If Howard goes to Houston can Celtics land Asik?

[nickagneta]

I read an article yesterday about possible landing spots for Dwight Howard. Here it is: http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9133623/nba-pros-cons-2013-free-agent-dwight-howard-going-atlanta-los-angeles-dallas-houston

Interesting read. We all know that LA will be able to offer the most money but will Howard stay in LA playing 2nd banana(or third if the Lakers can't get rid of Gasol)? He also has been called out by Kobe and had what appears to be a bad time of it in LA. But if he goes elsewhere he will leave money on the table.

Houston might provide the best place for Howard to land but as the article states, Larry Coon doesn't believe the Rockets have a max deal on the table.

But if they relinquish their non-guaranteed contracts and then trade Asik, who won't be needed there for a savings(remember Houston will be under the cap and won't be held to the same restrictions teams over the cap are held to), they might be able to get enough under the cap to still sign Howard and have the following:

Lin
Harden
Parsons
Robinson/Montiejunas/Jones/White

Now Asik is a perfect fit for the Celtics and they will have plenty of players to offer Darryl Morey but the Celtics will have to make the money work and I am sure give up picks, especially the 2014 first rounder which figures to be pretty valuable.

With Asik's salary at $8.375 million that means the Celtics can send a minimum of $5.58 million. Bass fits into that perfectly and gets Houston almost $2 million/year more to sign Howard but Terry also fits the bill if you throw in one or two of the non-guaranteed contracts the Celtics just signed(Randolph, Williams, White) or possibly include a sign and traded Chris Wilcox though my guess is someone they could cut on a non-guaranteed contract makes more sense.

So, my guess here is the Rockets would want as much salary as possible to give Howard so perhaps any package we send out might have to go to a team under the cap who will send picks Houston's way while we get Asik. There's a ton of possibilities.

Now the chances are remote that Howard even chooses Houston, but if he does, it might be the best thing for the Celtics as it might open them up to getting the defensive anchor, rebounding center they have been missing that allows KG to take a smaller or efficient role.

Rondo/
Bradley/Crawford
Pierce/Green
KG/Sullinger
Asik/Melo

and either Bass and Lee or Terry and Lee or bass and Terry. Yes, a tremendous long shot but one, if I am Danny, I am already discussing with Morey in the hopes of getting it done if Howard shows interest in Houston.

[Lucky17]

Would the Lakers be able to S&T Howard to Houston for Asik?

[celtsfan84]

Would the Lakers be able to S&T Howard to Houston for Asik?

Yes.

And to reference the first post, Howard won't be "2nd banana" to Kobe for very long and will never be "3rd banana" to Gasol.  Gasol has been the clear #3 this year.

[Moranis]

Yeah if I am LA, I make Houston trade with me and also try to unload some dead weight contracts.  Houston can of course say no, but that might mean Howard doesn't go there.

[nickagneta]

Would the Lakers be able to S&T Howard to Houston for Asik?

Yes.

And to reference the first post, Howard won't be "2nd banana" to Kobe for very long and will never be "3rd banana" to Gasol.  Gasol has been the clear #3 this year.

Can they with the new CBA? They are way over the luxury/tax line which I think prohibits them from participating in sign and trades though I am not sure whether that means they can't receive sign and trades or send themn out or both.

[Bankshot]

Would the Celtics be able to sign Howard?

[celtsfan84]

Would the Lakers be able to S&T Howard to Houston for Asik?

Yes.

And to reference the first post, Howard won't be "2nd banana" to Kobe for very long and will never be "3rd banana" to Gasol.  Gasol has been the clear #3 this year.

Can they with the new CBA? They are way over the luxury/tax line which I think prohibits them from participating in sign and trades though I am not sure whether that means they can't receive sign and trades or send themn out or both.

Per Larry Coon's CBA FAQ -

•Starting in 2013-14, the team receiving the player cannot be above the "apron" ($4 million above the tax level) after the trade.

These teams are free to send players to other teams in sign-and-trade transactions, or to receive players in sign-and-trade transactions who weren't signed-and-traded themselves. Also, the restriction applies only to the sign-and-trade transaction itself -- teams are free to acquire players who had been signed-and-traded in earlier transactions.

In other words, they can't use a sign-and-trade to sign an existing free agent (like they did with Nash) but they can be the trading team in a sign-and-trade and acquire a player that way.  Asik is under contract, so they can trade for him.

[nickagneta]

Would the Lakers be able to S&T Howard to Houston for Asik?

Yes.

And to reference the first post, Howard won't be "2nd banana" to Kobe for very long and will never be "3rd banana" to Gasol.  Gasol has been the clear #3 this year.

Can they with the new CBA? They are way over the luxury/tax line which I think prohibits them from participating in sign and trades though I am not sure whether that means they can't receive sign and trades or send themn out or both.

Per Larry Coon's CBA FAQ -

•Starting in 2013-14, the team receiving the player cannot be above the "apron" ($4 million above the tax level) after the trade.

These teams are free to send players to other teams in sign-and-trade transactions, or to receive players in sign-and-trade transactions who weren't signed-and-traded themselves. Also, the restriction applies only to the sign-and-trade transaction itself -- teams are free to acquire players who had been signed-and-traded in earlier transactions.

In other words, they can't use a sign-and-trade to sign an existing free agent (like they did with Nash) but they can be the trading team in a sign-and-trade.

Clarifies things. Guess if Howard is going to Houston it would make the most logic for Morey to explore a sign and trade and max out Howard's contract. I think a $14-16 million traded player exception with picks might work and would greatly reduce(along with a World Peace amnesty)the Lakers' massive luxury tax penalty.

[lightspeed5]

howard is staying in LA. he's getting paid big adidas $$$ to be an LA star.

[Quinn]

I like asik but isn't the third year of his contract a "poison pill"
I don't want to comit that much salary to a defensive center.

[syfy9]

I like asik but isn't the third year of his contract a "poison pill"
I don't want to comit that much salary to a defensive center.

He's showing a lot of glimpses of offensive talent. McHale might be the best situation for any defensive-oriented big man in the league - I've seen him do signature up fakes McHale used to do.

I'd say he's like the Jeff Green of centers, if I had to describe him. He's slowly proving that he's worth his contract.

[lightspeed5]

asik is a joke.

[SHAQATTACK]

why would Doc want ASIK on this team....to sit him on the bench and frown at him for being 7 foot.?

taboo ....Doc playing young bigs.....or any big who dares rebound

 

LETS " get "......more shooting guards who can't shoot and play 5 of them at the same time,

[CelticConcourse]

why would Doc want ASIK on this team....to sit him on the bench and frown at him for being 7 foot.?

taboo ....Doc playing young bigs.....or any big who dares rebound

 

LETS " get "......more shooting guards who can't shoot and play 5 of them at the same time,

Asik plays defense; Doc would not bench him. (come on, Thibs played him)

[ejk3489]

Would the Lakers be able to S&T Howard to Houston for Asik?

Yes.

And to reference the first post, Howard won't be "2nd banana" to Kobe for very long and will never be "3rd banana" to Gasol.  Gasol has been the clear #3 this year.

Can they with the new CBA? They are way over the luxury/tax line which I think prohibits them from participating in sign and trades though I am not sure whether that means they can't receive sign and trades or send themn out or both.

In reality, yes, LA could sign and trade Howard to Houston. But the Rockets would have no reason to do that b/c they are under the cap, so there is no benefit for them to give away their players when they can just sign Dwight outright as a free agent.

It's also much harder for the player (Dwight in this case) to agree to a S/T because the maximum deals/years are limited in the new CBA -

Contract w/ same team: 5 years, 7.5% raises
Contract w/ new team: 4 years, 4.5% raises
Sign-and-trade contract: 4 years, 4.5% raises

From John Schuhmann (nba.com):

Under the new CBA, new contracts with the player's current team can be five years long with 7.5 percent raises, while contracts with a new team can only be four years long with 4.5 percent raises. Another major change is that sign-and-trade deals are limited to the same maximums as deals with a new team (four years, 4.5 percent raises).

So if Dwight Howard wants to sign with a team with cap space (like Dallas or New Jersey) this summer, neither he nor his new team has any incentive to work out a sign-and-trade deal with Orlando. However, if he wanted to sign with a team that was over the cap (like the Lakers) or not under the cap enough to sign him, then that team would need to work out a sign-and-trade with the Magic.

(For example, to acquire Chandler in December, the Knicks worked out a three-way sign-and-trade with the Mavs and Wizards that shed them of the contracts of Andy Rautins and Ronny Turiaf, creating the needed cap space for Chandler's contract.)

The sign-and-trade rule change could affect the leverage in a potential Howard deal at the deadline. The Magic have additional leverage over Howard, knowing that if he wants to leave Orlando in the summer, he'll definitely have to sign a shorter deal with his new team. But the Nets also have additional leverage over the Magic, because Orlando's not getting anything back if they keep Howard past the deadline and he ultimately chooses to play in Brooklyn next season.