Ridnour and Alexander for a second?

WiscoKing13 · Post #1 » by **WiscoKing13** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:25 pm

The bucks need to cut cap like no body's business

Joe Alexander was drafted number 8 last year. He was drafted as a project and still is a project. He never really has gotten the PT he needed after LRMAM took off and took Joe's minutes.

Ridnour is an expiring who can be a decent back up PG.

So if your team has cap there not going to to use this summer (SAC, MEM, MIN, OKL, etc), would it be worth the risk to give up an early second to take a risk on Joe?

Post #2 » by **gswhoops** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:28 pm

You're going to have to provide more incentive. No team's going to bail the Bucks out of $9M worth of contracts this year for marginal players.

Perhaps you could convince the T'Wolves to do Luke, Joe, #13 for #18 or something along those lines.

Winter Wonder · Post #3 » by **Winter Wonder** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:43 pm

gswhoops wrote:You're going to have to provide more incentive. No team's going to bail the Bucks out of $9M worth of contracts this year for marginal players.

Perhaps you could convince the T'Wolves to do Luke, Joe, #13 for #18 or something along those lines.

This is something I think MN would definitely take a hard look at. Alot depends on what they see in their current prospects, but Luke solidifies the PG for a year to see if we want to keep Foye as a 2 not a 1 and Alexander is worth taking a look at (not sure his exact contract though). Luke doesn't hurt the 2010 cap space and a move up in the draft... It all looks pretty nice, depends on what they think of Alexander and who MN may want at 13.

WiscoKing13 · Post #4 » by **WiscoKing13** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:44 pm

gswhoops wrote:You're going to have to provide more incentive. No team's going to bail the Bucks out of $9M worth of contracts this year for marginal players.

Perhaps you could convince the T'Wolves to do Luke, Joe, #13 for #18 or something along those lines.

I'd do that deal, but by the end of this free fall we could have the 10th pick.

I hope were not that desperate to give up last years 1, and move down 8 spots in the draft just to get rid of ridnour

john2jer · Post #5 » by **john2jer** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:15 pm

Pretty sure the Wolves don't have the cap space to take on Ridnour and Alexander without giving up Salary. But I love the trade.

shrink · Post #6 » by **shrink** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:52 pm

john2jer wrote:Pretty sure the Wolves don't have the cap space to take on Ridnour and Alexander without giving up Salary. But I love the trade.

That's right. MIN will probably only have $2-$3 mil of 2009 cap space.

The back door to this is through Dallas.

DAL GIVES: Stackhouse + Shawne Williams
DAL GETS: Mike Miller

JES has mentioned this frequently. Miller is a nice fit because he's a great complimentary player with the rebounds, assists, et al, and he's an expiring so DAL can align a rebuild at 2010.

MIN GIVES: Mike Miller (+late pick?)
MIN GETS: Ridnour + Alexander + #13

MIL GIVES: Ridnour + Alexander + #13
MIL GETS: Stackhouse (+ late pick?)

Stackhouse has a salary of $7.25 mil, but can be bought out in August for $2.0 mil, so he'd effectively be a $5.25 mil 2009 TPE. Perhaps a MIL fan can say how much the Bucks need, but this is a super piece of raw cap space to help re-sign Sessions and CV and stay under the lux.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For MIN though .. I don't know. If they did the DAL part, they'd be $8 mil under the lux, and could make an offer to a guy like Marvin Williams, so some of the other 2009 free agents that deserve more than the MLE, but there aren't enough buyers to get one. Also, MIA is dropping like a stone, and their current pick is tied for 17 right now, and could be as low as 14. I think MIN would rather keep the pick and have Williams. I agree with gswhoops here -- if MIL wants raw cap space, nobody wants to trade it, and it'll cost a lot.

Finally, taking a MIN pick back kind of undoes the point of the trade -- clearing 2009 salary for MIL. I wouldn't put a pick in at all, but it would make more sense to include the UTA pick, which right now would be deferred for the future (Top 15-17 protected for the next four years).

Winter Wonder · Post #7 » by **Winter Wonder** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:23 pm

The logic behind the argument is, of course, sound, Shrink and if we could get Marvin Williams, then I would much prefer to go that route. Of course, the elephant in the room is the whole RFA thing with ATL holding the right to match and the possibility that MN FO doesn't want to make their big splash this offseason and our not doing anything with whatever cap space we have our could create.

And of course, I hadn't looked closely to see if the financials worked (I leave that to you and some of the others), so that does make it a bunch more messy, since we start giving up more assets. As much as I don't like having to trade Miller though, I still have to consider it, though with Miller included, the pick exchange should be re-addressed. Maybe it's the Boston/Utah picks combined instead?

As Wisco mentions as well, though MIA pick may vary in value, the MIL pick is also quite likely/possibly going to decline (improve) to possibly the 10ish area.

vege · Post #8 » by **vege** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:58 pm

Raw capspace is worth more than Alexander and Ridenour this offseason.

old rem · Post #9 » by **old rem** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:58 pm

vege wrote:Raw capspace is worth more than Alexander and Ridenour this offseason.

It may be if you are hovering around Lux tax, but Alexander isn't dead meat,Ridenour is maybe overpaid by $1-1.5 mill or such, so,a deal of giving both AND accepting a heavy draft trade-down pretty much says the Bucks are in a negative spiral just as they'd crawled up to the level of nearly average.
With a small market, and a shaky economy, do you tell your fans to check back in 3-4 years...we're just treading water for awhile?

There's " Raw Capspace" and thee's "Lowered Payroll" and they ain't quite the same. Some teams basically are looking to cut costs. Some are just making a slot for the next spending spending

Baddy Chuck · Post #10 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 10:18 pm

If its Ridnour/Alexander/1st that it takes to keep CV then sorry CV but don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

vege · Post #11 » by **vege** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 10:52 pm

old rem wrote:
vege wrote:Raw capspace is worth more than Alexander and Ridenour this offseason.

It may be if you are hovering around Lux tax, but Alexander isn't dead meat,Ridenour is maybe overpaid by $1-1.5 mill or such, so,a deal of giving both AND accepting a heavy draft trade-down pretty much says the Bucks are in a negative spiral just as they'd crawled up to the level of nearly average.
With a small market, and a shaky economy, do you tell your fans to check back in 3-4 years...we're just treading water for awhile?

There's " Raw Capspace" and thee's "Lowered Payroll" and they ain't quite the same. Some teams basically are looking to cut costs. Some are just making a slot for the next spending spending

Gotcha. Raw capspace is worth more than that exactly for what you said. There are a lot of teams ~the Luxury Tax and very few buyers. That makes cap space worth more than players like Ridenour and a project like Alexander. Especially together. Those teams will make raw cap space valuable.

I don't see any team offering a 2nd for Ridenour and Alexander sorry. I just can't see.

shrink · Post #12 » by **shrink** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 11:08 pm

Let me see if I have the MIL finances right:

The lux will be around $68.8 mil

MIL already has 10 players guaranteed $66.4 mil.

Sessions will want more than the $5.5 mil MLE, or he'll go elsewhere

Villanueva will want at least the $5.5 mil MLE, or he'll go elsewhere

MIL's pick (let's say #12) would add $1.9 mil in guaranteed salary

MIL would have to add additional players to reach a roster size of 12 if they pass on the previous three, at $0.44 mil each.

Do I have the situation right?

WiscoKing13 · Post #13 » by **WiscoKing13** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:06 am

everything is right beside I diagree on how much sessions will get

I'm guessing 3.5-4 mil a year IMO

Bac2Basics · Post #14 » by **Bac2Basics** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:53 am

Why would a team trade nothing but pure cap space for Ridnour when the could just as easily use it to sign Sessions themselves?

trwi7 · Post #15 » by **trwi7** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 5:22 am

shrink wrote:MIL already has 10 players guaranteed $66.4 mil.

It's actually $64.412 million for 10 players. $61.412 for 8 if Allen and Elson don't exercise their options. If just Elson doesn't it's $62.712 million, if just Allen doesn't it's $63.112 million.

Sessions will want more than the $5.5 mil MLE, or he'll go elsewhere

Sessions can't earn more than the MLE his first two years (Arenas provision)

Villanueva will want at least the $5.5 mil MLE, or he'll go elsewhere

Or he could take his $4.6 million qualifying offer and become a UFA in 2010. That might not be a bad idea. With so many teams going for cap space and with some likely to strike out, he could get a nice contract.

MIL's pick (let's say #12) would add $1.9 mil in guaranteed salary

You're too kind. In reality we're likely to end up around 9th. :wink:

trwi7 · Post #16 » by **trwi7** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 5:23 am

Bac2Basics wrote:Why would a team trade nothing but pure cap space for Ridnour when the could just as easily use it to sign Sessions themselves?

Because Sessions is an RFA so if the Bucks match, that team isn't going to get Sessions.

Teddy KGB · Post #17 » by **Teddy KGB** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 5:42 am

our 2nd round pick and Stackhouse and George for the pair?

JES12 · Post #18 » by **JES12** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 6:15 am

JHos Hydro wrote:our 2nd round pick and Stackhouse and George for the pair?

Our 2nd round pick was spent to get Williams.

And I rather have Mike Miller with Stack & filler.

shrink · Post #19 » by **shrink** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:12 pm

trwi7 wrote:
Sessions will want more than the $5.5 mil MLE, or he'll go elsewhere

Sessions can't earn more than the MLE his first two years (Arenas provision)

OK, I get you, but if you don't match MLE offers, he'll walk, right?

trwi7 wrote:
Villanueva will want at least the $5.5 mil MLE, or he'll go elsewhere

Or he could take his $4.6 million qualifying offer and become a UFA in 2010. That might not be a bad idea. With so many teams going for cap space and with some likely to strike out, he could get a nice contract.

I agree that's a possibility, but he's turning down the MLE elsewhere, like Sessions, right?

trwi7 wrote:
MIL's pick (let's say #12) would add $1.9 mil in guaranteed salary

You're too kind. In reality we're likely to end up around 9th. :wink:

LOL, ok, I didn't want to drop you too much. It'd be $2.2 mil for the 9th pick.

Thanks for posting this. I'm sure its been well-discussed on the MIL boards. What are the most likely scenarios here?

shrink · Post #20 » by **shrink** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:14 pm

trwi7 wrote:
Bac2Basics wrote:Why would a team trade nothing but pure cap space for Ridnour when the could just as easily use it to sign Sessions themselves?

Because Sessions is an RFA so if the Bucks match, that team isn't going to get Sessions.

I think MIL is stuck with Ridnour They could use the pure cap space in free agency, and there are several far better point guards in free agency .. some of them will end up with an MLE deal.