Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 107

Thread: Toronto's sell-off competition

  1. #1
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    17,776
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Toronto's sell-off competition

    If Toronto were to decide the upside to the current team was limited and were to get active on the trade market, what other teams would they be competing with to return maximum assets? In other words, what teams are going to be sellers and what are they selling?

    HoopsWorld.com has this article: 5 players most likely to be traded. Click the link to get rationale but according to them:

    Danny Granger, Indiana Pacers
    Jeremy Lin, Houston Rockets
    Rajon Rondo, Boston Celtics
    LaMarcus Aldridge, Portland Trail Blazers
    Joel Anthony, Miami HEAT

    I would add:

    Marcin Gortat, Phoenix Suns
    "Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them."
    Tim Leiweke

    Basketball has clear winners every night --
    except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.

  2. #2
    Raptors Republic All-Star Superjudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Niagara
    Posts
    2,371
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Aldridge

  3. #3
    Super Moderator CalgaryRapsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,064
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Granger is the only high-profile wing on that list, so I view him as the primary direct competition to either Gay or DeRozan, should the Raps decide to shop one/both of them. Granger is an injury risk on an expiring contract ($14M), Gay is the best overall talent today and DeRozan is the youngest/cheapest/controlled longest/most upside. I guess it depends what aspect(s) the other team values most, partly due to how their potential offer matches up with the expected return for each of them.

    On a related note, how good would Aldridge look in a lineup alongside Valanciunas and Gay? That would be more of a retooling move to improve in the short-term (opposite of the tanking/rebuilding premise of this thread, I know).

  4. Like Axel liked this post
  5. #4
    Raptors Republic All-Star Superjudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Niagara
    Posts
    2,371
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    aldridge is under 30 man...he's a kid still, he'd be AWESOME.

  6. #5
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    810
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The problem is that the Pacers essentially can't afford to take any long term salary. If they trade Granger, it's for expirings+picks. Would they do that? They are contenders. It would significantly hurt them this year, in return for a pick which may not even pan out for many years.

    I don't know that I see them as major competition (for selling Gay).

  7. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,022
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Very interesting question, but way too much complexity for my mind to try and wrap around at the moment. Man, you need to look at 28 teams, their needs, their assets. Ouch. my head is already hurting, but it could lead to interesting discussion,,,,,,,, as long as this thread doesn't get into another tank/no-tank battle, or DeMar skill-set battle.

  8. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    744
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I wonder if we could acquire Rondo and Aldridge, hmm

  9. Like bounty, GoldenBaller, Joey liked this post
  10. #8
    Raptors Republic Starter Fully's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    Granger is the only high-profile wing on that list, so I view him as the primary direct competition to either Gay or DeRozan, should the Raps decide to shop one/both of them. Granger is an injury risk on an expiring contract ($14M), Gay is the best overall talent today and DeRozan is the youngest/cheapest/controlled longest/most upside. I guess it depends what aspect(s) the other team values most, partly due to how their potential offer matches up with the expected return for each of them.

    On a related note, how good would Aldridge look in a lineup alongside Valanciunas and Gay? That would be more of a retooling move to improve in the short-term (opposite of the tanking/rebuilding premise of this thread, I know).
    Aldridge would be an awesome fit in the lineup, there's no doubt. The obvious problem is how you land him.

    Wasn't there a rumour that the Cavs were offering the #1, Thompson and Waiters for him and got denied before the draft? It's pretty hard to fathom the Raps putting together a better offer than that without making JV available.

  11. #9
    Super Moderator CalgaryRapsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,064
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote BobLoblaw wrote: View Post
    The problem is that the Pacers essentially can't afford to take any long term salary. If they trade Granger, it's for expirings+picks. Would they do that? They are contenders. It would significantly hurt them this year, in return for a pick which may not even pan out for many years.

    I don't know that I see them as major competition (for selling Gay).
    The bolded was my first thought, until I remembered that they played the end of the season and playoffs without him, managing to do pretty well. Given his age, degree of injury risk, declining production and contract status, as well as the team's financial situation ($70M in salary, with both George and Stephenson expiring after this coming season), I could easily see them looking to get younger/cheaper at the SF spot.

  12. #10
    Raptors Republic Starter jimmie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    491
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    With Aldridge, it's a different scenario. The team has no interest in getting rid of him. He's their core piece, and he fits what they're trying to do in Portland. He's only on this list because of a rumour that HE wanted to leave them, not the reverse. And that may change if the moves they've made this summer work out for them.

    So if you want Aldridge, you're a) going to have to be an attractive destination for him, and b) going to have to pay a premium to Portland, who are not motivated to let him go.
    Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

  13. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    744
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote jimmie wrote: View Post
    With Aldridge, it's a different scenario. The team has no interest in getting rid of him. He's their core piece, and he fits what they're trying to do in Portland. He's only on this list because of a rumour that HE wanted to leave them, not the reverse. And that may change if the moves they've made this summer work out for them.

    So if you want Aldridge, you're a) going to have to be an attractive destination for him, and b) going to have to pay a premium to Portland, who are not motivated to let him go.
    Right but Aldridge is also a free agent in 2015, so if he wants to go Portland may be forced into a situation where they have to trade him THIS season. If they wait till 14-15, they might have trouble getting as much back for a one-year or half-year rental of Aldridge. It's kind of like the Deron Williams situation with the Jazz in that sense. I think the Nets were willing to trade that many assets because they knew they'd have time to try and woo DWill into staying.

  14. #12
    Raptors Republic All-Star Letter N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,040
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    The bolded was my first thought, until I remembered that they played the end of the season and playoffs without him, managing to do pretty well. Given his age, degree of injury risk, declining production and contract status, as well as the team's financial situation ($70M in salary, with both George and Stephenson expiring after this coming season), I could easily see them looking to get younger/cheaper at the SF spot.
    But it's very similar to the Thunder situation last year. Knowing that you were that close to winning it all do you risk it with a player that will help (even if not immensely, his ability to score would be a boost against the Heat, Bulls and anyone from the West they might meet in the finals) but cost money and will probably leave for nothing, or do you get what you can and hope you can have your cake and eat it too?

    I think if Granger and George play well together at the start of the year you'll see Indiana keep him and go for it because they don't want to go out the same way the Thunder, and to a lesser extent the Grizzlies went out last year, with people putting some of the blame on the GM/owners for making those moves.

  15. #13
    Raptors Republic All-Star Craiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,120
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    If Toronto were to decide the upside to the current team was limited and were to get active on the trade market, what other teams would they be competing with to return maximum assets? In other words, what teams are going to be sellers and what are they selling?

    HoopsWorld.com has this article: 5 players most likely to be traded. Click the link to get rationale but according to them:




    I would add:

    Marcin Gortat, Phoenix Suns
    I don't think any of the players, alone, would maximize a return on assets, atleast on a relative value.

    Let me put it this way.

    Real value : Aldridge = or > most combinations of Toronto's 'assets' aside from Val.

    Relative Value : Aldridge + chance of FA + opportunity cost of direction of the team < 'realistic' combination of Toronto's assets that won't reduce current and future wins.

    (If the team could add Aldridge + an extension, without given up Gay/Lowry/Val/Amir then maybe, but I don't see that as realistic possibility).

  16. #14
    Raptors Republic All-Star Superjudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Niagara
    Posts
    2,371
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Fully wrote: View Post
    Aldridge would be an awesome fit in the lineup, there's no doubt. The obvious problem is how you land him.

    Wasn't there a rumour that the Cavs were offering the #1, Thompson and Waiters for him and got denied before the draft? It's pretty hard to fathom the Raps putting together a better offer than that without making JV available.
    Excuse me?????

    Portland turned that down???

    Wow, the GM there is on crack, clearly. Wow.

  17. #15
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    17,776
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Craiger wrote: View Post
    I don't think any of the players, alone, would maximize a return on assets, atleast on a relative value.

    Let me put it this way.

    Real value : Aldridge = or > most combinations of Toronto's 'assets' aside from Val.

    Relative Value : Aldridge + chance of FA + opportunity cost of direction of the team < 'realistic' combination of Toronto's assets that won't reduce current and future wins.

    (If the team could add Aldridge + an extension, without given up Gay/Lowry/Val/Amir then maybe, but I don't see that as realistic possibility).
    I did not mean to look at it from the perspective of Toronto acquiring Aldridge or any of those players.

    I was looking at it from the perspective that those players who are rumoured to be available or could become available would be the Raptors competition if they decided to move DD/Gay/Lowry.
    "Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them."
    Tim Leiweke

    Basketball has clear winners every night --
    except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.

  18. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    744
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Fully wrote: View Post
    Aldridge would be an awesome fit in the lineup, there's no doubt. The obvious problem is how you land him.

    Wasn't there a rumour that the Cavs were offering the #1, Thompson and Waiters for him and got denied before the draft? It's pretty hard to fathom the Raps putting together a better offer than that without making JV available.
    No there wasn't.

    http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...Nos-1-19-Picks

    It was the #1 Pick + #19

    The offer you're referring to was for Kevin Love

    http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...For-Kevin-Love

  19. #17
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    17,776
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Xixak wrote: View Post
    No there wasn't.

    http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...Nos-1-19-Picks

    It was the #1 Pick + #19

    The offer you're referring to was for Kevin Love

    http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...For-Kevin-Love
    You know teams are allowed to make multiple offers to teams right?

    http://www.fearthesword.com/2013/6/2...s-nerlens-noel
    "Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them."
    Tim Leiweke

    Basketball has clear winners every night --
    except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.

  20. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    744
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    You know teams are allowed to make multiple offers to teams right?

    http://www.fearthesword.com/2013/6/2...s-nerlens-noel
    Umm that says that they offered #1 + #19 for Aldridge as well...

    What are the Cleveland Cavaliers seeking in exchange for the No. 1 pick? Sources say they reached out to the Portland Trail Blazers in an attempt to land LaMarcus Aldridge for the Nos. 1 and 19 picks. The Blazers quickly rebuffed them.
    Oh and get this at the bottom there's a link to another page where it says they offered Waiters+1st+TT for Love.

    http://www.fearthesword.com/2013/6/2...umber-one-pick

    According to a source, Cleveland offered the No. 1 pick, Tristan Thompson and Dion Waiters to try and land Minnesota’s Kevin Love. But new Timberwolves president Flip Saunders won’t move Love.
    Congratulations on making yourself look like an imbecile.

  21. #19
    Raptors Republic Rookie
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    43
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The inverse of this thread is what position is the 'weakest' across the league which requires an upgrade.

    I see very few teams that must upgrade the SG position, at least where DD is the guard being considered the upgrade. I can see Pistons for certain and maybe Suns/Bulls/Hawks.

    On the other hand, there are many team that teams can upgrade their SF. They start with Detroit, New Orleans, Milwaukee and Houston as the most likely, while Dallas, Charlotte, Cleveland, Sacramento, Phoenix and Washington are less likely to upgrade the starting SF and maybe even Atlanta, Minnesota.

    On PG, the Bucks (Knight) should upgrade though after that candidates for Lowry are less probable with maybe SAC (Vasquez), Bobcats (Walker), Dallas (upgrade defense). Also, the Heat, Detroit or Knicks who might upgrade.

    For PF, I don't see a big market there to upgrade but perhaps Dallas, Charlotte, Clippers (bruiser) or Pelicans (bruiser).

    I didn't look at C as the raptors don't have a starting center they are willing to trade.

  22. #20
    Raptors Republic All-Star Axel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    2,304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Xixak wrote: View Post
    Umm that says that they offered #1 + #19 for Aldridge as well...



    Oh and get this at the bottom there's a link to another page where it says they offered Waiters+1st+TT for Love.

    http://www.fearthesword.com/2013/6/2...umber-one-pick



    Congratulations on making yourself look like an imbecile.
    Why are you so rude to people? Does it make you feel smarter/cooler to be rude rather than just say that the link doesn't support his comment? Perhaps it was the incorrect link, or maybe he simply made a mistake. Being rude about it doesn't make him look like the imbecile...
    Whatever you do, do it the best you can

  23. Like p00ka, Mediumcore, LBF liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •