Trade Rumor: Pierce to Cavs for two 2nd rounders (31 and 33)

mmmmm & dslack wrote:

It doesn't really help.

Pierce’s contract comes off the books after this coming year anyway, so if it doesn’t get the Celtics under the cap this year it doesn’t help. And it doesn’t get the Celtics under the cap this year, at least not without another trade to get KG off the books for nothing in return or if he retires.

by dslack on Jun 22, 2013 | 12:12 PM                                     




Except the TE can be used at any point before then

and is more flexible than trying to get an exact match trade.

And it doesn’t matter that the TE doesn’t get you under the cap regarding free agents. It does take salary off in regards to the luxury tax AND it can be used to bring someone in via trade without worrying about the cap.

by mmmmm on Jun 22, 2013 | 12:22 PM 




Oh, I totally agree.
My point was just that it doesn’t get the Celtics cap room that they could use to sign a free agent. (Although it could help with a S/T.)

by dslack     

mmmmm and others wrote:
The trade exception still counts against room under the cap.

It doesn’t count as ‘salary’ so if a team is over the luxury tax threshold it doesn’t hurt you.
But if you are salary cap, the trade exception (as well as others like the Disabled Player Exception) counts against your room under the cap.
This is avoid the obvious loophole of the team using that space to sign a free agent and then to use the exception to recieve a player in trade that puts them way over the cap.
The Trade Exception has a lot of value though. $15M can be enough to bring a very good player in via trade.

by mmmmm on Jun 21, 2013 | 6:08 PM                                                     


[url=http://www.sbnation.com/users/Banner 18][/url]

if that's the case then that's a very good deal

the club essentially gets a future, quality 15 Mil player plus 2 high second rounders that can be packaged in other trades
my question is, does the exception have to be one player for $15 mil or can it be a number of players equaling $15 mil? like a 10 mil and a 5 mil
also, what does that other team get (future C’s trading partner)? do they in turn get an exception of their own?
#BOSTONSTRONG
by [url=http://www.sbnation.com/users/Banner 18]Banner 18[/url] on Jun 21, 2013 |                                      




It can be a number of players...

but it cannot exceed the total amount of the trade exception, even if we include additional players. I also believe the team we deal with gets a trade exception for the annual amount of the player coming back [although I could be wrong – I tried brushing up on my CBA rules a few weeks ago].
by jambr380 on Jun 21, 2013 | 7:40 PM                                 




yes, it can be broken up to get multiple players from different teams

in different trades. Just cant send out players with the exception

meet me on the corner of walk and dont walk

by craziness@analltimehigh on Jun 21, 2013 | 7:42 PM                                                     




Right...

I worded that wrong [‘even if we include additional players’ should have probably read, ‘even if we wanted to include additional players to match salaries, as we wouldn’t be allowed to’]. Thank you for clarifying it for everybody else.
by jambr380 on Jun 21, 2013 | 7:45 PM up reply rec flag


[url=http://www.sbnation.com/users/Banner 18][/url]

still, that a pretty powerful chip

there’s lot of versatility there, if the C’s can find the right partners, they can bring in a huge haul for the rebuild
I know it’s still a rumor but I’ll be checking out player’s salaries now to explore possible trade scenarios with trading partners that make sense

by [url=http://www.sbnation.com/users/Banner 18]Banner 18[/url] on Jun 21, 2013 | 7:55 PM

dslack and others wrote:


That's a disappointing offer for Pierce.

He’s still extremely talented and can put up numbers across-the-board.
This isn’t even a deep draft with tons of unmistakeable talent. A first-round pick has to be thrown in, somehow.
by Wicklow on Jun 21, 2013 | 4:09 PM                                                                             




+1

Yea a first round pick must be in the discussions at least for a player the caliber of Pierce.
Maybe the Cavs are starting with 2 2nd round picks, but when the bargaining is done they will yield to giving up a 1 st round pick somewhere in the deal?
by fordescort on Jun 21, 2013 | 4:11 PM                                                     




The destination is extremely disappointing

but it would be picks and a $15 million trade exception to go shopping with. That said, I’d like a first round pick.
by PLuscombe on Jun 21, 2013 | 4:16 PM                                                     




Is there a trade exception? I forgot about that. That makes it slightly more appealing.

I’d still rather get a 2013 #2 and 2014 or 2015 #1. The #1 will probably be lottery-protected, but I guess that’d be acceptable.
by Wicklow on Jun 21, 2013 | 10:50 PM 



Yes.

Any time a team gives up a player and takes no salary back (or takes much less salary back) a trade exception is generated, which can be filled for up to a year. It’s a non-simultaneous trade. It means the Celtics could accept a player who makes up to Pierce’s salary without having to give anyone up.

by dslack on Jun 22, 2013 | 1:10 PM

others wrote:
A trade exception would be enormous.

So enormous, it will probably never happen. So to anyone bashing this deal based off its merits, you’re wrong.
It essentially would turn any asset being paid $2 million a year and a draft pick into ANY high profile free agent who would like to come here when free agency rolls around. Once a team knows they are going to lose someone to free agency, they look to see if they can work a sign and trade. A rebuilding team wants to bring in as little salary commitment as possible attached to their assets. The celtics will automatically become the most attractive trade partner out there (meaning we have leverage over the compensation included.) I reckon the day we got the trade exception we’d have teams calling to celtics suggesting ways they should use it in a trade. WAKE UP PEOPLE.

by beantownboy171 on Jun 21, 2013 |                                       




snnoooooooze

I know all about the stuff you are saying and I still don’t buy it.
Loyalty, Tradition, Respect
PP=proven for another year.
Cap exemption???? hahahahhaha
by Duncan1 on Jun 21, 2013 | 10:34 PM





As if the GM of the Celtics isnt a hard enough job

lets add the pressure to do great deals without hurting anyone’s feelings.

by [url=http://www.sbnation.com/users/P stoff]P stoff[/url] on Jun 21, 2013 | 10:39 PM                                       



                                      




comment collapsed

So the Cs get two cost controlled high second round picks, a gigantic trade exception that can be used to lure a max contract guy from a team looking to dump salary or rebuild, and they save $5 million by not having to cut Pierce.

If the Cs have decided to rebuild, that’s a pretty good deal. Here are some players that could have been snagged with the 31st or 33rd pick the past few drafts: Draymond Green., Jae Crowder, Chandler Parsons, Lavoy Allen, Kyle Singler, Landry Fields, Lance Stephenson.
Of course, there have been more misses at the top of the second round than hits, but if DA scored with even one pick, a nd then could get someone useful with the trade exception, it’s a good deal. If they’re going to cut him anyways, it’s a good deal too.

My first choice would be to spin him to Dallas for Marion’s expiring deal and filler and their 13th pick.

by TripleOT on Jun 21, 2013 | 10:59 PM