<b>aelliott & GATER</b> We have been throwing wet blankets on the KG talk, then somebody comes along and throws fuel on the fire. More work ahead of us. <b>oeilpere</b> Undoubtedly McHale, KG etc are in a bad spot.........but would Minnesota take the best deal possible or make a bad deal and send Kevin to his team of choice? The Bucks and Bulls wouldn't put superior offers on the table compared to what the Rockets could do? Mango
I don't know, but. . . a key to oily's garnett speculation may be what he mentioned about "if garnett wants to come here. . ." aelliott, mango: there may be a bunch of teams that can offer MIN a better deal. but would garnett agree to those deals? I don't know, but perhaps garnett has trade veto rights? does that even exist in basketball? I can see why garnett would perhaps not want to play in milwaukee, portland, etc. I think one crucial aspect to any hopes of garnett becoming a Rocket is garnett wanting to be a Rocket. him wanting that really badly may be the wild card. if he has double chubbies for francis and rudy, maybe that's the key. I don't think there's any way the Rockets get him if he isn't really pumped about the idea. and I'd still love to hear whether he'd have the flexibility to renegotiate his contract if he really wanted to. AND I KNOW THAT HE WOULDN'T WANT TO! I just want to know if he COULD if he DID want to. anyone? anyone? bueller?
I just can't see us assembling a deal that doesn't leave us with like 8 players on the roster. Our depth was destroyed last year...it'd be even worse. Is a team built of Francis Garnett good enough? Is it better than Francis, Mobley, Griffin, Ming? Or Francis, Mobley, Griffin, whatever you could get for Ming (at least Odom/#8)? I almost see the same problem of a Francis-Garnett tandem of a Francis-McDyess one: A playoff team no doubt, but is it anything more? KG had a supporting cast of Terrell Brandon and Wally Scuz a couple years ago. Assume you trade Mobley and Griffin-will KG have anyone else? KG would literally eat more than half the cap-who'd be left to play center? shooting guard? the other forward? As opie said-slim to none.
Honestly...yes, I think so. If you follow with the right supporting cast, definitely. Look at the Lakers...they've got one freak at center and a damned good shooting guard. We would have a freak at 4/3 and a damned good point guard. The trick would be assembling that cast with KG's salary, but I think it could be done. However, I'm a huge KG fan. He's the one player I start any roster with when I'm king of the world and I get my way.
I completely agree. look at Pierce and Walker. O'Neal and Bryant. whoever thinks that you have to have 5 great players to win a championship is wrong. hell, look at Drexler and Olajuwon. Francis and Garnett would not win the title next year. there is not a reasonable scenario in which the Rockets would win the title next year. so yes, I think it's okay to gut the team for Garnett. then, it's simply a matter of putting the right players to fit the right roles around Franchise and KG. with those two, you've got your freakishly talented twosome. round up a bunch of kenny smiths and will perdues and rick foxes and nate mcmillans, and you're on your way. one magnificent inside-outside combo is worth 12 outside-outside-outside-outside combos.
Minnesota trades: SG Anthony Peeler C Marc Jackson PF Joe Smith SF Kevin Garnett Minnesota receives: SF Eddie Griffin SF Glen Rice PG Eric Snow PF Derrick Coleman SG Allen Iverson Nesterovic/resign Woods? Coleman/Griffin Szczerbiak/Rice Iverson/Billups Brandon/Snow/Billups Houston trades: SF Eddie Griffin PG Moochie Norris C Kelvin Cato SF Glen Rice PF Maurice Taylor Houston receives: C Marc Jackson SF Kevin Garnett SF Matt Harpring Jackson/Collier Garnett/Thomas Harpring/Morris Mobley/Torres Francis/Tierre? Philadelphia trades: SF Matt Harpring PG Eric Snow PF Derrick Coleman SG Allen Iverson Philadelphia receives: SG Anthony Peeler PF Joe Smith PG Moochie Norris C Kelvin Cato PF Maurice Taylor Mutumbo/Cato/Dalembert Taylor/Smith Draft picks? McKie/Peeler Draft pick?/Claxton All that needs to be sorted out is the picks that Philly gets (many). This trade works under the cap. Philly and Minnesota are both looking to gut. This would benefit all teams severely.
Mango - I'm not as Senior nor as respected as aelliott and you, but I'm in the trenches, too. I don't care if it's a 2 teamer or a six teamer, if the Rockets take on KG's $25M they have to ship $25m out. Since the picks basically don't count in trade $, that means mimimum EG, KT and two of three bad contracts - Cato, Rice, or MoT (plus #1 & #15 and maybe future picks and Cat). Here's your 2002-2003 Rockets - 5) Collier 4) MoT 3) KG / TMo 2) Cat / OT 1) Steve / Mooch Now, how's that sound?
All that needs to be sorted out is the picks that Philly gets. Oh and Gater, They need to send all of those bad contracts out plus the minimum KT and EG if they want 25 mil.
NYKRule - Your trade doesn't work because Matt Harpring is a Qualifying Offer FA and can NOT be included in draft day trades. This is a quirk in the RealGM program that allows you to do it, but it can not be done in real life.
GATER, My oversight is fixed. I have always respected your work on the BBS. Anybody else that I overlooked? Mango
A combo of Claxton and Dalembert could address that, the only thing is that leaves the Sixers with no PGs whatsoever. They'd have to address this with the probable 4 picks they could have from the trade.
I doubt that all three could be eliminated but here's your lineup: 5) Collier 4) KG 3) TMo 2) Cat 1) Steve Is that better?
Those three bad contracts are roughly 22 million combined. I don't know how they would pull off 25 mill without dishing those 3 out.
Mango - I'm sure there are a few other "ultra-realists" lurking about and they'll step up later. Thanks for the compliment. It has taken me two years and I'm finally beginning to grasp the mechanics of the C(ollective)BA. I must have driven aelliott, heypartner and NIKEstrad out of their minds with some of my earlier drivel. For now, I'm trying to work on being less confrontational with my posts. Hey, were all Rockets fans, right?
Gater pretty much summed up my feelings. To get Garnett, we'll have to ship out at least $21.25M in salary. Let's say we're willing to do whatever it takes to get Garnett. Ok, fine, let's include both Mobley and Griffen. That takes up less than $7M in salary. Now, if we're not including Steve (as OP says), then what's left to include? You need $14.25M more in salary, and the pickings are pretty slim once you take Mobley, Griffen and Francis out of the equation. No matter how much upside Minnesota thinks Mobley and Griffen have, I don't see them giving up Garnett AND taking on $14.5M in bad contracts to get those guys and Jay Williams. The only way a Garnett trade makes sense is for Minnesota to deal with a team (or teams) that have cap space or a large salaried player (pre 1997). If we're involved in a 3 way and we get Garnett, then it really doesn't matter who the 3rd team in the deal is. We still have to give away $21.25 in salary and the large percent of that would have to be bad contracts. It just doesn't make sense for us to be included in a deal for Garnett, we bring nothing to the table. As far as where Garnett wants to go it doesn't really matter. He's under contract till 2004 and he can be traded without his consent. Here's Larry Coon's explanation on what theoretically could be done with Garnett's contract (if he was wiling to reduce it) <I>Sometimes players and teams mutually decide to divorce each other. They do this by mutually agreeing that: The team will waive the player; If the player clears waivers, the compensation protection for lack of skill (see question 83 ) will be reduced or eliminated For example, the Celtics did this with Dino Radja prior to the 97-98 season. They mutually agreed to reduce Radja's compensation protection to 50% of its value, then the Celtics waived him. When he cleared waivers he was paid the 50% he was owed, and he was then free to return to Europe. But there's a twist, which needed an arbitrator's ruling during the 99-00 season to resolve. As detailed in question 84 , on January 10 all contracts become guaranteed for the rest of the season. Compensation protection insures the player against loss of salary after being being waived for lack of skill. But if he is waived after January 10, then he doesn't lose his salary, so the compensation protection does not kick in. Even though the team & player can mutually agree to reduce or eliminate the player's compensation protection, he is still owed his full salary if waived after January 10. This was challenged by John Starks during the 99-00 season. Starks had been traded to the Bulls, and wanted to sever ties with the team after January 10. The arbitrator ruled that in the last season of a player's contract, the team and player could choose to eliminate the contract guarantee that kicked in on January 10. Starks and the Bulls where therefore free to agree to a divorce (with no money owed to Starks) as described above. There is one other type of buyout described in the CBA. When a contract contains an option year, a buyout amount for the option year can be written into the contract. The buyout amount may be up to 50% of the salary for the option year. </i> Obviously, the first type doesn't apply here because Minnesota obviously won't waive Garnett. If Garnett had an option year on the end of his deal (I don't believe that he does) and a buyout for that option year was written into the deal, then the TWolves could buy out his final year at up to 50% of the value. Of course, they wouldn't do this either because he would then become a free agent and they would get no compensation for him. So, if the TWolves intend to get some compensation for Garnett, then a buy out doesn't apply. Here's an excerpt Coon's explanation of contract renegotiations: <i>Contracts cannot be renegotiated downward (players can't take a "pay cut" in order to create salary cap room for the team). Contracts cannot be renegotiated to contain fewer seasons. </i> So, basically Garnett's contract will remain as is until 2004.
OK, I ran this by RealGM, and it was accepted. This would piggyback the 3 team blockbuster trade ideas from this morning, adding Minnesota to the equation ... LAC gets Curry, Mobely CHI gets #1 for Ming, #2 for Williams, Thomas HOU gets Garnett MIN gets #8/12, Odom, Fizer, Rice, Taylor, Piatkowski Minnesota gets a 1 year expiring contract on Piatkowski, a 2 year expiring contract with Rice, an upcoming superstar in Odom to replace Garnett, 2 lottery draft picks, depth, and cap relief. Minnesota would probably turn right around, and make a deal with Cleveland to give them the draft picks, someone like Fizer to get Andre Miller... perhaps... they'd turn the situation into getting cap relief within 2 years, Odom, Miller and Taylor. For hypothetical purposes, if we took Stoudamire (or whichever PF drops) with our #15 pick, then Dixon with our 2nd round pick, grabbed Lee Nailon in FA with our middle exc, We'd end up with: Cato/Collier Griffin/TMo/Stoudamire Garnett/Nailon/(TMo) Torres/Dixon Francis/Brown Now would that be better than: Cato/Curry Griffin/Taylor/Stoudamire Odom/Rice/TMo Mobely/Torres/Dixon Francis/Brown or: Cato/Ming/Stoudamire Griffin/Taylor/Thomas Rice/TMo/Nailon Mobely/Torres/Dixon Francis/Norris/Brown
The teams wouldn't allow Chicago to have the number 1 pick and Kenny Thomas for Curry and Fizer. Other than that, its an almost perfect start.
I'd take the 2nd team (with Curry/Odom), except I think Stoudemire will be gone (his stock is rising), and I'd take the 6'6'' combo guard, Jiri Welsch or maybe Frank Williams, at 15. I'm not going in with Brown and Torres as my chief backup guards. I'm hoping we take care of most of our frontline needs via draft/trade, and can use parts of the exception on solid backup veteran guards, with at least one talented young backup (Brown just isn't that good). Ideally, draft Welsch at 15, pickup a guy like Blaylock, keep Torres, and so your 5 guards (one on the IR)- Francis, Mobley, Welsch, Torres, Blaylock. Then either keep Willis, or sign a guy like Scot Williams to provide depth/stability in the power positions. Garnett is good. Clearly better than Odom. But, you don't give up a 20 ppg SG (Cat), a high potential center (Curry), and a solid PF (Taylor) to upgrade from Odom (making 3 mill) to Garnett (making 23 mill). In a couple years, you have a solid front line Curry-Griffin-Odom backed by Cato-Taylor-Morris with a high scoring backcourt Francis-Moochie, everyone's still under 30. I'd go to war with that. Cato/Curry/Williams Taylor/Griffin Odom/Rice/Morris Mobley/(Welsch)/Torres Francis/Welsch/Blaylock Now, just parlay KT, MN, and #1 into Curry and Odom.
