). He's sure to get more than that on the open market.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

It's not about a verbal commitment. It's a financial issue. Portland will only have the Tax MLE that they could pay him (around $6M). He's sure to get more than that on the open market.

Hey, I am not at all up to date on the latest CBA agreement, but it does not take too much of an imagination to reason out that if the organization wanted to retain him, there are was to do so.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Hey, I am not at all up to date on the latest CBA agreement, but it does not take too much of an imagination to reason out that if the organization wanted to retain him, there are ways to do so.

If you were more up to date on the latest CBA agreement, you would know that it would actually take a lot of imagination for the organization to be able to find a way to retain him, the very start of which would be somehow divesting itself of several large albatross contracts, which is of course easier said than done.

 

[tester551]

Hey, I am not at all up to date on the latest CBA agreement, but it does not take too much of an imagination to reason out that if the organization wanted to retain him, there are was to do so.

Those ways to do so come at a significant cost... such as not resigning Nurk (and being left without a starting C) or paying a team to take Turner (which would take MULTIPLE firsts during the FA frenzy).

The current CBA makes it VERY DIFFICULT for teams in Portland's position.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

If you were more up to date on the latest CBA agreement, you would know that it would actually take a lot of imagination for the organization to be able to find a way to retain him, the very start of which would be somehow divesting itself of several large albatross contracts, which is of course easier said than done.

Those ways to do so come at a significant cost... such as not resigning Nurk (and being left without a starting C) or paying a team to take Turner (which would take MULTIPLE firsts during the FA frenzy).

The current CBA makes it VERY DIFFICULT for teams in Portland's position.

I get that, I realize that the team i in a poor position to make moves without really shaking up things.

Off the top of my head, lets say that we do a three team deal the includes some bad contracts and a desirable player, like CJ (who I really like). Lets face it, I am not in love with this team as a whole. There are no sacred cows. I would trade anyone as long as we improve, including Dame.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Hey, I am not at all up to date on the latest CBA agreement, but it does not take too much of an imagination to reason out that if the organization wanted to retain him, there are was to do so.

Yeah, not so much. That's why Bird Rights are so valuable. It's why the Gilbert Arenas Rule was made. It's why Early Bird is a thing. There weren't ways to do things, so that the original team was screwed out of even giving a chance. Similar to how a toxic contract offer can't say, for instance, "Allen Crabbe will play 50% of his games in Brooklyn. Signed, Brooklyn" "HA! You can't match all the clauses, Blazers!" (this was the "Hutchinson Rule" in NFL).

If the organization wants to retain him, they can do one of three things. 1) sign him to the taxpayer MLE. 2) Jettison roughly 20M of salary to sign him to the non-taxpayer MLE and hard cap yourself at the apron in 2018-19. 3) Jettison roughly 40M of salary to be able to even start to give him more than the MLE. That's all.

EDIT: ^^what PP said, if I'd bothered to read the rest of the thread

 

[Sarni]

LOL! Ain't nobody giving up a 1st rounder for a 1-year expiring contract. Unless it's like the 29th-30th pick.

Celtics will offer their IMO, and Cavs might too though I expect Cavs to move for DeAndre Jordan with their pick instead, or Mirotic, not Evans.

I think 76ers will offer two second rounders and one of their young players - they badly want to make the playoffs. To be fair it would be a better deal for Grizzlies. Your chances of hitting jackpot while picking twice in 35-45 range (I think Sixers have Knicks and Nets second round picks) are probably better than picking once at 26 or 27 .

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Yeah, not so much. That's why Bird Rights are so valuable. It's why the Gilbert Arenas Rule was made. It's why Early Bird is a thing. There weren't ways to do things, so that the original team was screwed out of even giving a chance. Similar to how a toxic contract offer can't say, for instance, "Allen Crabbe will play 50% of his games in Brooklyn. Signed, Brooklyn" "HA! You can't match all the clauses, Blazers!" (this was the "Hutchinson Rule" in NFL).

If the organization wants to retain him, they can do one of three things. 1) sign him to the taxpayer MLE. 2) Jettison roughly 20M of salary to sign him to the non-taxpayer MLE and hard cap yourself at the apron in 2018-19. 3) Jettison roughly 40M of salary to be able to even start to give him more than the MLE. That's all.

EDIT: ^^what PP said, if I'd bothered to read the rest of the thread

Guess I need to bone up, my friend. I recall PDX sucking up bad contracts to attain a player, only to buy them out. Is that still available now? Or better stated, cant we package CJ or some with market value with a bad contract or two?

 

[BigGameDamian]

going through all the pros and cons listed in the tread, I am in agreement that the only way is if we could get a verbal commitment that he would stay beyond this year. Love the guys size and he has good handles. Lets us shed a few pint sized players.

Just make sure you don't take any chances though!

 

[BBert]

It's not about a verbal commitment. It's a financial issue. Portland will only have the Tax MLE that they could pay him (around $6M). He's sure to get more than that on the open market.

If that's the case then the question is moot.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Guess I need to bone up, my friend. I recall PDX sucking up bad contracts to attain a player, only to buy them out. Is that still available now? Or better stated, cant we package CJ or some with market value with a bad contract or two?

There's a difference between what you're referencing and the Evans situation. First, if he were severely overpaid, you might have a shot. For instance, if he was making 30M, MEM might say "give us 20M back in contracts (say, Meyers and Mo) and we'll call it good, b/c we'd rather pay those dudes 20M than one guy who kinda sucks now 30M". PA didn't care when there wasn't a punative luxury tax. We could trade a 10M expiring contract for a 12M long term one, reducing the amount another team might owe an overpaid player from, say, 48M over 4 years to 10M over 1 (RLEC?). Luxury tax hurts, but you can still do stuff like that, if you find the right partners and the team's willing to buy off on huge luxury tax implications.

In this case, he's becoming a free agent, so we're limited by the amount the league will even let us offer him (the options above...likely the Taxpayer MLE of around 5.8M or so). The non-taxpayer MLE that almost every other team will have is going to be about 8.8M. So just by being in the tax, we're at a 3M disadvantage to every other team's "Free Exception". AND we're nowhere near close enough that we can offer "cap space" salary without drastically slashing payroll (like, 40M or so worth of it).

 

[DaLincolnJones]

There's a difference between what you're referencing and the Evans situation. First, if he were severely overpaid, you might have a shot. For instance, if he was making 30M, MEM might say "give us 20M back in contracts (say, Meyers and Mo) and we'll call it good, b/c we'd rather pay those dudes 20M than one guy who kinda sucks now 30M". PA didn't care when there wasn't a punative luxury tax. We could trade a 10M expiring contract for a 12M long term one, reducing the amount another team might owe an overpaid player from, say, 48M over 4 years to 10M over 1 (RLEC?). Luxury tax hurts, but you can still do stuff like that, if you find the right partners and the team's willing to buy off on huge luxury tax implications.

In this case, he's becoming a free agent, so we're limited by the amount the league will even let us offer him (the options above...likely the Taxpayer MLE of around 5.8M or so). The non-taxpayer MLE that almost every other team will have is going to be about 8.8M. So just by being in the tax, we're at a 3M disadvantage to every other team's "Free Exception". AND we're nowhere near close enough that we can offer "cap space" salary without drastically slashing payroll (like, 40M or so worth of it).

okay....got it, thanks. so there is no way we can entice someone to take CJ and some junk to clear cap ..damn, I am uninformed