Would you give up the cap space for a lottery pick?

[Moranis]

This would be a trade similar to what the Cavs did with Baron Davis, whereas they took on his contract for a first (which happened to turn into Irving).  I have no idea if any of the trades or teams below would be interested in something like what I have, but I would certainly look at trades like those because they could potentially lead to a franchise player this summer (or down the road if the pick has any protection on it).

Golden State might want to get out of Biedrins contract.  As a possible trade something like O'Neal and Bradley for Biedrins and GS 1st works (GS owns the pick if it is in the top 7, otherwise it goes to Utah so there is a big risk there that the pick may not come for awhile).

Detroit has the Ben Gordon and Charlie V contracts it might want to get out of, Garnett for Gordon, Charlie, and a 1st works (I'd probably even let Detroit top 3 protect the pick and let it just turn over next year if they keep it).

New Orleans has Okafor and 2 firsts (its own and Minnesota's).  It may be willing to part with the lesser of the picks to get out of Okafor's contract.  Allen and Bradley for Okafor, 1st works (of course with the NBA running things, I don't think that sort of trade is possible). 

Milwaukee has Drew Gooden and Mbah a Moute who while their contracts aren't huge dollars do stretch out through 14-15.  Allen for them both and a 1st works (again I'd probably allow a top 3 protection on it).

[PosImpos]

Yes, absolutely.  The free agent market this summer is pretty weak, so there's not much I'd want the team to use that cap space on, anyway.  

As long as we're not taking on an absolutely crippling contract, it makes sense to essentially "rent" the cap space with an overpaid or significantly declined player for a couple years if it means getting a lottery pick in this draft.

After all, when we enter rebuilding, our goal will be to tank for as high a pick as possible each year while developing the young talent we've got.  therefore, we're going to have to fill our roster with overpaid role players and veterans at the end of their deals anyhow due to the minimum salary threshold.


Each of the trades you propose is interesting (except for perhaps the Charlie V / Gordon one . . . really would rather not touch those guys).  That Golden State one would be great if it weren't for the fact that the Jazz get it if the Warriors don't get a top 7 spot.

[wdleehi]

In the offseason and for contracts that are no longer then 2 years.

[celtics2]

YYEEeeeeeeeesssssssss. First of all I don't trust the Celtic Brain Team to develop a team on their own. Danny's health is also in question.

[CFAN38]

This is really a great idea. I never thought of it but this might give the Cs the best of both worlds. Take on a bad contract in exchange for a good draft pick (either this years of next years draft). Then keep pierce for the remainder of his contract, resign ray to short term deal this off season, and see if KG will sign short term. Draft two rookies in the first round of 2012, play a season with our aged vets (pierce,ray,KG),young vets 9rondo,bass and youth (avery,JJJ,moore,steimsma,rookie,and rookie). Then have 2 more picks in 2013 and we now have a very young team that has been brought up in a winning atmosphere. The final step would be taking a year to develop the young talent and then flipping them for some proven veterans.

[clover]

This is really a great idea. I never thought of it but this might give the Cs the best of both worlds. Take on a bad contract in exchange for a good draft pick (either this years of next years draft). Then keep pierce for the remainder of his contract, resign ray to short term deal this off season, and see if KG will sign short term. Draft two rookies in the first round of 2012, play a season with our aged vets (pierce,ray,KG),young vets 9rondo,bass and youth (avery,JJJ,moore,steimsma,rookie,and rookie). Then have 2 more picks in 2013 and we now have a very young team that has been brought up in a winning atmosphere. The final step would be taking a year to develop the young talent and then flipping them for some proven veterans.

How would they have been brought up in a winning atmosphere?  I can think of little worse than extending this strategy of losing by playing decrepit stars while the rookies watch.  You'd really have Danny give up the ability to sign top free agents for that?

[Yoki_IsTheName]

I kind of like this idea as well. Get hooked up on a bad contract so we could get a potential top 10 pick.

Give me Bargnani and Raptors' 1st for the two 1st and anybody but Rondo, Ray and Paul (and possibly KG, which leaves us pretty much nothing that Toronto would want, but just for discussion purposes). Long, pretty bad contract but can produce. Then the top 10 pick.

[Roy H.]

Probably.  It depends on how many years were left on the deal we're acquiring.  If there's one year left, it's a no brainer.  Two years, and it becomes tricky.  Three, I'd pass unless we're talking about a top five pick.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Probably.  It depends on how many years were left on the deal we're acquiring.  If there's one year left, it's a no brainer.  Two years, and it becomes tricky.  Three, I'd pass unless we're talking about a top five pick.

Washington is looking like a team who will produce a top 5 pick. They might wanna unload a big 6'11'' 260 lbs talented but ultra lazy tumor for some expirings. Will that be an example of this, sir Roy?

[Roy H.]

Probably.  It depends on how many years were left on the deal we're acquiring.  If there's one year left, it's a no brainer.  Two years, and it becomes tricky.  Three, I'd pass unless we're talking about a top five pick.

Washington is looking like a team who will produce a top 5 pick. They might wanna unload a big 6'11'' 260 lbs talented but ultra lazy tumor for some expirings. Will that be an example of this, sir Roy?

I don't think the Wizards would package their #1 to get teams to take Blatche; I think their fan base would revolt.  Blatche has a ton of talent, and is signed to a reasonable (if long term) deal.  He's a headcase and a tumor, but he's got ability.

That said, if the trade on the table was something like:

Blatche + Rashard + #1

for

KG + Wilcox (to make salaries match)

... then yes, I think we have to do that, as much as I hate Blatche.

[CFAN38]

Kg to Washington (make part of the deal that they get our pick and the clippers in there pick is top5, just our pick if its top ten)

R Lewis and a there 2012 1st to boston

saves washington one year of a huge contract, and they dont really need more youth on that roster.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Probably.  It depends on how many years were left on the deal we're acquiring.  If there's one year left, it's a no brainer.  Two years, and it becomes tricky.  Three, I'd pass unless we're talking about a top five pick.

Washington is looking like a team who will produce a top 5 pick. They might wanna unload a big 6'11'' 260 lbs talented but ultra lazy tumor for some expirings. Will that be an example of this, sir Roy?

I don't think the Wizards would package their #1 to get teams to take Blatche; I think their fan base would revolt.  Blatche has a ton of talent, and is signed to a reasonable (if long term) deal.  He's a headcase and a tumor, but he's got ability.

That said, if the trade on the table was something like:

Blatche + Rashard + #1

for

KG + Wilcox (to make salaries match)

... then yes, I think we have to do that, as much as I hate Blatche.

I was gonna say the same thing.

I really liked Blatched until you knocked some sense into me with what you guys were telling me from before. But I doubt also that they will package it just like that.

However if we absorb Shard's contract, it might do.

[bfrombleacher]

That's a smart idea.

Which teams are looking to unload a 2 year bad contract (for the free agency) to rebuild? We could give them JO's expiring one and not have to touch the core at all. Even if their contract is more than 2 years, I think its worth it if they give us picks.

[chambers]

Probably.  It depends on how many years were left on the deal we're acquiring.  If there's one year left, it's a no brainer.  Two years, and it becomes tricky.  Three, I'd pass unless we're talking about a top five pick.

Washington is looking like a team who will produce a top 5 pick. They might wanna unload a big 6'11'' 260 lbs talented but ultra lazy tumor for some expirings. Will that be an example of this, sir Roy?

I don't think the Wizards would package their #1 to get teams to take Blatche; I think their fan base would revolt.  Blatche has a ton of talent, and is signed to a reasonable (if long term) deal.  He's a headcase and a tumor, but he's got ability.

That said, if the trade on the table was something like:

Blatche + Rashard + #1

for

KG + Wilcox (to make salaries match)

... then yes, I think we have to do that, as much as I hate Blatche.

Don't you think KG will just retire if he was shipped like that to a garbage team like the Wizards?

Wizards get rid of Lewis and lose Blatche and a pick for Wilcox and a retiring KG?
Dunno.

[Roy H.]

Probably.  It depends on how many years were left on the deal we're acquiring.  If there's one year left, it's a no brainer.  Two years, and it becomes tricky.  Three, I'd pass unless we're talking about a top five pick.

Washington is looking like a team who will produce a top 5 pick. They might wanna unload a big 6'11'' 260 lbs talented but ultra lazy tumor for some expirings. Will that be an example of this, sir Roy?

I don't think the Wizards would package their #1 to get teams to take Blatche; I think their fan base would revolt.  Blatche has a ton of talent, and is signed to a reasonable (if long term) deal.  He's a headcase and a tumor, but he's got ability.

That said, if the trade on the table was something like:

Blatche + Rashard + #1

for

KG + Wilcox (to make salaries match)

... then yes, I think we have to do that, as much as I hate Blatche.

Don't you think KG will just retire if he was shipped like that to a garbage team like the Wizards?

Wizards get rid of Lewis and lose Blatche and a pick for Wilcox and a retiring KG?
Dunno.

Well, like I said, I doubt the Wizards would move their pick solely to dump Blatche (or Rashard).

If they were inclined to do so, though, KG retiring wouldn't really bother them. In fact, it would save them a bunch of money.