I agree, but remember this is also a salary dump in the hopes of signing Wilson Chandler. So it would be more like: Calderon for Collison, a pick and Chandler, which to me, is a great deal.Quote:
hateslosing wrote:
However, since it seems likely that Denver will re-sign Chandler, I wouldn't do this deal with Indiana unless I was certain Toronto could get Chandler.
You totally completely changed my mind about trading him. I've always loved his game and used him as a valuable trade guy, now I think it would be best to keep him. Problem is his contract hurts us for the future, when we draft, sign, trade for better players.Quote:
hateslosing wrote:
If that scenario took place, that would be great. I think Chandler is staying where he is at though so I wouldn't do it.Quote:
10 000 Hours wrote:
My thing with Jose is I think he may take less money on his next contract. He only has a year left on his current deal and the only reason we'd need his contract off the books is if we wanted to make more than one big signing or if we were going to pay someone the max. So I say keep him at least another season, let him continue to provide great leadership and passing and hopefully we can resign him for about 8 per year after next season. At worst, he simply walks next year and opens up cap room, which isn't that bad of a situation for us since it doesn't sound like he would bring that anything back that we couldn't just get off of the free agent market. At best he resigns for less and continues to perform at the level he has been for the next decade, leading us to multiple titles :).Quote:
RaptorReuben wrote:
What is this recent obsession with young average starter-quality player?
First, it was Wilson Chandler who is as average as can be at the starting small forward spot and now Darren Collison. Their historical performance are very consistent year after year and to me, this suggests they are basically finished products and won't likely improve significantly.
Collison may not even be "average"... ;-)Quote:
Hugmenot wrote:
But yeah, I'm hoping all this underrating/overrating of players is just a factor of the mid-season balhs + trade deadline excitement and a desire to be involved. I'd be 100% happy if Colangelo did NOTHING at the deadline and stuck with what he has until the summer.
This team is being built to make the playoffs next year. This is not about developing 12 under-25 guys in the hopes that they all become keepers and the Raptors make the playoffs when they're all hitting the late-20s. Toronto will be a 6-8 seed next year or Colangelo will die trying. That's my opinion, anyway, and one shared by a lot of folks out there.
If that's the case, why would you trade ANYONE this year unless they are bringing back cap space or a talented player who will be here for the next 3-4 years in return? Collison will never make up for the loss of Calderon, and will eat cap. Chandler *might* be the latter, but he also might be no better than James Johnson. Is that worth not only giving up a top-tier game manager in Calderon (which is *exactly* what this team will need next year and the year after as a younger PG develops into that role) but also locking up $30-40M in cap room for the next 4-5 years?
No you're right, we should stand pat with what we have. We'll win something eventually!
It's not about standing pat. It's about making the right moves at the right time. Now is not the right time, unless there's a sweetheart deal out there. Signing Wilson Chandler for $10M/year, or trading Calderon for Collison and/or cap space (now, vs. next season) is not the right deal, right now.Quote:
ceez wrote:
You worried we might not make the playoffs or something?
Edit: good lord I don't think anyone want to spend that much on Chandler
I'll be surprised if Chandler isn't looking for more than $8M per.Quote:
ceez wrote:
I'm not at all worried about making the playoffs. Losing more games this season isn't the issue (although it also shouldn't be the rationale behind any roster move; tanking is hardly a proven team-building method). The issue is how they will lose those games, and what they will be giving up, in terms of player development, in the process.
What does Chandler do for this team this season that he wouldn't do for the team if signed this off-season instead? On the one hand, you say he won't command that much cash, but on the other, Toronto has to rush to make a play for him now, in order to beat out all the other teams that will be vying for his services if they wait? Does not compute.
Either the guy is some kind of heavily-sought-after superstar wing who must be signed NOW or risk losing him forever (at the expense of giving up the one player on the team who can actually help to facilitate the development of the young players), or he is not.
If he is not a guy who is going to be a core part of getting this team into playoff contention, then crafting some trade just to get the cap space to sign him is not a great idea at the moment, in my opinion.
He very well could be. The only guy at HoopsWorld.com I take any faith in when it comes to rumours is Alex Kennedy. Bill Ingram is certainly on the bottom of the list so it is with a huge grain of salt I offer this:Quote:
jimmie wrote:
Quote:
For their part, the Nuggets are not interested in simply signing Chandler for the rest of this season; they want a multiyear deal starting at roughly $7.5 million. Chandler’s camp is pushing for a deal that pays him through the end of this season and allows him to become an unrestricted free agent in July. They’re even threatening to sit out the rest of this season in order to make that happen, though that is almost certainly an empty threat. Chandler signed in China because he hasn’t managed his money well and needed a quick payday. He’s not about to push his next payday back five months.
Source
If Denver is willing to do $7.5M per season, then I think we are reaching maximum dollars I'd offer anyways. If If Denver is in fact offering this and Chandler is looking for more than this, I think he is nuts and my interest would end there.
I am mostly in agreement with your last few posts but must comment on your musing about Chandler wanting more than 8 mil/per. imv, that would be excessive...and I certainly dont think he will get that from Denver. Gallinari is their long term starter just signed for 10/ so WC will be in as backup. Their sg positions already have Affalo & Rudy Fernandez and he would also be slated in as a backup there (that is a deep team!). My own view is Batum might command the 8-9 mil./ and WC a step lower (6-7). Now, he might command a bit of a premium signing with the Raps. Also Denver may just be posturing so as to extract an asset from another team...dont know if WC doesnt want to be a starter which is a bit problematic in Denver.Quote:
jimmie wrote:
You're ignoring Calderon's age. When the Raptors are "good" (in 3-5 years), how big of a role do you see Calderon playing?Quote:
hateslosing wrote:
If this was 5 years ago, there would be a strong case to stick with Calderon. But Colangelo has said on many occasions this season, that he'll be looking to fill the hole at PG. He's basically saying that Calderon isn't part of the future.
It's hard to say if Calderon will even be in the NBA in five seasons. Who knows, maybe he looks to go back to Spain and play out his twilight seasons? I know Calderon plays to win and he wants to be competitive but International players don't always value NBA championships like North American born players do.
This thread about Barbosa?
How about the Lakers as an option? They have the TPE from the Lamar Odom deal ... aaaand they also happen to have TWO first round picks this year, once of which they would likely offer to rent Blur for a playoff run.
I actually want to keep Blur, and re-sign him in the offseason, but if we could get a first rounder for him - and still have a chance at bringing him back this offseason, that is a good scenario.
I mentioned this in another thread just now and I think it's possible. I don't think they include any first rounders though. The Raptors have no leverage because the Lakers would be doing them a favor by taking Barbosa at this point given the circumstances.
I guess if we're not in the running for getting Wilson Chandler, then there is less reason to want to dump Barbosa ... other than saving a few bucks between now and the end of the year. We need that Guard depth badly, so maybe we just keep him?Quote:
Apollo wrote:
The only way the Lakers help out is if they Raptors take salary back. Barbosa at $7.6M prorated would be $15.2M prorated as they are tax payers.Quote:
Apollo wrote:
Barbosa is a UFA so there is no guarantee they can even keep him. Their best bet is moving him before the trade deadline to either add something of value or to facilitate another move which adds something of value.
If the Lakers use their TPE on Barbosa wouldn't it end up costing them the same? I thought the TPE counted against the cap.. so they'd be in tax territory regardless. I could be completely wrong about this though.Quote:
Matt52 wrote:
The TPE has no money value until a contract is assigned to it. Right now their $8.9M TPE is worth $0 against the cap. As soon as they absorb a contract, they have to pay for it plus the luxury tax (currently $1 for $1).Quote:
planetmars wrote: