[Bulls.com/Sam Smith] T-Mac takes his spot on the NBA Trading Block

I firmly believe Morey put the "McGrady for Trade" sign and is now sitting back waiting for someone to bite hard. Of this won't happen until February when team evaluate their playoff chances and most importantly their cap. And of course there will be some teams way over the cap and at least one WILL PANIC!

:grin:

 

I think this just illustrates the quality of many of the posts/posters here, as most of what I'd read in that article I had indeed heard before - here.

It is nice to have some confirmation though, that we're not just spinning our wheels mentally, but that others with some experience and that aren't invested in our franchise, are saying some of the same things at least.

Agreed with another poster that we are hearing conflicting things from the media that a) we have few likely trade partners but b) list multiple scenarios that seem likely, all in the same article.

guess we aren't the only ones speculating the heck out of this season's trades, are we? : )

 

You're probably right about Washington not having much motivation to make such a deal. I was simply saying that such a package would be one in which Morey would be interested. That said, depending on how bad things got in Washington, and depending on whether the Wizards' management viewed McGrady is more than just an expiring contract (i.e., ticket draw and/or helpful player), then the following trade would at least be SOMEWHAT realistic:

Tracy McGrady, Joey Dorsey, 2010 (lottery protected) 1st round pick and $3M cash
for
Javale McGee, Mike Miller, Mike James and Fabricio Oberto

Sure, I wouldn't do this if I were Washington, but if they like McGrady enough, they might. They end up increasing their 2009-10 team salary (and luxury tax hit) a little, but the $3M would help offset it. Plus, they get what could be a decent mid-first rounder.

Meanwhile, the Rockets could immediately waive/buyout James and could add Miller and McGee to the rotation.

Still, I agree with you that it is not very likely to happen.

That Chicago trade is something I've thought about before. It all depends on whether Morey and Adelman view John Salmons as a quality player who can help the team win. For instance, would Morey have been willing to pursue Salmons this summer with the MLE had he chosen to let McGrady's contract expire? If so, then sure. Makes some sense. If not, why risk having Salmons not opt out of his deal this summer and be stuck paying him $5.8M next season?

But again, I agree with you on the reality of the "overlap" between the trade market for McGrady (on the one hand) and what Morey is willing to take back for T-Mac (on the other hand).

 

I do not know why this Sam Smith is more interested in the writing for the Tmac trade? It sounds like the Bulls clearly want to get Tmac. If this article has something in it, then the rockets do have some options to work out one good trade.

 

I think in the Chicago scenario, Rockets would do the trade to get that 1st round pick (in my made-up trade) or whatever else Chicago is willing to throw in to dump Salmon's salary (so they can make a run at a free agent). I think Salmons' ability to play is not all that critical.

Basically, by doing this trade, the Rockets get that 1st round pick, take on Salmons at $5.8 million, and will have enough room to both (1) sign Scola and Lowry back, and (2) use the MLE. (By the way, my guess is that, if the Rockets have room to use the MLE without paying tax, Morey will be waiting outside Manu Ginoboli's house at 12:01 a.m.). At worst you, end up with some additional cheap young talent and a chance to go for a FA that somehow slipped through the Lebron/Wade/Bosh mania with the MLE. Also, you kind of extend the expiring date on Tracy McGrady's expiring contract's value by creating a "Bobby Jackson" situation with Salmons and draft picks. These can be used, perhaps in combination with other contracts/talent, to acquire something either during the offseason or even during next season.

For example, would Minnesota be willing to take, on draft date, the Chicago pick + the Rockets pick (perhaps plus next year's Rockets pick) for Ricky Rubiio? If Kings won't do the Martin deal now, would they do it for Salmons, Andersen + a 1st round pick or two?

 

Yeah, I don't see Washington valuing McGrady as a player, because they're purely rebuilding. With D'antoni's statements, the Knicks may be a different story. I think eventually they may offer expirings and Wilson Chandler. I like Chandler as a player, but he is a little redundant with Ariza there. Would Morey be willing to give up on Ariza this early and swap him for a Jared Jeffries in a deal like this to get out of the remaining years of his contract? Something like...

T-Mac and Ariza for Hughes, Milicic, Jeffries and Chandler? I think I would.

The Knicks get to see if Mac still has it, and they actually have about 2.6 mill more going into free agency with the loss of Chandler's contract and the difference between Ariza's and Jeffries'.

 

Excellent insight, CH. While I'm not so sure that Morey would value another mid-first rounder as much as he would the cap flexibility this summer, I like how you're thinking.

I doubt that Minnesota will be too interested in additional first round picks in this year's draft. They are scheduled to have as many as three first round picks this year, with the T-Wolves expected to draft in the top 5, along with owning Charlotte's (top-12 protected) pick and Utah's (top-15 protected) pick. The Wolves are probably looking to consolidate those picks, if anything. The Martin deal, however, might be a possibility if he proves to be a terrible fit with Evans (although I still think Sacramento will want to use Martin as bait to unload some bad contracts).

 

Wasn't Adelman at the helm in Sacto when they drafted Salmons out of Miami? I'm just saying...

 

I think Morey is fine with Ariza and is not looking to "get out from under his contract", especially not for Jared Jeffries. Also, the Knicks would probably rather keep their cap room open than make a trade for long-term contracts (even if it adds a little cap room next summer). Plus, it would take a lot more than Wilson Chandler for the Rockets to both give up Ariza and take on Jeffries's contract.

No, thanks.

 

Ariza isn't going anywhere. This is a feeling out year for him and the team and they expect his performance to only increase with Yao back in the lineup.

So, let's stop talking about trading Trevor...

 

This tells me you see Ariza as a better prospect than Chandler. I'm not so sure. Their numbers are very similar, but Chandler is much more efficient. Chandler also happens to be a couple years younger.

Lebron seems to be a big fan of Ariza, so I think he would only be an asset for the Knicks going into free agency.

To make it more appealing for the Rockets, you could toss in Harrington for one of the expirings. Or remove the Ariza-Jeffries swap.

 

Yes, I do view Ariza as a better PLAYER than Chandler. While Chandler has better offensive numbers, they are skewed by the fact that he plays in Mike D'Antoni's run-and-gun offense (with little to no defense being played by the Knicks). Ariza is a significantly better defender than Chandler. Morey has openly commented on how Ariza is worth his salary based on his defense alone and that he projects as a key contributor on a championship team (aside from the fact that he has already done so).

Also, I would much rather spend $6.3M on Ariza next season than spend a combined $9M+ on Chandler + Jeffries. Plus, Chandler will be a free agent in 2011, and there is no telling what it will cost to retain him. Better to hold onto the superior player who is also locked into a long-term deal at a reasonable salary.

 

Yes, that's exactly how these stories come off, because one minute they're talking about how valuable McGrady's contract may be to teams and the next minute they're talking about McGrady's diminished skills. They're saying he's a valuable trade asset in one breath, then in the next they're saying he isn't. These columns are rambling, self-contradictory and full of conjecture with very little meat to support it. They write this stuff because fans love to read it, but we shouldn't be putting too much stock in what they say. We should have learned that by now.

 

Sure, Chandler's numbers are a bit inflated because of the system, but you can't tell me Ariza's aren't inflated by 39 mpg and 16 shots a game?

I think the real question is: Would you rather pay Chandler+Jeffries 9 mill next year and then have the flexibility to re-sign Chandler if you want, or pay Ariza, who is looking like Shandon Anderson 2.0, 30 mill over the next 4 years and hope he pans out?

 

Ariza's scoring numbers are inflated, and his shooting %s are horrible. Still, he is still a better all-around player than Chandler. As Stevierebel already stated in this thread, this is a "feeling out" year for Ariza and his true value will be measured by how he plays with Yao next season. Morey seems to think that he is a great fit with Yao.

And, yes, I'd still rather have Ariza's contract than Chandler+Jeffries for one year.

 

Agreed. I'm tired of all the Ariza sucks comments. They are imo trying to develop him, build some confidence and I believe they see something in him. Ariza seems to be coachable, with this shooting slump he has been in coach told him to make the team better in different areas, passing, defense and such, it seems to be working. When Yao comes back and hopefully we add another key piece I believe Ariza will shine more

 

Interesting about Minny's picks. I didn't realize they could have up to 3. I agree that additional picks may not appeal to Minny in that case. I also agree that Sac may not trade Martin without unloading additional contracts. (However, recent reports have indicated that the Kings are no longer in contract dumping mode since the Maloffs are doing better financially.)

In any case, my point remains that a Salmons + 1st rounder type exchange is better than just letting McGrady's contract expire. I mean, the Rockets will only have the MLE and LLE anyway if they let TMac expire, unless they dump Scola, Lowry and Battier-- which is not something I think Morey is inclined to do. I believe Morey thinks Battier is good value at his salary. I also think that Morey thinks he can use the restricted status of Scola and Lowry to retain them at a good value.

Besides, having $11-13 million in cap space is not all that useful comparing to just having the MLE for obtaining a max player. I think the only way the Rockets can get a James/Wade, etc. is through a S&T whether they are capped out or has $11-13 million-- meaning, if Lebron wants to come to Houston, he has to tell Cleveland that he wants to leave and his first choice is Houston, so either they work out a S&T or he leaves them with nothing by either (1) signing for the max with the Knicks/Nets, or (2) signing a below market deal with Houston. Now, I don't think option (2) is much of a threat whether that is an MLE deal or a $11-13 mil a year deal since Lebron is losing a ton of money... thus my theory that cap room is useless for the "big fish."

So, in sum, I think the thing to do, unless a homerun deal is offered, is to make a Salmons type deal and go from there in the summer.

 

Sounds like they've been reading clutchfans.

 

Kevin Martin at $10 million per is good value..........in spite of his injuries. He would be worth taking back Nocioni to get. And don't forget Nocioni can ball too and is a fit in Adelman's system big time.

 

If Ariza is traded, it's not because he sucks. On the contrary, it's because he is a positive asset. He could be used as a sweetener to get a deal we really want. I don't think Ariza is more untouchable than Battier, Scola, Hayes, and Landry.