ragingFire, let me try simplifying it. You know how RealGM calculates trade scenarios for you. You know how it says "Trade Accepted" at the bottom, or gives you a reason why salaries aren't matching, thus the trade is illegal. Well, with a $9m trade exception, pretty much every trade would get TRADE ACCEPTED The most common use of this on the BBS would be used by all the Mobley hatas to come up with trades that used to not work because Mobley's salary doesn't match up with guys of equal talent. So for instance, we could do Mobley for Eddie Jones Mobley for Stackhouse Mobley for Hamilton Mobley for Odom (Sterling would love Mobes salary) Mobley for Wally Mobley for Finley Mobley for Dre Miller Mobley for Damon S. Mobley for Jason Williams Mobley for Jalen Rose Mobley for Walker Mobley for Mashburn blah blah blah blah <b>man, a $9m trade exception might be the best way to use Rice, but it would ruin this BBS.</b>
what? 9.5 million trade exception? first off, i think you are talking about the 4.5 million cap exception, and no, you can't trade that. you are mistaking it with an INJURY exception, which the league must grant to you.
\ Sometimes I wonder... Guy is somewhat new to the board. Guy wanders into a 3 page long thread. Guy looks at hp, at the top of his 14000+ post (geez, hp, do you ever get laid or something man? just to be sure you're human) Guy posts without any thinking whatsoever, and with AUTHORITY to booth! Guy gets flamed. Ah, the beauty of it. I'm definetely in a good mood today.
aelliott, I finally got around to reading the actual trade. What is the "mutual benefit" from Utah's perspective. They give us their 1st round, likely lotto pick, for the wonderous right to pay Glen Rice's last year of salary? $9 m i l l i o n. Miller is supposed to increase his salary by $9m, so that it will come of the books next summer? huh? Where is the salary purging from Utah's perspective? This trade makes little sense to me, unless Utah unloads about $5m of salary on us.
to add further perspective to this, if Utah really wanted the right to pay Rice's last year of salary with no sum gain in cap space next summer, then they could definitely talk me down to a trade of Rice for cash compensation of one dollar. TRADE ACCEPTED. hehe
<i>I finally got around to reading the actual trade. What is the "mutual benefit" from Utah's perspective. They give us their 1st round, likely lotto pick, for the wonderous right to pay Glen Rice's last year of salary? $9 m i l l i o n. Miller is supposed to increase his salary by $9m, so that it will come of the books next summer? huh? Where is the salary purging from Utah's perspective? This trade makes little sense to me, unless Utah unloads about $5m of salary on us.</i> HP, The original deal suggested had us sending the first rounder to Utah, not the other way around. To that I responded, <b>Again nice idea. The only part that I disagree with is the inclusion of a first round pick. There's no reason to do that. The trade is still beneficial to the Jazz without the pick. </b> I agree with you that Utah wouldn't give up a first round pick for Rice. Rice for a 2nd round pick is more realistic.
Rice has no trade value, right? His expiring contract has value in its ability to purge salary. No trade mentioned in this thread purges salary for Utah. There is no sum gain in cap space for Utah at the expiration of the contract. Since the trades suggested do nothing for Utah's capspace, is this all about some suggestion that Utah would pay his paycheck for the right to try to trade Rice's expiring contract by the trade deadline? Why would Utah pay his paycheck, and give up $9m in cap room to try to trade Rice? Having an expiring contract is not better than pure cap space. bottomline: i doubt any fan, sportswriter, GM, coach, or owner believes having Rice is better than having $9m in caproom. To suggest otherwise is dreamcasting in my opinion. But I do like the way Sir Jackie Chiles got excited about this trade: <img src="http://www.jodi.com/images/image2.jpg">
<I>Rice has no trade value, right? His expiring contract has value in its ability to purge salary. No trade mentioned in this thread purges salary for Utah. There is no sum gain in cap space for Utah at the expiration of the contract. Since the trades suggested do nothing for Utah's capspace, is this all about some suggestion that Utah would pay his paycheck for the right to try to trade Rice's expiring contract by the trade deadline? Why would Utah pay his paycheck, and give up $9m in cap room to try to trade Rice? Having an expiring contract is not better than pure cap space. bottomline: i doubt any fan, sportswriter, GM, coach, or owner believes having Rice is better than having $9m in caproom. To suggest otherwise is dreamcasting in my opinion. But I do like the way Sir Jackie Chiles got excited about this trade: </i> I think that you're missing the logic here. 1. Utah is currently under the league's minimum salary. 2. Trading for Rice would allow them to get alot close to meeting the minimum salary without committing any money past the end of this season. 3. At the end of the season, Rice's contract is up and they've got $9M or so in cap space back to pursue other free agents. Does that make sense? Rice actually would help them spend money this season (which they have to do), but they also wouldn't be committing that money for any longer than this year.
There's only one way to convince the doubters. I hate how some people say "Why would they trade cap space for an ageing Glen Rice?" or "Why would Atlanta trade us Reef for Rice when SAR posts 20/10 everyseason" "If . . . guys (general managers of the over-the-cap teams) say, 'Look, would you take so-and-so, and we'll take a second-round pick in the year 2009, and you'll get a pretty good player?' " O'Connor said, "that's what we'd look at doing." Jusdging by this quote, evena Mo Taylor for capsapce sounds VERY VERY possible. I am starting to think they'd rather have MoT than Rice, as they would have a locked up proven scorer that they would probably pursue if he was a free agent. He also plays a position that none of their current players play.
Isn't New York paying part of Rice's salary? That would make the trade more appetizing. Also, we could send $3 million with the deal.
It is nice to see ESPN thinking on the same line. The fact that Rice's salary counts 9.5 against the cap, but because of his signing bonus, the team owing his contract will have to pay only six million makes and his ending contract will be more lucrative to Utah as compared to other ending contracts. I will not hesitate to throw in a future first rounder to make it even more attractive. 9.5 million trade exceptions will give the Rockets alot of flexibility to retool the support cast. Watch out for the big splash-------------
See, I first suggested this (similar) trade in July. Some of you guys blasted me for that. I think it is a great trade for the Rocks, albeit a bit late. Nevertheless the trade exception gives us tremendous flexibility. Amachi is also a better third string Center than Collier. I Jim Jackson bosters our 2 spot, which was already quite deep. I would suggest that Rockets also sign Mark Jackson for the veteran leadership. This will free up stevie to do spot duty at 2 and Jim Jackson and Adrian Griffin to slide to the 3 spot. True we have not improved at the forward position, but watch out for a future move. I bigger midseason deal is all the more likelly. Some of my favorites are: Moble+Eddie+Trade exception for Jermain O'neal. MO Taylor+Mobley for SAR Amachi+part of exception for Ron Artest Some three way deals involving combinations of exception and/or Cato/ Taylor/ Eddie/Mobley for significant upgrade at 3/4 spot is also more than likely. The bottomline is apart from Yao and Stevie no one can take his spot for granted and will have to earn it on the court or pack his bags. I bet alot of our guys will put an extra effort and we will see a better team chemistry and unselfish ball play. Go Rocks
Sanjay, Just to be fair, shouldn't you give ESPN's Marc Stein all the credit seeing as how your thread was based on his chat wrap?? Its not like there haven't been articles all summer long (before your thread) about Utah willing to take on a large expiring contract and return some cap relief.
http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=3811 ESPN article came out on JULY 30th. My Post was on July 27. But the point is it is a good move for the ROCKS. I do not need any praise, I want the parade, eventually.
I think Sanjay posted his idea FIRST - Marc Stein probably reads this board. Great job Sanjay...funny that I wrote in this thread that I thought it was the best idea I had seen and now that it actually happened, I kind of thinks it sucks. But it all depends on whether we actually USE the trade exception or if it was just a move to save Les some money.
Actually, I do apologize. It was not from Stein's chat, but rather, from a Utah newspaper. I believe HOTDODDIE actually posted the article in thread that I will look for.
