But that would literally be the only way to get a significant player. And we could make that work ($21M+ starting salary) for any player with Ariza, Papa, and Dorsey in the offseason anyway because Ariza will fetch an asset and Papa and Dorsey will be expiring with Papa not even guaranteed. So the S&T team would almost 100% prefer those 3 and picks to Johnson and picks. The only benefit to Johnson is if you think he is the last piece to the puzzle over a combination of Ariza and Terry.
Not true. Johnson has a much larger contract. Can take back way more salary than Ariza, Papa, and Dorsey. And he's by far the best player of all those guys. A package of him and the pick would be tremendous value to the right team(s). And I almost failed to mention the trade value he would have at the deadline for a playoff contender looking to shake things up again. So a team rebuilding and losing their superstar could dump salary along with their superstar, pick up Joe Johnson and the Pels pick, and then flip Joe Johnson again at the deadline for another asset.
Ummm...it is true. In a S&T, we could only take back the one player. No one will have a starting salary close to Johnson's $24.8M. No one will likely have a starting salary over $21M, which we could easily offer with just those 3 and still have a guy like Jones whose salary could add enough to equal Johnson's. Love and Aldridge won't even get over $21M in starting salary in a S&T, unless the cap shoots over $70m. Johnson is certainly not "by far" the best player compared to Ariza. The Pels pick would already be used on a player by next year's trade deadline, so that makes trading that player much, much harder. That is especially true when he wouldn't be logging any minutes in Houston.
Not true. Doesn't matter. They can add salaries. Not a single NBA GM would agree with you on this. The key time of the offseason is the draft and free agency. A lot of trades are done at that time or agreed to at that time to be executed after the July moratorium. Bottom line: Unless JJ blows out a knee or an Achilles he will have great trade value when combined with the Pels pick. If he can be acquired with expirings and a couple of our youngsters, his contract fits our timeline. Even if we don't trade him again in the summer, he fits the team through the 2016 season and then allows us our free cap space to run for Durant or whomever else is available in that free agent market. And he's an upgrade to Ariza now.
Wouldn't trade. Instead of trading all the time, we need to build chemistry. That's what's gonna when a title. We got the pieces, just gotta put the puzzle together now.
and also....leave Dragic where he is. Any player can go cold at any time, including Dragic. Players tend to relax once they start getting paid (ala Dwight) We have a better Dragic in Canaan for way cheaper. Give him time to develop.
Have ya'll ever heard of the theory of diminishing marginal utility? If we get one more "big name" on this team, prepare for a January Cavaliers fiasco....
1. We can have max cap space in 2016 whether we trade for and hold Johnson or hold onto Ariza, so this potential trade does not affect that in the slightest. 2. Plenty of people (and most definitely GMs) disagree with you PLENTY of the time about players and especially about transactions. 3. Aldridge and Love are the only players who the Joe Johnson contract even enters into the discussion for being advantageous this summer. Are either likely to leave their teams? Absolutely not. Even less likely for Houston. Both teams are in contend now mode. And what bad contracts would Portland and Cleveland be dying to unload along with them? Portland has 0. Cleveland has JR Smith, but that is only $6.4M and Joe Johnson is exactly the player they do not need. Ariza (and Terry and Papa or Shved & Jones, plus picks) for Johnson just does not make any sense. Sorry.
You can't trade the Pels pick in sign and trade deal. That pick is made in June and then that player selected can't be traded until August and desirable free agents aren't waiting until August for a sign and trade deal to go through. Plus once that pick is made, it loses the vast majority of its value. This doesn't even get into the fact that Ariza has 3 years left on his deal in which he will be on the wrong side of 30. He's an ideal role player on a contending team but to a lottery team he is only worth the young assets you want to attach to him unless taking an equally bad or worse contract in return. Why would you want to do that?
That's very highfalutin' of you. Your reasoning only makes sense if we actually had multiple superstar players. "Too much of a good thing" does not apply to the likes of Josh Smith, Dwight Howard or Trevor Ariza. You can go wrong by having no depth behind your stars (Cleveland, OKC in years past) but that's not an economic theory you blowhard!
Already been done before. You can leave pick unsigned and trade his rights or you can sign him and use him in trade after 60 days.
honestly i think we value him more than other teams. great defense, low fg%, and a decent salary arent attractive enough to get us something in return. although, my personal belief is brewer would do fine as a replacement in case we get a hella deal
The point was Johnsons contact doesn't hurt our 2016 cap. We'll just have to disagree with whata rebuilding team would want more buti can't imagine a single scenario where Ariza and the $23+ million he is owed plus Kostas and shved are worth more to a rebuilding team than Joe Johnson and the $23 million he is owed.
The scenario is that the team could pay Ariza $8.2M and not pay the other two anything. Plus they could easily trade Ariza for an expiring and more picks. Trading Johnson for expirings would be very difficult. It would save the acquiring team millions and millions of dollars and give them much, much more flexibility. I can't see any scenario where a rebuilding team would prefer Joe Johnson's contract for 1 year over (essentially) just Ariza.
NO..Ariza is more important than alot think.Hes an anchor defensively.The guy gets a crazy amount of steals and has already been part of a championship team.We need a dragic and I'm gonna keep saying it till we get em back!
Ariza could easily be traded to a contender for an expiring and pick(s) or young players to help a rebuilding team. All a team would need is a contract or contracts adding up to $5.4M to acquire him. Teams have young players or small contracts like that all over the league. Essentially any team (save the Rockets in your Joe Johnson scenario) would be able to work something. Joe Johnson's contract would be nearly impossible to find a trade partner for AND get anything of value without taking on huge salary obligations for a rebuilding team.
The term right deal is a very vague term. Something like a slightly inferior player + a draft pick for Ariza could be considered the right deal. Allowing a team to absorb him into a TPE in exchange for a draft pick could be considered the right deal. Including him in a package for a declining big name like Joe Johnson could be considered the right deal. It could mean a lot of things. Factoring in chemistry changes everything. Yeah, the professional element is part of the reason why I'd be reluctant to deal Ariza (he's demonstrated his loyalty and played well on the court; done exactly what he's been asked to do unlike Brooks who stunk both times we dealt him), but chemistry is the main thing I'm concerned about here. For me, personally, to deal Ariza it would have to be for a monster upgrade. Something that undoubtedly justifies the risk of dealing a player that's proven to be a championship level role player and has been one of our main workhorses up until this point.
