Bobcats l Hawks - VETOED (0-3)

[Deleted]

Bobcats get:[/i][/color]
2013 1ST (MIA)

Hawks get:[/i][/color]
SG Ben Gordon, CHA - 12:$12.40M 13:$13.20M

---

Bobcats confirm, while we think Ben Gordon is a nice veteran, we want to give the other players on our team an opportunity to grow and this will be a nice trade for us as we can add another young piece to the puzzle.

Hawks to confirm..

[Deleted]

accept--I need to get some players who will contribute to my squad now

[Thunder GM (Tiago)]

I understand the idea.

The Hawks are trying to compete this season, and Bobcats continues to build the future.

Even if we all agree that Miami 1st round will probably be a late one, I'm still not sure if Gordon's production will be worth it.

But i would approve if one of the following were true:

- Gordon's salary was a lot smaller - This way, the hawks loses all their flexibilty in one average player

- Gordon's contract was expiring or a TO - The lost of flexibility is bad, but having to keep Gordon next season for 13M if he picks up his PO (which he will for sure, since nobody will pay him close to that money elsewhere) is just terrible business for the Hawks


So, all things accounted for, we have a late first for an average player with a terrible contract for probably two years.


Maybe the new Hawks GM needs another day or two in the league to try and find a better deal.

Sorry guys, but I will

Veto (0-1)

[Celtics GM (Jose)]

A very probable late 20's pick for, at least, 1 year of Ben Gordon. This seems like a fair trade, however i fell ATL is either gambling on Ben Gordon's declining next year's PO or hasn't read the rule regarding PO's.

If the PO is picked up by Gordon, i think it's a horrible trade for ATL that hinders their cap space significatively.



Vetoed (0-2

[Lakers GM (Renato)]

Sorry for being late on this one. I just missed it for some reason that I really cannot explain.

Basically you're vetoeing because Ben Gordon, who is averaging 15.5 ppg, 2.8rpg, 3.0ast, with 51%fg and 1.8treys per game is too expensive? Sure, he has an expensive contract but there are worse in this league. I was tempted to let this one go, but then I thought about that PO and checked ATL cap space for next season.

This is basically absorbing a 13M contract for 2 years without having any salary moving out, regardless of the value of the player that pick nets. I just fail to understand the reason to do it...

Maybe this is one of those situations where a little bit of micromanaging is necessary...

Veto (0-3)

Please DO NOT update your roster...

[Deleted]

He dropped 34 last night, thanks guys!

[Former Spurs GM (Adam)]

Just checking for future reference - This vetoed trade had more to do with Atlanta's roster situation than the actual value of the trade.? I'm just interested in knowing, because I've considered offering first rounders for lesser players than Ben Gordon with poor contracts as well. Thanks.