General Trades Discussion

[LittleCriminal]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...sten-to/page/5

Would you trade Leonard,Jackson and Splitter for Rudy Gay??
I would not.

[Paranoid Pop]

Moving Splitter seems like a not so bad idea again now that he proved completely inefficient vs Ibaka :

Tiago to Boston
Bradley and Bargnani to SA
Melo Sullinger and Sjax's expiring to Toronto (+pick eventually)

We get the best perimeter defense duo in the league with KY/Bradley and true spacing vs OKC who can just protect the paint too easily right now.
Boston get the perfect fit to play with KG and Rondo
Toronto get two young prospect, a pick and a lot of cap space

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cp3llmr

Boston probably says no since it takes away all their youth for a one year rental of Tiago but they may get desperate enough...

Then I'd do Green for a backup big, Vesely or Williams or anyone.

[Bruno]

I would prefer someone like Gustavo Ayon who seems more attuned to be a role player than Randolph, who I suppose has been a flop everywhere he has gone, his so called potential notwithstanding.

Yep, Spurs could very well put Randolph in the bust category.


More globally, it's noteworthy that Splitter starting with Tim and playing an expanded role has changed what Spurs need. Earlier this season, it was clear Spurs needed a quality PF. With Splitter being now more than Tim's backup, Spurs seems to have fine 3 men PF/C rotation of Duncan/Splitter/Diaw. It could change in the future especially if Diaw continue to play at that poor level.

The need for Spurs to do a significant trade is way lower with the new rotation decided by Pop. A 3rd string center would be welcomed but Spurs could get one through free agency or a minor trade. I would too keep an eye on how Blair will react at being buried at the end of the bench.

[Paranoid Pop]

Yep, Spurs could very well put Randolph in the bust category.


More globally, it's noteworthy that Splitter starting with Tim and playing an expanded role has changed what Spurs need. Earlier this season, it was clear Spurs needed a quality PF. With Splitter being now more than Tim's backup, Spurs seems to have fine 3 men PF/C rotation of Duncan/Splitter/Diaw. It could change in the future especially if Diaw continue to play at that poor level.

The need for Spurs to do a significant trade is way lower with the new rotation decided by Pop. A 3rd string center would be welcomed but Spurs could get one through free agency or a minor trade. I would too keep an eye on how Blair will react at being buried at the end of the bench.

Yeah they may instead put a secondary playmaker next to TP to make the twin twoer experiment work better before deciding anything...

[Bruno]

Yeah they may instead put a secondary playmaker next to TP to make the twin twoer experiment work better before deciding anything...

Well, the Splitter/Duncan pair +/- is +34 in 127mins which is very good. Even considering that it didn't work that well against OKC, early hints have shown that pairing Duncan with Splitter was a good move.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Yep, Spurs could very well put Randolph in the bust category.

The need for Spurs to do a significant trade is way lower with the new rotation decided by Pop. A 3rd string center would be welcomed but Spurs could get one through free agency or a minor trade. I would too keep an eye on how Blair will react at being buried at the end of the bench.

Yes, a defensive PF is not so much an imperative now since Splitter's emergence as Duncan's co-starter. But I think that Blair seems to have exhausted his effectiveness and Diaw, with his abilities, does seem limited. And maybe all the questions asked of the Spurs in last few years' post-season will be repeated again. Just so that the Spurs' main players remain fresher for the post-season and are without too much wear and tear, I think they should consider getting a replacement for Blair/Bonner. Diaw adds a rarer dimension as a stretch-big/passing big/ competent post defender and is therefore more surer than Blair/ Bonner now.

[Chinook]

1. No trade is Impossible (Jefferson for Jackson)
2. I did not have to add the TE but I did, so what? With or without it the trade still works.
3. I did add M. Daniels. So What? With or WithOut him the trade still works.

Wanna see Your Impossible Trade Idea Again:
D. Granger, T. Hansbrough for B. Udric+Bench Players

Edit: 4) The Pacers aren't going to Trade away Granger and Hansbrough for B. Udric+Bench Players. Practice what you Preach!! (Reread Quote In Original Post Above)

Btw Granger is out Probably till March... Can you trade an Injured player after or before the trade deadline?? lol
NBA Trade Deadline 2013 is at 2:00 PM (CT) on Thursday February 21.
Looks like you need to catch up on some reading!!!

"Bruno it may be worthwhile to put a link to the CBA FAQ in the OP. Maybe that would encourage people to look some of this stuff up instead of consistently proposing impossible trades ideas."--- I'll admit it's a good Idea to do what you asked of Bruno..If a Poster wants to get into the details of the CBA, good for them, but I am not going to read the CBA Link just to post a trade Idea....waste of time/life.

Myself as well as many others ( I Hope) find the NBA purely as a form of entertainment in our lives. All I care about is the Class of the Spurs Organization, 95% of the current roster, watching the games and Winning.

I don't need to understand the entire CBA due to the fact you,myself and many other Spurstalk Posters do not have the Authority to use said Knowledge In the actual NBA. People like you use this Info to about Trade Ideas in an Online Trade Idea Forum.

Understand that you have no clue as to what any NBA organization is going to do just like the rest of us.
Quit acting like you know what team would do what.... you don't!

1 Yes, that trade is impossible. You CAN'T trade a TE with anything else. It's against the rules you don't care to understand. That's why you should look them up instead of acting like Jefferson for Jackson (completely legal) is a legitimate retort.

2 See the first point. It does NOT work.

3 No, you did not add Daniels until after I said that you could if you wanted to give the Bucks a TE. A trade of Joseph and Blair for Sanders is possible without adding Daniels (as in, it's legal). But as I said in that point, it's a waste of time (like doesn't give them anymore flexibility) to add Daniels unless the Bucks just want to get rid of him.

I couldn't care less about how you view the forum. You ask what people think about an idea, and I respond telling you it's impossible (as in illegal according to the CBA). That's not a minor little thing we should all just overlook because you're too lazy to remember the three or four rules you need to know in order to propose trades that could actually happen. I wasn't trying to dig at your idea when talking Bruno. The CBA FAQ is a good resource for people who want to understand when a trade is legal and when it's not (in addition to many other things).

4 You asked our opinions, and I said what I thought: The Spurs aren't going to be able to trade crap unless it's for crap, horribly damaged goods or terrible contracts. If there's no reason why it would happen, then it's a bad idea. It's not me saying I wouldn't do it if I was Buford and the other team came to me and asked.

Lay off the whining, man. People aren't trying to act high and mighty by telling you why your idea is bad. Some of us try to actually know what we're talking about so that we don't give foolish opinions. Your opinions are just as welcome here as anyone else, but that doesn't give you the right to ignore facts and rules about the NBA's legal system and then to get upset when your idea is criticized after you ask for people's opinions.

[Chinook]

If Spurs still believe in his upside, Blair for Anthony Randolph would be a nice little trade.

That would be interesting, but that would involve cutting Anderson, as the Spurs would be over the tax after that trade. Secondly, the rules seem to suggest that Randolph's salary is too big for that trade to work.

I keep hearing about how high Randolph's upside it, but it just doesn't seem to be working with him. It'd be nice to see him on a winning team for once, but with him having a long-term deal, I don't see the Spurs absorbing that much risk.

Along the lines of trading Blair for a big with supposed upside, what about Jeremy Tyler? I heard that he was good in high school but got bad advice which has really hurt is career. His contract is a lot smaller than Blair's, but that's not an issue, because Blair can fit into GS's exception. If the Spurs were to put Tyler in the Ford exception, then they'd get a brand new TE equal to all of Blair's salary, which could come in handy. I've heard nothing about Tyler being a good player now, but I'd rather have a big with upside on the bench than one who has declining knee health.

[Paranoid Pop]

Another long shot :

Danny Green Neal? pick? to Minny - they get the SG they desperately want

SJax Bonner Budinger to Toronto - they get the SF of the future they are looking for and a lot of cap space

Derrick Williams Bargnani Landry Fields to SA - we get all the bigs we need, taking a bad contract back is not that bad for what we get

It's a strech for Minny to send Derrick Williams and Budinger for Danny Green and I'm not sure adding a pick and even Gary Neal would change that, but you could argue we send them a SG and a SF back. Three ways trade proposals take a lot of wishful thinking most of the time, that one is no exception I guess...

[Paranoid Pop]

All things considered it's pretty safe to assume Pop will bet on Splitter this year.

Green for Derrick Williams seems like the safest bet, too bad Green can't be traded before January 15th...

Besides Williams has the mobnility to challenge Abaka's shots. Could start in limited minutes next to Tim with Splitter playing big minutes off the bench...

Is Pop too in love with Green to even think about it?

Would the Wolves bite? and for what package exactly?

The thing is Minny is involved in a lot of trade rumors involving much bigger targets than Green, their name come up in the Gasol, Verajao trade rumors so if they pull the trigger on something like that it kills any chance of the trade happening...

[szkorhetz]

Another long shot :

Danny Green Neal? pick? to Minny - they get the SG they desperately want

SJax Bonner Budinger to Toronto - they get the SF of the future they are looking for and a lot of cap space

Derrick Williams Bargnani Landry Fields to SA - we get all the bigs we need, taking a bad contract back is not that bad for what we get

It's a strech for Minny to send Derrick Williams and Budinger for Danny Green and I'm not sure adding a pick and even Gary Neal would change that, but you could argue we send them a SG and a SF back. Three ways trade proposals take a lot of wishful thinking most of the time, that one is no exception I guess...

So, basically our two best options are Bargnani and Williams?
Nice....

[Paranoid Pop]

So, basically our two best options are Bargnani and Williams?
Nice....

To be fair I'm the only one who thinks Bargnani could be a positive and not sure why you would complain about Williams, what did you expect? Gasol or Ilyasova?

[szkorhetz]

To be fair I'm the only one who thinks Bargnani could be a positive and not sure why you would complain about Williams, what did you expect? Gasol or Ilyasova?

I actually like Williams, he is very athletic.But Bargs... He is not much better than Bon-Bon. Okay, more athletic, younger, better penetration, but nothing else.

[Chinook]

He can't shoot threes like Bonner, and he's not as experienced as Bonner. But I like Williams' potential. Anything outside Parker, Kawhi and Splitter is a reasonable price to pay for a player with that kind of upside. There are others like Duncan and Manu that the Spurs wouldn't trade, anyway, but he's worth the risk of giving up a couple of people like Green and Neal.

[Bruno]

That would be interesting, but that would involve cutting Anderson, as the Spurs would be over the tax after that trade. Secondly, the rules seem to suggest that Randolph's salary is too big for that trade to work.

This trade should work if Anderson is cut before it. Spurs would then be able to benefit to the non-taxpayers trade rules that allows them to take back up to 150%+100K of the salary send.

Regardless of that trade scenario, with everybody on his way back, it's time for Spurs organization to wonder whether or not they should keep Anderson. He has been relatively fine but he doesn't really fill a need.

[Chinook]

I think he's good to keep if they plan to move a wing. He seems to know the system, and he's not pushing for time the same way that Neal, De Colo and Mills are. He seems perfect as a depth player.

[Paranoid Pop]

Espn insider had an article on potential Derrick Williams trades, not sure if posted already and I'm not sure what's the policity with insider articles since the plagiarism scandal so I'll just link what I found when googling for it : http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=937889

[Chinook]

Espn insider had an article on potential Derrick Williams trades, not sure if posted already and I'm not sure what's the policity with insider articles since the plagiarism scandal so I'll just link what I found when googling for it : http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=937889

Thanks for the link. If that's Williams' value, the Spurs really could beat it which their spare parts. It does suppose that Williams is a small-forward, though, which I don't think is true in today's NBA. As a power-forward, Williams may have a different market. Neal, Green or De Colo along with Blair or Bonner and a couple of firsts should be able to get it done.

[Paranoid Pop]

A scenario worth exploring imo :

Sign Aron Baynes as back up center and mostly play him with a polished passers like Boris/Nando.

Allows us to trade our best trading chip Tiago who's too good to be back up C and doesn't fit that well at PF.

Move him and Green in a three way trade with Minny and Boston for Derrick Williams and AB.

We get a young core of De Colo AB KY D.Williams while still getting better or at least more balanced.

[ace3g]

A scenario worth exploring imo :

Sign Aron Baynes as back up center and mostly play him with a polished passers like Boris/Nando.

Allows us to trade our best trading chip Tiago who's too good to be back up C and doesn't fit that well at PF.

Move him and Green in a three way trade with Minny and Boston for Derrick Williams and AB.

We get a young core of De Colo AB KY D.Williams while still getting better or at least more balanced.

While I'm impressed with Baynes rebounding # in Euroleague, he doesn't allow the Spurs to move Tiago, because Baynes is still an unproven commodity in the NBA

[Paranoid Pop]

While I'm impressed with Baynes rebounding # in Euroleague, he doesn't allow the Spurs to move Tiago, because Baynes is still an unproven commodity in the NBA

Well we could use a rebounder anyway so we should get him and go from there. Pop doesn't want to keep Anderson anyway imo so we have a free roster spot who is wasted basically right now.

[Chinook]

A scenario worth exploring imo :

Sign Aron Baynes as back up center and mostly play him with a polished passers like Boris/Nando.

Allows us to trade our best trading chip Tiago who's too good to be back up C and doesn't fit that well at PF.

Move him and Green in a three way trade with Minny and Boston for Derrick Williams and AB.

We get a young core of De Colo AB KY D.Williams while still getting better or at least more balanced.

I don't like that deal.

One, Boston can't absorb Splitter for Bradley.

Two, if Green is enough to get Williams, I think the Spurs should just do that and be happy with it.

Three, I actually like Splitter and Duncan starting together. Baynes working out would mean the Spurs have a legitimate third post player to come in, which reduces the pressure of foul trouble and losing size on the bench.

Four, I like what Bradley did defensively last year, but he's sort of small to play the 2 guard, and the back court is pretty packed as it is. I'd rather keep Green and move Neal if the Spurs don't feel comfortable with their guards' defensive abilities.

[ace3g]

I'm all for signing Baynes as you can see in the Baynes thread, just not at the expense of trading Splitter. Kind of hoping if the Spurs are interested in him, to try and bring him in as quickly as possible to see what kind of role he can carve. I agree though with the 15th spot should go to a PF/C rather than a SF in JA.

[Chinook]

Paranoid Pop

A deal like you described would look something like this:

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=cbmjgul

but it would have Green instead of Neal and Bonner going to Minny once the restriction gets lifted. I think that deal is semi-doable, since the Wolves would get two legitimate swing men who are young and signed to long-term deals. Boston gets some size, rather than a player who interferes with Green in Williams. I think the Spurs lose a lot, though. I don't see how anything from the other teams can make up for the loss of Splitter, and Bradley still has some work to do to get to Green's level.

If the Spurs were looking for a major shake-up, this would qualify. But I don't think they're anywhere near worried enough to make this type of move.

[Paranoid Pop]

Yeah I actually agree with both of you. I don't see a huge move happening.

I don't believe in Splitter as much as most people but the Tim/Tiago starting frontline could be a very hard match up for a team like Miami... On paper it should do good vs OKC as well but I really doubt that one. We did well in the past with Blair's inside scoring vs OKC so there's no reason it shouldn't work with Splitter but I still think Tiago is a bad defender at PF, not mobile enough to challenge outside shots.

If we keep Splitter, a rebounder is probably the priority, we gave up to many offensive rebounds vs OKC to have a chance, Collinson got 5 or 6 on Blair alone but Ibaka got a lot as well... So bringing in a rebounding back up center may be enough.

If we part with Splitter obviously getting a PF would be in order but I don't Pop doing that.