I don't see any reason why the Sixers would want Aaron Brooks. They already have Jrue Holiday and Lou Williams... If we want Iggy, I think it will take at least Budinger, Hill, and expirings. Plus maybe even a 1st round pick.
Shipping Kevin Martin out is the next move. Courtney Lee is younger, cheaper, a better defender, and is shooting absolutely lights out this season. Courtney Lee is shooting 51% from downtown this year! If anybody deserves more minutes, it is this man.
Thats true, but most of those threes that he's shooting at such a good clip are those set threes in which he's open. He proved that he could shoot those his rookie season yet when he was traded to the nets and was told to try and be one of the primary options on offense, he shot those threes at a much lower clip, which is what would happen if we trade k-mart and told lee to shoot more. I like the idea, but this is probably what would happen
Whatever the next move is needs to be sooner than not as middlingness is a fearsome pervasiveness seemingly ready to assure longterm hopelessness.
If the Rockets are rebuilding, every big contract (or player up for one) is probably gone. If the Rockets are simply re-loading, I think Jeffries, Brooks, and possibly Martin are gone.
I don't see us moving Martin unless it is for Anthony or Chris Paul. I think a Aaron Brooks based package is likely.
I'll go a step further to ultimately end up with: http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=25drtmp Paul/Smith Lee/T-Will Anthony/T-Will Scola Yao/Miller Add a few scraps here and there and DONE.
I'd do a trade of Bud/Hill/Jeffries and a pick... Philly has been picking up momentum lately though, will they still be willing to trade him?
I'm really surprised someone of your ability would even pose the question. If the trade partner has (as most teams do) a fulll roster, then they have to get rid of at least one contract to maintain a roster of 15. The waived player is a contract they still have to pay for. That ups the price of what the trade partner just took in. A single Troy Murphy-type expiring contract has more value than the equivalent Battier + Jeffries for the vast majority of potential trade partners. Taking that a step further. If the presence of Jeffries on your roster means you had to cut a player on a small multi-year deal, you've paid for Jeffries' roster spot into the next season(s). If you are cutting a player with an expiring to have a roster spot for Jeffries, then clearly you only gained the difference Jeffries made over the waived player. And you've had to pay the waived players' salary just to get the additional expiring. If you don't believe me, do this. Look at all of the major trades where a franchise player has been moved. Then look at the $ components of that trade. In every case I can find, there is a "bad" contract involved. If the goal of $Ball is to avoid "bad" contracts, you will continually be trumped in a trade. The next time 4 $4M contracts alone get moved for a $16M "star" will be the first time in NBA history.
Morey is a guy that likes to look ahead and see how a move will effect us down the road, so any move he makes has to benefit us in the future. With this in mind, I think we can eliminate any Andre Iguodala type of move(which people are proposing) due to his hefty contract. Which would really limit us in any possible move in the future, so I doubt morey trades for him. Plus we have a very similar player in T-Will, who is younger and on a much cheaper contract. I don't know what Morey has up his sleeve but I have a feeling that one of our bigger names (Martin, Scola, or Brooks) will be traded come the trade deadline.
So the thing I wasn't clear on (and I'm not by any stretch a "capologist", so forgive the ignorance), was whether a team had the option of immediately waiving an incoming player before they count against the roster limit. Because if that was allowed, I see no benefit of getting 1 big expiring versus multiple smaller ones. I just looked at Larry Coon's FAQ for clarification on this: [rquoter]# A team cannot acquire players when they do not have room on their 15-man roster, even if they intend to waive an incoming player immediately. For example, a team with 14 players cannot trade one player for three, while simultaneously waiving an incoming player to remain at 15 players. Note: it is possible to work around this restriction by waiving a current player, executing the trade, waiving one of the incoming players, and then re-signing the original player.[/rquoter] He does describe a work-around there, but I don't know what are the rules in re-signing a waived player like that.
