Enough with the BBD Trades

[bobdelt]

Maybe I'm completely crazy. But can someone show me a case - when a free agent - has done a sign and trade - and it was a super star caliber/max deal type player

We cannot trade BBD - he's a free agent. No team with cap space will trade for him, because they can simply just sign him anyway.

BBD will want to pick where he signs. He's not going to let DA tell him where is going to play via sign and trade.

As much as we want him as an asset - we can't trade him until he signs with us, and even then we will probably have to have him for a year - which isnt a bad thing for the right price.

[wdleehi]

Teams talk about sign and trades all the time.  Players usually go along with it because it gets them to a team that wants them and are willing to pay to get them.




I think the bigger issue with Davis trade ideas is the value we seem to think he is worth and will get. 

[Fafnir]

Teams talk about sign and trades all the time.  Players usually go along with it because it gets them to a team that wants them and are willing to pay to get them.




I think the bigger issue with Davis trade ideas is the value we seem to think he is worth and will get. 

The biggest issue in my opinion is that he will be a BYC player and this makes him very hard to sign and trade to most teams.

[RAcker]

Teams talk about sign and trades all the time.  Players usually go along with it because it gets them to a team that wants them and are willing to pay to get them.




I think the bigger issue with Davis trade ideas is the value we seem to think he is worth and will get. 

Exactly, and I'm still not sure if there is a consensus on that value.

[Roy Hobbs]

BBD trades are complicated by base year compensation rules.

That being said, a sign-and-trade could work if: 1) a team wants to sign BBD but also wants to cut payroll, and 2) we're interested in getting a player back in return for the team signing him.  Under that scenario, I could see us signing and trading him, if we could make the numbers work.

For an example of a sign-and-trade for a non-max player, we signed and traded Antoine to the Miami Heat, I believe.

[Chris]

The problem is, if another team is afraid the C's are going to match their offer to Davis, then they will not give him an offer sheet.  However, if they have something the C's might want, they may then try to convince them to do a sign and trade in order to assure they get the guy they want.  And it also helps, because it will help the other team create room for Davis' salary by clearing off the other salary.

For example, if Sacramento was interested in signing Davis as a PF to go along with their youth movement, instead of just signing him to an offer sheet, they could go to the C's, and ask if they would be interested in trading Davis, along with an expiring contract or two for Nocioni.  By doing this, the C's get a player who probably has more value playing for them than for the Kings, and the Kings end up saving a ton of money both short-term and long-term.  They save money short-term, because instead of adding Davis' contract on top of Nocioni's, they have it (along with someone like Allen or Scal) in place of Nocioni's.  And then longterm they save money, because Davis would be making less money than Nocioni, and the other contracts would come off the books next summer, while Nocioni's would have stayed on the books for another couple of year.

[Chris]

Another interesting type of sign and trade for Davis could be if a team under the cap is interested in him, the C's could send Davis and some cash for a highly protected second round pick.  Instead of the other team just signing Davis straight up.

This would give the team under the cap some extra cash to throw around, and they really aren't giving anything up (since they can protect the pick enough that it will never be seen by the C's), and the C's get a valuable trade exception. 

This type of deal we have been seeing more and more lately, and could be a real possibility if a team like Memphis was interested in Davis.

[Who]

Yeah, I don't think they're getting anything from a Glen Davis trade either.

Certainly not anything substantial.

[indeedproceed]

Teams talk about sign and trades all the time.  Players usually go along with it because it gets them to a team that wants them and are willing to pay to get them.




I think the bigger issue with Davis trade ideas is the value we seem to think he is worth and will get. 

The biggest issue in my opinion is that he will be a BYC player and this makes him very hard to sign and trade to most teams.

THat is easily the biggest problem.

[paintitgreen]

The problem is, if another team is afraid the C's are going to match their offer to Davis, then they will not give him an offer sheet.  However, if they have something the C's might want, they may then try to convince them to do a sign and trade in order to assure they get the guy they want.  And it also helps, because it will help the other team create room for Davis' salary by clearing off the other salary.

For example, if Sacramento was interested in signing Davis as a PF to go along with their youth movement, instead of just signing him to an offer sheet, they could go to the C's, and ask if they would be interested in trading Davis, along with an expiring contract or two for Nocioni.  By doing this, the C's get a player who probably has more value playing for them than for the Kings, and the Kings end up saving a ton of money both short-term and long-term.  They save money short-term, because instead of adding Davis' contract on top of Nocioni's, they have it (along with someone like Allen or Scal) in place of Nocioni's.  And then longterm they save money, because Davis would be making less money than Nocioni, and the other contracts would come off the books next summer, while Nocioni's would have stayed on the books for another couple of year.

Just so you know, it's almost impossible to do a sign and trade with Davis and have the other team save money this year. The team getting Davis has to accept his full salary for terms of "matching rules" while we can only use half of his new salary for that purpose. So, with Nocioni for example, we'd be getting a contract worth $7.5 million. Therefore, for the trade to work, we have to send out at least $5.92 million in salary (7.5 mil minus 100K divided by 1.25). With Davis, only half of whatever he's paid can count as outgoing salary.

The chart below lists the amounts Davis might sign for in the first column and the amount of additional salary we'll have to include with Davis to make the trade work in the second column. The final column lists the incoming value for Sacramento, which is always over $7.5 mil.

$4 mil   $3.92 mil   $7.92 mil
$5 mil   $3.42 mil   $8.42 mil
$6 mil   $2.92 mil   $8.92 mil
$7 mil   $2.42 mil   $9.42 mil

So Sacto can't save money, unless we kick in cash.

Not a dealbreaker necessarily, but worth considering.

[Chris]

The problem is, if another team is afraid the C's are going to match their offer to Davis, then they will not give him an offer sheet.  However, if they have something the C's might want, they may then try to convince them to do a sign and trade in order to assure they get the guy they want.  And it also helps, because it will help the other team create room for Davis' salary by clearing off the other salary.

For example, if Sacramento was interested in signing Davis as a PF to go along with their youth movement, instead of just signing him to an offer sheet, they could go to the C's, and ask if they would be interested in trading Davis, along with an expiring contract or two for Nocioni.  By doing this, the C's get a player who probably has more value playing for them than for the Kings, and the Kings end up saving a ton of money both short-term and long-term.  They save money short-term, because instead of adding Davis' contract on top of Nocioni's, they have it (along with someone like Allen or Scal) in place of Nocioni's.  And then longterm they save money, because Davis would be making less money than Nocioni, and the other contracts would come off the books next summer, while Nocioni's would have stayed on the books for another couple of year.

Just so you know, it's almost impossible to do a sign and trade with Davis and have the other team save money this year. The team getting Davis has to accept his full salary for terms of "matching rules" while we can only use half of his new salary for that purpose. So, with Nocioni for example, we'd be getting a contract worth $7.5 million. Therefore, for the trade to work, we have to send out at least $5.92 million in salary (7.5 mil minus 100K divided by 1.25). With Davis, only half of whatever he's paid can count as outgoing salary.

The chart below lists the amounts Davis might sign for in the first column and the amount of additional salary we'll have to include with Davis to make the trade work in the second column. The final column lists the incoming value for Sacramento, which is always over $7.5 mil.

$4 mil   $3.92 mil   $7.92 mil
$5 mil   $3.42 mil   $8.42 mil
$6 mil   $2.92 mil   $8.92 mil
$7 mil   $2.42 mil   $9.42 mil

So Sacto can't save money, unless we kick in cash.

Not a dealbreaker necessarily, but worth considering.

I think you are missing my point.  You are right that they wouldn't be able to save money based on what their salary was before the trade.  However, what I was saying was that if a team wanted Davis, and they had a player that they didn't want, because they didn't fit into the direction they were going, by doing a sign and trade for Davis, they would be saving money over paying Davis AND the other guy.

The Sacto example was if they sign and traded Davis and say, Tony and/or Scal for Nocioni, it would save them money over just signing Davis, because they would be essentially replacing Nocioni's salary slot with Davis and the filler, rather than putting Davis' salary on top of Nocioni's.

[bobdelt]

So in return - we take an overpaid player another team doesn't want?

Who did we get from Miami in the Antoine trade?

Draft picks wont work, because this isnt going to happen before the draft, but we could get a draftee...

But my point was, that there are too many criteria for this to work, and we shouldnt really be discussing trade ideas with bbd in them - until we expresses interest in a team - and that team has a player they do not want, that for some reason, we do.

[Fan from VT]

Teams talk about sign and trades all the time.  Players usually go along with it because it gets them to a team that wants them and are willing to pay to get them.




I think the bigger issue with Davis trade ideas is the value we seem to think he is worth and will get. 

The biggest issue in my opinion is that he will be a BYC player and this makes him very hard to sign and trade to most teams.

THat is easily the biggest problem.

Funny, I thought BBD was the BIGGEST part of everything in which he is involved...

[Chris]

So in return - we take an overpaid player another team doesn't want?

Who did we get from Miami in the Antoine trade?

Draft picks wont work, because this isnt going to happen before the draft, but we could get a draftee...

But my point was, that there are too many criteria for this to work, and we shouldnt really be discussing trade ideas with bbd in them - until we expresses interest in a team - and that team has a player they do not want, that for some reason, we do.

So you think discussing trades of Rondo and Ray makes any more sense?  A sign and trade of Davis is no less likely than a trade of either of those guys.

Its all complete speculation anyways.  Everyone is just having fun, trying to find ideas that work. 

And from Miami, we ended up getting a bunch of garbage (including Qyntel Woods and his pitbulls), a second round pick or two, and a trade exception that Danny then squandered half of on Dan Dickau. 

[guava_wrench]

So in return - we take an overpaid player another team doesn't want?

Who did we get from Miami in the Antoine trade?

Draft picks wont work, because this isnt going to happen before the draft, but we could get a draftee...

But my point was, that there are too many criteria for this to work, and we shouldnt really be discussing trade ideas with bbd in them - until we expresses interest in a team - and that team has a player they do not want, that for some reason, we do.

So you think discussing trades of Rondo and Ray makes any more sense?  A sign and trade of Davis is no less likely than a trade of either of those guys.

Its all complete speculation anyways.  Everyone is just having fun, trying to find ideas that work. 

And from Miami, we ended up getting a bunch of garbage (including Qyntel Woods and his pitbulls), a second round pick or two, and a trade exception that Danny then squandered half of on Dan Dickau. 

Why wouldn't a trade of Ray make sense? There are many scenarios where it could make sense for us and for the other team if they get rid of longer contracts (not necessarily bad contracts) of talented players. An example is Memphis dumping Gasol. Gasol did not have a bad contract. Trading Ray can make sense if we want to avoid having him walk after next season leaving us unable to fill our roster due to the salary cap.

The BBD ideas make less sense for the reasons listed above by others.