No way to know this but my guess is that there are 1 or 2 fail safe options that can be done at any time and so Dell is exploring other avenues and seeing if something better can be done. Just a guess thoughOriginally Posted by Hugeaux II
 |
| . |
|
No way to know this but my guess is that there are 1 or 2 fail safe options that can be done at any time and so Dell is exploring other avenues and seeing if something better can be done. Just a guess though
@mcnamara247
I, for one, feel that this is a very, very accurate guess.....
"we might make dollars, but we don't necessarily make sense"
"always be sincere....whether you mean it or not"
My guess is that Eric Gordon is traded or stretched based on Dell's press conference quote when asked about Tyreke and Gordon role on team:
"It will take care of itself"
I sort of agree. If Dell is on the hottest of the hot seats, he couldn't care less about future dead money.
Also a team trading for Gordon also realizes that on the worst case scenario -Gordon sucks and doesn't opt out next summer -they have the option of buying him out and stretching him. Depending of the situation (Chicago if they miss on Melo) Gordon could be worth the risk.
Just a shame we can't give Gordon a Bobby Bonilla type deal and send him on his way.
If you Jimmer it, they will come.
When I saw "stretching Gordon" I thought we were talking about playing him at SF. Thank god I kept reading
Gordon needs to stretch so he doesn't get hurt so often. ba dum cha!
I remember a Brady Bunch episode where one of the boys thought that if he hung from a bar all day that he would grow faster. Might be worth a try if we are forced to keep him.
Best case scenario would be to trade Gordon for another bad deal in a four player trade to a team with cap space. The deal can be submitted separately to crate the trade exception. Something like Gordon (14mill) traded into Boston's cap space for Joel Anthony (3.8), then we execute a 2nd trade sending Austin Rivers to Boston for Gerald Wallace (10 mill)'s terrible deal. That creates a 10 million dollar trade exception for us, doesn't shift either teams cap space considerably (Boston picks up Rivers' 2.3 million cap number), and boston picks up a prospect/asset they like in Rivers. Not to mention Gordon is an infinitely better player than Wallace at this point. Having the trade exception would allow us to slide Asik into that, while keeping our cap space, our MLE, and our Biannual exceptions to re-sign our own guys that we want, sign a starting SF w/ the MLE, and bring back Morrow w/ the Biannual. Also, if Wallace's head is on straight, he could be a valuable veteran piece to chip in at the 3 and even the some at the 4. It would also free up Boston to move Rondo and go w/ the Smart/Gordon/Avery Bradley/Rivers backcourt in their rebuild.
Not something I heard of course, but something like this would be a best case scenario I think. Creating the cap exception is ideal. It allows us to keep all of our other means of improving while absorbing Asik. I don't think dumping rivers works for us, because if we dump him and trade Asik into cap space, we lose our cap space, our MLE, and our Biannual. I don't think DD is willing to do that. The same trade could be made with, for example, Milwaukee for ZaZa Paculia (5.2) AND OJ Mayo (8 million). They need a salary that is 6 million or less to deal Gordon for to make the necessary trade exception.
Contributor 
Every year a trade happens where we all sit up and say 'how did a contract that bad get traded?' - and the 2 guard is a very thin position around the league, so I'm hopeful...
Exactly this! I'm a first time long time so I'll try and be brief... We are all frustrated with EG. Whether being from how he handled his free agency, his glass-knee-itis, etc. the list goes on. But hopefully our Front Office isn't blinded by those frustrations like our fan base is and give too much to dump him. Look, EG has not lived up to his contract, we all know this extremely well, but the way this off season is shaping up has me slightly optimistic.
Believe it or not his contract is not the worst out there. I see it as if we're getting .66 cents on the dollar, meaning of the $15 million he's owed, he's producing at a $10 million value. I think dleboeuf84 has the right method just wrong team.
First issue is that BOS thinks they're buyers when in all actuality they're sellers. Gerald Walllace is far from his prime and is valued at .35 cents on the dollar (of the $10 million he is owed $3.5 million value) and has 2 years left on his contract, I'll pass.
Secondly we should be focusing on trades with small markets. Teams that are more desperate to get players through trades rather than free agency, sound familiar NOLA.
Last but not least is need. After Wade and Stephenson resign with their teams, EG will look a whole lot better. Especially to eastern conference teams that realize the laws of returns. I honestly think that he could make a team 5 wins better and we all now what 5 games means in the lEastern Conference.
We need to talk to 6 teams: TOR, CHA, ATL, DET, PHI and MIL. I know all of these aren't small markets but they fall into that non destination category, are sellers, and have a huge gaping whole at SG.
My favorite scenario is with TOR. After they resign Lowry, they'll turn their attention to perimeter help for him. Insert EG and move Derozan too the wing. TOR literally has 5 SF's and just drafted another one in DeAndre Daniels. If we can convince them to send us Landry Fields for EG + 2nd rounder + cash = profit for both squads. They get spacing and the chance of getting a SG capable of being top 5 in that position in the east and we get cap space and a guy who when was healthy in NY was a decent SF.
I know too long but I'm bored watching Futbal.
The problem with moving Gordon(and bad contracts in the future) lays with a couple things.
1st the cap is getting much tighter. It no longer just a case of paying the luxury tax. It's now becoming a situation where you need the space or you can't add a guy. Which means that even teams like the Mavs or the Lakers can't just say what the hell likes make a run at whoever. They have to ship someone(usually equally as bad) to make the salaries match.
Next Gordon has a awful history of injuries. So while somebody may take Rudy Gay's bad/awful contract because they know while his production doesn't match his salary he'll at least be on the court "earning" his money and not in the trainers room or in L.A. rehabbing.
I can't see how any GM in the league would be willing to put their jobs on the line trading for Eric Gordon. Especially when we finally got to see him the healthiest he's been in several seasons and didn't look anything like the promising guard he was sold as when he 1st got here.
So with this as your belief, you will agree right here and now that if Dell dumps him that you will give him props, right?
Welcome to the board. Good post.
Only thing I would disagree with is that Gordon is giving $10 million in value with his play. I'd say it's closer to 7-8 and that's when healthy, which isn't often. It'll be tough to trade that contract, but I'm feeling more optimistic about it this summer then ever before.
When have I not given him props for things I have agreed with or under the circumstance deals? Certainly you aren't trying to paint me as someone who doesn't take his medicine we he is wrong?
If anything at this point my opinions have proven to be more flexible than most here.
Never said any of those things. Just asking ahead of time.
I know I'm not trippin'.
At this point I don't even fault Demps he's saving his job. I can't imagine I would be doing anything else in his shoes. I like the fit of Asik next to Davis. The future 1st is terrible in my world, but in his reality what difference does it make? He won't be here to make the pick if we don't make a huge jump in record this year.
Does the future 1st to you matter less, if say we are good enough to keep it next year and don't give it away for a few years? I mean, if we land around 23 next year, keep the pick and re-sign Asik, that trade looks a little different, no?
I think that's where people have a problem with you. You view it as "Dell saving his job". I think most people here view it as a good move. I can't imagine we will ever see you commend a move this franchise makes.
Here the problem we never know we can only base opinions on the now. I don't think we are a playoff team even after this Asik deal. So IMO we gave away a lottery pick for a guy we aren't likely to retain next year. Of course we don't know and the pick isn't that big of a deal 20 and up.
So to answer your question of course if everything works out the deal looks different. It is such an obvious concept IMO it's not even worth the discussion. We should be discussing IMO are the chances "it" does go right.
And see, I think we are a playoff team and Asik is re-signed, so two different ideas of the future give us two different perceptions of the trade in the present I suppose
Who doesn't view it as him saving his job? We all believe he was given the directive to win now. We all believe after last season his seat is hotter than the year before(we can debate just how hot the seat is). So to say he's not "GMing" for his job is asinine at any point in any GM's career let alone the position Demps find himself in with an owner who wants to win now. Whether you view it as the right decision doesn't change the fact that his job is in danger more than it's been at any other time Dell has been our GM. It's illogical to think Demps would make the right decision long term when his job is in jeopardy short term.
I think as two logical thinking people we have long came to this conclusion. This is why I don't say anybody is wrong to often I just merely point out where I disagree and make my case. I certainly won't be shock if this team is in the post season the talent is there. Now the question becomes chemistry and the bench. All things that I feel will hurt us and prevent us from becoming a playoff team in such an insane conference.
Last edited by da ThRONe; 06-28-2014 at 01:58 PM.
I think that if you look at the conference as a whole it looks insane, but if you look at each team individually, you only see 4 teams that are a lock for the playoffs IMO. I can't find a 5th that I would definitely put over us, especially if Gordon is gone and a SF is here
And this is why I said it was pointless to discuss this stuff with you. You see it fundamentally different than almost everyone else.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
