|
|
Post by Former Spurs GM (Adam) on Jan 19, 2014 22:00:17 GMT
Pacers Receive:
From Spurs: C Marc Gasol - Grizzlies (2013/14 $14.86) (2014/15 $15.83)
From Magic: PG George Hill - Pacers (2013/14 $8.00) (2014/15 $8.00) (2015/16 $8.00) (2016/17 $8.00)
Total : $22.86m
Spurs Receive:
From Pacers: PF,C Amare Stoudemire - Knicks (2013/14 $21.68) 2014/15 $23.41 TO)
From Pacers: SG,SF Giannis Antetokounmpo - Bucks (2013/14 $1.00) (2014/15 $1.10) (2015/16 $1.27) (2016/17 $1.45 (2016/17 $1.82 QO
Total: $22.68m
Magic receive:
From Spurs: PF Arnett Moultrie - 76ers (2013/14 $1.10) (2014/15 $1.27 TO) (2015/16 $1.45 TO) (2016/17 $1.82 QO)
From Spurs: PF,C Elton Brand - Hawks (2013/14 $0.50)
From Spurs: PG Aaron Brooks (2013/14 $0.50)
Total: $2.10m
There are a lot of ways to break this down, but at the core, my primary reason for making this trade is because I'd like to have Giannis and his contract going into next year.
The Milwaukee Bucks seem committed to giving their younger players a try, and are marketing Antetekounmpo more every day. There's little reason for them not to play him for the remainder of the season.
This is a gamble. It's always possible that he could be the next Michael Kidd Gilchrist, but I'm hoping for more. If he does flop, I'll take full responsibility, and live with this decision. There's no way anyone can truly know how this will end up. But the amount of potential on such a low contract makes this worthwhile for me. If the concern is that I'll devalue my team and then abandon it, I can offer whatever reassurance that I'll hang around as long as allowed and see this through.
Certainly there are more details to this trade. Gasol is an elite player, but with a contract that is only slightly less than free agent value. I'll miss Moultrie, but guessing that Amare can fill his spot for the current year at least. Brand and Brooks were free agents that I don't mind moving to make this work.
Thank you for your patience Pacers, and for helping out Magic.
In case it helps, it appears that the Magic have the roster space if Carl Landry is moved to IR. Thanks.
Also of note: Brand can't be traded until January 22.
|
|
|
|
Post by Domingo on Jan 19, 2014 22:29:54 GMT
I accept:
Gasol and Hill are big upgrades to help me this year. I hate losing Giannis sinces hes already shown potential of being a great and already has an amaing contract. and It looks like for now this trade is stop me from signing a good free agent as I lose 22M in cap durng the offseason. Good dealing Adam and Jay
|
|
|
|
Post by Former Spurs GM (Adam) on Jan 20, 2014 4:18:21 GMT
Cool surprise, he played tonight. Please scratch my statement about Carl Landry. Insert "Al Horford" instead. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jay on Jan 20, 2014 5:59:49 GMT
I didn't really check the roster spaces so If I have not enough room we will have to retry. But otherwise I accept. George hill is an underrated player IMO and if I wasn't clearing out my team I would've tried to keep him. Brand and brooks are both just 2-3 week rentals. Hopefully moultrie turns out okay.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakers GM (Renato) on Jan 20, 2014 10:27:50 GMT
Orlando has the space, assuming Horford moves to IR.
So, here we go... What a trade! Adam and Domingo reworked this trade and even included a third team to make this work. I know how hard Adam pursued this because before my last trade, this could've possibly been a 4 team trade. If for no other reason alone, this would be approved by me and worthy of an applause for the hard work involved. That being said, we need to analyze this properly:
The Spurs are the "losers" in this trade unless Giannis fulfills his potential in the next couple of years. I believe that, as presently constructed, the Spurs had a shot at making the WCF at least and anything can happen in fantasy playoffs. They lose the best player involved and 3 rotation players for a Amare's expiring contract and Giannis. However, even if Giannis doesn't pan out, I guess that having all that cap space next year is worth it.
The Pacers consolidate their status as contenders, specially in the East (just like in real life NBA) where there are less contenders. Gasol is great and is properly paid. Hill is also a solid a more consistent player than Giannis, so far. Barring any trade, the Pacers will be contenders this year and the next, even if they have zero cap flexibility.
The Magic proceed with their rebuilding plan and got some cap relief to help their rebuilding efforts. IF I would veto something about this trade would be here, as I don't think he's getting enough value for Hill. However, we know he has a plan and as long as the active players on his roster are actually in the lineup on daily basis, I'd say that it isn't worth a veto.
Good job everyone.
Approve (1-0)
|
|
|
|
Post by Thunder GM (Tiago) on Jan 20, 2014 12:59:16 GMT
This trade posted in another way: SAS trades - Brooks | Moultrie | Brand | Gasol SAS gets - Giannis | Amare IND trades - Giannis | Amare IND gets - Hill | Gasol ORL trades - Hill ORL gets - Moultrie | Brooks | Brand This is pretty bad for SAS, as he trades a top 15 player, a decent prospect and two depth players for Giannis and the player with the worst production/wage ratio on the entire league, and that is only in essence an expiring contract. I totally understand that Adam is insanely high on Giannis, and since he comes back again and again with the same Gasol+ for a 19 year old kid, I would think about passing this trade. But the problem (other than this trade not being any better than the last one because SAS replaces Green and Bayless for Moultrie, Brand and Brooks but also receives less Nate and two 2nds) is that I strongly believe this disrupt the balance of the league as it gives an unfair advantage to IND. He's giving just Giannis, somehow ditch the cap problem in amare and also picks up a top 15 player (#10 last year) and another top 100 player (#42 last season) in Hill both on multiyear contracts. Since Landon has approved the last one, I assume he's approving this one, and quite frankly I hope it passes (because I know that if it doesn't I will have another one Gasol/Giannis to vote in the next few days  ), but I can't approve it in order to maintain my coherence. Sorry guys... Veto (1-1) PS: Maybe another difference in evaluataion is that I don't agree with "Gasol is an elite player, but with a contract that is only slightly less than free agent value". He's an elite player alright, but the top players in the FA have gone for +20M in last years of their contracts. Dwight Howard coming from a low season (and he's never been a top 15 player unless you punt some cats) will have a 24M salary in his last year of contract. PS: Like I said, the problem is not that SAS loses big in the deal (he can choose to, because we all trust Adam) but that IND wins it big. If the winning part was more distributed I would approve it and give a leap of faith in Giannis and Adam, but this way I can't |
|
|
|
Post by Former Spurs GM (Adam) on Jan 20, 2014 15:59:53 GMT
I really appreciate the amount of thought that's being put into this. Sorry to put everyone through this multiple times trying to hit on a combination that can walk the tightrope of being both accepted and approved.
Its hard to nail down what Gasol's FA value would be. But last offseason, I would have classified Al Jefferson as having equal value, and Paul Millsap as being in the same tier as Gasol. Millsap has taken a step forward, so his contract looks like great value, but Jefferson's makes me think that Gasol's is close to free agent value. I understand that some contracts will go over $20, and rightfully so. But as an estimate, that seems like the higher end of the spectrum of where he'd go.
Just to give a little further explanation on some of the changes in version 3.0:
Gerald Green was said to have put the trade over the top last time, so he's been replaced with Moultrie. Honestly, I do prefer to keep Green, so that's got to be a step in the right direction.
Brooks and Brand were added, but I hope they're viewed as inconsequential, since they were recently signed free agents at a minimum salary. Brooks in particular looks to have a short shelf life.
Nate Rob was removed since he was viewed as having negative value in version 2.0.
The 2 second rounders weren't included since they didn't move the needle anyway.
If the main concern is that Indy is getting too good too fast, I don't know what to say about that. I wish I was trading with a team lower in the standings. Surely we have to recognize that Giannis has more trade value than the production he's putting up, and if it doesn't happen in this trade, its just as likely to happen with one of a number of other teams.
I agree that it would be much more even if it were simply Gasol for Amare and Giannis. For the sake of comparison, here is how their season averages would break down:
Marc Gasol: 14.8 pts, 6.5 reb, 3.7 ast, 0.9 stl, 1.1 blk
Amare plus Giannis: 16.7 pts, 9.0 reb, 2.1 ast, 1.2 stl, 1.1 blk
Amare plus Giannis is very likely to out perform Gasol alone. (These numbers are also deflated as a result of the infrequent minutes Giannis was receiving to start the season.) Giannis' and Amare's contracts hold more value than Gasol's. There has to be some level of improvement, and enough to make it worthwhile to the Pacers for them to give up the better contracts. George Hill has generally underperformed this year, and has a less than ideal contract. My hope was that he could help me walk the tightrope of giving something that helps Indy, but not too much to make it vetoable.
Anyway, thanks to all for the time and effort put into the different explanations on this. They truly are appreciated. I know it's not very fun to have to judge someone else's borderline trade. I see it from a different perspective, but I also make more than my share of mistakes, so thanks again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2014 3:29:51 GMT
Sorry everyone. I tried my best to see how I can pass this but I just cannot. After further considering all the points stated above, I decided to veto. Pacers just not giving enough to get Gasol and Hill. Veto (1-2)
|
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jan 21, 2014 4:10:22 GMT
It took me very long time to think this trade over and over and that's why it take me so long to vote. Sorry about this. Okay, back to the trade, first, I agree with Giggsy and Tiago that 206 (Pacers) is not giving enough (only give up a crap exprining contract in Stat and Giannis) to get both Hill and Gasol in the same deal. But this is not the only reason, I also look at it for Adam, even though I understand and know how high he is for Giannis, but what he is getting is 1 potential player in Giannis and give up 1 potential on (Arnett, remember he had some very good numbers the end of last year) and a top 15 All Star Center. If you are telling me that Giannis is doing great every night and providing consistent number already, then I may have different view, but the fact that he's with Bucks makes thing very inconsistent and uncertain, also he maybe giving up a young player in Arnett with just as much potential as Giannis.
Sorry, at the end of the day, I cannot convience myself to accept this trade, so Veto (1-3). I smell another tough vote coming up for version number 4, but I do what I have to do.
VETO (1-3)
|
|
|
|
Post by Former Spurs GM (Adam) on Jan 21, 2014 5:03:15 GMT
Any suggestions on how to make this work?
Version 1.0 - it was suggested to add a first round draft pick. That wasn't something Indy had in their inventory, so Nate Robinson and 2 second rounders were added. I would've thought that roughly equaled a 2015 first rounder, but it wasn't sufficient.
Version 2.0 - the suggestion was to remove Gerald Green because of where he sits on the player rater. Green was removed and replaced with the great George Hill. (As explained by Tiago, Indy's side is the more important one to consider here.) George Hill was considered too much improvement for Indiana's side. ?
Version 3.0 - The best conclusion I can draw is that if there is to be a Gasol-Giannis trade, then Amare must be viewed as of no consequence whatsoever. But statistically, that just doesn't ring true. It's clear that its only fair to add something small to Gasol, but George Hill is adding too much. Any suggestions other than the obvious? Just give up on the idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jan 21, 2014 5:17:34 GMT
Not speaking for the other TC, but I think Indiana has to give a little more solid assets than just Gianna (which currently still unproven, except for occassion good nights, but so did Arnett last year). Basically Indiana got a top center and a serviceable pg (he's average with below average contract) for the expense of only Gianna and crap / expiring contract in Amare, just can't see that works. And also for you, Adam, gave up a young good potential player in Arnett and acquire another and give up an All Star Center at the same time just doesn't seems fair to me. If you are talking about expiring contracts, I think I would approve this deal if that expiring contract not the one from Amare, if it's from Grotat, I think it would look a whole lot better and I would have no problem to approve that trade. I'm not trying to manage teams for others, but this is just a suggestion hopefully I can help to make it work since I know how much Adam wants to get this done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thunder GM (Tiago) on Jan 21, 2014 16:11:58 GMT
I understand your frustration Adam, but if the base of the deal is Gasol for Giannis it will need a lot of work. I don't like to do this and I'm only posting because I can see that you really want Giannis and there's already have been 3 vetos.
But the best bet (imo) is if you add someone with potential (Moultrie?) and IND adds someone that has real value (if not for you this year, at least as a trade piece) as Gortat or even Marion.
That would mean a top 15 C with 2 years left (gasol) + a potential guy for a lesser player on an expiring contract (gortat/marion) and a better prospect (giannis).
But this is just my take, not sure what IND feels about this, and I only have 1 vote...
|
|
), but I can't approve it in order to maintain my coherence.