Raptors/Suns/Hornets: Agreed on Draft Day, July 1st Deal

[loserX]

And I'm saying that Calderon/Humphries may be worth that to the Raptors, but he is not worth that to the Suns. My vision is clear, thanks.

I think that they are worth that to the Suns. Calderon is almost a decade younger, a very talented point guard, and Steve Nash is a UFA next year. The Suns obviously do this trade.

It's funny how only the Raptors fans in this thread think so. Weird that everyone else would miss something so obvious.

Hell, Humphries isn't even bad.

Again, then the Raptors should keep him. He poses negative value to the Suns, and doesn't need to be in the trade at all.

[bcortell]

The difference in PER between Jose Calderon and Steve Nash this past year was .8

What do you think the "marketability" difference is between the two? (And yes, I might have just coined that term.)

[Alfred]

The difference in PER between Jose Calderon and Steve Nash this past year was .8

What do you think the "marketability" difference is between the two? (And yes, I might have just coined that term.)

What do you think will be the marketability of that team a few years down the road? Teams take that into consideration as well, you know.

Also, add into that equasion: team success. Do you believe that a few years down the road, the Suns would be more successful with Steve Nash or Jose Calderon?

[Alfred]

And I'm saying that Calderon/Humphries may be worth that to the Raptors, but he is not worth that to the Suns. My vision is clear, thanks.

I think that they are worth that to the Suns. Calderon is almost a decade younger, a very talented point guard, and Steve Nash is a UFA next year. The Suns obviously do this trade.

It's funny how only the Raptors fans in this thread think so. Weird that everyone else would miss something so obvious.

Jose Calderon has had trade rumours swirling about him for months and months, with every deal slowly becoming more and more of a lowball. That's what happens with any player on the trade forum. The more they are inserted into proposed trades, the more people scrutinize their shortcomings, the more lowball offers you hear: it creates an echo chamber that reinforces perceived data, be it real or not real. Look at Chris Bosh for instance: what kind of offers were said to be his worth at the beginning of the trade rumours, and what it is now.

For example, if Steve Nash had his name floated in trade rumours and started showing up on the trade board, you'd start off with something that approaches a real offer for him, and slowly you'll start to see his "value" decline. It's like in real life. If you shop something long enough, it'll lose a lot of percieved value.

For example, people see the talent gap between Jose and Nash to be this gaping chasm, when in reality their PERs were only .8 apart this year (which was also a down season for him, where he played through injury). Considering the age difference and Nash's contract status, submit that as my evidence why the Suns would OBVIOUSLY take this trade.

[Alfred]

Again, then the Raptors should keep him. He poses negative value to the Suns, and doesn't need to be in the trade at all.

Again, you're making the same mistake LX! All I am saying is that the Suns would make the Jose/Humphries for Steve Nash + #14 trade.

[loserX]

Again, then the Raptors should keep him. He poses negative value to the Suns, and doesn't need to be in the trade at all.

Again, you're making the same mistake LX! All I am saying is that the Suns would make this trade.

I am making no mistake. I am saying that the Suns would be a lot more tempted to make this trade if Humphries were not in it, because he unnecessarily sandbags the value that the Suns are receiving. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what the Raptors think of Humphries or how they value him. The trade is better for the Suns if Humphries is not in it. I think it is your turn to be confused.

[Leto]

I had a similar thought with Hinrich and #26 going to the Suns for Nash and the #14. He's got a much better contract that declines, is a better defender and I personally like his game better. He's definitely more suited to playoff basketball and the Suns would save a couple million immediately.

[Rapsobsessed7]

wait so your valuing nash on past years? Im sure than Allen Iverson is worth a whole bunch or Tracey Mcgrady i hate how people view players from past accomplishments what did nash win THIS SEASON? That separates him so much from nash? I showed you stats their basically equal except age and you think a lottery pick at #14 in one of the weakest drafts in history so they can draft who at #14 (williams, Flynn?) In other drafts those are 20+ in the draft yet all of a sudden this #14 pick can help them rebuild? Jose Calderon is marketed as the 2nd face of the franchise here in Toronto and i wouldnt think the difference in marketing is all that big as you make it out to be. Toronto is one of the biggest markets for sports, i see how nash would get recognition outside of the Phoenix area but so does Jose playing internationally. I just dont see the marketing difference that huge but if Nash came to Canada then you see this big difference and MLSE starts to make huge amounts of money by bringing Nashh (a canadian) to toronto.

That being said a 35 year old nash wont get better offers than this in the open market, Jose has had a down year and is very undervalued by many here. The big problem many have here is the pick being sent to toronto but whats the difference from #14 in this years draft (Terrence Williams) or #20 next year (Xavier Henry, Draft Express) Just throwing that out there because next season when the new CBA is set to be put in place, people trying to clear room youll see picks sold and not to say Henry goes there but he is a MUCH better talent than Williams and thats at #20, going down theres a bunch of players that have more potential than williams because this is such a weak draft, next year looks loaded which is why the 3 million cash would compensate for the loss of williams.

[Alfred]

Again, then the Raptors should keep him. He poses negative value to the Suns, and doesn't need to be in the trade at all.

Again, you're making the same mistake LX! All I am saying is that the Suns would make this trade.

I am making no mistake. I am saying that the Suns would be a lot more tempted to make this trade if Humphries were not in it, because he unnecessarily sandbags the value that the Suns are receiving. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what the Raptors think of Humphries or how they value him. The trade is better for the Suns if Humphries is not in it. I think it is your turn to be confused.

Maybe the trade would be better for the Suns if Humphries isn't in the trade. What I'm saying is that they would still make the trade regardless, because of the superior value of Jose Calderon.

You're not grasping what I'm saying so I'll try to be a bit more clear:

Imagine if the Raptors were demanding that Humphries had to be included in the deal, for whatever reason. I'm saying that the Suns would still make the trade.

Why am I making this point? Because I'm trying to establish the relative values of the players involved as part of my argument. Humphries not being bad is one of the reasons behind that.

[loserX]

You're not grasping what I'm saying so I'll try to be a bit more clear:

Imagine if the Raptors were demanding that Humphries had to be included in the deal, for whatever reason. I'm saying that the Suns would still make the trade.

I am well aware of what you're saying. I am simply disagreeing with it. This does not mean I am confused or "making a mistake", though.

[Rapsobsessed7]

Loserx how do you expect salaries to match 1.25% + 100,000 under the CBA. Theres a way so tell me what you think of this revised version.

Steve Nash $13,125,000
+ 1.25 - 100,000
= 10,400,000

Meaning the raptors have to make up

Jose Calderon $8,219,008 - 10,400,000
= 2, 180, 992

Now the only other contracts besides Humphries that makes this difference up would be.

Roko Ukic $1,350,000
Patrick O'Bryant $855,189
= 2, 205, 189

So the end deal would be:

Toronto Trades:
Jose Calderon $8,219,008
Roko Ukic $1,350,000
Patrick O'Bryant $855,189
3 million Cash (Miami Deal)
= 10, 424, 197 X 1.25 + 100,000
= 13, 130, 246

Phoenix Trades:
Steve Nash $13,125,000
Rights to Terrence Williams (#14)

Now this deal would have to happen once jose's BYC expires on july 1st so it would be like the JO deal last year, suns pick for the raptors and the trade is agreed to in principal and then on July 1st finalized. Does that deal appease you more? O'Byrant could be cut saving more money because hes only partially guaranteed and Roko gives you a solid backup to fight Dragic for minutes and hes still young only 24 years old.

[loserX]

Loserx how do you expect salaries to match 1.25% + 100,000 under the CBA. Theres a way so tell me what you think of this revised version.

<snip>

Now this deal would have to happen once jose's BYC expires on july 1st

After July 1st the Raptors will have capspace and there is no reason for the CBA salary matching. Calderon can be swapped for Nash and perhaps the pick without anyone else being included. Then the Suns do not need to blow roster spots or doubled luxury tax dollars on the Raptors' roster dross. I think that is what will tempt the Suns.

[Rapsobsessed7]

how is Humphries bad at all, i hate how people just look at his stats THIS SEASON. When he hasnt played more than 29 this season. Last season he had one of the highest PER's for his position where we can actually look at his value based on him playing a sufficient amount of games. Look at his PER last season

Last Season:

PER 48 15 PPG, 13 RPG, 1 BPG, 45% FG and 6 FTA

for a player making 2,900,000 and has a player option in 2010. I dont see how hes so bad that you shouldnt be taking his "contract" when its not even bad. If it was Marcus Banks or Jason kapono in the deal i could understand but this hatred for Humphries is ridiculous hes not a bad player at all. Hes young too only 24 years old and i revised the deal to keep him out as i wouldnt mind keeping him.

[Alfred]

You're not grasping what I'm saying so I'll try to be a bit more clear:

Imagine if the Raptors were demanding that Humphries had to be included in the deal, for whatever reason. I'm saying that the Suns would still make the trade.

I am well aware of what you're saying. I am simply disagreeing with it. This does not mean I am confused or "making a mistake", though.

Good, I think you get it now, but you did say this, which basically started it:

Again, then the Raptors should keep him. He poses negative value to the Suns, and doesn't need to be in the trade at all.

If you did understand my position, then this doesn't make any sense. Who cares if he "didn't need to be in the trade"? I'm talking about establishing value here.

[loserX]

for a player making 2,900,000 and has a player option in 2010. I dont see how hes so bad that you shouldnt be taking his "contract" when its not even bad.

The Suns are in the luxury tax and would be paying $5.8M for him next year. That is going to sour them on a deal that does not require him to be in it.

[loserX]

Good, I think you get it now, but you did say this, which basically started it:

Again, then the Raptors should keep him. He poses negative value to the Suns, and doesn't need to be in the trade at all.

If you did understand my position, then this doesn't make any sense. Who cares if he "didn't need to be in the trade"? I'm talking about establishing value here.

Right. And I am establishing that, at $5.8M after taxes, Humphries carries considerable negative value to the Suns. So the Suns, for one, certainly do care if he doesn't need to be in the trade.

The deal is considerably better for the Suns if he is removed. How is that not relevant? How does it not make sense? His inclusion worsens the trade for the Suns. I'm sorry, I don't see the disconnect.

You're saying the Suns would do the trade if Humphries is included, and I'm not sure that's true. It's a pretty pertinent fact.

[Rapsobsessed7]

Loserx how do you expect salaries to match 1.25% + 100,000 under the CBA. Theres a way so tell me what you think of this revised version.

<snip>

Now this deal would have to happen once jose's BYC expires on july 1st

After July 1st the Raptors will have capspace and there is no reason for the CBA salary matching. Calderon can be swapped for Nash and perhaps the pick without anyone else being included. Then the Suns do not need to blow roster spots or doubled luxury tax dollars on the Raptors' roster dross. I think that is what will tempt the Suns.

so we have to renounce marion, parker, graham to absorb this 5 million dollars + the picks salary in order to turn our 27 year old PG to a 35 year old PG and get a lottery pick that isnt more than a 20th pick in any other draft, um no? Your being unreasonable now because i switched it to Roko+POB which saves the suns more money because POB is only 300,000 guaranteed it would save them 3 million + getting cash and getting nashs replacement. I just dont see how the revised deal isnt more fair and we should be taking the salary when the players numbers are pretty identical this season the only difference is past accomplishments and nash has a higher salary

Calderon
Roko
POB
Cash

for

Nash
#14

Is as far as this deal goes if you can find other small contract fillers than fine but Roko is only 24 years old and developing and POB can be cut to save money and the cash lets them replace the pick so it comes down to Jose+Roko for Nash which is more in favor to the suns than the raptors.

[Rapsobsessed7]

and i took humphries out and made the deal much better for the suns giving them a young PG in roko and 3 million savings in this deal but yet we should be the ones absorbing salary for the 35 year old PG vs a 27 year old, right.. Leaves a bunch of holes in the roster and simply wouldnt make us THAT much better i mean look at the other trade in this thread. Hinrich+#26 for Nash+#14. Thats way worse than Jose+Roko+POB+Cash for Nash+14th, hell you could buy a pick in this years draft if you wanted to but the thing is Hump is taken out so that part can stop its now about Roko+POB inclusion.

[Alfred]

Good, I think you get it now, but you did say this, which basically started it:

Again, then the Raptors should keep him. He poses negative value to the Suns, and doesn't need to be in the trade at all.

If you did understand my position, then this doesn't make any sense. Who cares if he "didn't need to be in the trade"? I'm talking about establishing value here.

Right. And I am establishing that, at $5.8M after taxes, Humphries carries considerable negative value to the Suns. So the Suns, for one, certainly do care if he doesn't need to be in the trade.

The deal is considerably better for the Suns if he is removed. How is that not relevant? How does it not make sense? His inclusion worsens the trade for the Suns. I'm sorry, I don't see the disconnect.

You said:

Then by all means the Raptors should keep him. I don't know why they would want to trade a proven commodity on a reasonable contract for what is being considered a clearly inferior player and a gamble of a draft pick.

As if to say "If he's so good, keep him then! Why are you trying to give him to the Suns when he's worth so much?"

This was in response to when I was trying to defend a completely different point, which was that Jose/Humphries/Cash was worth Nash/#14. Obviously, your criticism doesn't make any sense when you understand what I'm talking about. I'm trying to establish that this package is at least worth Nash/#14, you're responding as though I actually want this trade to go through.

You then said in the quote that I just recently quoted that "Humphries doesn't NEED to be in the deal." I don't care if he doesn't NEED to be in the deal. The way you phrased it, it has absolutely no bearing on whether Jose/Humphries/Cash is worth Nash/#14. None.

Now you're trying to hide the fact that you didn't understand.

[loserX]

and i took humphries out and made the deal much better for the suns giving them a young PG in roko and 3 million savings in this deal but yet we should be the ones absorbing salary for the 35 year old PG vs a 27 year old, right..

You are swapping long-term salary for short-term salary, and getting a lottery pick besides. There is nothing unreasonable about that. Now you want to have your cake and eat it too? Tough. I'm sure renouncing Joey Graham isn't going to be that big a hardship if it comes to that.