Bargnani Trade Idea Thread

[charlesnba23]

I agree, I prefer the Celtics one. But Okur is a pretty good option for a one year span. The Jazz could also throw some picks, but yeah, the trade with Boston would be pretty nice.

[mcHAPPY]

I agree, I prefer the Celtics one. But Okur is a pretty good option for a one year span. The Jazz could also throw some picks, but yeah, the trade with Boston would be pretty nice.

The same reasons of interest in Okur in Toronto are probably the same reasons why they'd want to keep him in Utah (expiring, leadership, experience) plus he is Turkish as is Kanter.

I think getting Jefferson would be more realistic. Given their rebuilding I would think shedding salary would be important. Taking on Bargnani does not solve the log jam at PF/C. Enter a third team that is very good defensively, has desperate need of scoring, and has a dominant defensive C - Milwaukee.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMa...radeId=3oyog45

TOR: Jefferson, 1st round pick from Milwaukee
MIL: Bargnani
UTA: Livingston, Ilyasova

Toronto gets a C with 2 years on his (bad) contract - one year without Jonas, the second to ease Jonas in his first year. Risk of Jefferson's history of poor work habits and selfishness. However, he'll be 27 when the contract is up and will most likely be working to have one last pay day. His contract would come off the books with Calderon's creating a lot of cap space at a time when rookie deals are expiring and (with solid drafting) a free agent or two might push the Raps in to top 5 of the East. He might also be used to acquire other players or draft picks - he is a legit 20/10 player no matter what anyone says and there will always be a team willing to roll the dice on one (Z-Bo is a good example).

Utah saves a lot of money. It is no secret Ilyasova wants out of his contract to return to Europe. The Jazz could buy him out for $1 - I think they could at least if both parties agree. They would only owe Livingston $3.5M next year and have a team option for 2012-13 - plus they need a back up PG. This would save UTA around $26M, free up playing time for Favors and Kanter, and fill a need (back up PG).

MIL gets the polar opposite of what they are - and that might not be a bad thing.

The odds of this happening are slim to none but I think it is more likely than the Okur trade and Bargnani, despite all his warts, is worth more than him.

Maybe Bargnani for Okur and 2012 GSW 1st round pick (top 7 protected).

[RAPresenting]

Matt the 3 way you mentioned looks a lot better for everyone included. One thing to note is Ilyasova might also be more interested in Utah with 2 Turkish players on the roster. The Jazz definitely lose the deal based on talent but the financial savings would be huge.

[Soft Euro]

Do we need a center who is generally considered to be a defensive liability and trade away range as well as Jefferson has limited range, which is already a problem of our team. We will just get 5 more rebounds a game and pay a million a rebound. I don't see the upside.

In terms of team needs we would be better of signing Jordan from the Clips for 8-9 a year and give Bargnani away for anything. Not saying that's a good idea, but it's not as bad.

[charlesnba23]

What I see, is that we should not rush the rebuilding process. Adding Jefferson for 2 years would be too much of an upgrade, just like trading for Jermaine, Marion and Turkoglu a couple years ago. Those trades will improve your team significantly enough for your team to get the 10,9 seed and maybe make the playoffs. Just enough for your team to not get a high draft pick. Then 2 years later, you have to restart the process. So we better make the rebuild a little bit slower, this way we are sure to be a lot better in a couple of years by still getting a high draft pick in the 2012 draft. Plus, Bradley would be a huge part of our core for years to come.

[Soft Euro]

What I see, is that we should not rush the rebuilding process. Adding Jefferson for 2 years would be too much of an upgrade, just like trading for Jermaine, Marion and Turkoglu a couple years ago. Those trades will improve your team significantly enough for your team to get the 10,9 seed and maybe make the playoffs. Just enough for your team to not get a high draft pick. Then 2 years later, you have to restart the process. So we better make the rebuild a little bit slower, this way we are sure to be a lot better in a couple of years by still getting a high draft pick in the 2012 draft. Plus, Bradley would be a huge part of our core for years to come.

In 2007-2008 the Timberwolves went 22-60
In 2008-2009 before Jefferson got injured they were 17-33
In 2009-2010 the Timberwolves went 15-67

That's not quite getting them to the 10-9 seed and he will not significantly improve our team as well.

[mcHAPPY]

I had a big reply done and lost it. I don't feel like typing it again.

The jist of it was Jefferson won't help too much (which is a good thing) but still better than Bargnani on D, he might be able to be flipped for other assets, or a 4 team (very unlikely) trade could be done. DEN, IND, HOU, CLE all have holes at the PF and/or C spot and looking to fill them.

I think for the young guys on the team Bargnani needs to go. At the very least it will be a display that no one person is bigger than the team - a lesson learned much too late regarding Bargnani though.

[planetmars]

If the intention is to rebuild, then trading Bargnani for a veteran doesn't make sense to me. I think the only asset worth getting for Bargnani is another pick.

I don't see a lottery team wanting him, unless if we do what the Cavs did this past season and trade him and fillers for someone like Rashard Lewis (which may not be such a bad gamble since Lewis' contract expires in 2 years, one of which may be voided due to the lockout). This was considered a bad move by the Cavs last year, and it paid off for them. I actually would love to get Washington's pick even if it meant getting Lewis' contract too. A Wiz pick will be very high next year.

Another nice pick would be Orlando's 2013 pick. I don't see Howard staying past next year, and Orlando in 2013 will be very bad.


If we can convince one of those 'mediocre' teams that sending Bargnani for their pick might help them get into the playoffs, then that's what we should do.

Anyone of these teams' picks would work for me:
Philly, Indiana, Milwaukee, New Orleans, Houston (owned by NJ/top14 protected), Portland, Denver, Utah (owned by Minny/top14 protected), Golden State (owned by Utah/top7 protected).


The deal for Boston doesn't make much sense to me. I don't think Boston would ever want a player like Bargnani. He is the opposite type of player to what has made them successful (ie, defense). Plus their pick will be in the high 20's. The Celtics are a very good regular season team, and so will have a very high draft pick next year. Boston does own the Clips pick and is top 10 protected. I wouldn't mind that pick in a trade, but I don't see the Celtics jumping on Bargnani even if it is for JO.

[mcHAPPY]

If the intention is to rebuild, then trading Bargnani for a veteran doesn't make sense to me. I think the only asset worth getting for Bargnani is another pick.

I don't see a lottery team wanting him, unless if we do what the Cavs did this past season and trade him and fillers for someone like Rashard Lewis (which may not be such a bad gamble since Lewis' contract expires in 2 years, one of which may be voided due to the lockout). This was considered a bad move by the Cavs last year, and it paid off for them. I actually would love to get Washington's pick even if it meant getting Lewis' contract too. A Wiz pick will be very high next year.

Another nice pick would be Orlando's 2013 pick. I don't see Howard staying past next year, and Orlando in 2013 will be very bad.


If we can convince one of those 'mediocre' teams that sending Bargnani for their pick might help them get into the playoffs, then that's what we should do.

Anyone of these teams' picks would work for me:
Philly, Indiana, Milwaukee, New Orleans, Houston (owned by NJ/top14 protected), Portland, Denver, Utah (owned by Minny/top14 protected), Golden State (owned by Utah/top7 protected).


The deal for Boston doesn't make much sense to me. I don't think Boston would ever want a player like Bargnani. He is the opposite type of player to what has made them successful (ie, defense). Plus their pick will be in the high 20's. The Celtics are a very good regular season team, and so will have a very high draft pick next year. Boston does own the Clips pick and is top 10 protected. I wouldn't mind that pick in a trade, but I don't see the Celtics jumping on Bargnani even if it is for JO.

The 2nd year remaining on Lewis' contract is 'only' guaranteed for around $10M. I would take Lewis and his contract for Bargnani and their pick (unprotected of course).

[charlesnba23]

If the intention is to rebuild, then trading Bargnani for a veteran doesn't make sense to me. I think the only asset worth getting for Bargnani is another pick.

I don't see a lottery team wanting him, unless if we do what the Cavs did this past season and trade him and fillers for someone like Rashard Lewis (which may not be such a bad gamble since Lewis' contract expires in 2 years, one of which may be voided due to the lockout). This was considered a bad move by the Cavs last year, and it paid off for them. I actually would love to get Washington's pick even if it meant getting Lewis' contract too. A Wiz pick will be very high next year.

Another nice pick would be Orlando's 2013 pick. I don't see Howard staying past next year, and Orlando in 2013 will be very bad.


If we can convince one of those 'mediocre' teams that sending Bargnani for their pick might help them get into the playoffs, then that's what we should do.

Anyone of these teams' picks would work for me:
Philly, Indiana, Milwaukee, New Orleans, Houston (owned by NJ/top14 protected), Portland, Denver, Utah (owned by Minny/top14 protected), Golden State (owned by Utah/top7 protected).


The deal for Boston doesn't make much sense to me. I don't think Boston would ever want a player like Bargnani. He is the opposite type of player to what has made them successful (ie, defense). Plus their pick will be in the high 20's. The Celtics are a very good regular season team, and so will have a very high draft pick next year. Boston does own the Clips pick and is top 10 protected. I wouldn't mind that pick in a trade, but I don't see the Celtics jumping on Bargnani even if it is for JO.

You say you don't see why this trade would help the rebuilding process. Well, it's pretty simple. You get rid of Bargnani, you create space for the young inside players, you create cap space with the ending contract of O'Neal while getting a center for next season, and with Bradley, young get a young, promising guard for the future. Look at what could be the roster:
C: O'Neal/Evans/Alabi
PF: Davis/Johnson/Ajinça
SF: Johnson/Kleiza
SG: DeRozan/Barbosa/Bradley
PG: Bayless/Calderon/Bradley

Then the other year you get Jonas and your rookie small forward (Jones, Barnes, etc.)

And this is what it could look like:
Valanciunas/Evans/Alabi
Davis/Johnson/Ajinça
Rookie/Johnson/Kleiza
DeRozan/Barbosa/?????
Bayless/Calderon/Bradley

[planetmars]

You say you don't see why this trade would help the rebuilding process. Well, it's pretty simple. You get rid of Bargnani, you create space for the young inside players, you create cap space with the ending contract of O'Neal while getting a center for next season, and with Bradley, young get a young, promising guard for the future. Look at what could be the roster:
C: O'Neal/Evans/Alabi
PF: Davis/Johnson/Ajinça
SF: Johnson/Kleiza
SG: DeRozan/Barbosa/Bradley
PG: Bayless/Calderon/Bradley

Then the other year you get Jonas and your rookie small forward (Jones, Barnes, etc.)

And this is what it could look like:
Valanciunas/Evans/Alabi
Davis/Johnson/Ajinça
Rookie/Johnson/Kleiza
DeRozan/Barbosa/?????
Bayless/Calderon/Bradley

I totally get what you are going for in the trade. But I have two concerns.

The first is I don't think it helps Boston out. I don't see them going for Bargnani who is a weak defensive player. If they still had Perkins then its a possibility but I just don't see that team wanting him. Of all 30 NBA teams, I think Boston would be the first on the list to say no to Bargnani.

The second is that in my opinion what is more valuable then cap space is another top pick in next years draft. I would want another pick - preferably lottery (which could net us a PG with that SF) over Bradley who is a second string guard at his best.

If Boston would trade JO and the Clippers 2012 first rounder (which is top 10 protected) for Bargnani, then I would go for it. If Bradley is thrown in then it would make the deal much sweeter, but I'd do it for the pick with or without Bradley. I just don't see Boston going for it though.

Although isn't there a rule that says a team cannot give up their lottery pick two years in a row? Since the Clippers pick in 2011 yielded the #1 pick, does it mean that the Clippers pick in 2012 has to stay with the Clippers? If there is no way we can get that pick, then I would count Boston out. I do not want their own pick which will be in the high 20's. That's not a good enough return for Bargnani.

[Soft Euro]

There are also more accelerating rebuilding trade-ideas possible in my view. Suppose we really go after a center in free agency like has been suggested in the media and we'd use Valanciunas as a power forward, which some commentators say he is (at the moment). Nene, Chandler and Gasol are all free agents and Jordan is restricted. Chandler would be least favorite of mine, as he probably will be overpaid a lot on his next contract. Nene would be my favorite and I'd be willing to pay up big for him. But those are four quality options. Valanciunas could be more of a force right away when he is paired with a strong center so he doesn't have to bang so much in his first years when he will still be getting stronger.

That would mean that we could use Davis (or Amir) as well as Bargnani as trade-assets which should provide a good return. We could flip them for a high pick (and expirings) or a good young player for sure and maybe a good (semi)veteran. We could also trade (or let go) one of our pointguards. This way we probably still get a relatively high pick in next years draft of our own and possibly another top 10-15 pick. We would have one of the better frontcourts (top 2/3 in the East I'd say) and be able to improve at sf and pg in one sweep and be a big force in the East almost immediately.

[Shantz]

Although isn't there a rule that says a team cannot give up their lottery pick two years in a row? Since the Clippers pick in 2011 yielded the #1 pick, does it mean that the Clippers pick in 2012 has to stay with the Clippers? If there is no way we can get that pick, then I would count Boston out. I do not want their own pick which will be in the high 20's. That's not a good enough return for Bargnani.

The rule stipulates that you cannot go 2 consecutive years without a First Round Draft pick. The rule does only deal with future picks though. If a team were to trade their pick on draft day, they are then eligible to trade the following years pick immediately after the draft is over.

Since the Clippers own Minnesota's pick, that either gave them a 2011 pick (if Minnesota pulled out of the bottom 10 since the pick was trading during the season) or a 2012 pick. Either way, they would have had a pick in one of the 2 subsequent drafts which means they fall under the rules.

[charlesnba23]

Planetmars, the Celtics are in a really good position to get a starting center in next year free agency, and there is some pretty good ones that could hit the market in 2012: Roy Hibbert, Chris Kaman, Andrew Bynum, Brook Lopez and, the last but not the least, Dwight Howard, to only say them. If you can add any of those to a core that include Rajon Rondo, Jeff Green and Andrea Bargnani, this is not bad at all!

[ezz_bee]

a big problem with the celtic trade is the fact that they are in our division. Not sure the would be keen to deal w/ each other.