Can Rick Sund Dictate.....

[mrhonline]

I was going to let your post go, D, but since you got a +1, I'll respond.

I assumed the knowledgeable posters here would understand I was referencing S&T's in the new CBA, so that rules out your first two trades. Your third trade isn't even a S&T; Jefferson was already under contract.

Your 4th is a successful S&T, but you'll remember how difficult that trade was to pull off, so I'm sure you'll agree it's far outweighed in terms of precedent by the Rashard Lewis trade.

I do believe that there will be a S&T or two this summer, but I do not expect the Hawks to get anything of great value. Definitely a TPE, maybe a draft pick, or maybe a young player with upside. Expecting a starter isn't realistic. Not impossible, but not realistic.

^^^+1 to myself and niremetal. LOL.

Edited May 28, 2010 by mrhonline

[mrhonline]

Raptors' fans are discussing this, too:

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=32&p=23506889

[Diesel]

No doubt man. Only way we get more than that is if someone wants two unrestricted free agents; which is what Diesel is hoping for. Problem is that is a one in one hundred shot at best; maybe a one in one thousand.

Well, I wouldn't say that. My thing is if JJ wants to leave us then it's likely that he wants to leave us for a better chance at winning because at this point.. it can't be about money.

Better situation means that he's playing with a bonafide Superstar.

As we look around, there's Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Ginobili, Randolph, Dirk Shaq, and a couple of more guys who can ask for over 10+ million and be a superstar for his team. I will erase Dirk because he opted out to help Dallas. However, some of these others are moving. If JJ wants to move to be with them, then the team that go to will have to clear space (except for NY and maybe Miami).

Now, let's look at some other issues.

Leverage.

1. There's leverage if JJ wants to play with Bron, Wade, or Bosh as a package to a team other than NY or Miami.

2. There's leverage if JJ wants a 6th year (likely).

3. There's leverage if JJ wants Bird raises 10.5% rather than 7%. (likely)

We have some leverage to dictate (depending on what JJ wants). People don't understand... this is JJ's last major contract. IF he wants the money, he has to cash in here. IF it's not about Money, then JJ will take the first good 5 year deal out there that puts him in a better situation than he has here.

However, SUND DOESNT HAVE TO TAKE ANOTHER TEAMS CRAP TO KEEP JJ HAPPY.

Like I said before.

I would rather lose JJ outright and give him no bird raises and no 6th year than to lose him for Crappy Eddy Curry or bad contract Hinrich or Deng. At this point, we don't owe Tellem.

I was going to let your post go, D, but since you got a +1, I'll respond.

I assumed the knowledgeable posters here would understand I was referencing S&T's in the new CBA, so that rules out your first two trades. Your third trade isn't even a S&T; Jefferson was already under contract.

Your 4th is a successful S&T, but you'll remember how difficult that trade was to pull off, so I'm sure you'll agree it's far outweighed in terms of precedent by the Rashard Lewis trade.

I do believe that there will be a S&T or two this summer, but I do not expect the Hawks to get anything of great value. Definitely a TPE, maybe a draft pick, or maybe a young player with upside. Expecting a starter isn't realistic. Not impossible, but not realistic.

^^^+1 to myself and niremetal. LOL.

You did say "HISTORICAL EVIDENCE" right?

If you don't like the historical evidence, don't make blanket statements that are inaccurate.

Can I get a +2?

Edited May 28, 2010 by Diesel

[mrhonline]

You did say "HISTORICAL EVIDENCE" right?

Are you seriously encouraging people to analyze your every word as if it were literature?

So, yeah, go ahead and find some S&T's from 1956.

[mrhonline]

My +2 is bigger than your +2.

:laughing5:

[Sothron]

Very true. I think we are overestimating our leverage here with these teams.

I think that is a mild way of putting it. If we lose Joe we aren't going to get anything great back. There may be some added chips for us at the table due to the unprecedented amount of max players dangling out there as unrestricted free agents and the stated desire of some of them to play together but I am not expecting us to walk away with some of the names I've been seeing lately.

[Diesel]

Are you seriously encouraging people to analyze your every word as if it were literature?

So, yeah, go ahead and find some S&T's from 1956.

The Tmac and the Hill trades being under a different CBA makes no difference. It's still a CBA that recognized FAcy. That recognized UFA. That recognized that the UFA didn't have to deal with his previous team. That recognized that the receiving team still had to fit that player under it's cap. The only difference between that CBA and what we have now is the Luxury tax and Rookie contracts and 12.5% raises to 10.5% raises. Those things are irrelevant to the conversation so I don't see why you are running up under the skirt of the old CBA as if it can protect your inaccuracy?? Just man up and admit that you were mistaken and move on.

[Diesel]

I think that is a mild way of putting it. If we lose Joe we aren't going to get anything great back. There may be some added chips for us at the table due to the unprecedented amount of max players dangling out there as unrestricted free agents and the stated desire of some of them to play together but I am not expecting us to walk away with some of the names I've been seeing lately.

I think that it really depends on the team and the situation.

For instance if Joe and Lebron decide that they want to Join Phil Jackson and Rose in Chicago...

Do you not see how we hold some cards in this deal??

Chicago has both Deng and Hinrich.... that they must move in order to get that combination. Both have crappy contracts as far as we are concerned. However, what we can do is push for Noah/Hinrich. IF they don't take our deal, then we have a small measure of control over them making that deal with everybody being happy. If they want Joe completely happy, then they'd give in on Noah... or they give in #17 or they give in on Johson or Gibson or whatever we want from them... but they can't force us to take Garbage that we don't want.

[niremetal]

I think that it really depends on the team and the situation.

For instance if Joe and Lebron decide that they want to Join Phil Jackson and Rose in Chicago...

Do you not see how we hold some cards in this deal??

Chicago has both Deng and Hinrich.... that they must move in order to get that combination. Both have crappy contracts as far as we are concerned. However, what we can do is push for Noah/Hinrich. IF they don't take our deal, then we have a small measure of control over them making that deal with everybody being happy. If they want Joe completely happy, then they'd give in on Noah... or they give in #17 or they give in on Johson or Gibson or whatever we want from them... but they can't force us to take Garbage that we don't want.

First off, I noticed that you didn't respond to my post debunking your "examples."

Second, the Bulls must move only Hinrich OR Deng to clear the cap space to take on two elite FAs, not both.

Third, you're assuming that Chicago and LeBron will have their heart set on JJ specifically. But JJ isn't the only other big-name free agent on the market this summer. Bosh, Boozer, Amare, Wade, Dirk, plus a ton of second-tier guys like T-Mac, Allen, Harrington, Lee, etc. The Cavs would have preferred Amare but went with Jamison when the Suns asked for too much (namely Hickson). I don't see the Bulls being so single-mindedly fixated on acquiring JJ that they kowtow to our demands. Besides, even if they DO have their heart set on JJ, they could simply structure the deal the other way - work out a S&T with Cleveland for LeBron and then sign JJ outright.

Our bargaining position is absurdly weak with Chicago. The only way it shakes out like you say is if 1) LeBron comes to them and says "I'll sign with you only if you get JJ too" AND 2) the Cavs refuse to agree to a S&T involving Hinrich or Deng. And that, to say the least, is not likely.

[Joker]

I think that it really depends on the team and the situation.

For instance if Joe and Lebron decide that they want to Join Phil Jackson and Rose in Chicago...

Do you not see how we hold some cards in this deal??

Chicago has both Deng and Hinrich.... that they must move in order to get that combination. Both have crappy contracts as far as we are concerned. However, what we can do is push for Noah/Hinrich. IF they don't take our deal, then we have a small measure of control over them making that deal with everybody being happy. If they want Joe completely happy, then they'd give in on Noah... or they give in #17 or they give in on Johson or Gibson or whatever we want from them... but they can't force us to take Garbage that we don't want.

This is the basic point. Mrh is going into a measure of things that we are not talking about. Even a TPE is more unlikely since teams are not willing to part with those often. Diesel and I have made the same point, we have no need to take on a bad contract for no reason. It doesn't make us better and it cripples our future. Joe can either walk or they can give us key pieces that make us a better team. TPE is even better but as stated, teams do not like parting with those.

First off, I noticed that you didn't respond to my post debunking your "examples."

Second, the Bulls must move only Hinrich OR Deng to clear the cap space to take on two elite FAs, not both.

Third, you're assuming that Chicago and LeBron will have their heart set on JJ specifically. But JJ isn't the only other big-name free agent on the market this summer. Bosh, Boozer, Amare, Wade, Dirk, plus a ton of second-tier guys like T-Mac, Allen, Harrington, Lee, etc. The Cavs would have preferred Amare but went with Jamison when the Suns asked for too much (namely Hickson). I don't see the Bulls being so single-mindedly fixated on acquiring JJ that they kowtow to our demands. Besides, even if they DO have their heart set on JJ, they could simply structure the deal the other way - work out a S&T with Cleveland for LeBron and then sign JJ outright.

Our bargaining position is absurdly weak with Chicago. The only way it shakes out like you say is if 1) LeBron comes to them and says "I'll sign with you only if you get JJ too" AND 2) the Cavs refuse to agree to a S&T involving Hinrich or Deng. And that, to say the least, is not likely.

If they don't want JJ, he can go elsewhere. The Knicks, Nets, Clippers, Mavs, and Heat want Joe. He has options. It's unlikely that Wade, Dirk, or Amare will leave their respective teams. To say our bargaining position is petite is absurd, doesn't make sense at all. In all likelihood, Bosh will be a Laker. Boozer will probably be a Heat and Joe and Lebron are unknowns. Really just two FA's for five teams who need either one of those players. Once again, we have a lot of bargaining power. Cleveland will not do a SnT unless they get key players like Noah and Lebron could take less than 6 years and just walk. Joe will not do that and this will be his final big contract. That's why I disagree with all mrh is saying. He has mentioned a lot of great points but is undermining the market. If the market was like he says it is, I would agree.

Edited May 28, 2010 by nbasuperstar40

[spotatl]

Even a TPE is more unlikely since teams are not willing to part with those often

What the hell are you talking about? TPE's aren't parted with- they are simply created. If Chicago wants Joe Johnson and we want James Johnson, then because they have caproom we can do that trade and get James Johnson plus a huge TPE. I have no clue where you get the idea that teams aren't willing to give up TPE's- they are created all the time. I'll bet there are at least 30 TPE's out there right now.

If a team is willing to sign a player using caproom then they have paid the price it takes to create the TPE. Hell- it doesn't even require a team with caproom in order to create a TPE.

Edited May 28, 2010 by spotatl

[niremetal]

It's unlikely that Wade, Dirk, or Amare will leave their respective teams. To say our bargaining position is petite is absurd, doesn't make sense at all. In all likelihood, Bosh will be a Laker. Boozer will probably be a Heat and Joe and Lebron are unknowns. Really just two FA's for five teams who need either one of those players.

That's a hell of a crystal ball you have there. :thumbsdownsmileyanim:

Even a TPE is more unlikely since teams are not willing to part with those often.

:help wanted3:

Edited May 28, 2010 by niremetal

[Diesel]

First off, I noticed that you didn't respond to my post debunking your "examples."

Second, the Bulls must move only Hinrich OR Deng to clear the cap space to take on two elite FAs, not both.

Third, you're assuming that Chicago and LeBron will have their heart set on JJ specifically. But JJ isn't the only other big-name free agent on the market this summer. Bosh, Boozer, Amare, Wade, Dirk, plus a ton of second-tier guys like T-Mac, Allen, Harrington, Lee, etc. The Cavs would have preferred Amare but went with Jamison when the Suns asked for too much (namely Hickson). I don't see the Bulls being so single-mindedly fixated on acquiring JJ that they kowtow to our demands. Besides, even if they DO have their heart set on JJ, they could simply structure the deal the other way - work out a S&T with Cleveland for LeBron and then sign JJ outright.

Our bargaining position is absurdly weak with Chicago. The only way it shakes out like you say is if 1) LeBron comes to them and says "I'll sign with you only if you get JJ too" AND 2) the Cavs refuse to agree to a S&T involving Hinrich or Deng. And that, to say the least, is not likely.

Let's "debunk" your first 3 paragraphs with what I said earlier.... "if Joe and Lebron decide that they want to Join Phil Jackson and Rose in Chicago.."

So on to your fourth paragraph that we can discuss.

Cleveland is just like us... really worse. They are far over the salary cap, far into the luxury cap. Do you think they would stay there just to get Kirk Hinrich???

2/3s of their squad plays the same game as Kirk Hinrich. Seriously. Most of the players making 4-5 Million Plus Mo Williams not only plays Hinrich's game, they play it better and they make less. For them, Hinrich is a cap waste.. just like for us. Deng is worse.. His contract is longer and he doesn't bring much more to the table. Why would Cleveland want Deng when they got Jamario Moon, Anthony Parker, and Jawad Williams (for that matter) making far less and still signed.

Cleveland is not going to entertain a SNT that makes an in conference, divisional rival a dynasty by taking bad contracts from them. Good Grief Charlie Brown.

Neither should we. Not unless we get what we want. I know the league may seem like it... but this is not Lebron's world.

[thecampster]

Wow Camp, I've never seen a poster intentionally undress themselves in public like this. If you actually spent time reading your astounding exhibit A you would see that I am parroting now what I said then. Sad to see you haven't smartened up in the two months since.

Maybe you missed my first post in that thread which is, not without coincidence, in response to your foolishness then. I'll summarize :

Boom, my posts tend to be wordy lately and I feel my message is getting lost amongst the lazy or just plain stupid on here so I made it short and sweet. Unless you think there is a young player with allstar potential out there named TPE, that is about the most you can expect for JJ from all the likely suitors this offseason.

Actually when I first started talking about this, you started chatting in that thread saying there was no reason they would give us anything. They don't owe us anything. By the end of the thread you admitted we weren't wrong, just short sighted. Your story changed multiple times in that thread alone. There are tons of reasons we could get something of real value back. FYI real value is not a star quality player, it's an upgrade. You trade away JJ and you give me a better point guard, better backup small forward, the chance to bring back childress and a 2nd round draft pick, I would call that a whole lot better than just losing JJ for nothing.

I just find it interesting that you are now admitting a sign and trade is plausible but have changed to saying that nothing of value in return will be gained. If there was nothing of value to be gained, sign and trades wouldn't happen.

Edited May 28, 2010 by thecampster

[niremetal]

Cleveland is just like us... really worse. They are far over the salary cap, far into the luxury cap. Do you think they would stay there just to get Kirk Hinrich???

You're so wrong so often that it's just painful. Minus Shaq and James, the Cavs aren't even in the general vicinity of the luxury tax. Hell, they wouldn't even be over the cap. Jamison's contract hamstrings them as far as staying enough under the cap to make a major FA splash until 2012 - which just happens to be when Hinrich's contract expires - but they would be about $15M below the tax threshold after a James-for-Hinrich swap. And they would have little difficulty finding a suitor for either Mo Williams or Hinrich. Even if they took Deng, they'd be well under the tax threshold.

You also keep talking about Hinrich as if teams will be terrified at the prospect of taking on a 2-year $17M contract for a solid PG. Hinrich is expendable because Chicago has Rose, but his contract is not an albatross. Stop acting like it is.

Edited May 28, 2010 by niremetal

[MaceCase]

This is the basic point. Mrh is going into a measure of things that we are not talking about. Even a TPE is more unlikely since teams are not willing to part with those often. Diesel and I have made the same point, we have no need to take on a bad contract for no reason. It doesn't make us better and it cripples our future. Joe can either walk or they can give us key pieces that make us a better team. TPE is even better but as stated, teams do not like parting with those.

Again with the nonsense. Really? A team is not willing to part with a TPE? You think a TPE is like a draft pick or player just laying around? A traded player exception is generated or needed when you trade a player, it is not something the Bulls or Knicks just have laying around their office and refuse to give away it is a functional result of the trade itself. Ay yi yi.

[Joker]

:help wanted3:

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=10274

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=13735

It basically cap for JJ and give us a lot of options, and it a lot better than the other options but will it happen is completely different. Aaron aka mrh explained it well.

Edited May 28, 2010 by nbasuperstar40

[Buzzard]

Well, I wouldn't say that. My thing is if JJ wants to leave us then it's likely that he wants to leave us for a better chance at winning because at this point.. it can't be about money.

Better situation means that he's playing with a bonafide Superstar.

As we look around, there's Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Ginobili, Randolph, Dirk Shaq, and a couple of more guys who can ask for over 10+ million and be a superstar for his team. I will erase Dirk because he opted out to help Dallas. However, some of these others are moving.

Its not just what JJ wants though. The other team has to think enough of a 29 yr old all-star who has been nothing short of dismal in the playoffs. A 6 yr max contract for JJ is not something every team with cap space is going to consider. He will get one offer like that at best IMO; and it could easily come from a team that loses out on the 1st tier FAs.

If you sign Wade or Lebron, a logical next choice would be a offensive big to help out; not another 6'8" guard/sf. Seriously which teams with cap space can honestly say they have a frontline that can compete with Howard, Garnett/Perks, or Gasol/Bynum/Odum if they just sign SGs and SFs?

Edited May 28, 2010 by Buzzard

[Sothron]

I think that it really depends on the team and the situation.

For instance if Joe and Lebron decide that they want to Join Phil Jackson and Rose in Chicago...

Do you not see how we hold some cards in this deal??

Chicago has both Deng and Hinrich.... that they must move in order to get that combination. Both have crappy contracts as far as we are concerned. However, what we can do is push for Noah/Hinrich. IF they don't take our deal, then we have a small measure of control over them making that deal with everybody being happy. If they want Joe completely happy, then they'd give in on Noah... or they give in #17 or they give in on Johson or Gibson or whatever we want from them... but they can't force us to take Garbage that we don't want.

As noted elsewhere they only need to move or the other. I do think the Hawks could get Hinrich if we are sending them Joe but would the Spirit want to take on his contract? I agree with you that with the Bird rights dangling over their heads the soon to be former teams have some definite bargaining power. I just don't know how much it translates into.

If the Hawks don't want Hinrich or take on as you said bad contracts then Joe is just going to walk. While I wouldn't mind adding Hinrich if we are definitely losing Joe I don't want Deng. There is no way the Bulls are trading Noah in any deal because he's one of their core young players that is why these guys are wanting to sign there in the first place.

[Diesel]

You're so wrong so often that it's just painful. Minus Shaq and James, the Cavs aren't even in the general vicinity of the luxury tax. Hell, they wouldn't even be over the cap. Jamison's contract hamstrings them as far as staying enough under the cap to make a major FA splash until 2012 - which just happens to be when Hinrich's contract expires - but they would be about $15M below the tax threshold after a James-for-Hinrich swap. And they would have little difficulty finding a suitor for either Mo Williams or Hinrich. Even if they took Deng, they'd be well under the tax threshold.

You also keep talking about Hinrich as if teams will be terrified at the prospect of taking on a 2-year $17M contract for a solid PG. Hinrich is expendable because Chicago has Rose, but his contract is not an albatross. Stop acting like it is.

Dude, what I said is true. They are sitting at 66 million. You're saying add 10 more million to that to take Deng or Hinrich when they don't have to?

If you're pained, it's because the truth hurts sometimes.