(12-15-2025, 07:52 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: I don't think what you quoted denoted immediacy, only capability. I guess it was sloppy to not fully add some caveat about the timing being "at the appropriate time in late February when Nembhard has used up his 50 games". Can we stipulate that since you taught it and I assume everyone now knows it. Or, do I have to add the qualifier every time I write about this.
BTW, I see people putting Exum in trades occasionally. It feels more likely he stays unless he's absolutely needed in the deal (or we get an expiring player back who can be cut or we send out more players than we get back). If the plan is to sign Nembhard to a standard contract (at the appropriate time in late February when Nembhard has used up his 50 games), we need a path to create the roster space. Exum as our 15th man provides that. To answer your question, the only advantage I see to jumping the gun on the 50 game timing would be to sign someone else to the two-way slot. Blanton? Someone who looks good in the upcoming G-League showcase?
One interesting thing about today. Players traded today can be aggregated in a deadline trade even though the usual 60 day timeframe for aggregation won't have occurred by then. It is a one-time use it or lose it opportunity. It got me to looking for D'Lo trades. I wonder if Orlando might do something straight up for D'Lo or Hardy for expiring Jett Howard. They could use some bench creation and Dallas could stand to shed the future salary of either player.
It seems I must have missed your intended meaning on clearing cap room, as it sounded to me like you were stating there is some value in lowering their cap number, in relation to how they deal with Nembhard. Sorry about that.
About trading Exum, yes it's a no-no to do so UNLESS they end their trades with a 14-man roster rather than 15. But it's wiser to refrain from waiving him for now, until after the TDL at least, because he does offer smaller expiring salary filler for a trade, which could prove useful in satisfying the unbending rule to be trading away MORE than you get back, if such a need arises. And of course, trading the contract you don't want (if you can do it) is much better choice than waiving it.
Just a quick fyi: The 60-day re-trade exception (re the TDL) is available for trades that happen both today and tomorrow.
Thinking through the options you offer: (1) If DAR for Jett by this deadline, does that gain in Jett a better trade piece or more useful player than I had in DAR? (2) Hardy for Jett? Yes please. I've never been a fan of the Hardy contract. Unfortunately, I also see that if it was a swap these teams liked, both players have been tradable for each other all along.