Gerald Wallace opts out

[Lucky17]

Good points Lucky17.  TP.  I still say the amount of financial responsibility they would be undertaking with Scola and Martin would have been problematic to the eventual goal of selling the team.  But good points.

The Scola/Martin package definitely would have required some follow-up work from Demps and Co.

In terms of making that roster attractive to a potential buyer, the Gordon return did go a long way, obviously.

[LarBrd33]

Good points Lucky17.  TP.  I still say the amount of financial responsibility they would be undertaking with Scola and Martin would have been problematic to the eventual goal of selling the team.  But good points.

The Scola/Martin package definitely would have required some follow-up work from Demps and Co.

In terms of making that roster attractive to a potential buyer, the Gordon return did go a long way, obviously.

I have always felt it's best to bottom out, though.  You need to give your team a shot at a top 5 pick.  I'm under the assumption that bringing in Scola and Martin would have helped them win games... just not enough to be a contender. It would have been a temporary bandage on a permanent wound.  It would have just prolonged the inevitable for them.  I guess you could say they could "flip them" down the line for assets, but if that was easy... Houston would be doing it right now.  I sure as hell don't want Scola and Martin on the Celtics.

Granted, bringing in Eric Gordon would have theoretically helped them "win games" too if he had played, but that team was DEFINITELY a lotto team and the intention to tank was pretty clear all along.  If you're a 46 win team with a top 5 NBA superstar (chris Paul)... clearly you're going to be a bad team if you replace that superstar with a fringe all-star.   The potential tanking benefits really is what made that deal a winner for me.  And obviously "best-case scenario" ended up happening. 

[FrDrake]

Good points Lucky17.  TP.  I still say the amount of financial responsibility they would be undertaking with Scola and Martin would have been problematic to the eventual goal of selling the team.  But good points.

The Scola/Martin package definitely would have required some follow-up work from Demps and Co.

In terms of making that roster attractive to a potential buyer, the Gordon return did go a long way, obviously.

This was an interesting debate comparing the rejected Paul trade to LAL as compared to the later approved Paul to LA Clipper trade. I think most people can admit that both trades of Paul had pros and cons.  After reading the posts I actually think the Gordon + a lottery pick + cap flexibility was probably the better deal, but it is no slam dunk, and we must remember that Stern didn't have the luxury of comparing the two deals since the clippers offer wasn't on the table when he rejected the Lakers deal.

The bigger point is that BOTH Paul trades were FAR more logical and easily justified when compared to the insane Gerald Wallace to the Nets trade - and this is true even if Wallace does resign for a multi-year deal with the Nets.  Wallace is a middling all-star who will soon be overpaid, while a top six pick in a stacked draft could easily become an underpaid all-star.

In essence Stern acted in an unprecedented manner acting as defacto owner of the Hornets to reject/disapprove a trade of Paul which begs the question, why wouldn't he act again in a more equitable manner to disallow an EGREGIOUSLY more irresponsible trade of a valuable lottery pick for 16 games worth of Gerald Wallace by a team going absolutely nowhere? 

[byennie]

I wouldn't mind picking up Wallace, even for a decent chunk of change. I consider him a significant upgrade to Bass, and someone who can truly play both the 3 and the 4 spots. He could start at the 4 and also take minutes in a "big" lineup when Pierce sits.

He's never played for a winner, still under 30, and he both rebounds and defends. And we DO have money to spend in every scenario, so as long as our contracts aren't too long we might as well spend it.

I wonder if Ryan Anderson played his value down enough that we could get him as a cheaper bench player. Wallace starting and then Anderson jacking 3s off the bench might be a nice mix. They can both rebound which is a nice change.

Rondo / Bradley
Bradley / Moore
Pierce  / Wallace
Wallace (2yr/$20M) / Anderson (2yr/$12M) / JJJ
Garnett (2yr/$20M) / Steimsma

Add in whatever comes out of the draft plus a veteran or two, and we have tons of cap room again in 2 years?