The most likely scenario

[Donoghus]

I'd say either D or E.  I just don't see much offseason action going on.  Possible a cheap free agent signing here or there but I don't forsee any blockbuster trades and I certainly don't see Ray Allen getting traded before the season starts. 

[Chris]

(1) Option D

Way way back in the rear view mirror

(2) Option A
(3) Option C

Not happening -- Option B, and/or a Glen Davis sign and trade.

I still think a minor sign and trade of Davis that gives the C's either a trade exception, or a role player that the team signing him didn't need is just as likely, if not more likely than a trade of Allen or Rondo.  And I also think that a trade of Rondo would be more likely than a trade of Allen.

I really think the C's are going to be very cap conscious with any moves this offseason, and that is why I really doubt they will move Allen unless they are getting an upgrade, AND cap relief next year...and I just don't see many packages like that out there.

But by trading Rondo, they may be able to get a little more cost certainty over the next few years, and also solidify more than one position with his (soon to be increasing) salary slot.  I don't think that its likely to happen, but moreso than an Allen trade.

And while a Davis trade would be more complicated, these are professional GM's, and don't let a little extra math stand in their way of making deals.  It all depends on which teams show interest in him, but if it is a team with cap space, I would be shocked if it is not a sign and trade in which the C's send cash, and get back a trade exemption, and if the team is over the cap, I would not be the least bit surprised to see Danny try to leverage a deal where he turns Davis and a couple of the spare part expiring deals into a rotation player or two, by threatening to match an offer.

Ultimately though, I think Davis comes back on a 2 year contract (as does Powe), they sign a veteran big man with the MLE, and then between a minor trade of some combination of Tony/Scal/Giddens, as well as the LLE and vet minimum, they bring in a veteran PG (or possibly Marbury) and veteran wing.

[nickagneta]

I just don't see what the infatuation is with signing guys who are going to be 35 and older before the next season even starts!! I understand veteran teams win championships but I thought the key word there was veteran not old as crap for a professional basketball player.

The problem is, from my perspective, that two types of players are available for cheap money:  "old guys", and unproven guys.  It's going to be very difficult to fill the bench with multiple young talented guys.  Those are the players that either stay put, or sign contracts for more than we have.  Sure, we could sign Zaza for the full MLE (if he leaves Atlanta) but how are we going to fill other holes?  Signing an older veteran may allow us to split the MLE between 2 or even 3 players.

And as much as I would like to ship Tony out of town for less than a bucket of balls, a Scal and Tony package isn't going to be making a major difference, if any, on this team. I just don't see any of the A through D options happening anytime soon.

We'll see.  It could be that there's nothing out there for that package.  It could also be that a player like Nocioni is available, who would help tremendously.

Rasheed has already discussed his desire for $8 million per year or he's retiring so how exactly are we supposed to sign him and get another guy for the MLE?

Also, I can see the LLE getting a guy like Jones or Ross and in my scenario I don't see Flip Murray getting anything more than a vet minimum.

Besides, is McDyess or Smith really worth anything more than a vet min?

[Cman]

(D)

I think the Cs extend BBD and Powe, use part of the MLE on McDyess or another (experienced) big, use the vet min on backup PG and SF.

[crownsy]

I just don't see what the infatuation is with signing guys who are going to be 35 and older before the next season even starts!! I understand veteran teams win championships but I thought the key word there was veteran not old as crap for a professional basketball player.

The problem is, from my perspective, that two types of players are available for cheap money:  "old guys", and unproven guys.  It's going to be very difficult to fill the bench with multiple young talented guys.  Those are the players that either stay put, or sign contracts for more than we have.  Sure, we could sign Zaza for the full MLE (if he leaves Atlanta) but how are we going to fill other holes?  Signing an older veteran may allow us to split the MLE between 2 or even 3 players.

And as much as I would like to ship Tony out of town for less than a bucket of balls, a Scal and Tony package isn't going to be making a major difference, if any, on this team. I just don't see any of the A through D options happening anytime soon.

We'll see.  It could be that there's nothing out there for that package.  It could also be that a player like Nocioni is available, who would help tremendously.

Rasheed has already discussed his desire for $8 million per year or he's retiring so how exactly are we supposed to sign him and get another guy for the MLE?

Also, I can see the LLE getting a guy like Jones or Ross and in my scenario I don't see Flip Murray getting anything more than a vet minimum.

Besides, is McDyess or Smith really worth anything more than a vet min?

The sheed scenario depends on the rumor that he's told friends the one team he would make an exception for is a "one last ride" scenario with KG on the celtics.

wheather thats true or not depends on if you give any credit to the always helpful, always unnamed, "sources close to the player" 

[Roy Hobbs]

Rasheed has already discussed his desire for $8 million per year or he's retiring so how exactly are we supposed to sign him and get another guy for the MLE?

When did I mention Rasheed?  There are plenty of competent veterans, though, who will be making more than the minimum, but less than the full MLE.  For instance, I'd rather have McDyess + Anthony Parker than I would Zaza + Flip Murray (who I think will get more than the minimum, regardless).

Besides, is McDyess or Smith really worth anything more than a vet min?

I think they are, especially McDyess.  Did you watch him play last season?  He nearly averaged a double-double for the season and shot 51%, and you don't think he's worth more than a minimum contract?  That seems off base to me.

[Who]

I just don't see Glen Davis bringing back anything substantial in a sign and trade. I don't think anyone would give up anything of importance to land him, not on top of the pay check they're going to have to write.

Maybe a future second round pick or something ... but that's about it. Something that's easy to discard and holds little value to the team that's acquiring BBD.

[Who]

Age isn't important. Talent is.

These bench players are likely only going to be here for one season anyway ... all that matters is that one year.

If the older player figures to be better for next season, then he's the guy you want. If he doesn't, you don't want him, or if the injury concerns are too much, you don't want him.

There's going to be a lot of roster turnover so long as so much money is tied up in the starting five. I think folks should get comfortable with a revolving door of role players, many of which will be older and only here for a year or two.

[droopdog7]

I just don't see Glen Davis bringing back anything substantial in a sign and trade. I don't think anyone would give up anything of importance to land him, not on top of the pay check they're going to have to write.

Maybe a future second round pick or something ... but that's about it. Something that's easy to discard and holds little value to the team that's acquiring BBD.

Maybe an expiring contract?

[Twisk]

I would say E.  Following Doc's words, we need a big, a wing to back-up Pierce, and a back-up PG.  So we get rid of Mikki, Marbury and (Pruit or Giddens).  Then sign Zaza or Chris Kaman (big bangers) for most of MLE, Barnes (young enough to provide energy and defense) and Flip Murray (provides good handle and shooting) for vet min.  Can this be done?  Does it add enough talent and balance the young-old?

[RAcker]

Option D is most likely.  I'd like to see a combination of C & D.

I'm with the C&D combo as well (although I'm not sure it's most likely).

If we sign some big man veteran help and get a point guard we're in good shape.  If we can use Scal and TA to sweeten what we get in return even more, we're in great shape.  Hopefully that last move would be to assure that Paul has some real help finally.

[Who]

I just don't see Glen Davis bringing back anything substantial in a sign and trade. I don't think anyone would give up anything of importance to land him, not on top of the pay check they're going to have to write.

Maybe a future second round pick or something ... but that's about it. Something that's easy to discard and holds little value to the team that's acquiring BBD.

Maybe an expiring contract?

Possibly ... that could be useful down the road too. I like that idea.

[snively]

I like option D the best.  I don't want to go into next season with Baby or Scal as the primary back-up big.

A,B and E would all be mistakes in my opinion.  The starters are great and shouldn't be tinkered with.  The bench is only half-stocked and should receive at least one major addition.  We have a flawed but passable back-up 1 in House, a nice 4th big if we resign Powe, a decent 5th big in Scal.  We could use a real 3rd big.  We have a crapshoot of wings, passable as 4th wings.  So we also could use a 3rd wing.

Probably don't have enough resources to land legit options at both positions.  I'd imagine it's most likely that we spend the bulk of our resources on a 3rd big and then skimp on a wing replacement, with perhaps a vet min signing for the 1.  

Then Danny will try to trade TA, JR and Scal for a wing midseason, but only pull the trigger if it's a really good deal (which means he probably won't pull the trigger).

We'll be flawed again going into next year, but that shouldn't destroy our chances of winning.  The year we won, we had major question marks at the 1 and 5 in the starting line-up and veteran scoring options off the bench to help balance the starter's inconsistency.  This year we had a great starting line-up and nothing reliable off the bench.  Due to the improvement of our starters, we don't need the 08 bench, we just need something better than the 09 bench.

[KungPoweChicken]

This is a bit off topic. But I figured I'd bring it up in this here, as I feel it doesn't really warrant a new thread. What do you guys think the chances are the Lakers re-sign both Odom and Ariza? Which player do they value more? How much money will the players command? Also, should our payroll be close or equal to what the Lakers is next year if we want to win? 


And to answer the question: I think and hope option D is what we'll go with.

[silvershamrocker]

I'm hoping C happens. As for D... Well I'm not a big fan of signing guys with both feet in the grave (Grant Hill, McDyess). But it wouldn't be the end of the world if we signed those guys.