(06-14-2021, 01:56 PM)fifteenth Wrote: [ -> ]I could be wrong, but I think you're misunderstanding Scott. "Welcome, hope you like it here" is Scott's way of saying, "look at this disfunctional family (Mavs) that you've joined! Hope you like it!"
Am I wrong on that, Scott?
Nah it was Scott´s way of saying we are already discussing it in a separate thread for an hour.
(06-14-2021, 01:57 PM)Mavs2021 Wrote: [ -> ]Nah it was Scott´s way of saying we are already discussing it in a separate thread for an hour.
Ahh, ok, I was wrong.
So basically Scott was being a jerk. :-)
So...Welcome to the forum omahen!
SO Charlotte would need to trade roughly $5 - $6 million (in addition/not added to a S&T player) to take KP into cap space and cover empty roster slots.
Interesting detail in that piece - Hornets allegedly see Ball and Rozier as their core. In this case there are only two options for a KP trade.
1. If Charlotte operates under the cap the only realistic option for the outgoing salary is Hayward. Non Ball and Rozier contracts are realistically too small to cover the 10 mil needed besides the possible cap space (renouncing Monk included). I doubt Charlotte would pay Bridges+Washington+one or two smaller contracts while renouncing Monk for KP. Hayward would be great but I would want something more, as he is way older and same injury liability.
2. If Charlotte goes over the cap they would have to send out roughly 25 mil of salary. Graham+Monk could be that, but do we need that? Washington or Bridges is just 5 mil, so paying 20 mil to Graham seems like a reach. Unless perhaps the salary is declining. SnT someone else?
Technically, Charlotte operating UNDER the CAP only needs 8-9 million outgoing in trade to make room for Graham's 190% hold (~3 million) and KP under the cap.
They can renounce Monk and then keep him using the Room Exception.
The trick to make this work would be to load up 2-3 2nd rd picks that would be signed using the minimum to reduce the number of roster slot holds, and/or convert their 2-ways to minimum contracts.
Dallas could be interested in working with Charlotte due to the opportunity to create the space to money whip Collins and/or Holmes; especially if they could swap a couple of 2nd's for a couple of 1st's in the process.
I'm at the point where I'm good with simply undoing the mistake of KP's contract (cf. KL). Any assets coming back are gravy. Imagine $50-60 mil in cap room to work with this summer. Come play with Luka.
Pacers wanted Hayward last year, couldn't they just do some kind of Turner/Hayward swap and call it a day?
Turner + Lamb might make sense for Hayward. If I am the Hornets, that's the route I would take to solve my center problem. Hayward is sort of a luxury with all the guards and wins they have.
For the Mavs it would mean one less suitor for Holmes in that case.
(06-14-2021, 03:28 PM)SkenfromLMF Wrote: [ -> ]Technically, Charlotte operating UNDER the CAP only needs 8-9 million outgoing in trade to make room for Graham's 190% hold (~3 million) and KP under the cap.
I think Graham caphold is 4,7 (Spotrac) and you have to add the FRP. Still, even 8-9 mil means basically Bridges and Washington, which is likely a no-go
RE: Hornets wanting KP
Give me Graham, Zeller, & Bridges.
(06-14-2021, 02:58 PM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]I doubt Charlotte would pay Bridges+Washington+one or two smaller contracts while renouncing Monk for KP.
That's exactly what I would look for if I'm Dallas. Two big, young, athletic wings would be welcome additions, and it would also free up a ton of cap space in the process to go after other free agents at guard and center. You could truly turn the roster over into something a lot more dynamic around Luka.
And for a team like Charlotte looking to build relevance, I honestly think they might go for it. Because Ball, Rozier, Hayward, and KP would be a pretty darned good team with a bit of star power that could put Charlotte back on the map in the East.
(06-14-2021, 03:30 PM)Scott41theMavs Wrote: [ -> ]I'm at the point where I'm good with simply undoing the mistake of KP's contract (cf. KL). Any assets coming back are gravy. Imagine $50-60 mil in cap room to work with this summer. Come play with Luka.
Not sure Mavs see things that way.
(06-14-2021, 03:38 PM)Tyler Wrote: [ -> ]That's exactly what I would look for if I'm Dallas. Two big, young, athletic wings would be welcome additions, and it would also free up a ton of cap space in the process to go after other free agents at guard and center. You could truly turn the roster over into something a lot more dynamic around Luka.
And for a team like Charlotte looking to build relevance, I honestly think they might go for it. Because Ball, Rozier, Hayward, and KP would be a pretty darned good team with a bit of star power that could put Charlotte back on the map in the East.
Sure, I would to if I am Dallas. But I don't find the Charlotte part likely. I would way rather part with Hayward and picks as this would build me a great young core of Ball-Rozier-Bridges-Washington-KP. Or the alternative Graham+whatever other non core salaries.
If the report is true, there is another positive - teams see KP as a building block.
Does Evan Massey have any authority? Seems like a clickbait guy who just mentions generally "a source" when talking about his anonymous totally real sources.
(06-14-2021, 03:45 PM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]Sure, I would to if I am Dallas. But I don't find the Charlotte part likely. I would way rather part with Hayward and picks...
Fair enough. I just seriously doubt that Charlotte will trade the one big FA who recently chose them. They're not Boston.
In any case, I do think they're an interesting potential trading partner that could also enable other big moves. Something to keep an eye on, for sure.
So can't rule out Charlotte bc of course it's MJ and they handed Hayward 120 million dollars last year. He would be the guy they would be swapping out. They could actually get KP AND Holmes or someone like that if they want to. I know PJ Washington is there but you could move him to the bench.
If they flip Hayward into Turner/Lamb or KP then that's not bad asset management for a small market team that can't get A-listers to sign without overpays or some luck. KP is in a similar contract situation as Haywards.
If the Pacers were willing to do a Turner/Hayward trade last year its reasonable to think they would still be open to that.
For the Hornets they might prefer KP over Turner or might think ab getting KP + another player.
If I am the Mavs I would happily take Hayward or Turner given the issues we've had with KP.
(06-14-2021, 03:33 PM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]I think Graham caphold is 4,7 (Spotrac) and you have to add the FRP. Still, even 8-9 mil means basically Bridges and Washington, which is likely a no-go
I show Graham coming off of a MLE contract (Basketball Reference) which is a 190% hold (Coon's Cap FAQ)...
That said, IF you think the 1st rd pick is the sticking point then hope Charlotte moves DOWN in the lottery which might put it in play in the trade. Dallas gets the rights to the 21 pick; Dallas gives a Charlotte the right to pick swap in '22; Charlotte gives Dallas their '23 pick.
Charlotte could send their Martin twins and Dallas could send back their 2-ways and/or Terry, which would help reduce the Hornets payroll.
Total for Charlotte: Bridges, rights to '21 FRP, '23 FRP; for KP, right to pick swap '22, and 2 of Terry/Bey/Hinton.
(06-14-2021, 04:24 PM)SkenfromLMF Wrote: [ -> ]I show Graham coming off of a MLE contract (Basketball Reference) which is a 190% hold (Coon's Cap FAQ)...
That said, IF you think the 1st rd pick is the sticking point then hope Charlotte moves DOWN in the lottery which might put it in play in the trade. Dallas gets the rights to the 21 pick; Dallas gives a Charlotte the right to pick swap in '22; Charlotte gives Dallas their '23 pick.
Charlotte could send their Martin twins and Dallas could send back their 2-ways and/or Terry, which would help reduce the Hornets payroll.
Total for Charlotte: Bridges, rights to '21 FRP, '23 FRP; for KP, right to pick swap '22, and 2 of Terry/Bey/Hinton.
They can't have Bey; love the rest of it.