LAC-LAL

[Shaq O'Neal]

*Using 19-20 salaries queued till draft day*

Clippers trade

J.R. Smith dead money $28,600,000




Lakers trade

Marcus Thornton dead money $3,480,000

Pau Gasol dead money $11,760,000

Tyler Johnson $10,000,000 $10,000,000

Wayne Ellington $1,091,400 $2,182,800

Wenyen Gabriel $1,091,400 $2,182,800

LAL 2024 1st top 3 protected (increasing conveyance)


Outgoing salary=$27,422,800(125% of 27,422,800=34,278,500)

I accept
Ron Artest(1x Champ) to accept

[Ron Artest(1x Champ)]

Ye

[Shaq O'Neal]

Yeezy
Stuff The Magic Dragon
Nino Brown
Logan Hough
billy
Ed Cooley

[Ed Cooley]

A couple things on rules here that are a little confusing. So this would bring LAL below 12 players on their roster, which is legal in the offseason. However, does the offseason begin for a team as soon as they’re eliminated from the playoffs or after their last reg season game? If not, would this trade then have to be queued for the full offseason? If this is the case, then wouldn’t the dead money part of the trade be invalidated or does previous season dead money continue to be movable until the next season starts?

Now outside of rules: why? This still leaves the Lakers slightly under the available cap for a full max, so why give that sort of 1st if it’s freeing up space for a tier 2 FA? Kawhi’s contract ends 2022 (latest by PO) so a pick that far out when the superstar has a NTC seems more valuable than a tier 2 FA

[billy]

The offseason begins when the playoffs end.

[Yeezy]

A 1st for $14M of cap? Seems bad

[Brian Scalabrine]

You can't get him to take Exum too?

[Ron Artest(1x Champ)]

For full transparency, I did agree to this deal a while back. Can’t remember when, but I figured this wouldn’t get passed after the recent deals LAC tried to make involving future picks from other teams. I just didn’t want to be a dick, and renege on our original agreement.

[Yeezy]

ok well veto

[Stuff The Magic Dragon]

Accept

[Nino Brown]

Gonna have to decline this one on the basis of a very similar deal being declined recently.

[Brian Scalabrine]

Oct 23, 2020 11:00:30 GMT -5 Ron Artest(1x Champ) said:

For full transparency, I did agree to this deal a while back. Can’t remember when, but I figured this wouldn’t get passed after the recent deals LAC tried to make involving future picks from other teams. I just didn’t want to be a dick, and renege on our original agreement.

Hot take:

There's literally nothing wrong with coming back to a GM a while later and admitting that you have a better deal on the table, or don't want to do it anymore. As far as I'm concerned, there isn't anything wrong with being honest about feeling differently than you did before. As long as you're clear about that to the GM, and a trade thread hasn't been posted yet, it's chill. The "not a dick" thing to do is to give them the chance to offer more/a different deal.

I'm a little drunk rn, but I'm pretty sure I offered you a deal that got you off Johnson AND Exum, and that I said I'd accept it for either Bol or LAL 2020 1st. I could be wrong about that specifically bc I didn't go through the messages, but I would have accepted that. IDGAF that you didn't accept that, I'm happy with the deal I made with JT, but overall, it's wild to me that people feel bound to deals they agreed to earlier that are worse for their team. That's all.

Shop around, get the best deal available. That's how trading works.

[Shaq O'Neal]

Oct 24, 2020 2:46:32 GMT -5 Brian Scalabrine said:

Oct 23, 2020 11:00:30 GMT -5 Ron Artest(1x Champ) said:

For full transparency, I did agree to this deal a while back. Can’t remember when, but I figured this wouldn’t get passed after the recent deals LAC tried to make involving future picks from other teams. I just didn’t want to be a dick, and renege on our original agreement.

Hot take:

There's literally nothing wrong with coming back to a GM a while later and admitting that you have a better deal on the table, or don't want to do it anymore. As far as I'm concerned, there isn't anything wrong with being honest about feeling differently than you did before. As long as you're clear about that to the GM, and a trade thread hasn't been posted yet, it's chill. The "not a dick" thing to do is to give them the chance to offer more/a different deal.

I'm a little drunk rn, but I'm pretty sure I offered you a deal that got you off Johnson AND Exum, and that I said I'd accept it for either Bol or LAL 2020 1st. I could be wrong about that specifically bc I didn't go through the messages, but I would have accepted that. IDGAF that you didn't accept that, I'm happy with the deal I made with JT, but overall, it's wild to me that people feel bound to deals they agreed to earlier that are worse for their team. That's all.

Shop around, get the best deal available. That's how trading works.

I think that if you are unsure about doing a deal you shouldn't confirm  it.It is fine in my opinion if a GM does not agree to a deal till they are sure about it and want to evaluate options but if you confirm a deal which has to be posted a little later for some reason then you shouldn't go back on your word. Whenever I get a deal confirmed I start thinking about a series of deals so a certain GM going back on their word would affect all my future deals which would suck so I would say that don't confirm a deal unless you are 100% sure of it.

[Shaq O'Neal]

Oct 23, 2020 20:15:32 GMT -5 Nino Brown said:

Gonna have to decline this one on the basis of a very similar deal being declined recently.

The thing is that the major issue people had with our deal was the involvement of an unprotected pick which was fixed in this deal by adding a top 3 protection.Moreover,additional cap space seemed more like a luxury for you since you already had 35 mil in cap space at the time of the deal compared to Ron's current 17 mil space.

[Shaq O'Neal]

Also keeping this trade and the rejected TOR-BOS trade involving Middleton in mind,I really don't think the TC should reject a trade just because a GM involved doesn't like it anymore.I feel like doing that just negates the rule that  a GM can't go back on a trade after they have posted the trade/replied with an accept.

[billy]

Oct 24, 2020 5:50:21 GMT -5 Shaq O'Neal said:

Also keeping this trade and the rejected TOR-BOS trade involving Middleton in mind,I really don't think the TC should reject a trade just because a GM involved doesn't like it anymore.I feel like doing that just negates the rule that  a GM can't go back on a trade after they have posted the trade/replied with an accept.

I agree with this.

That being said ill be submitting my reject for the same reasons as the Cleveland trade. There's just no scenario where clearing a less-than-max amount of cap is worth a first even with top 3 protection. Give it top 8 and id accept.

[Deleted]

4 Days Trade Failed 1-2