What about the trade exception!?

by gswfanforlife on Oct 3, 2007 11:33 AM PDT

What are we going to do with the trade exception we obtained when we shipped J-Rich to Charlotte? I haven't heard anybody talking about it lately. It seems with the Nellie, Baron and Pietrus salary negotiations, not much talk has stemmed from this.

I don't understand all this money talk, but won't we lose the trade exception if we don't use it this year?

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

Tweet Comment 25 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

If I'm not mistaken,

the dubs have a whole year to use it.

THIS IS OOOAKLAND!!!

by Tim N Chris Burger on Oct 3, 2007 11:44 AM PDT reply actions

The most likley use for the TPE all along

has been a mid-season trade.

Here are two reasons:

* Possible trading partners who are having a poor season are more likely to give up a player for less as the season progresses.

* An added mid-season player will only cost the Warrior's half of a full salary.

A couple of possabilities, who have been bandied about here on GSoM:

Ricky Davis - Minnesota will probably have a poor season. He has an expiring contract and Don Nelson has never seen a decent wing player that he couldn't use, particuarly if Richardson's replacements (Azubuike, Belinelli and Pietrus) struggle.

Chris Wilcox - Ditto for Seattle having low expectations. The Sonics have a glut of PFs. The Warriors may realize that their current crop of PFs aren't cutting it. Wilcox has an athletic game who would be an improvement in the rebounding dept.

by San Francisco Slim on Oct 3, 2007 11:55 AM PDT reply actions

Or let it expire

and use that saved money to re-sign Monta et al.

I agree with both those signings as reasonable possibilities. I'm skeptical whether Durant is going to work out playing shooting guard with the Sonics, and if that experiment fails, he moves back into a crowded frontcourt (Wilcox, Collison, Kurt Thomas, and Jeff Green, along with centers Swift, Sene, and Petro). They have enough young promising guys to trade away Wilcox and use that savings, along with Thomas' expiring, to get more than $10M under the cap next summer.

Speaking of Thomas, if he can run, rebound, and defend with the Suns...

by ivanbe on Oct 3, 2007 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions

An expiring contract

like Ricky Davis's, would make no difference to future contracts.

I agree about Durant. His future is at forward, where he has the quickness advantage. Nelson would proabably play him at C.

by San Francisco Slim on Oct 3, 2007 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions

I meant the TPE

If the TPE is traded for a player not expiring like Wilcox, it makes a difference for future contracts. (I think we'd still have enough money to re-sign our boys even with Wilcox on board, but that's no given.) If it's traded for Ricky Davis, then it's a wash (except for Cohan, but hey, it ain't my money!).

by ivanbe on Oct 3, 2007 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions

we can hope...

Thomas couldn't really run with the suns. They let him go because they needed to get under the cap, but also because when he was in the game, it wasn't to help the suns set the tempo on the court. It was because he could defend Tim Duncan. Thomas' role was not to help the Suns control the pace of the game, but rather prevent the Spurs from doing that.

Too bad playing into Duncan's style simply doesn't work.

If we could get Wilcox, I'd be ecstatic. He's the kind of player who could sub in for Biedrins at center or play next to him. Neither are strong enough to contend with the stronger players in the league and I don't think Wilcox has a midrange game that could compliment Biedrins, which is a concern, but their athleticism would make up for it.

Unfortunately, while Seattle may have a jam at PF, I don't think trading Wilcox solves their problems. Someone else would likely go instead.

by BingBluNT on Oct 3, 2007 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions

Seattle

Wilcox doesn't need to be dealt, as you said. He expires in '09, same time as Wally. That's when they want $$$ freed up, so it all fits.

Where they have excess of interest is at the point: Ridnour and Watson both have roughly 3 years, $17M left, and then they also acquired Delonte West, an underated backup combo guard in the process.

Seems to me like one of Ridnour or Watson will lose the PG battle in training camp and find himself riding pine.

Ridnour is a poor man's Nash, a creative finisher and good passer but poor defender; Watson can't shoot a lick but is a solid distributor and defender.

I'm virtually chalking up Ellis as trade bait, which means we'll need a backup PG next year. Either Watson or Ridnour would be a spectacularly good fit. A little expensive for a backup, but cheaper than Ellis and a shorter commitment on years. More importantly, both are true PG's.

They are not ideal (mainly due to cost), but I would keep an eye on them as the season progresses.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Oct 3, 2007 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions

Ridnour, no thanks.

It's rare that anyone described as the "poor man's" <instert name of good player here> ever really works out well for a team. Ridnour's didn't shoot particularly well overall, wasn't a particularly noteworthy distributor and was a net+/- on a team what was overall terrible, meaning that he had every opportunity to be better than his teammates but it didn't happen. I suspect that we'd find out that he's more of the homeless man's Steve Nash were we to mistakenly acquire him.

by jae on Oct 3, 2007 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions

Seatte

The coaches in Seattle really yanked him around. First he was a starter, then bench, back and forth. It didn't help that no one on the team played any D: he had no shotblocker to guard his back, and Allen/Lewis were no help at all.

Looking at his per40 career numbers, I see some potential:

7.4 ast/2.6 to is roughly a 3:1 ast/to ratio, superb.

1.7 steals indicates solid hands and activity.

What skews his numbers are a horrible, horrible year from 3P in '05-'06 that's totally out of line with the rest of his career...

He is also 27, so there is hope for more refinement to his game.

I agree that he has worrisome flaws:

doesn't get to the line enough
low FG% indicates he settles for the perimeter J too much

In the end, though, looking at him for 2 years as a backup (he has been fairly healthy, avging over 70 games/season) to Baron in an uptempo team...I see potential.

What do you think of Watson? He has a rep as a solid on-the-ball defender, isn't quite the distributor..older, can't shoot a lick (check the FT%).

Neither is perfect, but I'm really just looking for short-term PG options that aren't...Troy Hudson level of minimalism.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Oct 3, 2007 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions

Correcting the numbers.

Ridenour's assist to turnover ratio is good. I wouldn't call it superb. It looks much, much better if you round up to 3:1, but that's a rather bogus way to look at it. It's actually closer to 2:1 (2.36:1 actually). That was 32nd in the league among those with qualifying minutes. 32nd isn't superb. 27th among the 42 point guards with qualifying minutes played isn't superb. It's below the average for a starting NBA point guard. It's actually worse than what Watson did last year, though it's probably splitting hairs at that point

I don't think much more of Watson. Similar problems in both of them. Don't get to the line much and don't contribute at even an average level. Neither do anything that makes them stand out. I can see why Seattle had problems deciding on the starter. They were remarkably similar in their below-average-but-not-terribleness. Sure, that's probably what you're going to get as a backup, but I'm not sure that acquiring either would help much.

by jae on Oct 4, 2007 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions

Sorry

Sorry, correcting my misread. Didn't realize you were looking at Ridnour's career assists:turnover, which should have been clear since you said you were looking at his career numbers. That is closer to 3:1 (~2.8). I still wouldn't call it superb--it's good, not great-- but it's better than what he did last year.

by jae on Oct 4, 2007 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions

career or year

Were you using career numbers or from a particular year?

Career ast/to by my count is 7.4/2.6 or 2.8/1, unless i had another mathmatical mental breakdown

But yes, we're really just splitting hairs.

Sleeper option:

Kyle Lowery

The Grizz drafted an better, more highly regarded version of him in Mike Conley and still have Damon Stoudamire for two more years. Juan Carlos Navarro is another supposedly stud combo guard that could get some action at the point (too small to be a fulltime SG) as well.

Lowry figures to be a big trade chip for them,to ditch a contract like Swift's or to bring in another young player, perhaps another swingman.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Oct 4, 2007 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions

Agree

about Lowry probably being available. He seems to be the odd man out of their guard rotation, but I guess Memphis will see how things shake out in traning camp, before deciding to make a move.

by San Francisco Slim on Oct 4, 2007 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions

Lowry

Lowry I like a bunch. He played so little last year that there's not much to go on, but the things he did well are very important. The shooting numbers don't indicate enough attempts to know what he can do. But his rebounding numbers and ability to get to the line make him intriguing. Of course any time you're talking about a guy who played less than 200 minutes total, numbers can be skewed, but rebounds is one of the things that scales the best. If was only half the rebounder he showed himself to be, he'd be an asset at the position.

I don't know what Memphis has planned for him. He was hurt so early in the season that I can't really tell if he's the "odd man out" or they just really liked Conley, but it's hard to believe that they'd take a point guard if they really thought Kyle was their guy. He doesn't cost much, so they don't have much incentive to move him, but I suspect he could be available for the right price.

by jae on Oct 4, 2007 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions

Memphis

If Warrick impresses again, then Swift is easily another expendable, burdensome contract.

I wonder if we might be able to take swift with the TPE and chip in a little something else to get him, like a pick or Pietrus.

The only real drawback (aside from the small sample size) is his relatively small size, at 6, 6'1.

I like bigger PGs, but that's a personal preference. Guys like Paul and Conley and TJ Ford have been successful.

Definitely something to watch in Memphis camp.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Oct 4, 2007 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions

contracts/height/basketball

The word on Lowry both when he was recruited out of high school and before he was drafted was that he plays much bigger than he is. I agree that a taller point guard is generally nice to have, but having a guy who plays taller than he is is better than having a guy who has the height but not the game to back it up.

My guess is that to get Lowry with the TPE, we'd be expected to eat an undesirable contract. Swift might be that guy--he certainly doesn't seem to generate wins on the court--, but his contract only runs one more year after this one. That makes him not too terrible to acquire, but might mean that Memphis doesn't see him as something that they need to dump such that they'd be willing to part with young talent just to get him off the books a year sooner.

by jae on Oct 4, 2007 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions

I prefer Watson

who is much the better defender and a very similar shooter - poor but not terrible. His assist rates are actually better than Ridnour.

Watson has a teny-tiny-bit better salary than Luke.

The Sonics ARE deep, so they have extra players, albit not great ones, all over the place. Of all of those extra players, I would prefer Wilcox to be on the Warriors. His contract is not unreasonable and is a year shoter than Watson and Ridnour.

by San Francisco Slim on Oct 4, 2007 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions

Question

If AK-47 is still not getting along and gets put on the block in January, can we use the $10 mil TPE on him since he had already been paid for half the year or does it count towards his whole season's salary?

by yehyeh82 on Oct 3, 2007 2:35 PM PDT reply actions

We

just cleared a big contract out by shedding J Rich, why would we use our cap space we just freed up on another hefty, long term contract?

by J Rich 4 MVP on Oct 3, 2007 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions

answers

yeh:
No, I am almost positive the salary is calculated on an annual rate, not pro-rated.

j rich:
Because Andrei Kirilenko is better than the contract we moved out (and 1 year shorter, to boot). Big>small, offensive versatility + ungodly defense> inconsistent, one dimentional offense and no defense

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Oct 3, 2007 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions

re:

Wow, that's being a little harsh on JRich. And would you really want to pick up AK's contract? I sure wouldn't. I agree AK's a beast on D, but offensive versatility? I mean, dude can't even shoot a jumpshot, and his whole game appears to be on the decline...

Finally hoops hope in the City Of Dope?

by oaklandish on Oct 3, 2007 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions

You

make good points, but where is he going to play? If he plays the 3 than where does SJax/Barnes/Harrington play? and if he's going to play the 4 where does Harrington play and what do we do about Wrights playing time? There are multiple reasons why we can't use the TPE for AK47.

by J Rich 4 MVP on Oct 3, 2007 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions

he's a forward

I have said all along, my ideal outcome is to put AK47 on the floor next to Al Harrington. Neither would be the "small forward", they'd just be "forwards".

Together, they would have the shooting rebounding of an ordinary SF-PF combo, but superior ball-handling, perimeter defense (since both are mobile and AK47 is freakishly long).

Harrington is more powerful than most SF's.

Ak47 excelled as an undersized 4- he beats you to the spot, he drives you insane with his length, and he causes havoc by erasing so many shots and swiping so many passes.

There would be absolutely no way to get dribble penetration on us- we'd have superior speed at every position. You can't pick and roll us; we'd either trap the ball handler with one of our long forwards or switch without giving you any advantage. Try attacking the basket with Biedrins and Ak47- instant fail. Since we have so much speed, we can close out on any perimeter shooting as well, even after a double team in the post (and again..we ain't giving up no dribble penetration).

Ak47 is like having an extra guy on defense- we saw what that was like briefly during the playoffs.

Anyways, the best way to get him (and this is offtopic by far, admittedly), is to wait for Richard Jefferson to get healthy while the Nets fall apart around him, and then work a three way with Utah (RJ + something to Utah, AK47 to us, and a package of kids to NJ).

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero @ Golden State Of Mind on Oct 3, 2007 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions

i think

we're just going to let it expire and use it for cap room on ellis and biedrins extensions.

unless...we play horribly by the middle of the season and need to make a trade. for instance, we may need a true pf or would like to get rid of pietrus...