|
|
Post by hornetsgm on Oct 6, 2012 3:46:40 GMT -5
What % of Anderson's contract can I eat in order for this trade to be allowed? I have no interest in accruing talent through free agency as I believe all the young players with potential will be gone by then. I selected NOLA as I am interested in a challenging rebuilding project and I don't believe this move is anything too far from what a realistic rebuilding squad would do. (see espn.go.com/blog/dallas/mavericks/post/_/id/4690853/mavs-officially-use-amnesty-on-brendan-haywood or www.storytellerscontracts.com/) Every NBA team pays for players no longer on their roster, whether it be via amnesty, trade agreement or otherwise. I can agree that this could potentially give Cleveland more money in free agency (depending on who he drafts), but that is an irrelevant issue to my Hornets as I am not looking to acquire quality talent through free agency or realistically going to compete for a championship this year. All that being said, what % of a player's contract can I assume to accrue draft picks? Please respond so that I may know and hopefully rework this trade. Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by Oklahoma City (League Manager) on Oct 6, 2012 9:00:23 GMT -5
Personally, I find it hard to settle on a % that you should pay. Obviously you feel comfortable with the deal. I realize these types of things happen in the NBA, but my concern is that Anderson was a top 30 player in fantasy using our scoring system. He was up there ahead of Bosh, Humphries, Irving, and just below Cousins & Daron Williams. The guy is only 24 years old and has a very reasonable long-term contract. I just don't feel like that trade was giving you fair value for him.
I think by getting a 2nd & 3rd round pick would be fair compensation for him, while you give up a 4th or 5th rounder with him. But having to pay a portion of a Top 30 player's salary, in my opinion, is a bit extreme. That's just my opinion. If you are really intent on doing that deal, I'm sure we can all agree on something.
|
|
|
|
Post by Warriors GM (League Manager) on Oct 6, 2012 11:48:36 GMT -5
I would only pass the trade if the Cavs paid 100% of Anderson's salary for both years. Like Joe said, he's a top fantasy contributor in this league, and he has an incredibly favorable contract as it is considering it's non-rookie scale. As for the amnesty argument...
1) Dallas is picking up the tab on Haywood's contract because they actually amnestied him,
2) Teams only amnesty players who have bad contracts or have contracts that generally overpay the talent that the player delivers, which is the opposite of Anderson's case,
3) If Anderson were amnestied, in theory, he would go back into the Free Agency pool where everyone would have a fair shot at bidding for him, with the winning bidder likely paying 10M per year and finally
4) Amnestying cannot be a provision of a trade in real life, and I see no reason why this league should be different.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (League Commish) on Oct 6, 2012 13:32:26 GMT -5
I think Joe and Dan put up very good cases for their veto, admittedly I had some unease with the pass that I gave it as I remarked in the trade folder. But, I do believe it's a deal that can be tweaked and made right and good for both teams.
|
|
