NardDogNation wrote:

Rookie wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Rookie wrote:My first priority would be to free up cap space and aquire picks and some role players. Over half of the league is under the cap next season and the cap is projected to go up approx 5M to around (63M). The reason I purge this roster is because we don't have enough 2 way players or role players and we aren't outscoring many teams with their uptempo free wheeling guards. This also gives our new staff a chance to start to shape the roster to run the triangle with an eye towards FA in 2015. This is my plan regardless if Melo stays or goes.

Teams under the cap:
Atlanta 48M
Boston 46.5M
Charlotte 44M
Cleveland 32M
Dallas 26.5M
Detroit 41M
LAL 35M
Milwaukee 43M
N.O. 48.5M
Orlando 35.5M
Plilly 27M
Phoenix 36M
Portland 57M
San Antonio 53M
Toronto 41M
Utah 16M
Washington 45.5

I would put a priority on moving Stat, Chandler, Bargnani and JR to teams that can absord salary, send back a few role players and picks. Then I would take a look at the FA market.

Why would teams take our contracts? If the free agent market were so spectacular, wouldn't they want to be players for those guys instead of our trash?

just a few off the top of my head

1) there will be 17 teams competing for available FA's.
2) our trash might be a good fit on another team and add to their depth. Our players aren't trash, they just don't really work together on the same team.
3) they are expiring contracts and good future trade assets. Also low risk for a playoff team looking for the x factor.
4) teams under the cap don't have to match $$ making any deal a lot more simple.
5) Teams won't have to give up much of anything to acquire them, unlike some of the one sided trade scenarios you read on fan forums that never happen.

Sure, those teams would have to give those players longer-termed deals than the players we'd be trading but isn't that the point? Why limit a player you like, who can help your team, to a one year deal? Even if a prospective free agent was demanding a multi-year deal, the lifetime of the contract will probably be cheaper or, at least, comparable to what an Amare or Bargnani is making. So why not go for the free agent player you want long-term, who will also be cheaper in the short and long-term than one of our big ticket guys?

That's my plan, to move our big contract expiring players to teams with cap room picking up some draft picks and role players but mostly to open up cap flexibility for this season. Maybe we even pick up a good you g prospect or two on rookie deals. I don't have one plan for if Melo stays and another for if he goes. I have one plan and either he buys into it or he doesn't. Either way we'll be ok. If we can't move them, they expire and we are good for 2015. How often are there 17 teams with significant cap room? This could work in our favor for once. We are due some luck

Rookie wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Rookie wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Rookie wrote:My first priority would be to free up cap space and aquire picks and some role players. Over half of the league is under the cap next season and the cap is projected to go up approx 5M to around (63M). The reason I purge this roster is because we don't have enough 2 way players or role players and we aren't outscoring many teams with their uptempo free wheeling guards. This also gives our new staff a chance to start to shape the roster to run the triangle with an eye towards FA in 2015. This is my plan regardless if Melo stays or goes.

Teams under the cap:
Atlanta 48M
Boston 46.5M
Charlotte 44M
Cleveland 32M
Dallas 26.5M
Detroit 41M
LAL 35M
Milwaukee 43M
N.O. 48.5M
Orlando 35.5M
Plilly 27M
Phoenix 36M
Portland 57M
San Antonio 53M
Toronto 41M
Utah 16M
Washington 45.5

I would put a priority on moving Stat, Chandler, Bargnani and JR to teams that can absord salary, send back a few role players and picks. Then I would take a look at the FA market.

Why would teams take our contracts? If the free agent market were so spectacular, wouldn't they want to be players for those guys instead of our trash?

just a few off the top of my head

1) there will be 17 teams competing for available FA's.
2) our trash might be a good fit on another team and add to their depth. Our players aren't trash, they just don't really work together on the same team.
3) they are expiring contracts and good future trade assets. Also low risk for a playoff team looking for the x factor.
4) teams under the cap don't have to match $$ making any deal a lot more simple.
5) Teams won't have to give up much of anything to acquire them, unlike some of the one sided trade scenarios you read on fan forums that never happen.

Sure, those teams would have to give those players longer-termed deals than the players we'd be trading but isn't that the point? Why limit a player you like, who can help your team, to a one year deal? Even if a prospective free agent was demanding a multi-year deal, the lifetime of the contract will probably be cheaper or, at least, comparable to what an Amare or Bargnani is making. So why not go for the free agent player you want long-term, who will also be cheaper in the short and long-term than one of our big ticket guys?

That's my plan, to move our big contract expiring players to teams with cap room picking up some draft picks and role players but mostly to open up cap flexibility for this season. Maybe we even pick up a good you g prospect or two on rookie deals. I don't have one plan for if Melo stays and another for if he goes. I have one plan and either he buys into it or he doesn't. Either way we'll be ok. If we can't move them, they expire and we are good for 2015. How often are there 17 teams with significant cap room? This could work in our favor for once. We are due some luck

Why would a team give up picks for Amare or Bargnani to play 30-40 games for them? I thought that the cap space alone was a bit far-fetch'd. I can't imagine them including young players/picks as well.

Rookie wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Rookie wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Rookie wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Rookie wrote:My first priority would be to free up cap space and aquire picks and some role players. Over half of the league is under the cap next season and the cap is projected to go up approx 5M to around (63M). The reason I purge this roster is because we don't have enough 2 way players or role players and we aren't outscoring many teams with their uptempo free wheeling guards. This also gives our new staff a chance to start to shape the roster to run the triangle with an eye towards FA in 2015. This is my plan regardless if Melo stays or goes.

Teams under the cap:
Atlanta 48M
Boston 46.5M
Charlotte 44M
Cleveland 32M
Dallas 26.5M
Detroit 41M
LAL 35M
Milwaukee 43M
N.O. 48.5M
Orlando 35.5M
Plilly 27M
Phoenix 36M
Portland 57M
San Antonio 53M
Toronto 41M
Utah 16M
Washington 45.5

I would put a priority on moving Stat, Chandler, Bargnani and JR to teams that can absord salary, send back a few role players and picks. Then I would take a look at the FA market.

Why would teams take our contracts? If the free agent market were so spectacular, wouldn't they want to be players for those guys instead of our trash?

just a few off the top of my head

1) there will be 17 teams competing for available FA's.
2) our trash might be a good fit on another team and add to their depth. Our players aren't trash, they just don't really work together on the same team.
3) they are expiring contracts and good future trade assets. Also low risk for a playoff team looking for the x factor.
4) teams under the cap don't have to match $$ making any deal a lot more simple.
5) Teams won't have to give up much of anything to acquire them, unlike some of the one sided trade scenarios you read on fan forums that never happen.

Sure, those teams would have to give those players longer-termed deals than the players we'd be trading but isn't that the point? Why limit a player you like, who can help your team, to a one year deal? Even if a prospective free agent was demanding a multi-year deal, the lifetime of the contract will probably be cheaper or, at least, comparable to what an Amare or Bargnani is making. So why not go for the free agent player you want long-term, who will also be cheaper in the short and long-term than one of our big ticket guys?

That's my plan, to move our big contract expiring players to teams with cap room picking up some draft picks and role players but mostly to open up cap flexibility for this season. Maybe we even pick up a good you g prospect or two on rookie deals. I don't have one plan for if Melo stays and another for if he goes. I have one plan and either he buys into it or he doesn't. Either way we'll be ok. If we can't move them, they expire and we are good for 2015. How often are there 17 teams with significant cap room? This could work in our favor for once. We are due some luck

Why would a team give up picks for Amare or Bargnani to play 30-40 games for them? I thought that the cap space alone was a bit far-fetch'd. I can't imagine them including young players/picks as well.

you wouldn't send Amare to Cleveland for Jarrett Jack and a 2nd rd pick? Jack has about 18M left over 3 yrs and is a gritty NY type player. To Detroit for Jennings 14M over 2 yrs? Milwaukie for Mayo's 16M over 2 yrs? These are just some examples of cap friendly role players. I think there is a market for Amare.

I misunderstood what you were saying to some extent. Even so, I still don't see the incentive of the Cavs paying Amare $22 million next season, to rid themselves of a contract that only has $12 million left on it. Jarrett Jack has actual value in the league, on a contender, so I don't see the Cavs dumping him in this fashion. The same reasoning goes for OJ Mayo, who has just $16 million left over the lifetime of his deal. As Jennings, he is small, ball dominant and can't shoot, which leads me to believe that he'd be a poor fit in the triangle.

When looking into these types of trades, we need to make sure that our partners are saving money in the long-term to create an incentive for them because guys like Bargnani and Amare are not healthy/talented enough to incentivize a deal, alone.

Rookie wrote:You need to look at Stat's stats. He is an efficient player who shoots a high percentage. He also has a tremendous work ethic and is a role model/leader. Cleveland could use a little of that, that's why I listed them first. They don't really need or have a role for Jack and they need a veteran leader. Amare has value and there will be a market for him with so many teams under the cap. Especially, since we don't need to demand a max star player in return. A role player and a 2nd round pick is my price.

As far as Bargs goes. He might be a fit in the triangle and we gave up a 1st rd pick to get him so I doubt moving him is a priority. I think if we can move Chandler and Amare (38M) and only take back around 10M, we would be right at the (new projected) cap given Melo stays and his projected salary stays around 23M. If Melo leaves, we have cap space to sign FA's. If he stays and takes less, we have some cap flexibilty and I believe being a non tax paying team we get our full MLE.

In anycase, cap flexibility is the goal and I think Amare and Chandler can be moved w/o taking back equal salary.

Amare and Bargs do not have any value and are basically un-tradeable unless we take back another ridiculous salbatross.

I sure hope we let him/them just expire in peace.

mreinman wrote:

Rookie wrote:Stat played more games then Garnett. Given similar minutes, Stat was a more efficient player on the Offensive averaging 2x as many points and similar rebounding/blocks. Of course Garnett is a better defender, but Stat is a better Offensive player. If Garnett has value, Stat has value.

Garnett's value has plummeted. His value is not as a leader.

Is Amare a leader?

He proved that he is before the Melo trade when he was 'the man'.

Rookie wrote:Amare has trade value. If he was on a team in the playoffs right now and scoring 12 points, 6 rebounds 4 assists and a block on 74% shooting in 22 minutes you would be starting a thread about 'how we can get him'.

Maybe at 3 million not 22 (if he actually had 4 assists per and/or shot 74%).

nixluva wrote:I saw the beginnings of STAT learning how to play inside out big man that can set up his teammates when the double comes. That's exactly the role of bigs in the Triangle and I think STAT could be successful in that role. If he starts the year and has success his expiring contract and post skills could be of use to a team looking for a big man for a playoff run at the trade deadline.

Not meaning to be snitty but how did you see that? He avg 0.5 assists this year.

The dude never ever passes. Its like putting a quarter into a broker pay phone.

He had the worst USG : AST ratio probably ever at about 5.5 : 1.

A package of Boozer, Dunleavy, two 2014 first-round picks (16 and 19) and perhaps a future first should be a workable package for both the Knicks and Bulls.
Read more at http://www.basketballinsiders.com/knicks-bulls-should-talk-melo-trade/#Zkh3JpVrEQ6X8T7h.99