The trade is to be completed on July 6th: Korver's deal needs to be guaranteed by the 7th. Don't see why this is an issue?
A small market team makes a significant move? A team makes a move that has some degree of risk associated with it? Is that even legal????
Crowder is getting paid 8M. ET is 18M. Hark/Leonard is 11M. It will be much easier for a contending team to find a deal for Crowder's contract. Also ignores the fact that Crowder is a useful player which is why someone would want him in the first place. ET/Leonard/Harkless are not.
As of last year there are new rules that if you trade a non/partial guaranteed player his contract only counts as the non-guaranteed amount for it to work to prevent teams from cutting salary that way. The math of this trade likely needs Korver to be guaranteed for it to work.
Didn't Meyers just drop 30 in an elimination game in the conference finals? I'd call that pretty useful.
The Jazz have the room to absorb Conley's deal as an under the cap team, provided Favors is waived by the 6th.
The point wasn't that Crowder is some great player. It's that he is an okay player AND his contract is more movable. The other three are worse players with larger contracts, making it less likely to find a deal.
We keep going down this rabbit hole but are missing the main point of of my initial post. Who is our Conley? And do we have the equivalent pieces to get him?
I wasn't aware of this rule but I did some research and it's not 100% true: https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/03/how-non-guaranteed-salaries-will-affect-trades-in-new-cba.html I haven't done the math with regards to this trade yet but I think there is a scenario where they don't need Korver's salary to count for 7.5 million if Favors is waived or moved before the 6th (his guarantee date is the 6th as well). Freaking CBA.
Looking for exact equivalence - and you're not going to find it. The same player can have different values for different teams. Love and Griffin are both plausible depending on how much we're willing to give up and whether or not those teams want to move them in the first place.
I think that's technically true, but I imagine they're interested in either bringing ba k favors, or trying to move him for something else. Otherwise, instead of Korver, crowder, allen, the deal is Korver, crowder, favors, allen, picks, which is much worse. If they werent using his salary, I dont believe they would bother including him
I'm sure theres a few we somehow havent discussed here, but otherwise, I think you're looking at the same list hashed out in here many times. Love, griffin, aldridge, porter, a few others. Of them, love fits the scenario most because hes older on a rebuilding team.
I think Love/Porter are the only ones currently on teams that would be willing to let em go for picks. I know we've had interest in Porter before. Wonder what CHI thinks.
That's fair. The salary amount is probably not that important for Memphis who is rebuilding anyways. Against the original point though, it helps that Crowder and Korver are two separate contracts, as opposed to one.
After the trade to CHI in 15 games, Porter's stats: 33 mpg, 17.5 ppg, 5.5 rebs, 2.7 rebs, 1.2 stl on 48% FG, 49% from 3, 91% FT, 18 PER. I did a deep dive on his corner 3pt shooting earlier this spring and there's couldn't be a better fit for us basketball wise. He's not a star, but will be making $ like one. These numbers are too distant from what he's put up the rest of his career in WAS, so it's not much of an anomaly. I still kinda like him better than Wiggins/Love/etc.
They got Porter for expirings (at least from the Bulls perspective, they were never going to resign Portis). Flipping him for some picks would mean they made a profit, but he played well with them, and fits their age timeline with regards to the rest of their core. I think Love and Griffin are more plausible. Can throw Haywards name in there as well depending on how you feel about him. I don't think Detroit WANTS to move Griffin now(for whatever reason), but it's just a matter of when with him.
Yeah, with porter, i just dont see why chicago would move off of him. Yes, hes overpaid, but they knew that when they traded for him. If they want cap relief, they'd have been better off keeping parker around. They still need to hit the salary floor, they have a super low payroll, and he only has 1 year beyond this. I'd live to get him, I just doubt they move him.
