|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rock0100
Star Player
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 5403
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| davidse wrote: | | rock0100 wrote: | | davidse wrote: | | Magic'sSon wrote: | | F Snaq wrote: | | fansincemagic wrote: | keep it simple, I'm a Cincy fan but they don't need Fortson, they have a younger version in Turiaf. Watson for McKie/Cook opens up a roster spot for Webber, and gives them a very deep roster.
Parker/Watson/Farmar
Kobe/Evans/Vujacic
Odom/Walton/Vlad
Webber/Turiaf/Vlad
Brown/Bynum/Turiaf |
I like this lineup. Simple trade, works for both teams. |
 |
sure - everything works - except for the money... 
that's what happens when you use the trade checker and don't bother to do the math yourself... |
The money does work. Cook and McKies salary times 125% plus $100,000 is more then the $5,400,000 that Watson is getting paid.
Great trade idea in my opinion, especially if Webber is really considering the Lakers. |
so you're saying that 125% of 4 mil. is 5.3 mil ? :roll:
ok then, i guess that when you really want to make a deal, even the laws of math can bend... :roll: |
Ok, Mr. Smarty pants. Due to the Poison Pill Provision, Brian Cook's value for a trade is $1,817,141 not $1,500,000. Now if you add that number to McKies yes my calculations are correct and yes the trade would work under the CBA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LAL25
Starting Rotation
Joined: 03 Jun 2002
Posts: 885
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| We should consider ourselves lucky if we get a draft pick for Cook. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gill2k
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2005
Posts: 7038
Location: Somewhere in Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Supersonics,
Take your pick: Radman or Cook. We'll kindly take Earl Watson.
Signed,
Mitch.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LaxT
Star Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2002
Posts: 2537
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rock0100 wrote: | | davidse wrote: | | rock0100 wrote: | | davidse wrote: | | Magic'sSon wrote: | | F Snaq wrote: | | fansincemagic wrote: | keep it simple, I'm a Cincy fan but they don't need Fortson, they have a younger version in Turiaf. Watson for McKie/Cook opens up a roster spot for Webber, and gives them a very deep roster.
Parker/Watson/Farmar
Kobe/Evans/Vujacic
Odom/Walton/Vlad
Webber/Turiaf/Vlad
Brown/Bynum/Turiaf |
I like this lineup. Simple trade, works for both teams. |
|
sure - everything works - except for the money...
that's what happens when you use the trade checker and don't bother to do the math yourself... |
The money does work. Cook and McKies salary times 125% plus $100,000 is more then the $5,400,000 that Watson is getting paid.
Great trade idea in my opinion, especially if Webber is really considering the Lakers. |
so you're saying that 125% of 4 mil. is 5.3 mil ? :roll:
ok then, i guess that when you really want to make a deal, even the laws of math can bend... :roll: |
Ok, Mr. Smarty pants. Due to the Poison Pill Provision, Brian Cook's value for a trade is $1,817,141 not $1,500,000. Now if you add that number to McKies yes my calculations are correct and yes the trade would work under the CBA. |
I am not here to argue about this trade idea but to make sure our understanding of the "poison pill" is on the same page. So correct me if my understanding is wrong. Below is what Larry says about this provision.
If a team trades an extended rookie between the date his extension is signed and the date it takes effect, his "trade value" for the receiving team is the average of the salaries in the last year of the scale contract and each year of the extension. This is called the "poison pill provision." The sending team uses the player's actual salary when calculating their outgoing salary. They use the current-year maximum salary in place of the (unknown) maximum salary for a future season, if necessary
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#73
As the incoming salary must be within 125% of the outgoing, it should be 1.5M that's used to calcualte how much we can take back. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MIMLaker
Franchise Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2001
Posts: 10015
Location: Los Angeles/ Alhambra, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AirKobe8 wrote: | | I dont want Watson, I want Wilcox... Vlad + Cook + Pick + Farmar or whatever... just do it Mitch... imagine what a powerline itd be Kwame/Bynum/Wilcox, with Odom's skill based game, one hell of a front line. |
And I think it's unlikely they'll give up Wilcox, since they have the same idea about building a young frontline with him. However, Hill has butted heads with Watson repeatedly this year.
Hence, McKie plus Cook plus whatever for Watson makes sense to me. If kwame and odom are fulls trength before the trade deadline, then I'd love to see this:
PG -- Smush/ Watson/ Farmar
SG -- Kobe/ Evans/ Sasha/ Williams
SF -- Luke/ Vlad
PF -- Odom/ Turiaf
C -- Bynum/ Kwame/ Mihm
Next year, ditch Smush and Williams, and we still have this:
PG -- Farmar/ Watson
SG -- Kobe/ Evans/ Sasha
SF -- Luke/ Vlad
PF -- Odom/ Turiad
C -- Bynum/ Kwame/ Mihm
A little less dead weight, a little more defense.
MIM
_________________
Keep or Dump Power Rankings (4/12/23):
1 - Bron; 1a - AD; 2 - Reaves; 2a - DLo; 3 - Vando; 4 - Rui; 5 - Shroo; 6 - Christie; 7- Brown; 8 - Gabriel; 9 - Beas; 10 - Bamba; 11- Lonnie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vlade
Star Player
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 2373
Location: valley of dry bone dreams
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| uberzev wrote: | | Please trade Cook. He's a decent player but Phil's man-love for him makes him a liability. |
_________________
-
"All the truth in the world adds up to one big lie." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vlade
Star Player
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 2373
Location: valley of dry bone dreams
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SteveMachine wrote: | | davidse wrote: | vlad for watson.
right now. straight up. in a heartbeat. |
do it mitch. |
You guys need some patience. This offense is hard to learn and the man is playing with an injured shooting hand. I have liked his movement and ability to get to the rim thus far, though his defense leaeves something to be desired and certainly he isn't shooting like we know he can. Come playoff time, or certainly by next season, I think he will be a big asset for us.
_________________
-
"All the truth in the world adds up to one big lie." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baby G
Starting Rotation
Joined: 06 Apr 2006
Posts: 258
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MIMLaker wrote: | | AirKobe8 wrote: | | I dont want Watson, I want Wilcox... Vlad + Cook + Pick + Farmar or whatever... just do it Mitch... imagine what a powerline itd be Kwame/Bynum/Wilcox, with Odom's skill based game, one hell of a front line. |
Next year, ditch Smush and Williams, and we still have this:
PG -- Farmar/ Watson
SG -- Kobe/ Evans/ Sasha
SF -- Luke/ Vlad
PF -- Odom/ Turiad
C -- Bynum/ Kwame/ Mihm
A little less dead weight, a little more defense. |
I like  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fansincemagic
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 11100
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I may have said this in another thread but it isn't so much that Webber can't defend some centers, but you CAN'T have him in the middle with the wrong player. I don't see how they defend Yao or Duncan with a PF/C combo of say Odom and Webber. For that matter you can't have Turiaf and Webber out there, and if you put Kwame out there...you might as well have him defend the better post player. If you have an average at best post scorer (Dalembert, Blount, Petro, ect..) I can see Webber guarding one of them for a period of time, but you're giving up a lot with the wrong matchup. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MIMLaker
Franchise Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2001
Posts: 10015
Location: Los Angeles/ Alhambra, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big Game James wrote: | | MIMLaker wrote: | | Although, actually, I had pictured CWebb at the 5 |
Dude...
MIM...
Webber at the center position?
I don't think I've ever done this before, but I am handing out a second trout slap in the same thread for that comment...
Laker nation  MIM wanting a soft PF (who plays more like a SF) to be our anchor at center. |
Given that more and more people in the Official Webber-Watch thread are discussing C-Webb at C, I am withdrawing my previous withdrawal of my statement. 
MIM
_________________
Keep or Dump Power Rankings (4/12/23):
1 - Bron; 1a - AD; 2 - Reaves; 2a - DLo; 3 - Vando; 4 - Rui; 5 - Shroo; 6 - Christie; 7- Brown; 8 - Gabriel; 9 - Beas; 10 - Bamba; 11- Lonnie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big Game James
Star Player
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Posts: 4005
Location: The official trout slapper of LG.net
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I personally wouldn't want to see Webber play too much time at the center position (some is OK with me) because Kwame is obviously a vastly superior defender and I wouldn't want to take minutes away from a developing Bynum.
But I have no problem with him bumping Cook!
_________________
Don't make me give you a trout slap! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MIMLaker
Franchise Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2001
Posts: 10015
Location: Los Angeles/ Alhambra, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, looks like the potential Webber deal is pretty near dead...
Anyone still up for trading Cook/ McKie to Seattle for Watson?
MIM
_________________
Keep or Dump Power Rankings (4/12/23):
1 - Bron; 1a - AD; 2 - Reaves; 2a - DLo; 3 - Vando; 4 - Rui; 5 - Shroo; 6 - Christie; 7- Brown; 8 - Gabriel; 9 - Beas; 10 - Bamba; 11- Lonnie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LA_Lakers_Rule
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 19482
Location: The X-Files
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Big Game James wrote:
| Quote: | What is it with these people that keep slamming Vlad for "not panning out"??? Don't you who say this realize the difficulty and time it takes to fully understand the intricacies of the triangle offense? It takes at least one full year (and actually 2 to fully master it). How long has Vlad been a Laker? 36 games? And already people here are crucifying him?
Give him a chance!
Laker nation People with little patience and that don't understand the complexities of the triangle. |
Thank you!!!
I love it when I actually see rational perspective on this forum instead of the Let's trade Odom, Let's trade Bynum, Let's trade Luke crowd.
All three of the players I just mentioned have improved dramatically and as a result we don't see the threads that we used to see all the time trashing them. Even Parker has raised his game recently.
Phil has publicly said many times it takes a solid 2 years to perfect the Triangle. As wee see Odom, Bynum, Luke and others really start to contribute with a second year of Triangle experience it is clearly reasonable to expect Vlade to really start hitting his stride in another year or so. Besides that he started out with a hand injury which has been speculated to need surgery. Give the guy a break, please.
If by year after next Vlade has not improved then okay then we can discuss trades, but until then I think it only fair to wait and see, imo.
_________________
Rule = win titles  
Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers ...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
