OKC-IND

[Steve Jobs]

---

OKC Trades:

---

Kevin Love - $34,545,000 $36,660,000
Danny Green - $12,260,000
Andre Roberson - $11,385,000 $12,127,500
Maurice Harkless - $2,500,000 $3,500,000 $4,500,000
[$60,690,000]

---

IND Trades:

---

Goran Dragic - $27,500,000 $28,000,000
Enes Kanter - $11,100,000
Ben McLemore - $5,500,000
DM of Anderson Varejao - $5,320,000
[$49,420,000]

(49,420,000 x 1.25 = 61,775,000 > 60,690,000)

---

I accept.  Love + Green + Harkless is really difficult to give up during a pursuit of a deep playoff run, and in terms of pure player value I'd never consider all of that for basically just Dragic, but shedding a bit of salary right now is a little bit more important to me than contending when the East is as loaded as it is and I have two big contracts to re-sign during the offseason, so the short term Big L is worth the long term small w.  

Reggie Miller

[Reggie Miller]

I accept. Needed some inside presence and Love will surely be a big help. Hard to let Dragic go but with this trade my line up will be more balance.

[Steve Jobs]

Theodore Duncan
Ed Cooley
Stuff The Magic Dragon
Logan Hough
Nino Brown

Let me know if I’m missing anyone... I just copied this from the other trade thread cause I’m at work and didn’t have time to look for the whole TC groups.

[Shaq O'Neal]

Yeezy too

[Theodore Duncan]

Not a big fan of this really for Indy. Kinda want to reject, although it's not really franchise ruining.

Love and Dragic are same level players so they even out. Love just comes with bit worse contract, but matches better with CJ so I see the point.

Roberson is still huge liability offensively so that 12mil is not going to be a good contract even if he is able to play. I see him as big negative asset at this point.
Harkless is ok bench player in decent contract.. but not really anything special. Same level players are every year available for minimum contracts

Getting Danny Green with BR is good, but as Indy will miss playoffs this year it's not going to help them make a big run. And there is a chance that Danny leaves in off-season for a better team. Maybe they can flip him for something else still before season ends. But as Indy also gives a decent player in Kanter (with BR).

So unless there is a trade waiting for Danny to flip him something good, and we leave out Love/Dragic, this sort of comes down to

- few months rental for Danny Green
- Harkless (meh)
- taking 12mil bad money

for

- Enes Kanter
- Mclemore (even bigger meh)


I think it's bit flopsided. I don't know what others think about it?

[Stuff The Magic Dragon]

An attempt for OKC to cut down their salary which is good.
Salary-wise, this one is pretty bad for IND but with them going nowhere, I don’t see this as something bad enough to reject. IND simply exist.
I’ll accept this one.

[Theodore Duncan]

Didn't check in detail the team salaries before, but this moves Pacers from over 27mil cap space to something like 3mil. That's a lot to give for this return.
I think that changes this to reject for me.

[Steve Jobs]

Aug 6, 2020 9:50:00 GMT -5 Theodore Duncan said:

Didn't check in detail the team salaries before, but this moves Pacers from over 27mil cap space to something like 3mil. That's a lot to give for this return.
I think that changes this to reject for me.

Reggie has been here since the very beginning. If this isn’t franchise ruining then rejecting because you wouldn’t do it is absurd.

[Scott Pilgrim]

seems good

[Theodore Duncan]

Aug 6, 2020 10:33:15 GMT -5 Steve Jobs said:

Aug 6, 2020 9:50:00 GMT -5 Theodore Duncan said:

Didn't check in detail the team salaries before, but this moves Pacers from over 27mil cap space to something like 3mil. That's a lot to give for this return.
I think that changes this to reject for me.

Reggie has been here since the very beginning. If this isn’t franchise ruining then rejecting because you wouldn’t do it is absurd.

I'm not sure who it was (maybe even you, or Billy) that put it quite well in some older trade thread. It's not typically one single trade that makes something franchise ruining. It's more like series of losing trades and suddenly team is in shape that you need multiple years to get back to been a healthy franchise.

At least for me that's the reason I try to be much more strict in my vote, if I see a team that is already in difficult situation making a trade that I think doesn't make sense for their overall situation and they are losing. Because that could be the start of the road to "ruin".  There are some trades that are very even, but at least every third there seems to be a winner/loser. That's just how it is.

But other way around, personally I can accept a very lopsided trade easily, if the team "losing" is still going to be in very good situation.

Example: Philly trades Dame to Pacers straight up for Devonte Graham.. Is it more lopsided than this? Yes, but I would accept it, because Philly would be just fine after the trade and it would not ruin competitive balance of the league. Other way around, that trade would of course be rejected straight away.

And yes. definitely longer tenured GM's get more leeway in trades, but it shouldn't mean that TC can't be critical about it. Reggie being experienced GM is only reason this is even now a discussion. If this would be posted by new GM being in a league for 1 month, I think it would be rejected without any discussion.

Indiana is in tough spot: 17-46 record with team mostly consisting of veterans. They don't own a 1st round pick this year. So in this situation giving up 24 million of cap space, which could really help in rebuild, and not getting any good future asset in return, just doesn't make sense for me.

So trying to look at this neutrally and according to my voting principles, I think this is reject.

[Penny Hardaway]

Dang didnt know indy was 16- 42 why are we trading for vets and less cap...

[Theodore Duncan]

Aug 6, 2020 12:31:06 GMT -5 Penny Hardaway said:

Dang didnt know indy was 16- 42 why are we trading for vets and less cap...

Actually I looked accidentally in day 69 standings. The final one was in day 70 and in that they are now 17-46, which is not any better. But just to correct myself

[Steve Jobs]

I won’t pretend to speak for Reggie here, but if I’m in his shoes, picking up Danny Green’s bird rights and swapping Dragic for a big that pairs well with CJ is a big benefit.

It’s easy to look at current record and next year’s cap space and just automatically assume that taking on salary is the wrong move, but 1) IND isn’t guaranteed any top tier FAs anyway, 2), Reggie can clear up more cap space if he wants to, 3) he still has Love over Dragic, which despite the small jump on salary is a younger, better player that fits the direction he wants to take his team.

It probably was me that gave you the inspirational discussion on trade committee theory, lol, so I’d hope you’d also take it to heart when I say, looking out for those small losses than can lead to long-term franchise ruin is almost exclusively a courtesy I extend to new GMs. Someone like Reggie who will stick it out through a low period isn’t the kind of GM we’re trying to... “protect from themself” if you will. He’s allowed to have a plan that isn’t obvious at first glance, and he’s also allowed to not need to divulge that plan just to get a non-franchise ruining trade through.

Either way, it’s whatever. If you want to reject it I’m not going to try that hard to talk you out of it. These are just my thoughts from a TC perspective.

[Nino Brown]

Feels like The Pacers should be getting at least a pick or nice prospect if they’re going to be taking on salary. They’re a rebuilding team, adding non rebuilding pieces.

[Steve Jobs]

Aug 6, 2020 16:28:39 GMT -5 Nino Brown said:

Feels like The Pacers should be getting at least a pick or nice prospect if they’re going to be taking on salary. They’re a rebuilding team, adding non rebuilding pieces.

Love + Green + Harkless (+ Roberson if healthy) >> Dragic + Kantor + McLemore. Why would I throw in a pick or prospect to take worse players?

[Brian Scalabrine]

Am I the only one who thinks the following?

A. Love on his contract is better than Dragic (good passing and shooting big--contract is icky but his skillset is harder to replace than Dragic, and besides that, even though the cost is more, once you get to overpaid guys in the 25+ mil range, they're about the same in terms of the contract being negative.)

B. Roberson is a candidate to decline his PO. This would be unlikely, but if he continues to be playable and a high end defensive player which he's shown in the bubble, he could talk himself into being able to get a three year contract this off-season at 4-6 mil a year. That's either a wash for him, or 6 mil more than he'll make in the one year.

C. Danny Green >>>> Kanter. Yeah, maybe Reggie doesn't benefit that much from Green in a vacuum, but the pieces he's getting here look more valuable to a contender than what he's sending. Green, Harkless, Roberson as a package could be sexy to a contender looking to send bad salary + rebuilding assets in return.

I dunno. I think IND is slightly winning in terms of overall value here, I don't see how it could shake out to make him worse off in any significant way, and maybe this deal gives him pieces he can use to get good deals on the fringes. Or, if he was planning to run this core back with a retool this off-season, his team is in fact better than before. Whether he's trying to compete next year or get more attractive pieces to move to another destination, the loss in value is very marginal bc Kanter is a flight risk, and Dragic is a negative contract on a pretty equal level to Love.

[Yeezy]

Aug 6, 2020 16:50:30 GMT -5 Brian Scalabrine said:

maybe this deal gives him pieces he can use to get good deals on the fringes. Or, if he was planning to run this core back with a retool this off-season, his team is in fact better than before. Whether he's trying to compete next year or get more attractive pieces to move to another destination, the loss in value is very marginal bc Kanter is a flight risk, and Dragic is a negative contract on a pretty equal level to Love.

I don't want to be a dick but does anyone believe this? When has Reggie made any forward looking moves or when has he made trades that were not initiated by someone else?

[Brian Scalabrine]

Aug 6, 2020 17:11:07 GMT -5 Yeezy said:

Aug 6, 2020 16:50:30 GMT -5 Brian Scalabrine said:

maybe this deal gives him pieces he can use to get good deals on the fringes. Or, if he was planning to run this core back with a retool this off-season, his team is in fact better than before. Whether he's trying to compete next year or get more attractive pieces to move to another destination, the loss in value is very marginal bc Kanter is a flight risk, and Dragic is a negative contract on a pretty equal level to Love.

I don't want to be a dick but does anyone believe this? When has Reggie made any forward looking moves or when has he made trades that were not initiated by someone else?

He won this one by a lot imo dynasty720.proboards.com/thread/6676/minnesota-indiana

[Nino Brown]

Aug 6, 2020 16:41:05 GMT -5 Steve Jobs said:

Aug 6, 2020 16:28:39 GMT -5 Nino Brown said:

Feels like The Pacers should be getting at least a pick or nice prospect if they’re going to be taking on salary. They’re a rebuilding team, adding non rebuilding pieces.

Love + Green + Harkless (+ Roberson if healthy) >> Dragic + Kantor + McLemore. Why would I throw in a pick or prospect to take worse players?

even if you’re trading “better” players now, all of these guys are over 30, and he’s rebuilding. That’s literally the opposite of what you do when you’re rebuilding, and he’s adding salary. Even if you want to fast forward a year, you have players 30+, who also lose trade value. Also Danny Green is on a steep decline. I don’t see any positive in this trade for him tbh.

[Yeezy]

Aug 6, 2020 17:36:01 GMT -5 Nino Brown said:

Aug 6, 2020 16:41:05 GMT -5 Steve Jobs said:

Love + Green + Harkless (+ Roberson if healthy) >> Dragic + Kantor + McLemore. Why would I throw in a pick or prospect to take worse players?

even if you’re trading “better” players now, all of these guys are over 30, and he’s rebuilding. That’s literally the opposite of what you do when you’re rebuilding, and he’s adding salary. Even if you want to fast forward a year, you have players 30+, who also lose trade value. Also Danny Green has clearly declined. I don’t see any positive in this trade for him tbh.

Problem is Reggie is making trades as though he's competing

[Brian Scalabrine]

Man I know I used to nitpick trades as much as anyone--but where is the deal out there for Dragic that gets Reggie rebuilding assets? I mean, maybe there's one for Kanter, but if there is one, then there's probably the same deal for Green. This move is exceptionally lateral for Indy.

[Yeezy]

Aug 6, 2020 17:46:04 GMT -5 Brian Scalabrine said:

Man I know I used to nitpick trades as much as anyone--but where is the deal out there for Dragic that gets Reggie rebuilding assets? I mean, maybe there's one for Kanter, but if there is one, then there's probably the same deal for Green. This move is exceptionally lateral for Indy.

Lateral move =/= adding 26M in salary or whatever the number is

[Brian Scalabrine]

Also, as someone who did a rebuild, trading junk for slightly better junk is exactly how you get the ball rolling. I have a hard time seeing how what his getting is worse junk than the junk he's sending. His likelihood of turning what he's receiving into rebuilding assets is virtually the same as it would be if he didn't do the trade. Imo they're better. Harkless would be worth a second in the draft to a contender for dead money. Love or Roberson + Green could be a good "receiving bad money + a pick or young guy" package. And even if he doesn't make any deal like that, he's improving his team without sending anything of significant positive value.

When you're looking for "slippery slope, sneaky franchise ruining trading chain" you look for things like him moving Graham or even Goga for something stupid.

[Brian Scalabrine]

Aug 6, 2020 17:51:03 GMT -5 Yeezy said:

Aug 6, 2020 17:46:04 GMT -5 Brian Scalabrine said:

Man I know I used to nitpick trades as much as anyone--but where is the deal out there for Dragic that gets Reggie rebuilding assets? I mean, maybe there's one for Kanter, but if there is one, then there's probably the same deal for Green. This move is exceptionally lateral for Indy.

Lateral move =/= adding 26M in salary or whatever the number is

It can be. Having expiring money has facilitated lots of deals for bad money + assets. It's a Kong classic.

[Jackie Kong]

Aug 6, 2020 17:57:33 GMT -5 Brian Scalabrine said:

It can be. Having expiring money has facilitated lots of deals for bad money + assets. It's a Kong classic.

I would appreciate if I could stay off this. but for the record, people have no idea how much long can it take to put together a large trade with tens of lines.

[Yeezy]

Aug 6, 2020 17:46:04 GMT -5 Brian Scalabrine said:

where is the deal out there for Dragic that gets Reggie rebuilding assets?     

There isn't one, but it's called: "Letting bad deals expire" or "I'll take on this extra salary for some kind of asset that makes my team better in the long run". 

If the point of the TC is to help owners get better, and you're just as guilty of this as anyone lol, I'd tell Reggie to just flip Dragic for Love and an asset. Or go all out, take on Love and Roberson for Dragic but get something of value out of it

[Steve Jobs]

Aug 6, 2020 18:45:36 GMT -5 Yeezy said:

Aug 6, 2020 17:46:04 GMT -5 Brian Scalabrine said:

where is the deal out there for Dragic that gets Reggie rebuilding assets?     

There isn't one, but it's called: "Letting bad deals expire" or "I'll take on this extra salary for some kind of asset that makes my team better in the long run". 

If the point of the TC is to help owners get better, and you're just as guilty of this as anyone lol, I'd tell Reggie to just flip Dragic for Love and an asset. Or go all out, take on Love and Roberson for Dragic but get something of value out of it

The point of the TC isn’t to help owners “get better”. The point of the TC is to stop franchise ruining trades. That’s it. It’s why the TC has gotten abolished multiple times in the short history of this league.

And while I appreciate the nod towards my consistent “lots of small trade losses can lead to ruined franchises“ philosophy as a TC member, the fact of the matter is that the TC should only be involved in helping GMs get more if they also reject because the trade is franchise ruining.

Now again, just talking TC theory here (not trying to sway you vote because honestly, who cares it’s a sim league), but I do think it’s important to check your distinctions here.

If Reggie and I can’t get a purely lateral, non-franchise ruining trade that we both agreed to passed, I genuinely don’t know how this group has accepted anything. lol

[Yeezy]

no

[Yeezy]

Y'all rejected much better trades FYI, hypocrite af

[Shaq O'Neal]

This trade is pretty bad for Indiana.I have seen some arguments on them getting better players and having a better fit but  as a 17-46 team (tied for the 4th worst record in the league) why should they care about that?They are taking 24 million back for next season and I think cap space is being really undervalued here.24 million in cap space is pretty valuable and you might say that with Indiana's record they will not be able to sign any major FA which is true but they can always take a shot on some young player who has potential but has not played well.Also 24 million cap space can fetch them some picks from a contender who needs cap relief which is the kind of deals that would be good for rebuilding teams.Unless they have another deal which makes them a lot better I do not see any value for Indiana is this.