General Trades Discussion

[SD126]

Can the Spurs even be players in waiver market this year? i forget how that process works.

I assume Bonner would have to be cut first.

Need to clear a roster spot first.

[Chinook]

Just saw these two trades on RealGM (Courtesy of Texas Chuck): http://forums.realgm.com/boards/view...?f=2&t=1447281

Pacers trade: George Hill, Monta Ellis, #20
Pacers get: Jeff Teague, #29

Hawks trade: Jeff Teague
Hawks get: Patty Mills, Nick Stauskas #20, #26

Sixers trade: pick #24, #26, Nick Stauskas
Sixers get: Tony Parker

Spurs trade: Tony Parker, Patty Mills, , #29
Spurs get: Monta Ellis, George Hill, , #24

Pacers get a new PG and dump one of their combo guards as they look to play faster--plus they gain more cap space
Hawks get a nice affordable backup PG who can really shoot, take a look at Stauskas, get a couple late 1sts and add cap space to help them keep/replace Bazemore
Sixers trade a couple late 1sts to get a veteran PG leader.
Spurs bring back an old friend, and in a move that might shock people bring in what looks on the surface like an anti-Spur in Monta Ellis. More on that later.

Then the Spurs package pick #24 with Kyle Anderson and a 2018 Spurs 2nd and trade with Chicago for #14 and Tony Snell. Bulls add a skilled forward prospect in exchange for dropping 10 spots.

I think he's off his rocker if he thinks Parker is worth two firsts and a prospect. But , if he isn't...

I wouldn't want to move up to 14 just to get Valentine. Would rather keep the better defender in Anderson. While using 24 on a guy like Beasley. However, if Deyonta Davis falls that far, then I'd totally reconsider.

[MaNu4Tres]

Just saw these two trades on RealGM (Courtesy of Texas Chuck): http://forums.realgm.com/boards/view...?f=2&t=1447281





I think he's off his rocker if he thinks Parker is worth two firsts and a prospect. But , if he isn't...

I wouldn't want to move up to 14 just to get Valentine. Would rather keep the better defender in Anderson. While using 24 on a guy like Beasley. However, if Deyonta Davis falls that far, then I'd totally reconsider.

Why on earth would the Sixers want Tony Parker? And don't say leadership. If they want leadership, they can get leadership much cheaper than giving up two first round picks and taking on 30 million for 2 years.

Makes absolutely no sense at all.

[Chinook]

Why on earth would the Sixers want Tony Parker? And don't say leadership. If they want leadership, they can get leadership much cheaper than giving up two first round picks and taking on 30 million for 2 years.

Makes absolutely no sense at all.

People make too much of Parker's contract. It's totally fine. It just wouldn't be for the Spurs if they wanted to sign Conley or Durant, as he wouldn't have much use. I could totally see Philly wanting him with their lack or guard and them having bigs who need someone to pass to them. And that ignores that Parker would help sell the team to other potential free agents. Parker, Noel, Oak, Simmons/Ingram and Embiid is a lot more attractive to vets than those guys without Tony by with some nameless rookies.

[palangi]

Why on earth would the Sixers want Tony Parker? And don't say leadership. If they want leadership, they can get leadership much cheaper than giving up two first round picks and taking on 30 million for 2 years.

Makes absolutely no sense at all.

Because philly doesn't have a PG. because philly has a real young team. Because philly could use Parker experience both on and off the court. Because Parker knows the system.

[MaNu4Tres]

People make too much of Parker's contract. It's totally fine. It just wouldn't be for the Spurs if they wanted to sign Conley or Durant, as he wouldn't have much use. I could totally see Philly wanting him with their lack or guard and them having bigs who need someone to pass to them. And that ignores that Parker would help sell the team to other potential free agents. Parker, Noel, Oak, Simmons/Ingram and Embiid is a lot more attractive to vets than those guys without Tony by with some nameless rookies.

I couldn't disagree more.

No way Sixers would give up assets ( two first round picks or even 1 first round pick) to take on 34 year old declining Tony Parker who has 2 years left worth 30 million -- makes absolutely no sense.


Lol at Parker being able to sell the team to other potential free agents. My goodness.

[MaNu4Tres]

Because philly doesn't have a PG. because philly has a real young team. Because philly could use Parker experience both on and off the court. Because Parker knows the system.

Sixers can attain a point guard with experience much cheaper in free agency than having to get rid of two first round picks ( like the proposed deal says) and much cheaper than having to pay 30 million over 2 years.

I have no idea how some of you guys on here come up with this stuff or how you think it makes sense.

[Chinook]

I couldn't disagree more.

Is this like a sig that shows up in front of your post instead of after it?

No way Sixers would give up assets ( two first round picks or even 1 first round pick) to take on 34 year old declining Tony Parker who has 2 years left worth 30 million -- makes absolutely no sense.

We are talking about Conley making twice that much per year this summer. This seems hard for some people to understand, but Parker isn't going to be particularly highly paid after this summer's frenzy.

And you can obviously disagree more, because I never said the Sixers should move picks for Parker. But he totally fits what they want to do. They need a bridge player to get their core to make the next step, in the same way Perkins was for OKC and Iggy was for GS.

Lol at Parker being able to sell the team to other potential free agents. My goodness.

Yeah, because he's never done that before...

[MaNu4Tres]

Is this like a sig that shows up in front of your post instead of after it?



We are talking about Conley making twice that much per year this summer. This seems hard for some people to understand, but Parker isn't going to be particularly highly paid after this summer's frenzy.

And you can obviously disagree more, because I never said the Sixers should move picks for Parker. But he totally fits what they want to do. They need a bridge player to get their core to make the next step, in the same way Perkins was for OKC and Iggy was for GS.



Yeah, because he's never done that before...

If Sixers want a veteran at point-guard, they can get one that can manage the offense just as well as 34 yr old declining Tony for a fraction of the price in free agency -- without giving up assets. (Rondo, Lin, Chalmers, Jennings, Deron Williams, Felton, Dellavedova to name a few unrestricted FA this summer that will be less than 15 mil per.)


And laugh out loud at Parker being able to sell the team to other potential free agents. Yeah Parker did it before alright, only when he sold his best friend since grade school to join the Spurs -- this was when Tony Parker was relevant in the league and a MVP candidate -- now he's not even top 15 at his position. That ship has sailed.

Some of your takes are very surprising Chinook -- expect much better.

[Chinook]

If Sixers want a veteran at point-guard, they can get one that can manage the offense just as well as 34 yr old declining Tony for a fraction of the price in free agency -- without giving up assets. (Rondo, Lin, Chalmers, Jennings, Deron Williams, Felton, Dellavedova to name a few unrestricted FA this summer that will be less than 15 mil per.)

So your solution is that they get worse players? They just gave up two high seconds for Ish Smith. They aren't going to try to be cheap. And you'll be surprised, apparently, because most of those guys will be making within 70 percent of what Parker is making and may well not choose the Sixers.

And laugh out loud at Parker being able to sell the team to other potential free agents. Yeah Parker did it before alright, only when he sold his best friend since grade school to join the Spurs -- this was when Tony Parker was relevant in the league and a MVP candidate -- now he's not even top 15 at his position. That ship has sailed.

You don't have to be an MVP candidate to sell your team well. He was there at the LMA meeting, as was broken-axle Tim. , LMA even called Danny Green for advice during the recruiting process. That ignores that he also was really intrigued by broken-down Tyson Chandler being brought on by the Suns.

When you have guys like Batum or Fournier looking for landing spots, a max contract from Philly with your nation's idol trying to get you to join him is very compelling. Do I think the players will flock to the Sixers? No. Do I think having Parker makes them a more attractive destination than having just what they have now plus a couple more rookies? Yes.

Some of your takes are very surprising Chinook -- expect much better.

You lost me once you started acting like coaching staffs don't matter.

[palangi]

If Sixers want a veteran at point-guard, they can get one that can manage the offense just as well as 34 yr old declining Tony for a fraction of the price in free agency -- without giving up assets. (Rondo, Lin, Chalmers, Jennings, Deron Williams, Felton, Dellavedova to name a few unrestricted FA this summer that will be less than 15 mil per.)


And laugh out loud at Parker being able to sell the team to other potential free agents. Yeah Parker did it before alright, only when he sold his best friend since grade school to join the Spurs -- this was when Tony Parker was relevant in the league and a MVP candidate -- now he's not even top 15 at his position. That ship has sailed.

Some of your takes are very surprising Chinook -- expect much better.

But they get a veteran in tony that knows the system, that is a big deal whether you want to admit it or not. Philly is very far under the cap. They need to spend some money. Why not get a guy the coach is familiar with and comfortable with? Like chinook has said he is a bridge for a younger guy. and 2 years is a good time to do this also.

[MaNu4Tres]

But they get a veteran in tony that knows the system, that is a big deal whether you want to admit it or not. Philly is very far under the cap. They need to spend some money. Why not get a guy the coach is familiar with and comfortable with? Like chinook has said he is a bridge for a younger guy. and 2 years is a good time to do this also.

I couldn't disagree more.

Makes no sense for Sixers to trade for Tony in my opinion.

People think differently its okay to disagree. Its all subjective right now anyway.

[Kawhitstorm]

Just saw these two trades on RealGM (Courtesy of Texas Chuck): http://forums.realgm.com/boards/view...?f=2&t=1447281

McMillan is a defensive minded coach so it doesn't make sense to trade G.Hill's reasonable contract for Porker especially considering Paul George handles the ball a lot thus he would have to play off the ball.

Again, the only teams I could see trading for Porker are the Jazz or the Hawks since both have links to the Spurs & could use a veteran point guard. Most likely that Jazz since nobody wants to play there & they have a bunch of 3rd string PGs. (The Hawks trading Teague to the Jazz for Alec Burks makes more sense since they might lose Bazemore & Hood/Hayward/Exum can eat up the wing minutes)

[Chinook]

McMillan is a defensive minded coach so it doesn't make sense to trade G.Hill's reasonable contract for Porker especially considering Paul George handles the ball a lot thus he would have to play off the ball.

Again, the only teams I could see trading for Porker are the Jazz or the Hawks since both have links to the Spurs & could use a veteran point guard. Most likely that Jazz since nobody wants to play there & they have a bunch of 3rd string PGs. (The Hawks trading Teague to the Jazz for Alec Burks makes more sense since they might lose Bazemore & Hood/Hayward/Exum can eat up the wing minutes)

That was actually long five-team trade where the Spurs end up with Snell, 14, Hill and Eliis by giving up Parker, Mills and Anderson and 29.

[objective]

I've actually thought about a Parker to Philly trade recently and think it might make sense for Philly.

Of course the Spurs would have to be willing to part with Parker (maybe for little or nothing) but it they were I could see it.

He has the relationship with Brett Brown. They need a point. The price trade wise wouldn't be high, maybe some late first or the like.

Colangelo is about winning now and vindicating his hire by differentiating himself from Hinkie. They have so much room that Parker's ridiculous contract doesn't hurt them while it's in effect, and will be over before it can hurt their ability to extend any young players.

And getting a tired vet point for a young team is not without precedent. , the Spurs did it with No Cheeks for Robinson, and Cheeks was even more finished than Parker and about to retire. But he allegedly was going to be a great leader who would teach the young players with his le experience. Instead he didn't lead anything and wasn't even willing to move out of his airport hotel room iirc.

Getting Parker would be the most anti-Hinkie move Philly can do, and with a high lotto pick the year, and Saric, and signing nba-level free agents, they could be a playoff team. And colangelo would be celebrated and up for executive of the year.

[SAGirl]

Both trades are too generous to the Spurs to be realistic.

I could see the 76ers trading for Tony but not attaching 2 picks and a young prospect, specially very early in FA (which is when it would be worth it for us, so we can go after a premium FA ourselves) which means Philly is doing us a favor. 2 picks and a young prospect is too much in that scenario. I could see 76ers getting cheap and not wanting to give up that much.

The Snell-Anderson trade/pick swap is puzzling bc it is also too much in the Spurs favor. I could see Snell for Anderson straight up, and that is not worth it for us, as Snell IMO is a worse player, has regressed and is not versatile or a good defender. He's the epitome of 3 and D but with average to below average D and average 3. Still that's a type favored by the Spurs, and I am sure a lot of guys would love that trade here, but we would likely be made worse by it and I doubt Spurs go for it bc Anderson has a higher ceiling. On the other hand, adding the picks is like saying KA is worth pick 14 and Snell is pick 29. I don't think KA is worth pick 14 right now. Bulls could possibly get a better player at that spot in the draft themselves or a better player in a trade with another team than KA. That trade assumes that KA is the prize for the Bulls and he's not in the category to be a prize player in a trade yet. He's better than Snell but he may not be better than pick 14.

[CGD]

Interesting thought but that's a lot of years of Monta...

The basic structure of that Kyle Anderson trade should be there without having to maneuver to move up 5 spots. For example, if the guy the Spurs are targeting drops to 16 Boston might be willing to do that trade.

[objective]

I didn't have any specific picks for a Parker trade, and don't usually like to guess at 3+ team deals which are so unwieldy even as hypotheticals that they're a waste of brainstorming time.

But a pick for Parker? I could see it. If SA were willing to move on.

[Kawhitstorm]

Getting Parker would be the most anti-Hinkie move Philly can do, and with a high lotto pick the year, and Saric, and signing nba-level free agents, they could be a playoff team. And colangelo would be celebrated and up for executive of the year.

Porker might end up as an MVP candidate if they make the playoffs.

[DPG21920]

Look, for a team like PHI, two late, late 1sts aren't really that valuable. They already have too many young players to look at. They also are ready to stop losing as much. They know they aren't a playoff team, but with the number 1 pick, they want to take steps forward.

They, more than anyone, will be willing to "overpay" to marginally improve as long as it's not a major sacrifice. They need vets and stars more than role players and with the odds of late firsts ever panning out let alone becoming rotation players I can totally see them "overpaying". Even if it's not for TP.

Heck, look at what BOS offered last year to try and get Winslow. An unproven and bad offensive player. When teams have too many draft picks and need talent, they are willing to overpay to get what they need IMO.

[Kawhitstorm]

Look, for a team like PHI, two late, late 1sts aren't really that valuable. They already have too many young players to look at. They also are ready to stop losing as much. They know they aren't a playoff team, but with the number 1 pick, they want to take steps forward.

They, more than anyone, will be willing to "overpay" to marginally improve as long as it's not a major sacrifice. They need vets and stars more than role players and with the odds of late firsts ever panning out let alone becoming rotation players I can totally see them "overpaying". Even if it's not for TP.

Heck, look at what BOS offered last year to try and get Winslow. An unproven and bad offensive player. When teams have too many draft picks and need talent, they are willing to overpay to get what they need IMO.

You also have idiotic teams like the Nets mortgaging their future for washed up All-Stars. (Sean Marks on Line 1)

[Taking it to the Hole]

Unfortunately all this discussion of trading Parker is a moot point as PATFO will not even think about doing it out of loyalty to the Big 3 but it is nice to fantasize. The only way we get a point guard at this point is thru the draft or free agency. No team is going to want to commit to his contract for the next few years and not get something more in return. Right now, the Spurs don't have anything other than Bobo to dangle as bait.

[lmbebo]

Phi and Bos are two teams with a lot of assets, so would make sense to target them if a player that interests us is still available. I would be very surprised if spurs looked to dump Parker. He's def over the hill, but can't see the Spurs sending him out the door. Plus, who would replace him?

Spurs have work to do this off season, I doubt we do all we need to this summer. But if a way to use Boris to get a draft pick this summer, I'm up for it.

[intlspurshk]

Any interest to trade Boris to Kings for Marco +Omini. Marco expressed his bad feelings against Kings to public and paved his way to be traded.

[Kawhitstorm]

Any interest to trade Boris to Kings for Marco +Omini. Marco expressed his bad feelings against Kings to public and paved his way to be traded.

Why would the Kings trade Casspi when he's on a dirty cheap contract & better than Diaw. (To dump Marco?)