Color Graham Gone

[JJackisangry]

The only reason I can see us moving him is to ease the burden or stay below the luxury tax next year if we can?t stay below it. We don?t really have a need and technically he does have on trait we need. Hopefully he picks up his shooting this year

[AusPel]

There's no way we're avoiding tax next year. Probably even more important to clear salary once repeater kicks in

Graham is basically an expiring contract that year

And I'm getting de-ja-vu writing this post

[MichaelMcNamara]

Currently, the team is willing to move him if:


A) No draft equity goes out and they get a similar player/similar contract

B) No draft equity and it’s a worse player on a shorter deal

C) Equity is attached but it’s a MAJOR upgrade

There is no interest in attaching equity just to get off the contract. Anything he ever gives as a player is a bonus moving forward. In reality, he is and will be just a contract. Think of him like when we signed Darius Miller a few years ago for that exact purpose

[Fedupfan]

Currently, the team is willing to move him if:


A) No draft equity goes out and they get a similar player/similar contract

B) No draft equity and it?s a worse player on a shorter deal

C) Equity is attached but it?s a MAJOR upgrade

There is no interest in attaching equity just to get off the contract. Anything he ever gives as a player is a bonus moving forward. In reality, he is and will be just a contract. Think of him like when we signed Darius Miller a few years ago for that exact purpose

What’s the word on Jordan Clarkson? I feel like he would be a good addition to the team if they can trade Graham and Jax and draft compensation. I would like to keep Jax, but it doesn’t seem like the Pels feel he has a future in New Orleans.

[pelafanatic]

What’s the word on Jordan Clarkson? I feel like he would be a good addition to the team if they can trade Graham and Jax and draft compensation. I would like to keep Jax, but it doesn’t seem like the Pels feel he has a future in New Orleans.

I think Graham would be OK getting DNPs if Dyson Daniels comes on strong. I don't think Clarkson would

[Fedupfan]

I think Graham would be OK getting DNPs if Dyson Daniels comes on strong. I don't think Clarkson would

I was thinking the same thing. Very good point. Graham doesn’t have any room to complain now.

[MichaelMcNamara]

They have talked to the Jazz about a few guys. The Jazz are trying to get off Conley and we said no thanks. Beasley is a better target than Clarkson and so is Bogdanovic. Also, a Hayes for Vanderbilt swap makes some sense for both teams but both sides probably think the other should throw in a sweetener

[Silverfoxx]

My God can we please sign Dyson Daniels so I can start getting excited about him again?

[Fedupfan]

They have talked to the Jazz about a few guys. The Jazz are trying to get off Conley and we said no thanks. Beasley is a better target than Clarkson and so is Bogdanovic. Also, a Hayes for Vanderbilt swap makes some sense for both teams but both sides probably think the other should throw in a sweetener

Damn, so I’m guessing Jazz don’t see Graham as a sweetener?. ��

[Pelicanidae]

I think Graham would be OK getting DNPs if Dyson Daniels comes on strong. I don't think Clarkson would

Also - and this is important - Jordan Clarkson is not good

[pelafanatic]

Also - and this is important - Jordan Clarkson is not good

Hence the DNPs

[AusPel]

Currently, the team is willing to move him if:


A) No draft equity goes out and they get a similar player/similar contract

B) No draft equity and it’s a worse player on a shorter deal

C) Equity is attached but it’s a MAJOR upgrade

There is no interest in attaching equity just to get off the contract. Anything he ever gives as a player is a bonus moving forward. In reality, he is and will be just a contract. Think of him like when we signed Darius Miller a few years ago for that exact purpose

Difference is, Darius was on a delicious 1 and 1. The most obvious salary ballast contract of all time

DeVonte is a 2 and 1 at this point. Plus cost us a bloody 1st

[neitzelbaby12]

They have talked to the Jazz about a few guys. The Jazz are trying to get off Conley and we said no thanks. Beasley is a better target than Clarkson and so is Bogdanovic. Also, a Hayes for Vanderbilt swap makes some sense for both teams but both sides probably think the other should throw in a sweetener

I went to the first TWolves game in the SKC last year and was so impressed with Vanderbilt, arms everywhere, hustle all the time, good communication. Made sure to keep an eye on him whenever the TWolves came on TV. Only issue is him getting in the way of other young guys but I would throw in a 2nd or 2 to make that deal work.

In relation to Devonte, I still expect him on this team like I did a few weeks ago. This situation certainly doesn't help in the short term, hopefully he keeps the vibes immaculate on the bench

[RUFshreve]

Lol buy him out? Because of a DWI? I get it, its not great. You shouldn't drive drunk, but let's not pretend like we'd be sitting here having this same conversation if he shot 38% from 3.

Agreed, some ppl here are going way overboard. Graham isn't such a bad asset that you have to attach a FRP to move him. He was always brought in to play off Zion anyways, so we should atleast let him try that and see if his 3 point shooting rises back to his career average, because then he'd be a neutral asset at worst. His contract is very cheap, if he can get back to 38-40% from deep.

[RUFshreve]

They have talked to the Jazz about a few guys. The Jazz are trying to get off Conley and we said no thanks. Beasley is a better target than Clarkson and so is Bogdanovic. Also, a Hayes for Vanderbilt swap makes some sense for both teams but both sides probably think the other should throw in a sweetener

I would love Bogdanovic on this team. What would the Jazz require for him?

[MichaelMcNamara]

You would have to attach a first to move him. Maybe you don’t believe you should have to, but you would.

You can’t just dump him to anyone and 2nds wouldn’t be enough. If it was just a dump, yes you would have to give up a first. Now, if you got a bad player back on an expiring or a slightly better player back on 2 yrs, maybe it’s only a second or two. But if you wanted to dump him, you would absolutely have to give up a first. He is a negative asset even before the DWI. And now, you trade for him as another team and you have to answer why you traded for a guy who just had some legal trouble

It absolutely would take a first. If it didn’t, he would be gone already

[MichaelMcNamara]

I would love Bogdanovic on this team. What would the Jazz require for him?

Graham, Hayes and a first. Still want him?

[rocketfox]

Bogdanovic is a horrible defender, I feel like I'm good on that lol

[MichaelMcNamara]

Bogdanovic is a horrible defender, I feel like I'm good on that lol

I agree. I would happily do it for Graham and Temple. Or even Graham and Hayes, maybe. But add an asset? Nah. Just hold onto guys and wait for the right player to emerge and use those player for the salary matching. Dont need to make the perfect roster on July 8th

[PELICANSFAN]

There's no way we're avoiding tax next year.

There is a route to staying under the tax next year. Assuming Hayes and Temple move on(Temple is non guaranteed next season), the Pels would be about $6 million under the estimated tax line with 13 players signed. That likely would be enough to add a draft pick and another minimum-type player. However, Nance would need to be extended. They would have to dump DG for nothing to extend Nance to a similar contract. That may entail attaching assets even next offseason even though his last season is only partially guaranteed. Will have to see how it plays out. Also, by that time, a decision may be made on whether to keep Kira or not.

[tdcreator]

Why not Sexton. We could give them a conditional first and a backup to Garland. I’m even starting to like Robinson a little bit. Beasley is still my guy that I really want though.

[pelafanatic]

There is a route to staying under the tax next year. Assuming Hayes and Temple move on(Temple is non guaranteed next season), the Pels would be about $6 million under the estimated tax line with 13 players signed. That likely would be enough to add a draft pick and another minimum-type player. However, Nance would need to be extended. They would have to dump DG for nothing to extend Nance to a similar contract. That may entail attaching assets even next offseason even though his last season is only partially guaranteed. Will have to see how it plays out. Also, by that time, a decision may be made on whether to keep Kira or not.

Mac may have said this already, but I can basically assure you that Gayle is not going to pay the tax this season. We would have to be top 3ish in the west at the deadline in order to maybe convince her to become a tax team, and even then I don't think it's happening. I do believe, however, that if we look like a contender this season, she will pay the tax next year

[MichaelMcNamara]

Correct. But people also need to remember that it only matters if you are in the tax at the end of the year

You can be over the tax line all year and then dump a guy with a pick or waive and stretch a guy, etc to get below. It’s not ideal. But it’s possible, so if a great deal comes available and it puts them into the tax for now, that won’t stop them from doing it, as long as there is a clear path to get out of the tax before the season is over (example - Jax and Graham for John Collins is somehow available)

That would put them in tax but buying out and stretching Temple or dumping him with a 2nd and cash would get them out

[NMThreeMVP]

Mac may have said this already, but I can basically assure you that Gayle is not going to pay the tax this season. We would have to be top 3ish in the west at the deadline in order to maybe convince her to become a tax team, and even then I don't think it's happening. I do believe, however, that if we look like a contender this season, she will pay the tax next year

Is it safe to assume the Pelicans are taking the approach of earning revenue from a playoff gate FIRST, and then allocating those resources in the following year?

[ragincaucasian]

You would have to attach a first to move him. Maybe you don?t believe you should have to, but you would.

You can?t just dump him to anyone and 2nds wouldn?t be enough. If it was just a dump, yes you would have to give up a first. Now, if you got a bad player back on an expiring or a slightly better player back on 2 yrs, maybe it?s only a second or two. But if you wanted to dump him, you would absolutely have to give up a first. He is a negative asset even before the DWI. And now, you trade for him as another team and you have to answer why you traded for a guy who just had some legal trouble

It absolutely would take a first. If it didn?t, he would be gone already

This was an absolute whiff by Griff. I mean, like swinging, missing and falling down and knocking out your teeth whiff.

I think we were still trying to figure out our identity at this point. But a tiny guard, who isn't a distributor, is a streaky shooter, and plays zero defense at all...and then giving up a FIRST ROUND PICK for him..

I think they finally figured out that whatever Devontae Graham is....we want the complete OPPOSITE of that.