Expiring Contracts: Who are the possible trade targets?

Okay. This might be the reason that the Rockets haven't re-signed Barry yet. He's looking for a standard raise, but the Rox are hovering right near the threshold and don't want to go too far into LT territory. I bet that they compromise by giving him a 2 year deal at the minimum. That will be about 2.4 mill over two years. Sounds like his camp is expecting a one year deal anyway. He can play this one year, get cut next year and make about the same amount of money. The Rockets would save 2 mill in tax, so it works out on their side.

 

Good idea. We'll have to see exactly how the CBA works on these minimum contracts.

 

I expect either they are no part of the calculation, or all minimum players count the same (the true NBA min/1st year player, was like 380K, guessing like 500K now)

 

Pietrus would be such a perfect fit here it's not even funny.

I know it's a pipe dream, but I'd take on Fisher or Foyle if it meant bringing in Pietrus.

 

Man, I don't know where do you get your fascination with miles.

Let's see...

Better defender? Nope. He averages less blocks and steals than Wallace.
Better passer? Nope, same assists, and more turnovers in less minutes.
Better shooter? Just slightly.
Rebounds? Wallace grabs more.

And Miles has character issues, while Wallace has none.

As someone else has said, if Wallace "goes Bobby Simmons on us" and develops a shot, he could even become a superstar.

Wallace:

PPG 11.1
RPG 5.5
APG 2.0
SPG 1.67
BPG 1.30
FG% .449
FT% .661
3P% .274
TO 2.27
MPG 30.7

Miles:

PPG 12.8
RPG 4.7
APG 2.0
SPG 1.19
BPG 1.24
FG% .482
FT% .600
3P% .348
TO 2.49
MPG 27.0

 

Jalen Rose would definately be my target. I don't know about JVG.

The risk is time limited. The potential payoff is a playoff game-breaker.

With Tmac and Rose on the wings, Yao and Swift down low, teams could not stop a Rocket attack. We'd have two tall wings for post feeds, 4 good options for ball movement to attack the defense. Add in Mike James for extra scoring punch. We also get pretty good rebounding.

That's me though. I like being able to attack and feed the post from the wings. JVG seems to prefer high picks from his 7'6 center. Thank God we have Tmac. It'd be nice to have enough power to really spread the defense and eliminate Yao chasing out top.

 

After reading about the luxury tax threshold and the Rockets current position, and considering Yao will soon be maxed, I'm feeling like it is probable all our expiring contracts will be allowed to expire without a trade. Maybe we'd take one guy for $4 or so million, but that's it.

 

Yes, Wallace could develop a shot at some point in his career I suppose. And he could develop into a decent defender and ball handler. If you are going to use blocks and steals stats as the definition of a good defensive player, then I suppose Wallace is the better defender. I like statistics but they don't tell the whole story. I watch games. If you had to defend any perimeter player in this league one on one, and you had to choose between Miles and Wallace defending him, who would you choose? I'm sure you'd prefer Wallace. I prefer Miles. I don't think Wallace is a good perimeter defender. Let's be more specific. If you had to defend Ginobili one on one, would you prefer Wallace or Miles? How about Josh Howard? Would you want Wallace or Miles on him? How about Kobe Bryant? Wallace or Miles? How about Ron Artest? Wallace or Miles? Corey Maggette? Ray Allen/Rashard Lewis? Lebron? Sorry, I'll take Miles on all those guys. He may not stop them but I think he has a better chance to stop them and to hastle them. For that matter, I'd take Patterson over Wallace on all those guys too. Look, we're trying to matchup at the 2/3 positions with McGrady and ????? on the opposing 2/3s. Against SA, I'd rather have McGrady and Miles out there on Gino and Bowen and Barry then McGrady and Wallace. Remember also, part of good defense is forcing the other team to have to defend you. How is SA going to defend with Bowen and Gino against TMac and Miles. We'll be going post up city on them. Get it? You can't post up Wallace.

Of course, Wallace could turn all that around and become a very good defender, and a very good shooter, and a better ball handler.

Of course, Miles could change his spots under Van Gundy like Wallace did under Larry Brown, and he's already got the basketball skills.

To me, after a player has been in this league 3 years, it is easier for them to change their attitude than it is for them to develop basketball skill.

Wallace could not crack the rotation on a Sacramento Kings team that emphasized passing and cutting. Why do you think that is?

I may be enamored with Miles. But really, I'm just looking at possibilities. Our chances of doing a S&T with DS involve the Portland Trailblazers. If we could pull off a deal, netting us DS and Patterson/Miles, then I think it is a better deal than getting Wallace to sign for LLE and then still looking around for a true point. In the Portland deal, we get both. Now, if we could get DS to sign for the lle, then maybe it may be worth the risk if Wallace would come here for league minimum. But just getting Wallace for league min and then watching DS walk to Memphis means we are stuck with a backcourt that now contains Wallace, Wesley, Sura, James, and a rookie. It means last year's backcourt without Jon Barry and with 2 more added players who have not proven they can be effective (Wallace, Head). I'm not down on Head, I think he's going to help us at some point. But why go into the season that way. Wallace is just taking up another roster spot.......and he's still got to prove that he can play.

If Wallace can play, why aren't the other GMs in the league going after him? There's a shortage of good swingmen this year and they are getting the big dollars. But Wallace hasn't even been mentioned. He's not even on the radar screen of most teams. Even his own team for whom he toiled last year is only throwing out the standard one year offer. What does that tell you?

I want a swingman who will and can defend, and can cause mismatches on the offensive end for our opponents and who can do more than shoot the dunk shot on the fast break. It doesn't have to be Miles. I'd take Pietrus too. I think MoPete would also be a fit. Patterson would be a fit on the defensive end, but he doesn't bring us as much on the offensive end. I would consider him though because he is a very good defender, rugged rebounder, and strong inside. To me, Wallace fits none of that..........................................yet.

 

Well, I could direct you to their efficiency ratings at 82games.com, but since you don't believe in stats, forget that idea.

If we are talking about opportunities a player has to prove their worth, Miles has had plenty so far. He had plenty of minutes with the Clippers, with the Cavs, and with the Blazers. And he never managed to solidify his role as a starter with ANY of them. Now, what that tells you?

Answering your question, Wallace played behind Peja, Christie and Bobby Jackson in Sac town. How the HECK did you expect him to become a major contribuitor in a team that deep at such a young age?

And if we are going to use your own argument, what can be said about Jermaine O'Neal? Was he worthless because he couldn't crack Portland's rotation? Yeah, sure. We all know the answer to that one.

Still has to prove that he can play? You've gota be kidding me. The man was 9th in steals per game last year and had plenty of good games and double doubles, on a crappy franchise where no one demands a freakin double team. I'm sure that Miles had plenty more opportunities playing with the likes o Stoudamire, Randolph and Shareef.

Heck, if we can get Miles with Stoudamire, I'm fine with that. I just don't see it happening. Miles hasn't even been mentioned in any trade rumours so far. And I have my own concerns regarding stoudamire himself. Height, age, character issues... plenty of them. Patterson? You've gotta be kidding me. The Kobe stopper episode should tell you something about his defensive prowess.

To say that Wallace would be only taking up a roster spot while he could at the very least backup the 2 and 3, while we know that even if we don't trade, Wesley and James won't be here next year, borders on insanity if you ask me.

 

m-cable put it well. Trade (an) expiring contract(s) and a pick for Gerald Wallace; Charlotte preserves cap space and gets another pick (Bernie not wanting to field a winning team for awhile, it seems).

Wallace runs the floor well and plays solid D. He's young. What's not to like about him on the Rockets?

 

This might sound radical, as he is about to be cut by Dallas, but perhaps we should explore trading for Michael Finley. With Joe Johnson going to Atlanta, I have no doubt that if set free, Finley would end up in Phoenix. The Rockets would have no chance of signing him. Not only would he be starting on a WCF team next to his buddy Nash, they could offer the MLE, were all the Rockets have is the LLE. Given this, perhaps Cuban would begrudingly rather see Finley go to Houston, a team it beat, than to Phoenix, a team it lost to in the playoffs. And if we were to save him $50 million in the process, I'm guessing he would jump on it.

We could offer our expiring contracts, and still have a contract left over to cut under amnesty, giving us room to re-sign Deke and Barry. Dallas would have to absorb equivalent value in contracts this year, but would free up $17 million the next two years which they would have been paying Finley. Also, they could then use their amnesty cut on Tariq Abdul-Wahad, who is giving them nothing, and save $15 million in luxury tax over the next two years. That adds up to $50 million in savings over cutting Finley outright.

We'd be overpaying Finley, but only for two years, considering we would have paid salary this year to the worthless cap fodder we send Dallas' way. At 32, Finley could be, for the next three years, the productive 6'7" SG that can play defense and shoot 3s at a better than 40% clip that would elevate us to contender status. And of course, we would keep him from going to a competitor in Phoenix.

 

Thanos,

Maybe I don't understand the 82 games stats as well as you do. When I look at them I see Miles as a much better shooter, passer, and ball handler than Wallace with Wallace a slightly better FT shooter (although both are poor) and slightly more adept at drawing fouls (since he can't shoot and has to always take it to the rack.......not necessarily a bad thing).

So, we trade an expiring and a pick for him. Now what we gonna do about our PG, just run with what we got?

 

All this Miles and Wallace talk sounds all good. But Miles comes with a almost a $42 million baggage over 5 years. Sounds a little steep to me and reminds me of a mo tay contract. I don't think the rox would want that risk on Miles, with issues. Wallace may come in alot cheaper than a D.Miles, IMO. With many players getting over paid, starting at 3-4 mill for wallace is a good deal as long has he produces the same or better than last season.

Getting another big solid defender at the 2-3 will help out Tmac alot not having to defend the best player on the opposing team. Maybe he can save himself for the post season.

 

More interesting tidbits on the amnesty clause:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2121672&num=2

NEXT UP: SOME "AMNESTY CLAUSE" FINE PRINT

Allan Houston and Michael Finley haven't said much about their futures since their names surfaced as the most likely former All-Stars to be waived via the new "amnesty clause", the onetime opportunity between Tuesday and Aug. 15 for teams to release a player without paying luxury tax on the rest of his contract.

The relative silence makes it tough to forecast exactly what they'll be looking for as free agents -- besides the chance to join a championship contender -- after their expected releases.

Which makes it tougher still to gauge how the "spread provision" in both players' contracts will affect their choices.

Houston and Finley, according to NBA front-office sources, both possess considerable spread provisions in their contracts that would result in drawn-out payment schedules from the Knicks and Mavericks after being let go.

In Finley's case, specifically, sources say the $51-plus million he's owed by Dallas over the next three seasons would be paid in annual increments of less than $5 million if he's waived by the Aug. 15 amnesty deadline. Houston's contract apparently includes a similar spread provision.

Translation?

Signing with a new team for a minimum contract in the sub-$2 million area, as Phoenix hopes to do with Finley, might not be so comfortable for either player. The fact that Finley wouldn't be able to collect his $51-plus million from the Mavs as originally scheduled over the next three seasons gives hope to a team like the Denver Nuggets, who are prepared to offer Finley their full $5 million mid-level exception.

Another factor is the "set-off provision" that was restored to the amnesty clause in the final stages of collective bargaining. The set-off provision returns a percentage of what a player makes from his new team to the team paying off his terminated contract.

In the new deal, the union fought to specifically word the amnesty clause to say that the set-off provision doesn't apply. That would have enabled players such as Houston and Finley to double-dip by collecting the full balance of their old contracts in addition to the payments from their new deals. But the league wouldn't give in, insisting that a chunk of an amnesty player's new earnings go back to the original team.

This means that money probably will matter to amnesty players who possess a long-term payout provision in their contract. The assumption that Finley can earn up to $21 million next season -- a full $16 million from the Mavs and $5 million from a team like Denver offering the full mid-level -- is a fallacy. To go back to the Suns, who drafted him in 1995, Finley might be looking at a pay cut of Karl Malone-to-the-Lakers proportions, even though he would eventually receive every cent Dallas owes him.