With a veteran, former all-star now running the point and Elton Brand about to be re-signed for several more years, obviously now is the time for the Clippers. They're about to lose a 20 ppg athletic wing player and know that if they upgrade that position, they may well be able to compete for elite status in the conference. They have the short-term contracts (Mobley and Tim Thomas @ 15.5 M/year expiring summer of 2010) and young assets (Eric Gordon, Al Thornton) to make an attractive offer to the Nets. I'm thinking the two vets plus Gordon and a future 2nd will get Vince plus Marcus Williams. I haven't run the numbers, but they look close enough to work.
Nope They love Gordon and Thornton. Your proposed trade would strip them of any hope of having a bench and give them zero financial flexibility.
I don't see how we're going to move him. Nobody wants him, nobody is going to trade young players or draft picks for him, and we can't take back any contract that lasts through 2010.
Baron and Brand have plenty of years left, they would be wise to hang onto Thorton. I think its interesting that c. Ford claims Thornki have revisited the Wallf deal. IF they made that move they would essentially be betting against VC
word is NJs trying to ship VC to the Cavs..............in order to make room for Bron and another star player in a couple years.........
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>word is NJs trying to ship VC to the Cavs.</div> Its the other way around
If they had to think on a Carter/Wally swap, it means that they might feel they might not get much more than that for him. Sure they would love to add Gordon or Thornton but think it is very unlikely. -Petey
my concern is if we do send VC to the Cavs, is that their final piece they need to win one? it may hurt whatever chances we have of getting Lebron.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>is that their final piece they need to win one?</div> Thats why Im saying if management did this trade it would basically mean they are betting against VC, bc no way would they do it if they thought he could out them over the top
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jul 2 2008, 01:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nope They love Gordon and Thornton. Your proposed trade would strip them of any hope of having a bench and give them zero financial flexibility.</div> Ah, ever at the ready with buckets of icewater, zero contructive suggestions, and dubious analysis. Of course they love Gordon and Thornton. They're two nice young prospects. But they finally addressed their glaring point guard weakness, have locked (or will lock) up Brand long-term and thus have two 29 year-olds with recent injury problems leading their team. They can't wait for Thornton and Gordon to mature. They are also losing their best wing player and would presumably like to replace his production (and then some) with another veteran that needs no grooming. As for depth, that's what free agency is for. Signing Davis made them more attractive to free agents and adding Vince would make them many times over more attractive since it really signals that the team is in it to win NOW. This is exactly what Boston did last year and what other teams have done for decades, get short term vets in their late 20s or early 30s who can provide reliable niche contributions to round out a roster that is top heavy with salary. The Barrys, Poseys, PJ Browns, etc. of the league are exactly the kinds of players that would come to a team like the Clippers (with the proposed core) and work for low wages in exchange for the chance to contribute to a team that has legitimate championship aspirations. The proposed trade only involved ONE of the two youngsters the Clippers like, so it wasn't over-reaching in that regard. As for financial flexibility, they would happily never play Tim Thomas again, and if anyone was willing to give anything for him in return, he would have been gone long ago. Mobley has been useful but grossly overpaid and is still a significant impediment to cap and roster flexibility, considering that he has two years left on his contract. The combined salaries of Mobley, Thomas, and Maggette FAR outweigh Vince's salary, and, if motivated as he was for the second half of last season, Vince offers total production that they can't hope to get from that trio of players. It's true that Vince would limit their financial options in 2010, but between now and then, their financial flexibility is greater with Vince than with those 3, and "now" is what's driving these recent moves by the Clippers, not 2010.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (soul driver @ Jul 2 2008, 02:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>my concern is if we do send VC to the Cavs, is that their final piece they need to win one? it may hurt whatever chances we have of getting Lebron.</div> I was thinking the same thing. lol why would the Nets want to do anything that would HELP the Cavs? VC + Lebron would probably put them into the ECF every year.
As for financial flexibility, they would happily never play Tim Thomas again, and if anyone was willing to give anything for him in return, he would have been gone long ago. Mobley has been useful but grossly overpaid and is still a significant impediment to cap and roster flexibility, considering that he has two years left on his contract. The combined salaries of Mobley, Thomas, and Maggette FAR outweigh Vince's salary, and, if motivated as he was for the second half of last season, Vince offers total production that they can't hope to get from that trio of players. It's true that Vince would limit their financial options in 2010, but between now and then, their financial flexibility is greater with Vince than with those 3, and "now" is what's driving these recent moves by the Clippers, not 2010. FWIW, I would do it. Thorton is at least a nice prospect, something the Cavs cant offer. Davis, Gordon, VC, Brand, Kaman
There is no waiting for Thornton to mature as he is ready to contribute now and did contribute last season. Gordon has an NBA body and an NBA ready skill in how he attacks the basket. Then there is the overlooking that Vince is not a Dunleavy type of player and the fact that Clippers aren't looking for someone to shoot as much as Vince does. Kaman proved what he could do last season while Brand and Davis are known quantities. Then add in that Vince's market value doesn't come close to getting a player like Gordon or Thornton back in a trade. No matter how much you post about it, this makes zero sense for the Clippers.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (turdymclovin @ Jul 2 2008, 03:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>FWIW, I would do it. Thorton is at least a nice prospect, something the Cavs cant offer.</div> Vince doesn't have enough value to get a player like that back in a trade.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jul 2 2008, 02:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No matter how much you post about it, this makes zero sense for the Clippers.</div> Is one thread starter and one reply on a slow summer day of FA watch such an inundation that you think I'm force-feeding the idea, LMAO? Maybe it's not something the Clippers would do, but, as usual, you overstate your case with hyperbole like "zero sense". I guarantee you if the Nets were on the phone now with the offer, it would get genuine consideration from the other side. For the record, I don't want Vince traded. I'd like him to retire a Net, so this is not some wish on my part. I actually dread that he probably will be traded, likely at the February deadline or next summer if he has exceeded (some people's) expectations and kept the Nets competitive in the interim.
I would take thornton and Gordon out and put future pick(s). As much as we would like to have them, the goal is to get rid of VC's contract.
Interesting, it's being reported that Brand can now only get 70 million over 5 from the Clippers....with the Baron deal. The Warriors have made Brand a 5 year 90 million dollar offer(GSW has about 25 million in cap space). Does Brand's agent turn down a 2 million dollar commission by doing the right thing? Is this true, I thought the Clipps own Brands Bird Rights they can pay the max on any contract.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (soul driver @ Jul 2 2008, 02:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>my concern is if we do send VC to the Cavs, is that their final piece they need to win one? it may hurt whatever chances we have of getting Lebron.</div> they might win one but thats about it and lebron need a pg
I think they would make good trading partners as well. It will also depend that they could sign some a coupe of players to fill out their bench and maybe even sign and trade Maggette(EDIT:I don't think they can sign and trade him because they renounced his bird rights). What would Brand's and Davis starting salary be respectively? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Sources told ESPN.com that Davis, 29, will receive a five-year deal worth an estimated $65 million.</div> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The most the Clippers can offer Brand is a five-year deal worth about $70 million due to salary-cap restrictions</div> So say around 11M million starting salary for Davis and 12 million starting salary for Brand. 11M - Davis 12M - Brand 9.5M - Kaman 1.7M - Knight 1.4M - Thorton 0.8M - Powell 2.6m - Gordon = 39 Million 9.2M - Mobley 6.5M - Thomas = 15.7M 14.749M - Carter Total = 54.7 Million with Mobley and Thomas Total = 53.7Million with Carter So a trade with the Clippers could be Tim Thomas + Mobley + two future first round picks for Carter (14.749M). 2007-2008 salary cap at 55.630 million 2006-07 season set at $53.135 million So how much will the salary cap rise for the upcoming season? Say it raises 2.5M to 58.125 million. The Clipper could possibly have around 3-4 million to sign another free agent or two. And then sign minimum players right to fill out their roster. Davis/Knight Carter/Gordon/Taylor Thorton/? Brand/? Kaman/?/DeAndre Jordon
