So, one thing I've heard from several commentators, including Ken Berger of CBS Sports (http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/...sses-with-no-major-activity-thanks-to-new-cba) and other respectable NBA journalists, is that the new CBA, in particular the more punitive luxury tax regime, has inhibited major deals at this trade deadline, thus causing it to be boring Not sure that I agree on two bases: 1. Is this deadline really quiet compared to past ones? While we had a fairly eventful deadline in 2012 (with Nene/McGee, Gerald Wallace, Bogut/Monta being the bigger-names involved: http://www.nba.com/news/trade_deadline_070213.html) and in 2011 (Melo got traded to the Knicks), we have also had fairly quiet ones in the recent past under the old CBA. For example: Here's the list of 2009 Trade Deadline activities: http://www.nba.com/2009/news/02/19/tradesroundup.20090219/index.html. Here's the list for 2010: http://www.nba.com/news/transactions/2010.trade.deadline.tracker/index.html Here it is for 2007: http://www.nba.com/news/trade_deadline_070213.html In fact, a lot of the trade deadline drama are often about rumored deadline deals that never happened (for example, the Dwight situation last year, which didn't result in a trade until the offseason) and the actual trades made at the deadline most often involve 2nd/3rd level names (like Nene, Reddick, Camby, Martin, etc.) and not true elite stars. So the activity level really is about how many such 2nd/3rd level names actually change hands. 2. Is the tax really the cause of the quietness? As far as I can tell, not really. This deadline is on the quiet side-- though, as noted above, not exceptionally so-- not because teams have no future ability to spend before getting into the tax territory, but because many teams actually have a lot of ability to spend a lot of money in the summer and possibly beyond. Specifically, teams like HOU, ATL, UTA, DET, CLE, PHX and many others are projected to have major cap room in the summer of 2013 (in some cases depending on whether they let certain of their own free agents go). I think the protection of this cap room, rather than any worries about tax, is the main reason why many deals were not done. For example, as has been discussed here, HOU has little reason to pay a big price for anyone on the trade market when they can easily sign a comparable level player in the summer (Dwight and CP would be a stretch, but the 2nd level names are very reasonably attainable) while keeping their would-be trade chips. On the other hand, a team like ATL and UTA, which has an upcoming FA that may want to trade but also projected summer cap room if the free agent leaves, likely don't want to take back any continuing contracts because they can use that cap room to sign a replacement that may well be better than what people offer them now (an additional factor is that a S&T can still land you some return for a FA in the right situation). Am I missing something here?
This was the first deadline in a while I was fine with making no trades (even though I am really happy with the Robinson trade). Reason: Oklahoma City traded guards James Harden and Daequan Cook, forward Lazar Hayward and center Cole Aldrich to Houston for guards Kevin Martin and Jeremy Lamb, two first-round picks and a second-round pick. Waived guard Andy Rautins, forward Hollis Thompson and center Daniel Orton. That, I think, was supposed to be the deadline deal that shook up the league. It just so happen to four months early.
I didn't even spend time analyzing it. I brushed off that idea completely when it was brought up by the media. Those claims weren't backed by any evidence and it just didn't make sense.
The tax did have something to do with it, but frankly there just weren't a lot of win-win deals out there for teams. Not enough assets to go around.
Nope .... the media had no Melo or DH12 drama to show every minute of every day for a month. The media making this statement means little as they had nothing to base the statement off of , you've laid out the reasons above why teams didnt make moves and they contradict the media's statement.
A list of trade deadline deals from 1987 to 2008 http://www.insidehoops.com/nba-trade-deadline.shtml Maybe a little incomplete cuz there's no dates on the deals, probably don't have the Rudy Gay type trades that should probably count as a deadline deal. Like in 2004, they list Atlanta trading Rasheed Wallace to the Pistons. But they don't list the trade just DAYS PRIOR to that which sent him from Portland to Atlanta. But all that is "midseason trade" activity. I'll probably mean just more offseason activity instead of midseason. Or if there is a midseason trade, teams won't be getting as HOSED or 1-upped as much, it'll be "change of scenery" symbolic moves.
If I was a journalist, I would have gone with quiet deadline despite new CBA. You've got teams up in the luxury tax that should feel pressure to make trades to reduce their tax burden that did not make trades. But, I do think there is one CBA factor that legitimately pacified the trade deadline -- the amnesty provision. There's a lot of guys now floating around making big money for no work because of that rule. If that didn't exist, you might see teams making trades to pay other teams to take their albatross contracts and avoid luxury taxes. Instead, they were able to just cut those guys to save their salary caps. Look at the highest payrolls in the league: the Magic cut Arenas' $20m; the Sixers cut Brand's $16m; Portland cut Roy's $16m. Maybe those were too big to move anyway. But, there's also Outlaw's $4m, Scola's $5m, and Haywood's $6m, and I don't know how many others.
