why wouldn't Washington trade for Sheed?

[Jeff]

or any other team with cap room and no shot at competing this year (Wolves?) for that matter

here's my thinking - the Wiz can trade a conditional 2nd rounder that will never be conveyed in exchange for Sheed, $3M in cash to pay half of his salary, and some kind of pick - maybe even a conditional 1st rounder.  The Celtics get a trade exception to use anytime from now till a year from the trade.

But the value doesn't end there for Washington.  They can NOT buy out Sheed and keep him on the books till February.  There they can pedal him for a player with a longer contract but that could be a good building block for years to come.  Or maybe they could trade him for a bad contract and get a pick back.  Or if someone's getting really nuts, you could add him to Gilbert's contract and take back a couple of semi-bad contracts in return (but at least they'd be getting a fresh start and maybe some role players).

So for price of basically paying a pro-rated portion of Sheed's contract, they could get at least a protected pick and maybe another asset or two in the deal.  I don't see the downside for D.C.

Back to Boston, you now have the option of signing a wing AND Harangody and going into the season with 14 serviceable bodies and a chance to add Perk and get someone else via the trade exception around February.  Seems to make sense to me but maybe I'm missing something.

Also, side question:  Can we trade Harangody before he gets signed?  I would imagine we could.  Maybe that's the holdup in signing him.

[LilRip]

hmm, i don't think i get your line of thinking. Sheed's contract is all about freeing cap space, or at least saving money if you're in the luxury because you won't have to pay twice for a relatively unused player.

why would the Wizards trade for a guy to create the cap space they already had in the first place? And if they had plans to trade him later on in the year, then why would they even need sheed in the first place? Why not just skip us entirely and offer that team a salary dump? Is it to get our first rounder?

Well if that's the case, I doubt DA would give up our first rounder just to be able to dump Sheed. We're over the cap anyway and i don't think we can use a trade exception to sign players. We can only use it in trades. And if you're going to trade Sheed and a first rounder, might as well get someone we can use, as opposed to just getting a trade exception.



- LilRip

[Celtics4ever]

Aye, what is the rush?

[Roy Hobbs]

If Rasheed agrees to retire, I can see Minnesota or Washington taking on his deal in return for cash or a draft pick.  If Rasheed then retired (rather than taking a buyout), they'd be in the exact same position, but would have extra cash / picks.

One thing to remember about buyouts:  since Rasheed has two years left on his deal, the buyout will be spread over two seasons, I believe, in terms of a cap hit.  (However, Rasheed may be able to decline his option in advance, if a team would like to have the hit in only one year.  I haven't researched whether this is possible.)

[Jeff]

hmm, i don't think i get your line of thinking. Sheed's contract is all about freeing cap space, or at least saving money if you're in the luxury because you won't have to pay twice for a relatively unused player.

why would the Wizards trade for a guy to create the cap space they already had in the first place? And if they had plans to trade him later on in the year, then why would they even need sheed in the first place? Why not just skip us entirely and offer that team a salary dump? Is it to get our first rounder?

Well if that's the case, I doubt DA would give up our first rounder just to be able to dump Sheed. We're over the cap anyway and i don't think we can use a trade exception to sign players. We can only use it in trades. And if you're going to trade Sheed and a first rounder, might as well get someone we can use, as opposed to just getting a trade exception

- LilRip

well, DC could just hold onto their cap space, but they could get our pick and still make a trade later on if they like

and Boston might be interested in order to free up a roster spot (as of now we have to decide between signing Harangody or a wing for the 15h spot)

of course, the simpler solution might just to trade Harangody for a future 2nd rounder and sign a guy like Hughes or whoever is left on the FA heap

[Roy Hobbs]

[quote . . . ]and Boston might be interested in order to free up a roster spot (as of now we have to decide between signing Harangody or a wing for the 15h spot)[/quote]

Once Rasheed retires, we're down to 14 roster spots, right?

I'm under the impression that if Rasheed isn't traded by the start of the regular season, he'll retire, and we'll lose him as a trade asset. 

[Jeff]

Once Rasheed retires, we're down to 14 roster spots, right?

I'm under the impression that if Rasheed isn't traded by the start of the regular season, he'll retire, and we'll lose him as a trade asset.  

I'm not under that impression at all.  I think if he isn't traded, we still have the option of holding onto him (inactive) until the trade deadline.  I suppose I could be wrong though.

[Roy Hobbs]

Once Rasheed retires, we're down to 14 roster spots, right?

I'm under the impression that if Rasheed isn't traded by the start of the regular season, he'll retire, and we'll lose him as a trade asset.  

I'm not under that impression at all.  I think if he isn't traded, we still have the option of holding onto him (inactive) until the trade deadline.  I suppose I could be wrong though.

We'd still have to pay him under those circumstances, though, and the $4 million we pay him in salary will, in all likelihood, count against the acquiring teams cap and luxury tax, even if he subsequently agrees to a buyout.  That means that rather than acquiring $6 million+ in cap relief, a team would save about $2 million or so.  In other words, Rasheed's contract won't be a very valuable trade asset if we have to pay him into the regular season.

[Jon]

Exactly, Roy. 

Even if it's allowed, and I'm not sure it will be by the league given all the "announcements" coming out that Rasheed is done and how blatant of a circumvention this is of the cap, will

a) Wyc want to pay him 4 million to sit at home?

b) will teams still want the cap savings at a reduced rate?

Some teams still might want the savings, since we could take on a player with a lengthier deal.  However, if we do that, we're potentially hurting the rebuilding effort in 2012.  Because any team with a player expiring in 2012 would probably just be better served holding onto to that player to use at next seasons's trade deadline to give other teams cap relief. 

[Jeff]

fair enough, but I still don't see Sheed just filing retirement papers and giving up his salary (for us or any other team)

I guess we'll see - tired of thinking about it really - wish we'd just round out the roster and get it over with, but then again, what fun would that be?

[LilRip]

hmm, i don't think i get your line of thinking. Sheed's contract is all about freeing cap space, or at least saving money if you're in the luxury because you won't have to pay twice for a relatively unused player.

why would the Wizards trade for a guy to create the cap space they already had in the first place? And if they had plans to trade him later on in the year, then why would they even need sheed in the first place? Why not just skip us entirely and offer that team a salary dump? Is it to get our first rounder?

Well if that's the case, I doubt DA would give up our first rounder just to be able to dump Sheed. We're over the cap anyway and i don't think we can use a trade exception to sign players. We can only use it in trades. And if you're going to trade Sheed and a first rounder, might as well get someone we can use, as opposed to just getting a trade exception

- LilRip

well, DC could just hold onto their cap space, but they could get our pick and still make a trade later on if they like

and Boston might be interested in order to free up a roster spot (as of now we have to decide between signing Harangody or a wing for the 15h spot)

of course, the simpler solution might just to trade Harangody for a future 2nd rounder and sign a guy like Hughes or whoever is left on the FA heap

we wouldn't need to trade Sheed or use a trade exception to sign Hughes. and i wouldn't want to sign Hughes either.

are we so desperate for a roster spot right now that we should resort to trading a 1st rd pick to get one? Is Harangody more valuable to us than a 1st round pick, which might be around the 20-25th pick? you can still get some pretty quality guys at that stage like Wilson Chandler and (surprise!) Rudy Fernandez. Of course, you can get busts too. But point is, Harangody is nothing spectacularly special that he should warrant us trading away our 1st just so we can accomodate him and a wing.



- LilRip

[Jeff]

ok, lets just trade Sheed for Nocioni and call it a day!

[moiso]

ok, lets just trade Sheed for Nocioni and call it a day!

Sounds good to me.  Maybe it would be smarter to hold off and wait for the best deal, but I also want to use his contract before we lose the chance.  Nocioni sounds nice.

[the_Bird]

If Rasheed agrees to retire, I can see Minnesota or Washington taking on his deal in return for cash or a draft pick.  If Rasheed then retired (rather than taking a buyout), they'd be in the exact same position, but would have extra cash / picks.

One thing to remember about buyouts:  since Rasheed has two years left on his deal, the buyout will be spread over two seasons, I believe, in terms of a cap hit.  (However, Rasheed may be able to decline his option in advance, if a team would like to have the hit in only one year.  I haven't researched whether this is possible.)

This is what I think is most likely to happen.  Danny could have Nooch or Posey now if he wanted them, but it doesn't seem that right now, there's much more than that available in a pure salary dump.  So yeah, unload 'Sheed, some cash, and a second rounder for a trade exemption and a freed-up roster spot.

I've talked myself into the appeal of going into next season with our fourteen guys (including Gody and Semih), a trade exemption, and a free roster spot.  Let's see where the team is at come February; given how old our key players are, odds are that SOMEONE will get hurt between now and then.  Let's keep the trade asset available until we really know what we're most going to need.

[Chris]

Once Rasheed retires, we're down to 14 roster spots, right?

I'm under the impression that if Rasheed isn't traded by the start of the regular season, he'll retire, and we'll lose him as a trade asset.  

I'm not under that impression at all.  I think if he isn't traded, we still have the option of holding onto him (inactive) until the trade deadline.  I suppose I could be wrong though.

We'd still have to pay him under those circumstances, though, and the $4 million we pay him in salary will, in all likelihood, count against the acquiring teams cap and luxury tax, even if he subsequently agrees to a buyout.  That means that rather than acquiring $6 million+ in cap relief, a team would save about $2 million or so.  In other words, Rasheed's contract won't be a very valuable trade asset if we have to pay him into the regular season.

Well, it would only really matter for a team over the luxury tax threshold, or a team under the cap.  If a team is under the cap, then it would cut into their cap space (although not sure it would matter if its the trade deadline anyways), but they would not have to pay Sheed any salary (beyond a possible buyout...which may not be necessary if he already got paid for 4 months, and also could be covered in cash by the C's.  

If a team is over the luxury tax, yes, I believe they would have to pay luxury tax dollars on what the C's already paid Sheed.  But they would still be saving a ton of money.  Lets say that team already paid the player they are trading for Sheed $4 million, and then Sheed joins them, with a cap hit of $4 million after he retires (but that $4 million was already paid by Boston).  That saves the team the $2+ million they would owe for the rest of the season, plus the luxury tax on that.  So the team would be saving $4+ million (not accounting for difference in salaries of Sheed and traded player).

So, its not like they don't get anything for it.

And for a team that is under the tax, but over the cap (or better yet, Sheed's retiring puts them under the tax), they wouldn't have to pay a dime to Sheed (depending on buyout).  Even if that money already paid to Sheed goes on their cap (in place of the guy they traded of course), nothing comes out of pocket.

BTW, I don't think Washington has enough cap space remaining to absorb Sheed anyways.