Bang. Mario Hezonja is the best shooter in this draft. And it's not really close. Yes, Kaminsky is definitely a nice shooter, especially for a big man. Booker is a nice shooter. Harvey, yep good. Winslow is average and improving. But the best shooter in this draft is Mario Hezonja. 6'8" and he can nail it from 35 feet like it's a free throw.
Don't know what kind of player we can sign. I wasn't really thinking about signing another player. I was thinking about keeping everything we had besides Ariza, and adding a young potential star on a rookie contract (Hezonja or Winslow) and then being able to trade Kostas/Pablo and perhaps other contracts for another player on an expiring contract. I suspect most of this year's superstar players are going to re-sign with their current teams on 1+1 contracts and then they're going to attempt to force trades at the deadline if they want to move on. Or else just go back into the free agent pool next summer. So, the idea was put ourselves in a position to have max cap space and then some next summer but also to have the flexibility to execute trades with non-guaranteeds/expirings this year to make our team championship competitive if one of those superstars forced a trade and wanted to come here this year. So, I suggested an Ariza/18 trade for #8 then using #8 to draft Winslow or Hezonja. This would clear out Ariza from the 2016 cap and replace him with a youngster making a little over $3 million that is definitely a tradeable asset if we needed to clear cap. Not to mention you are possibly picking up a blossoming star player. This would also allow us to keep Brewer, Bev, and Smith on cap holds and would only require us to drop Kostas to have enough cap space to sign both Llull ($5.4 million) and KJ McDaniels ($2 million) and still have the Room MLE for use during the season. We could then re-sign both Bev and Brewer to bloated 1 year deals with the second season a non-guaranteed team option. We could conceivably pay Bev and Brewer big money to sign a short-term deal, say $8 million for 1 year for Brewer with a second season team option non-guaranteed plus perhaps $6-8 million for Bev on a 1 year deal with a team option. Those contracts along with Jones/Dorsey could be used to send out for a guy like Joe Johnson at the deadline. Just one idea allowing for Llull to be paid a front-end loaded contract under the cap with decreasing salaries or perhaps even some non-guaranteed salary in 2016 and 2017 while simultaneously creating a couple non-guaranteed/expirings that we could use to pick up another big player or two.
All the people mentioning trading Ariza, do you realize the possible ramifications of that? If traded this offseason, this would be the second time that the Rockets igned him to a nice contract out of free agency and traded him exactly a year later after he played a key role for the team the prior season. That's not necessarily "good business" and Morey does pay attention to team chemistry. Regardless of what others may think.not to mention how valuable Ariza is as a player on the court for this team.
Can someone here please explain to me why we aren't heavily pursuing Millsap?? Exceptional player, can shoot the three ball too. Excellent defender. Has a solid post game too. He would be an exceptional fit in our offense and would strengthen the defense. I'm not saying he is a better player than LMA but I think in some ways he would be a better fit in our system. I also think he is a better defender. What's to stop us from offering him a one year deal and then re signing him to the max when the cap rises? Perhaps he doesn't want to leave and fully intends on staying in Atlanta, but it's just a thought I had before.
Wrong side of 30, going to demand far more on the market than the Rockets can reasonably afford without renouncing the Bird rights to Bev and Brewer, definitely not a position of need with Capela possibly earning rotation minutes and Smith coming back on a sweetheart deal.
The Rockets would probably have to pursue him with cap space. Unlike a disgruntled star, Millsap is going to want to come back to Atlanta, and forcing a S&T to Houston seems highly unlikely. The Rockets could possibly make around 9 million in cap space this offseason which they wont. That's just not enough for someone like Millsap. Really the key this offseason is going to be first finding a high profile player that WANTS to come to Houston, and makes that widely known. So far we've seen nothing yet publicly but that could change. The Rockets just do not have the cap space, and need that edge to force a S&T. I think the blueprint would be what Golden State did to S&T for Igoudala several years ago. Unfortunately they are going to have to make moves first (probably a Papanikolaou/Prig type trade) that sheds assets to look more like a serious free agency player. Then you get some attraction around the league with free agents, and go from there. But you must get that player to want to force his way to Houston, then you get some free agency leverage. Unfortunately for someone like Millsap, and even Love/LMA we are just two steps behind being able to court someone like him, but that could change shortly.
In case anyone wanted to know basketballholic/jopatmc's thoughts from the past day or so (20 posts) here they are in one post. It's about 12 1/2 pages and a little over 5,900 words. Spoiler 1. Jack is essentially an expiring contract with a very small guarantee for 2016 that makes him a trade chip. Lawson is not. He'd be on the books. 2. In addition to that..there is the possibility that we could possibly trade for Jack and another asset for essentially expirings/non-guaranteeds instead of giving up assets for Lawson. Lawson will both deplete our asset and cap space. 3. Jack plays defense. Lawson does not. The one thing we know is we've got to have defenders bracketing Harden. Have to have defenders bracketing Harden. Defenders around Harden. Defenders around Harden. Call that hypocrisy if you want. I call it two different players, two different situations. Keep pumping Lawson though. Be my guest. A fledgling playoff team will pick Rondo up and catch lightning in a bottle. He's got plenty of game. Just put shooters around him and he makes it easy on them. Surround him with guys that gotta dribble around all the time though and that's a problem. Horse poo. Rubio is an unstoppable playmaker. You can't get the ball from him. He gets the ball from you. And he gets the ball to guys that are WIDE OPEN for easy shots. Rubio is a shot creator. He's an excellent offensive player. Rubio is no different than Harden in demanding a system around him. Harden demands a system around him too. And we still haven't gotten it right yet. So, consequently Harden takes way too many possessions winding down the clock and getting off bad looks that he knocks down at a still acceptable rate because of how great he is. But we've got to get better around him. Rubio has been surrounded with the worst jump shooters in the whole league every year he's played in the NBA. And he needs shooters. So, while we haven't maximized Harden, Minnesota for sure hasn't maximized Rubio by getting shooters around him. Rubio does fit the NBA just fine and when he gets on a good team with good 3&D shooters you're gonna find out how good he is. He's a double-digit assist machine waiting to to doll out the rock. When he finds the right fit you'll be talking about how much he improved. There's a new model every year. That's what you have to understand about the game of basketball. There is a myriad of ways to play this game great. Spurs did it last season with electric ball movement. GS is doing it this year with off-the-charts shooting from Steph and moving Draymond around defensively and creating mismatches. Rondo didn't work in Dallas. He created a problem. And Rondo is a problem because he wants to be a player that is the coach/leader/chief decision maker. Rondo knows how smart he is and he wants to assert that to the coaching staff and front office. Rondo wants his team. In Dallas that was not to be. That doesn't mean the league has passed Rondo up. That's hogwash. Won't fly. And then to broadbrush Rondo and Rubio with the same brush is even more insane. Rubio is not a dissenter. He's not the locker room presence that Rondo is. He's not the distraction Rondo is. He doesn't but up in the coach's face and curse and generally act like a hoodlum. The game hasn't passed Rubio (or Rondo) by. That's simply a myopic take by people who don't understand the game and only see the "latest model of success". By the way, the Finals are still on-going. Cleveland could (if there's any team that could it would be Lebron's team) come back, win in Cleveland, and then go to GS and take the championship. Then what? What happens to the GS super team? What will guys like you think if CLE takes the championship away from GS by playing a grind it out tough defense and then putting the ball in Lebron's hands and he brings them home in a very inefficient but necessary fashion????? The narrative on what it takes to win a championship would change in a matter of seconds. So much for gotta have a PG that can shoot/score when Delly is out there flinging up poo shots. It is so ridiculous to make statements like the league has passed guys like Rondo/Rubio by. Small ball lineups definitely have a lot of sizzle about them. But it's just not small ball. It's spread-ball with defenders. What makes GS run is Draymond Green's ability to defend multiple positions effectively (something Rubio does from the perimeter). For his career Draymond is a 32.1% 3-point shooter. For his career Rubio is a 31.4% 3-point shooter. To add to that, Draymond is shooting 25.6% from 3 in this year's playoffs and is now shooting 28.3% from 3 in the playoffs for his career while chucking up over 3.5 3-point shots per game. You'd have to agree that GS's small-ball incorporates more than just shooters. You'd have to agree that Draymond is not a plus shooting floor spreader for them. But....what Draymond can do is shoot the 3-ball just well enough to be somewhat of a threat and he's also good enough that even though he is given space out there to shoot the 3, he can still penetrate and post-up against smaller defenders and he can still blow-by bigger defenders. Same holds true for Rubio. Although Rubio is not a scorer, he's the type of playmaker that can penetrate on any defense. You've got to bring 3 guys at him to get the ball out of his hands because he's so good on the dribble that he can beat even double teams and find the open man for the easy layup/dunk. Just as Green is too good because he has a size/strength mismatch against smaller defenders and a quickness/perimeter skills mismatch against bigger, slower defenders so does Rubio create constant offensive mismatches even though he's not a shooter. Rubio can take smaller point defenders into the post and operate with his back to the basket and flip the most ridiculous passes to wide open teammates for the finish or wide-open 3-balls. And if the opponent goes with bigger defenders on him, Rubio can waltz by them like they're standing still. Rubio is a great player that has spent the first 3 seasons of his career on subpar teams. If you put Curry on the Wolves and surround him with the same guys Rubio had and you put Rubio on the Warriors, their success ratios would be reversed. They're different players. Curry is the greatest shooter that ever played in the NBA. Rubio is going to go down as one of the most prolific playmakers and point defenders in the history of the NBA. They'll have plenty of clashes in the future with each man winning his share of the battles. There is constant movement in the NBA towards great players with multiple great skills. Not just towards a specific type of play. The 3-point line has changed the game definitely. But the idea that a non-shooting playmaker can't sustain success in this league is a joke. The 3-point line only makes a true playmaker more lethal. Because he has more space to work his creative genius when he has good to great 3-point shooters lined up around the arc. Small ball lineups definitely have a lot of sizzle about them. But it's just not small ball. It's spread-ball with defenders. What makes GS run is Draymond Green's ability to defend multiple positions effectively (something Rubio does from the perimeter). For his career Draymond is a 32.1% 3-point shooter. For his career Rubio is a 31.4% 3-point shooter. To add to that, Draymond is shooting 25.6% from 3 in this year's playoffs and is now shooting 28.3% from 3 in the playoffs for his career while chucking up over 3.5 3-point shots per game. You'd have to agree that GS's small-ball incorporates more than just shooters. You'd have to agree that Draymond is not a plus shooting floor spreader for them. But....what Draymond can do is shoot the 3-ball just well enough to be somewhat of a threat and he's also good enough that even though he is given space out there to shoot the 3, he can still penetrate and post-up against smaller defenders and he can still blow-by bigger defenders. Same holds true for Rubio. Although Rubio is not a scorer, he's the type of playmaker that can penetrate on any defense. You've got to bring 3 guys at him to get the ball out of his hands because he's so good on the dribble that he can beat even double teams and find the open man for the easy layup/dunk. Just as Green is too good because he has a size/strength mismatch against smaller defenders and a quickness/perimeter skills mismatch against bigger, slower defenders so does Rubio create constant offensive mismatches even though he's not a shooter. Rubio can take smaller point defenders into the post and operate with his back to the basket and flip the most ridiculous passes to wide open teammates for the finish or wide-open 3-balls. And if the opponent goes with bigger defenders on him, Rubio can waltz by them like they're standing still. Rubio is a great player that has spent the first 3 seasons of his career on subpar teams. If you put Curry on the Wolves and surround him with the same guys Rubio had and you put Rubio on the Warriors, their success ratios would be reversed. They're different players. Curry is the greatest shooter that ever played in the NBA. Rubio is going to go down as one of the most prolific playmakers and point defenders in the history of the NBA. They'll have plenty of clashes in the future with each man winning his share of the battles. There is constant movement in the NBA towards great players with multiple great skills. Not just towards a specific type of play. The 3-point line has changed the game definitely. But the idea that a non-shooting playmaker can't sustain success in this league is a joke. The 3-point line only makes a true playmaker more lethal. Because he has more space to work his creative genius when he has good to great 3-point shooters lined up around the arc. The general trend is to shoot many more 3-pointers and to eschew long 2-pointers. Simply put, a 30% 3-point shooter is just as valuable as a 45% long 2 shooter and you can't hardly find more than a handful of guys in the league that can shoot an 18-22 footer at greater than 45%. But that does not preclude guys that can break defenders down like Rubio can and collapse the defense like Rubio can. Those guys are special. And are only more special when they have 3-point shooters lined up to take an efficient 3-point shot. The adjustment Rondo will have to make is with his attitude. Not with his playing style. Disagree. Rubio can split double teams. And he can find guys. If Rubio wanted to score the basketball more, he'd simply take it to the rim and get fouled. He's an 80+% free throw shooter. (On a side note, you should remember Rubio's free-throw shooting percentage when his jump shot magically improves down the road. He's got the mechanics to make it happen.) Here's what happens to every team in this league during crunch time: THE OPPONENT DEFENSE ZEROES IN ON THE BEST PLAYER AND DOES EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER TO SHUT HIM OFF! Didn't you just witness Golden State do this to James Harden, one of the top scorers in the league????? It happens to every team. The problem with those T-Wolves teams, especially with Love gone, or when Love was out injured...was there was NO OTHER PLAYER even close to being as good as Rubio out there. Blame it on Rubio if you want to. But then you've got to blame it on Harden too. Re-watch the GS series and realize what happened to us out there. WE HAD NOBODY ELSE THAT COULD CREATE ANYTHING. GS took away Harden and his creation and we had nowhere to go. Same thing has happened to Rubio over and over in Minnesota. And yet many posters will point to Rubio's shooting percentages and blame him for not firing up a bunch of 25-footers and winning the game while giving Harden a free pass when he dribbles into a double team and loses the basketball. I think winning championships contributes to the changing of the landscape of the NBA way more than missing the playoffs does. Missing the playoffs means the team is bad. If missing the playoffs means the lead player is messed up then what we gonna do with Melo? Melo is one of the best shooters in this league. Put him on the Olympic team and he's flat out LETHAL taking the same shots he takes all season in the NBA. But put him on a crappy team with nobody to get him the ball or take defensive pressure away from him to the otherr side of the floor and he looks like crap. Yet, if he were to go on the trade market tomorrow, there'd be 10-15 teams bending over to trade for him. Because they know how good Melo is. They know Melo is a top 10 player in this league. Despite the losing. Yeah, his health has been a problem. But so was Steph's health a problem until this last season. Steph has had multiple problems with his ankles. And it looked like there for awhile like his career may be truncated because of those injuries. Rubio has had a run of bad luck. Injury is a risk to every player. Brandon Roy ring a bell? How many can we name? Countless great players have their careers cut short with injuries. There's no way of knowing what's gonna happen long-term with Rubio injury wise. But that doesn't mean he's not one of the most talented ballers in the association. he is. And if he gets and stays healthy and gets on a good team he'll show it. Just like Melo will if he gets the right supporting cast. Just like LaMarcus Aldridge will if he gets on the right team. The problem posters have with me is I simply state my OPINION without cushioning it with a bunch of "I think" lead-ins. I've been taught by professionals not to write that way or speak that way. It's part of my job training and I've done it for so long that it's second nature. NOBODY thinks they are wrong......including you. Neither do I. However when I realize I have been wrong and I have misjudged a player/coach/team or situation....I have no trouble admitting it. Even the highest paid professionals in the basketball business are wrong many times. It's not a matter of if they are ever wrong. It's a matter of how much they are right versus wrong. Enough of that crap. I'd rather talk basketball with basketballers, not sociology/philosophy with babblers. Every player, including Lebron and Curry, has weaknesses that can be exploited. What a good team does is cover up for each other's weaknesses. What a championship team does is the very best job in the NBA of covering each other's weaknesses. The problem Memphis had was not Tony Allen's inability to hit a jump shots. You're making a perfect case in point for what I've been trying to say about the T-Wolves. The problem Memphis had (and has) is they are one of the worst 3-point shooting TEAMS in the association and have been one of the worst 3-point shooting teams in the association for the last several years. Minnesota has the same problem. Despite having Love and KMart....Minnesota has still been one of the worst 3-point shooting teams over the last 3 seasons that Ricky has been there. And it hasn't been because Ricky is dragging them down. Ricky shoots such a small percentage of the team's 3-balls that even if you take him out of the equation their 3-point shooting percentage still stinks. Over the last 4 seasons since Rubio has been in town, Minnesota has shot a total of 1929/5878 for a glorious 32.8% from the 3-point line, tied with Charlotte for the WORST 3-point shooting percentage over that time period. Ricky Rubio made up a miniscule 6% of those numbers shooting a miserable 31.35% from 3. When you subtract Rubio's 3-point shooting numbers out of Minnesota's 3-point shooting numbers, their 3-point percentage raises up to 32.9%, a 1/10 of 1% difference. Let's suppose we replace Ricky's 116/370 with a shooter that shoots 40% from 3. That would be an additional 32 3-balls added to Minnesota's totals and their 3-point shooting percentage would be raised up to 33.3% from the 3-point line, tied with Philly at the second worst 3-point shooting percentage in the league over the same time period. So, you see, Rubio simply doesn't shoot the 3 in enough volume to move the needle one way or the other substantially for the T-Wolves. The problem the T-Wolves is they have played a bunch of guys that can't shoot the 3-ball together. Doesn't matter that Love was there for 3 of those 4 years shooting 35.8% on a huge volume of 3's. The truth is Love took way too many 3-balls and was not efficient with them. And even though Martin has hit them at a good rate, between the two of them (Martin and Love) they've only taken 23.5% of the 3-ball shots Minnesota has taken over the last 4 seasons. Minnesota surrounded Rubio and Love with the worst 3-point shooters in the league. Rubio's 3-ball or lack of 3-ball doesn't change that fact. Don't know how much clearer I can make this to understand. ====================================== As for Memphis, they shot 1487/4349 for 34.2% from the 3-point line over the same past 4 seasons, good for 5th worst in the league over that time frame. Tony Allen was responsible for approximately 2.5% of those numbers. If you take Tony Allen out of the equation completely, Memphis 3-point shooting percentages barely move to 34.37%. If you make Allen a 40% 3-point shooter it elevates MEM as a team up to 34.5%, good for 6th worse in the league instead of the actual 5th worst in the league with Tony Allen. ============================================== Now, you could make the case that Tony Allen hurts Memphis' floor spacing and thereby he actually hurts the offense more than just a miniscule couple tenths of a percent in 3-point shooting percentage. And I would agree with that. BECAUSE Tony Allen can neither shoot nor can he create for others. Nor can he put the ball on the deck and beat his man individually at a very efficient rate. Tony Allen is truly one-dimensional offensively. He can finish if he catches the ball at the rim. That's it. He can't shoot. And he can't handle. He can't distribute. He can't create. All he can do is catch and throw it down or lay it in. In fact, this is my same argument I have made repeatedly about Terrence. Except with one more caveat. Terrence can't defend his position either. Terrence is basically one-dimensional offensively with the finishes over inferior size, length, and athleticism, but that even gets watered down when he plays against the big boys. And Terrence gives it all back on the defensive end. He's not a plus defender. =============================================== But Rubio is not one-dimensional like either of those cases. Rubio is a great defender and a great creator and a great distributor and a great free throw shooter. Rubio has multiple great skill sets. Allen has one great skill set and his next greatest skill set (finishing) is probably the most common great skill set in the league. ============================================== But in both Memphis' and Minnesota's case, they are still 2 of the 5 worst 3-point shooting teams in the league even if you replaced Allen and Rubio with 40% 3-point shooters. ============================================= Rubio will average double-digit assists and over 2 steals a game when he finally gets on a team that has good 3&D players on it. Look up how many guys in the history of the league have averaged double-digit assists with 2+ steals, and 5+rebounds. That's a very short list of hall-of-famers there. And that's Rubio's game. And I'm not always going to spell out for the board when I'm talking from opinion or from a bit of insider information I've run across either. Just like you don't. Nor does Clutch. I have never proclaimed insider status. I have been very clear that I have 3 sources now whom are very close to insiders that share information with me. One source is a close friend with an agent and the other 2 sources have connections with a couple front offices. But none of them are in a front office. From time to time they share info with me. That doesn't mean everything they share with me is fact. As you well know, front offices intentionally put garbage out there to throw off all the insider connections. So when you hear "information" you have to remember that it has to be filtered into the realm of common sense and matched up with other facts that you know to be true. And even then, not all the time will you be able to tell fact from fiction. I'm sure you know all about that from your own connections. Although you've never officially proclaimed "insider" status I suspect that you (and Clutch) have your own loop of contacts that undoubtedly provide you with a lot of info that you can't even post here. And I'm sure some of that info trickles onto this board, many times without notice that its coming from a good source because that's just how things have to be for you to continue to receive legit information. I'm convinced of that because I have read several of Clutch's surmising in his articles and they line up with things I've heard. I wouldn't even be surprised if some of the stuff he and I hear comes from the same source. Sometimes I post in the same way. Sometimes I do know things but I can't state I've heard it or I know it. Only thing I can say is it's this way or that way. And then those things change. The NBA is always on the move. Front offices are always on the move. Things change with the wind. So what may be true one day isn't necessarily true a week later. All that said, I agree. Let's talk basketball. I understand that concern about Allen and Terrence. I've got that same concern about them. But it doesn't matter if the defense cheats off Rubio. He goes right into them and through them like water. And the reason why teams meet Rubio out high instead of fading off him......is because if they don't meet him out high he'll throw the ball right over their noggins to the perfect spot for his bigs and cutters to throw it down at the rim. He's been in the league 4 years now and they don't fade off him up top. They face guard him at the 3-point line. Why would they do that if he's so terrible from 3?? Well, it's simple. They know he ain't gonna take that low percentage 3. They know he's gonna thread the needle on them. Now....defenders do go under picks and give him the wide open 18 footers. But he only takes about a tenth of what they give him when they do that. The rest of the time, he collects himself, changes direction, and then the defenders have to collapse on him again because he's going at the rim. Rubio is one of those rare breed of players like Jason Kidd and Magic Johnson where their shooting percentages just don't matter very much. He's that good of a playmaker/distributor. If you would talk basketball instead of focusing on who is saying what it wouldn't matter. .....and what happens if you take Minnesota's 2-point shooting percentage from 7th worst to 10th best???? #'s work. Rubio has the ability to average double-digit assists, 2 steals, and 5 rebounds on a team of good shooters. Johnson is a quality defender. I'm okay with moving him out if he isn't showing drastic improvement in his shot as long as we retain KJ. BTW, Johnson, McDaniels, and Capela are all working out together at TC. All KJ needs to do is firm up his jumper. He's ready to be a difference-maker next season. I want to see him at the 1 with Harden when we go up against guys like Westbrook, etc. I am convinced McDaniels can defend 1's. And if he gets his spot-up jumper going he could be a killer when bracketed with Ariza around Harden. Johnson may have the ability to guard Curry. But McDaniels definitely does. McDaniels proved it in a large segment of minutes playing for Philly. Johnson didn't get enough minutes to really prove anything. He did look good defensively in his limited minutes. But McDaniels got major burn in Philly and proved himself quickly. Wow. So trading Ariza is a possibility? Wonder if there's really a chance or if it's one of those chances. Speaking of insurance costs, Canaan was pick #34 and we traded I believe it was pick #37 in this year's draft for McDaniels. But there's also an opportunity cost here that you're not discussing. That is the opportunity to keep McDaniels around on a cheap 1-year or 2-year deal and see what his upside becomes. We did not get the opportunity to see what McDaniels could bring to this team this past season. And that's a cost you can't bake in. Wouldn't it be a shame if we signed Llull and then didn't have the ability to match some piddling 2 year/$3 million offer for McDaniels because we were over the cap and didn't have our MLE left? Or wouldn't it be a shame to sign Llull and then to match some 2 year/$3 million offer sheet we'd have to release Kostas and Pablo and give up Birds rights to Brewer and one of Bev/Smith??? Because that's what it would take to match some little 2-year $3 million offer if we've signed Llull to the MLE. That means your cost of insurance was two high second round picks plus the opportunity cost of taking a look at McDaniel's upside OR it would be 2 second round picks plus the trade flexibility of Kostas' and Pablo's non-guaranteed deals plus Birds rights to Brewer (Brewer cost us 2 second rounders too) plus either Birds rights to Bev or non-Birds rights to Smoove (in the case of keeping McDaniels). Moving forward from the cost of insurance last season it makes more sense to look at how to maximize the value of the assets we currently own or control through draft or Birds rights. McDaniels is an asset because he has potential and he outplayed his draft position in his rookie season. If McDaniels were put into this year's draft based on what he did last season he'd most likely be drafted somewhere between 10-20. Because he's proven he can be a plus defender at the NBA level already. I'd definitely take him over RHJ and RJ Hunter for instance. And personally I'd take him over Sam Dekkar and Kelly Oubre as well. (But that's some of my bias probably. Oubre does have high potential and is a similar type of athlete to McDaniels and younger.) I would think Morey values McDaniels as worth at least a high second round pick at the minimum. So, I can't see any reasonable way that McDaniels signed to a reasonable, modest 1-year or 2-year contract, paying him somewhere in the neighborhood of what a #20 pick in this current draft or last year's draft would significantly lower his asset value. What would lower his asset value is if he stinks it up this fall in training camp, or he gets injured or runs into some off-court trouble during the summer or fall leading into next season. On the other side of the asset ledger, Ariza's asset value will probably never be higher and indeed Ariza's asset value could become negative in a hurry if he suffers an injury or otherwise underperforms this upcoming season. Heading into the mother-lode of all free agent summers most teams will be super reluctant to take on Ariza's contract after this upcoming season since they will most likely want as much cap space as possible to chase multiple max free agents that are going to pile up at the free agent door come June 2016. So, if there were a deal that could be done like say....Ariza and #18 for #8 and the non-guaranteed deal of Anthony Tolliver, then we could squeeze some of those younger, higher value assets and draft picks into the pipe along with keeping more Birds rights on valuable guys like Smith and Brewer while simultaneously clearing out cap space for our own 2016 free agency plans. It would probably be a lot easier to aggregate a player like Terrence Jones and move out his salary with #18 and Trevor Ariza to a team like Detroit who is on the verge of losing Greg Monroe will have the cap space to take in $11 million of salary while sending back a small non-guaranteed deal of Tolliver or nothing at all other than the pick. All these reason are why I said I expected Ariza to turn into a trade chip when we signed him last summer. Over the long term he hurts our roster flexibility and he's at the age where he's maxed out his skills and more likely than not to be decreasing in positive impact. That's not a strike against him. He was great here last year. We squeezed every ounce of positive play out of him. But looking forward at the bigger picture it makes a lot of sense to move him out now before it becomes a problem to move him out and costs us more assets rather than acquiring assets. And as good as Ariza is...he's replaceable. And here we go. Thibs firing only adds fuel to this fire. What a shocker! Yeah. I've come off Walden. He hasn't shown anything over the last couple months in workouts that stands out. Looks like he was just an efficient college model guard. There's more to it than just Rose. It's money and the whole coaching thing as well. Butler was one of the guys I kept saying would be more likely to want to sign a short term 2-year deal with an opt-out after next season so he could maximize his earnings. If Butler wants out of Chicago he has no reason to sign a 5-year offer. He'll sign the qualifying offer and walk next summer. And he'll make the same amount of money over 5 years as he would have signing that big 5-year deal this year. And that's the rub. He's already proven he'll walk away from guaranteed dollars. If he's willing to take the risk (and he's already proven he has) then he has no incentive to sign the 5-year deal if he wants to go to another situation. I think ideally Butler wants a 1+1 deal so he can control his destiny and force the Bulls to trade him if he wants out next year. He signs a 1+1 and his Birds rights are still there when he is traded. It's a straight power play. The players union, including Michelle Roberts, Lebron James (who is going to re-up on a 1+1 deal), and Chris Paul are all encouraging this kind of power play. Ok guys. Here you go. I was wrong. I honestly believed that the Cavs had solved the riddle and would adjust with Lebron in the post against Draymond and Lee. It never happened. I thought Blatt would continue to evolve and adjust and realize that the primary advantage would be to get the ball to Lebron in the post against Draymond. Instead the Cleveland D never rared it's head again. Delly never looked the same after game 3. Kerr adjusted and benched Bogut in favor of Draymond and iggy. And no more adjustments ever came from Cleveland. They should have but they didn't. I was wrong. Who is the best shooter in the draft? Nope. Not Booker. Nope. Not Hunter. Naw, not Harvey. Guess again...... Bang. Mario Hezonja is the best shooter in this draft. And it's not really close. Yes, Kaminsky is definitely a nice shooter, especially for a big man. Booker is a nice shooter. Harvey, yep good. Winslow is average and improving. But the best shooter in this draft is Mario Hezonja. 6'8" and he can nail it from 35 feet like it's a free throw. Don't know what kind of player we can sign. I wasn't really thinking about signing another player. I was thinking about keeping everything we had besides Ariza, and adding a young potential star on a rookie contract (Hezonja or Winslow) and then being able to trade Kostas/Pablo and perhaps other contracts for another player on an expiring contract. I suspect most of this year's superstar players are going to re-sign with their current teams on 1+1 contracts and then they're going to attempt to force trades at the deadline if they want to move on. Or else just go back into the free agent pool next summer. So, the idea was put ourselves in a position to have max cap space and then some next summer but also to have the flexibility to execute trades with non-guaranteeds/expirings this year to make our team championship competitive if one of those superstars forced a trade and wanted to come here this year. So, I suggested an Ariza/18 trade for #8 then using #8 to draft Winslow or Hezonja. This would clear out Ariza from the 2016 cap and replace him with a youngster making a little over $3 million that is definitely a tradeable asset if we needed to clear cap. Not to mention you are possibly picking up a blossoming star player. This would also allow us to keep Brewer, Bev, and Smith on cap holds and would only require us to drop Kostas to have enough cap space to sign both Llull ($5.4 million) and KJ McDaniels ($2 million) and still have the Room MLE for use during the season. We could then re-sign both Bev and Brewer to bloated 1 year deals with the second season a non-guaranteed team option. We could conceivably pay Bev and Brewer big money to sign a short-term deal, say $8 million for 1 year for Brewer with a second season team option non-guaranteed plus perhaps $6-8 million for Bev on a 1 year deal with a team option. Those contracts along with Jones/Dorsey could be used to send out for a guy like Joe Johnson at the deadline. Just one idea allowing for Llull to be paid a front-end loaded contract under the cap with decreasing salaries or perhaps even some non-guaranteed salary in 2016 and 2017 while simultaneously creating a couple non-guaranteed/expirings that we could use to pick up another big player or two.
Yes, I understand that. And that's part of why I don't think we'll trade him. The trade I mentioned is highly risky. Because the pick (Hezonja or Winslow or whoever) could bust. I just don't think Morey is willing to gamble that much. I happen to believe Hezonja is going to be a star very quickly in the NBA. And I also believe it's going to take 4 superstars to compete against teams like Cleveland and GS over the next few years. Cleveland lost these Finals but they were missing 2 of their top 3 players, 2 superstars. So you have to rationalize that if Kyrie and Love were healthy Cleveland would have probably pulled this thing out. And GS...well, they're not going anywhere. I don't believe that even with Bev and DMo we could've beat them. I think we need 2 more great players. Or at least 1 more great player with DMo continuing to improve and become the 4th great player. And I don't believe that Ariza's skill set is so irreplaceable. Washington sure didn't skip a beat by trading him away, did they? He's a good player but a role player. A role player who is 30 years old and who has been in the league since he was a teenager. A lot of miles piling up on him. And we need a second playmaker on the floor with Harden. He's not it. It'd probably be easier to upgrade Ariza and go with a true 3&D player at the point then it would be to trade for or pay a point guard to be the secondary playmaker. Defense at the point is crucial for our defensive (and subsequently offensive) success. While Ariza did outstanding for us when we asked him to defend points, he is not capable of doing that for a season or even for an entire playoff series against points like Curry and Kyrie. It's going to take a younger, even more agile, quicker defender than Ariza to adequately defend those guys. And as Ariza ages this will become more noticeable. And that's not discussing the cap implications of Ariza's deal for next summer. Hence my trade suggestion. But I don't believe it will happen.
If Howard, as I suspect opts out of the final year of his contract for the free agent bonanza in the summer of 2016, this coming season may be the Rockets best chance to actually win a title. Trading Ariza in for a mid-lottery rookie would certainly not further the goal of bringing home a 'ship.
That does not happen often, most drafts do not even produce one, and is completely unpredictable unless there is a LBJ or AD in the draft.
Danny (reportedly) loves IT. Danny has a gabillyun draft picks stockpiled, almost (if not quite) Hinkie-esque. Your trade ain't happenin'.
What I heard about Danny was that he loved IT's contract as an asset. Simmons and Lowe were talking about it around when the trade happened and word was they got him for so cheap that they had to take and eventually flip him for a better deal. I don't disagree though. Ainge isn't fun to deal with and would probably ask more than we're will to give since they gave up a first rounder to get him.
Yes, it's somewhat high risk. But the rest of the possibilities with trading Ariza's $8 million deal for a rookie making $3 million is we would then have the option to drop under the cap and sign a guy or guys outright. If we traded Ariza, along with say, Jones, #18, Dorsey, and $2 million for #8 that would cut our cap down to $57.65 million while still retaining cap holds on Bev, Smith, and McDaniels. To make it even better drop Kostas and keep Brewer's cap hold and we're at $59 million. Now you're set to really play hard ball with Llull. Instead of offering him the MLE at 3-17, you can basically offer him 2-16 with the second season a non-guaranteed team option. This would be a much preferable deal to Llull. It's short term so he can go back to Real if he doesn't want the NBA. He gets $8 million up front plus the buyout dollars so he makes a nice net chunk of change for coming over. And if he plays his butt off he gets another $8+ million in season 2. But if he doesn't perform he can view it as the NBA not for him and go back to Real...probably at a higher salary over there. But Morey can present that offer in a take-it or leave-it fashion so that Llull can't use it to negotiate a pay raise with Real. The offer is gone when Morey leaves the room. If Llull signs then we've won. We've still got our cap holds on Smith, Brewer, Bev, and McDaniels. We could have just enough wiggle room in this scenario to bring McDaniels salary up to around $1.3 million from cap space. You then can deal with Brewer and Bev from a position of strength, offering them similar bloated first year deals with the second seasons being non-guaranteed. If they take it, they're future trade chips. If they don't take it, you can reclaim around another $8.5 million of cap space to go after other players. Perhaps you give a chunk of it to Smoove to get him to stay and sign cheap next summer. Perhaps you see what else unfolds on the free agent market. Perhaps you just keep Kostas on the books for a future trade and still have another $3.8 million to give Smith or another player. And then you still have the room MLE at your disposal for later during the season. Trading Ariza simply opens up a myriad of options for us to go in a number of different directions with the cap while retaining key youngsters and assets on the books such as McDaniels, Beverley, and a nice, high draft pick.
