What's new
By:
Filters

Article About Denver Wanting to Trade

I'm always a bit confused on how these trades work in the off-season, but I think a team who can do this trade has to have cap-room to outright acquire Faried's contract.
 
TheStormofWar said:
Utah is not trading Burks for Faried. It would be the Ungs. Denver is looking to drop out of the tax. Trading Thabo, Jonas, and Epke for Faried and 14 would be the baseline deal. If Denver's GM Connelly has a gun to his head by ownership, Utah is one of the logical deals there as they can facilitate it.
Click to expand...

That would be a deal worth thinking about but do we really wanna lose those guys? Jonas and Crowder are tight, Thabo and Epke are both great locker room guys, if Favors walks i'd rather have them as a known quantity.

Is the 14th and 21st pick gonna get us closer to the big dance is really the question and i doubt it is.
 
With this being cleared up (thank you Cy), we dont have much trade power this off-season unless we just let those 3 guys walk, renounce Favors and use cap space plus Burks.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
So then it looks like we'll retain all three. As their value in a trade is from salary relief, unless some contender is wanting Udoh, there's not a market for them. And we don't really have FA cap space so I presume we're just going to retain all three.
 
infection said:
So then it looks like we'll retain all three. As their value in a trade is from salary relief, unless some contender is wanting Udoh, there's not a market for them. And we don't really have FA cap space so I presume we're just going to retain all three.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they have no trade value outside of their value as players. No team is trading for them on the purpose of waiving them to save money.

Bright-side: This severely limits how many dumb trades Lopo can come up with.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Yeah, they have no trade value outside of their value as players. No team is trading for them on the purpose of waiving them to save money.

Bright-side: This severely limits how many dumb trades Lopo can come up with.
Click to expand...

Wait. A draft day deal counts using that season's cap numbers, not the next seasons, right. If so, Faried for the Ungs should still work as the deals for them THIS season were guaranteed. I think anyway.
 
TheStormofWar said:
Wait. A draft day deal counts using that season's cap numbers, not the next seasons, right. If so, Faried for the Ungs should still work as the deals for them THIS season were guaranteed. I think anyway.
Click to expand...
Decent question.

On a side note, if we indeed can't trade them, is there any reason we won't bring all of them back, absent waiving everyone to create cap space (which I don't think will happen)?
 
TheStormofWar said:
Wait. A draft day deal counts using that season's cap numbers, not the next seasons, right. If so, Faried for the Ungs should still work as the deals for them THIS season were guaranteed. I think anyway.
Click to expand...
No, someone already posted the link explaining it all. They are all worth $0.

That's the rule change. They use to be worth that season's salary up until July 1st, but now they are just worth their guaranteed amount in the following year, which is 0 for all of them.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
No, someone already posted the link explaining it all. They are all worth $0.

That's the rule change. They use to be worth that season's salary up until July 1st, but now they are just worth their guaranteed amount in the following year, which is 0 for all of them.
Click to expand...

Damnitsomuch.
 
So, really, it's more just a question of Favors. Exum will likely be matched and the three unguaranteed guys should likely be back. Then a question mark on whether or not there's a deal that would include Burks and/or Bradley as they are somewhat superfluous.
 
The good news? Perhaps we can land Patrick Beverley with one of our exceptions if we're willing to part with some asset. Maybe Tomic wants to go to LA.
 
Some serious downside:

Now we don't really have salary for something like an Otto Porter. Not that that's what would happen, but this really hamstrings us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top