Hickson--Ripe

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    Cassell came to the C's after he was waived.  He could have went anywhere.  You can't just change a salary to make a trade work.

    http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2008/03/03/cassell_clears_waivers_signs_with_celtics/
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe:
    Teams below the salary cap may trade without regard to salary, as long as they don't end up more than $100,000 above the cap following a trade. Teams above the cap (or teams below the cap but would end up more than $100,000 over the cap following a trade) cannot acquire more than 125% plus $100,000 of the salary they trade away. There is no lower limit—teams may divest themselves of as much salary as they wish in a trade. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_salary_cap
    Posted by Kirk6


    Both teams are over the cap - so trading  Hickson (at 1.5 mill - 125% is 3.25 plus 100K)  for Green at 4.5 (now 5.9) doesn't work.  They would have to offer Green  a LOWER amount than what he made this year -  not happening!
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jrleftfoot. Show jrleftfoot's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe:
    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe : It matters Kirky! The NBA does not allow what you're saying. You can't discard a player's existing contract and replace it with a new one just so you can trade the player.  
    Posted by kycleptic

    Too complicated for 007.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jrleftfoot. Show jrleftfoot's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe:
    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe : So, Jeff Green would agree to tear up his offer of 5.9 million, take a 2.3 mill one year deal so he could be traded for JJ Hickson?? Think about that!  Cassell had to agree to that, didn't he?  And he was 38 yrs old!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11

    hay zeus ---kirk either can`t admit he`s wrong or he`s kinda slow --possibly both
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe:
    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe : No, I am not wrong. They can change a contract if the player is getting more. Or they could tear up the contract like the Clippers did to move Sam Cassell to the Celtics. But thanks for playing...
    Posted by Kirk6


    nope ur wrong

    it is not a restricted FA yr for hickson... he makes 2.3 on his rookie deal, no questions about  it...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    thanks for playing kirk, time to back down
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    I think we could have made A trade for Hickson.  Just not Green!  I'd rather have Green anyway........we need offense!
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe:
    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe : No, I am not wrong. They can change a contract if the player is getting more. Or they could tear up the contract like the Clippers did to move Sam Cassell to the Celtics. But thanks for playing...
    Posted by Kirk6


    You are right that Cleve is under the cap

    You are wrong about tearing up any contract... its called a 'buyout' so the Cavs would buyout Hickson's 2.3 million and that makes him a free agent to go ANYWHERE... not be involved in a new sign and trade

    You are also wrong about 'change the contract if the player is getting more' That doesn't even make sense. They can only EXTEND a contract w/ new salaries to start AFTER the original year (in this case 2.3m rookie deal) is over.



     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In the end I'd prob want Green and Baby over Hickson and the MLE SF we'd then have to bring in (Josh Howard? Grant Hill?).

    Baby is a proven 11-5 in the minutes we'd give Hickson (24-28 per) to get a 13-7. Green I see as a starter this year (PP makes more sense off the bench than Ray) and getting 32-34 minutes and giving us 16-17 points.

    I don't want to see Baby walk for nothing. I'd love to sign and trade him after the new MLE is decided. Baby, Avery and a 1st rd pick for OJ Mayo? Some deal like that.

    Jajuan Johnson won't be as good as Hickson next year, or maybe ever, but a 20p-8r-2b 6'10" Big 10 defensive player of the year should be a solid contributor. Hickson is only 6'8". Green and Johnson should be able to split BBD's mins at PF and we'd be better off if we can get a SG or C for him (and other assets thrown in).
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomobo. Show tomobo's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe:
    In the end I'd prob want Green and Baby over Hickson and the MLE SF we'd then have to bring in (Josh Howard? Grant Hill?). Baby is a proven 11-5 in the minutes we'd give Hickson (24-28 per) to get a 13-7. Green I see as a starter this year (PP makes more sense off the bench than Ray) and getting 32-34 minutes and giving us 16-17 points. I don't want to see Baby walk for nothing. I'd love to sign and trade him after the new MLE is decided. Baby, Avery and a 1st rd pick for OJ Mayo? Some deal like that. Jajuan Johnson won't be as good as Hickson next year, or maybe ever, but a 20p-8r-2b 6'10" Big 10 defensive player of the year should be a solid contributor. Hickson is only 6'8". Green and Johnson should be able to split BBD's mins at PF and we'd be better off if we can get a SG or C for him (and other assets thrown in).
    Posted by rameakap


    Nobody mentioned green & bb! One or the other would have been fine w/ me! It appears that green would have been more problematical according to the rules in place at the time. However the point was moot at the very beginning of this thread (the deal was already made)! My main contention was that we could have explored the possibility of getting Hickson for bb in the same window that the cavs pulled the deal off. The money was close and I would prefer hickson over seed. You can never have enough quality bigs. 
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe:
    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe : You are wrong! They can renegotiate a four or more year contract after the third year by paying more up to the limit of the cap.
    Posted by Mployee8


    How does that work in this case?  Tear up Hickson's deal, and pay him 5.9 so they can get Jeff Green????

    He's right, that doesn't make any sense!
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Hickson--Ripe

    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe:
    In Response to Re: Hickson--Ripe : It's doable but makes no sense for the team wanting to acquire Hickson. Had the Cavs renegotiated the 4th year of his contract between March 1st and June 30th they could have given him $5.9M (if still under the cap after the added salary) and up to 10.5% increases for each subsequent year of the remaining contract or added years on an extended contract. Other than locking him up for extra years at $6+M to avoid losing him to free agency after the 5th year of the original contract I don't see the advantage either. Just take him at existing contract, throw in another player to match salaries and then waive the throw in and resign him under bird rights come FA. I guess an argument could be made that another team might bid up the price in FA after two years and why not extend and increase the contract now to terms that you prefer if you really value him more than the player you're giving up.
    Posted by Mployee8


    I agree, and I don't see owners driving up the prices any time in the near future. I see most players staying on their own teams..collusion?  Hey, the players did it, saying they wanted to "play together."  That decision was made 3  years ago, and is a major sticking point in the deal, IMO.
    3 year deals MAX.  And lower deals for the Sasha's, Waltons, LaFrentz's and AK47's of the world.  Would the C's bid to keep BBD?  NO, so why do it!
    Latest rumor on DH to LAL -
    ORL gets Bynum, ODOM, Blake and Brown (although he has since opted out), LAA gets Howard and Arenas!!

    Makes NO sense for either team, any agree with me?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share