PDA

View Full Version : Another Summer 'Quis trade



OakMoses
02-20-2009, 06:04 PM
Pacers trade: 'Quis, 2009 1st round pick

Wizards trade: Brendan Haywood (1 yr, $6 million) + Javaris Crittenton (2 years, $2 million), 2009 1st round pick

Why?

Wizards save $7 million in '09-'10.

Pacers get a decent big man in Haywood on a 1 year deal. We don't resign Jack but get a similar, and potentially better, in Crittenton. We also move into a very high draft pick.

This deal could also be done without the switch of picks.

pacergod2
02-20-2009, 06:28 PM
Love this deal as well.

I was looking at something almost exactly the same with the Wizards LT issues next year.

I could also see us trying to dump Tinsley on them as insurance for Arenas in case he is injured, but also, because Tinsley could play next to Arenas. Arenas is a combo guard and Tins is a big PG.

J. Tinsley
M. Daniels

for

M. James
E. Thomas

I know Thomas has had health issues but he is a solid front court player. He is a more likable guy than Haywood is and would fit in better with our team. Plus, the Wiz are a lot less likely to get rid of Haywood. The best thing that could happen for us would be for M. James to opt out of his contract. He probably wouldn't be very happy to be in Indy, but we could use him as a backup PG, or trade him somewhere else if he doesn't opt out.

This is good because we solidify our front court and take on just enough money that it doesn't hurt our LT projection. We get Tinsley's two years off our books, for both Mike James and Etan Thomas' one year next year. That is utilizing both teams cap space most effectively. The talent isn't much different although I think Washington wins the talent aspect.

shockedandchagrined
02-21-2009, 01:10 PM
Pacers trade: 'Quis, 2009 1st round pick

Wizards trade: Brendan Haywood (1 yr, $6 million) + Javaris Crittenton (2 years, $2 million), 2009 1st round pick

Why?

Wizards save $7 million in '09-'10.

Pacers get a decent big man in Haywood on a 1 year deal. We don't resign Jack but get a similar, and potentially better, in Crittenton. We also move into a very high draft pick.

This deal could also be done without the switch of picks.

What am I missing here? How does this save Washington money next year?

Now that I've been set straight on where the Pacers' salary commitments are after renouncing all existing free agents (58mm), I do find it very unlikely that Daniels' option will be picked up for the sake of trading. The Pacers will really have to get a good offer to do it, and if they didn't get it at the trade deadline, it's unlikely they'll get it over the summer. In the current economic conditions, Daniels will probably have to accept much less than the approximately 7.5mm required to exercise the team option. I wonder if there would have been more interest in him if he hadn't had these back problems over the past 3-4 weeks.

Also, I am in agreement with those that suggest Jack will probably be back next year at something like 4mm/year.

It's TJ Ford that might have the contract to exploit at this point. As we just witnessed with all the point guard injuries leading up to the deadline, an experienced point guard on an expiring contract can be a very valuable commodity.

shockedandchagrined
02-21-2009, 02:01 PM
It's TJ Ford that might have the contract to exploit at this point. As we just witnessed with all the point guard injuries leading up to the deadline, an experienced point guard on an expiring contract can be a very valuable commodity.

Oops, I just checked and Ford's contract has a player option for 2010-11, so he does not have an expiring contract for the upcoming year. Back to the drawing board.

OakMoses
02-22-2009, 12:02 AM
What am I missing here? How does this save Washington money next year?


'Quis option doesn't have to be picked up until July 1. We could trade him before that and then the team we trade him to could choose not pick up his option. Then his contract would dissapear from their books.

BRushWithDeath
02-22-2009, 03:11 AM
'Quis option doesn't have to be picked up until July 1. We could trade him before that and then the team we trade him to could choose not pick up his option. Then his contract would dissapear from their books.

Is that right? That doesn't seem like it could be to me. Maybe I'm wrong.

Pacersfan46
02-22-2009, 03:14 PM
It's right, but no team would sell a pick that high for saving 6 million. The buzz generated by a top pick like that can MAKE a team millions of dollars.

-- Steve --

d_c
02-22-2009, 09:06 PM
'Quis option doesn't have to be picked up until July 1. We could trade him before that and then the team we trade him to could choose not pick up his option. Then his contract would dissapear from their books.

It's already been explained by count55 in another thread that (by rule) Daniels' is not allowed to be traded unless his option is first picked up. So Chad Ford was wrong: he can't be used as an immediate expiring contract for another team.

He can be an immediate expiring contract this summer for the Pacers, but not any other team.

BRushWithDeath
02-23-2009, 09:23 PM
It's already been explained by count55 in another thread that (by rule) Daniels' is not allowed to be traded unless his option is first picked up. So Chad Ford was wrong: he can't be used as an immediate expiring contract for another team.

He can be an immediate expiring contract this summer for the Pacers, but not any other team.

That's what I thought.

WetBob
02-24-2009, 01:52 AM
It's already been explained by count55 in another thread that (by rule) Daniels' is not allowed to be traded unless his option is first picked up. So Chad Ford was wrong: he can't be used as an immediate expiring contract for another team.

He can be an immediate expiring contract this summer for the Pacers, but not any other team.

That makes much more sense.

Trader Joe
02-24-2009, 03:01 AM
This isn't enough value for a guy that is a better all around basketball player than Danny Granger!

OakMoses
02-24-2009, 11:05 AM
It's already been explained by count55 in another thread that (by rule) Daniels' is not allowed to be traded unless his option is first picked up. So Chad Ford was wrong: he can't be used as an immediate expiring contract for another team.

He can be an immediate expiring contract this summer for the Pacers, but not any other team.

That's what I get for listening to Chad Ford. That kind of sucks because he's about the only ESPN guy that I think does a decent job.

BRushWithDeath
02-24-2009, 01:32 PM
This isn't enough value for a guy that is a better all around basketball player than Danny Granger!

Your love affair with Danny Granger makes you take everything said about him out of context.

BRushWithDeath
02-24-2009, 01:33 PM
That's what I get for listening to Chad Ford. That kind of sucks because he's about the only ESPN guy that I think does a decent job.

If anyone should know that it'd be Chad Ford. That's odd he'd make such a grievous mistake.

Trader Joe
02-24-2009, 01:44 PM
Your love affair with Danny Granger makes you take everything said about him out of context.

This was your original post on the subject...

I said it yesterday and it's more apparent tonight.

Marquis Daniels is better in every phase of the game than Danny Granger with outside shooting being the lone exception.

BRushWithDeath
02-24-2009, 01:53 PM
This was your original post on the subject...

I know what my original post was.

Better at most things. Not better.

pacergod2
02-24-2009, 08:01 PM
I am not totally sold on Chad Ford being wrong. I think the post that quotes Larry Coon is VERY VAGUE and does not give an exact answer to the team option question. I don't really know what to think and have yet to get a definitive answer one way or the other.

d_c
02-25-2009, 04:59 AM
I am not totally sold on Chad Ford being wrong. I think the post that quotes Larry Coon is VERY VAGUE and does not give an exact answer to the team option question. I don't really know what to think and have yet to get a definitive answer one way or the other.

This seems pretty straightforward to me:




When the trading deadline has passed. Teams are free to make trades again once their season has ended, but cannot trade players whose contracts are ending or could end due to an option or ETO.


http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q85

That describes Daniels' contract situation pretty clearly.