Trading for Tracy
There have been reports for quite some time that Houston might trade T-Mac's expiring contract before the deadline. Can the Wolves benefit from a deal that brings T-Mac to the Twin Cities?
He has an expiring contract of $22.84 Million. Unless they are getting back a superstar in return, Houston will want plenty of that cap space in return. The Wolves could send Blount's contract, Cardinal and Wilkins, which add up to $18.34 Million. Now, in order to make this deal worth it (rather than a needless "wash" of expirings) we would throw in a less-desirable contract to match salaries. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing Ryan Gomes off the books.
Would Houston take on Gomes 3 additional years, if we threw in Utah's draft pick? Morey has had success with mid-to-late picks, and might covet that asset more than most GM's.
This trade would offer us a chance to test drive T-Mac, and potentially establish a repoire that makes him want to re-sign at a reasonable deal. It also gives us a little bit more cap room and relief down the road. Finally, it would put a couple extra butts in the seats, since T-Mac, even this older version, can be fun to watch.
Just a thought.
0 recs |
19 comments
Comments
The problem with that trade is roster spots
I don’t think that Houston has enough roster spots to absorb that many players. I would do the deal in a heartbeat financially.
This is also an opportunity to really be a player in the FA market. If Kahn doesn’t feel that Jefferson is a part of the future, this would be an opportunity to move Jefferson and get additional cap space to sign a top flight FA.
Jeff 12M
Gomes 4M
Cardinal 6M
McGrady 22M
Tha’s potentially 30M in cap space. The Bosh/James combo could come into play.
by PGNation on Feb 4, 2010 12:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
You can’t trade Al Jefferson for cap room only. That’s an incredible roll of the dice for a franchise that hasn’t shown they can attract one marquee free agent, much less two in a single offseason.
I’m not opposed to trading Jefferson, but you have to get talent in return, not cap room.
Andy’s original deal is a no-brainer. I suspect that Houston is hoping to get back more than Gomes for T-Mac’s deal, though.
by SeanTO on Feb 4, 2010 1:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Gomes isn't 3 years
If they don’t pick up his option. If they cut him he’ll be more like 1M. I’m sure I’ve got the numbers wrong, but I know he’s substantially less if they don’t pick up his option.
SeanTO is right, there is no way I trade Al for a couple months rental of TMac. He could easily sign for less after the deal for “a chance to get a ring” and we dump arguably our best player for cap space, which is a horrible idea in my view. We can get more than cap space for him.
by Cedarpenguin on Feb 5, 2010 10:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
if the option isn't picked up
then he counts as 1M for each of the next two years and like another 100-200K for the third year. Otherwise its in excess of 4.5M a year.
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 7, 2010 10:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
to what end?
So T-Mac can play 30 games for us and we win 5 more games than we would have without him? If we want to unload Gomes we just don’t pick-up the option this summer (I do think Gomes has a chance of being traded to contender and actually net us something of value (late first, 2nd round pick) in return). And I certainly wouldn’t give up the Utah pick just to rent T-Mac for 30 games.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Feb 4, 2010 1:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
2nd Round picks don’t have any trade value — and if T-Mac can single-handedly improve a team by 5 wins over a 30-game stretch, then contenders like Cleveland should be lining up at the door for him. I get your points, but I don’t think Gomes has significant value and I don’t think T-Mac, in his current state, is going to disrupt our lottery plans as much as you think.
by Andy G on Feb 4, 2010 3:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m fine making the trade with the exception of including the Utah pick. But I doubt Houston would.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Feb 4, 2010 4:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
better than a two
I certainly hope Gomes is better than a second round pick!
by scottysnowski on Feb 4, 2010 6:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I might make the trade Andy suggests
It’s a role of the dice—basically risking that they can spend Jefferson’s money more efficiently than on Jefferson going forward; that they can use the money to become a better team than they can be with Jefferson.
The advantage of taking this risk is that it creates movement. It forces action. It requires that they embark on a new course. On the other hand, they might never find talent to replace Jefferson. But, well, Jefferson has presided over some pretty lousy teams the last 3 years, so how much of a risk is it really? That’s that argument for it.
by Eric in Madison on Feb 4, 2010 2:12 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
for the record..
I wasn’t the one who suggested trading Jefferson for cap space — that was PGNation. My thought was that Gomes doesn’t seem to have a big role on this team going forward so picking up T-Mac’s deal at a small cost would give us more space and give a chance to establish a good relationship with McGrady on the chance that he is in fact “rebuilt” and capable of more good seasons in the future.
by Andy G on Feb 4, 2010 3:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, sorry
I conflated the two ideas. And I spelled roll as role, which I hate. Not a good post by me.
As for the Gomes plus expirings for T-Mac…I suppose I would do that; why not? I doubt it would result in a long-term relationship with McGrady, but it would clear Gomes out painlessly. Depends on whether there was anyone else interested in Gomes and what they might offer.
My comment about a trade involving in Jefferson stands, except for the role/roll thing, which is mortifying.
by Eric in Madison on Feb 4, 2010 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah...
it’s by no means a blockbuster deal on either end… McGrady is an UFA and Gomes/24th Pick (approximatley) isn’t exactly going to catapult the Rockets atop the West. But I think both teams are potentially winners in the trade. We don’t need that pick, since we’ve already got two first rounders. Morey has a great track record with that type of draft pick. We get a bit more cap space and ticket revenue for a short period of time.
by Andy G on Feb 4, 2010 3:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
As pennance for your post
you must watch the whole game tomorrow, no matter how ugly it gets.
by Mplax on Feb 4, 2010 5:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You know perfectly well
that the punishment fits the crime ;-)
by Mplax on Feb 4, 2010 9:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not a T-Mac fan
I do not think that TMac would fit in very well with Minn. just as he seems to wear out his welcome wherever he has played. When I see him play, here is what I see: A man who dunks and slashes well, a man who pouts when things go bad, a selfish player who seems to rub teammates the wrong way, and a serious injury risk. I do not like the deal under any circumstances.
by scottysnowski on Feb 4, 2010 6:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
When did we get to the point of trading a player of Al’s talent for cap space?
I can’t think of any trade so one sided in terms of talent without some huge issue involved. The infamous Gasol deal (hated moreso at the time) at least brought 2 late firsts and 2 prospects in Crittendon/Marc Gasol. Vince Carter’s onerous contract netted an excellent prospect at the time in Courtney Lee (although the Nets also sent R. Anderson to the Magic). Z. Randolph was dumped for nothing, but he was toxic (attitude and contract) at the time. Camby was scrapped, but the Nuggets had serious tax issues (which the Wolves don’t). Is there an example out there that I’m missing where a team traded a young player of Al’s of talent for essentially no reason (i.e. no luxury tax, character or other big issues)?
At worst I would accept an upper lottery pick and expirings for Al. Guys like Jason Richardson, Antawn Jamison and Antonio Davis netted top 5-8 picks, why not Al? The Foye/Miller deal last year was an aberration IMO in that the Wolves were able to take advantage of a strange situation in Washington. The going rate for a lotto pick is traditionally more than 2 borderline starters.
by Blond Ricky on Feb 5, 2010 6:04 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

by 















