General theory: Sign and trade might make more sense in this environment than ever before

[sturt]

Given how the market is resetting itself before our eyes, suddenly all these players currently under contract are playing at a discount. At the same time, this is also a lesson for next season's anticipated additional boost upward.... that even these FAs today are going to potentially be playing at a discount to the degree that they are signed long-term.

Other thoughts?

[IheartVolt]

What's gonna happen is that every team is gonna throw around insane amounts of money to mediocre players causing everyone to cap out again. When players worth signing come about they are command such high salaries that you are gonna see the typical cutting salaries and sign and trades that has been happening. New salary cap say hello to the old salary cap. 

[skimaskway23]

92.9 mtnioned a sign and trade of Horford to okc for Kanter.  I nearly threw up in my mouth

[AUhawksfan]

24 minutes ago, IheartFerry said:

What's gonna happen is that every team is gonna throw around insane amounts of money to mediocre players causing everyone to cap out again. When players worth signing come about they are command such high salaries that you are gonna see the typical cutting salaries and sign and trades that has been happening. New salary cap say hello to the old salary cap. 

Yep, I feel like history is going to repeat itself and you'll see some team in a horrible cap situation like the Knicks were when Isaiah Thomas was GM.  The cap is going up and it seems like teams are willing to (over)pay.

[AHF]

Why does any of that make sign and trades more sensible?  The reason for the crazy prices is because teams have so much cap room available to spend.  The players don't get any more in a sign and trade.  So doesn't that mean sign and trades are less likely because players will just sign outright with their new team's cap space?

[Guest]

Why aren't more players signing 1+1 this offseason and really cash in next season is a bigger question.

[IheartVolt]

3 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Why aren't more players signing 1+1 this offseason and really cash in next season is a bigger question.

Who has signed?

[sturt]

28 minutes ago, AHF said:

Why does any of that make sign and trades more sensible?  The reason for the crazy prices is because teams have so much cap room available to spend.  The players don't get any more in a sign and trade.  So doesn't that mean sign and trades are less likely because players will just sign outright with their new team's cap space?

Why it makes more attractive ("sensible," maybe, maybe not)...?

Players you're getting in return are like paying your 2016 taxes with 1976 money.... the price on those players is already locked-in, though the new environment/expansion of the cap means they're effectively playing at a discount.

 

Doesn't that mean sign and trades are less likely b/c their players will sign with their new team's cap space?

In a situation where a player is signing for 3 or more years, true.

In a situation where a player is signing for next year plus a player option the following season--seemingly a popular option this FA period especially given next year's projections--Bird rights can be especially important.

 

[IheartVolt]

42 minutes ago, AHF said:

Why does any of that make sign and trades more sensible?  The reason for the crazy prices is because teams have so much cap room available to spend.  The players don't get any more in a sign and trade.  So doesn't that mean sign and trades are less likely because players will just sign outright with their new team's cap space?

Because teams are gonna spend to their hearts content.. Come on dude Base 20 million a year?  They will be capped out and have to work around it by trades. Nothing will change

[AHF]

6 minutes ago, sturt said:

Why it makes more attractive ("sensible," maybe, maybe not)...?

Players you're getting in return are like paying your 2016 taxes with 1976 money.... the price on those players is already locked-in, though the new environment/expansion of the cap means they're effectively playing at a discount.

 

Doesn't that mean sign and trades are less likely b/c their players will sign with their new team's cap space?

In a situation where a player is signing for 3 or more years, true.

In a situation where a player is signing for next year plus a player option the following season--seemingly a popular option this FA period especially given next year's projections--Bird rights can be especially important.

 

 

3 minutes ago, IheartFerry said:

Because teams are gonna spend to their hearts content.. Come on dude Base 20 million a year?  They will be capped out and have to work around it by trades. Nothing will change

I get why the team losing the player will want to acquire someone already under contract.  But why would a team that has cap room and guys under old contracts be willing to let those old contract guys go in order to sign a player with a newly inflated contract?

The reason people did S&Ts in the past was because the player was leaving anyway and this was a way to (a) get the team losing him something and (b) get the player more money that he couldn't have gotten by signing outright.  Now the only situation a S&T makes sense is where a team lacks the cap room to get him and has to unload salary to make room for him.  

I do not predict more sign and trade deals in this environment.  A few could certainly happen but nothing like the old days.

[NBASupes]

SnT are great for Demarre Carroll and Kent Bazemore types but they really do nothing for big time players or big contract guys. The best you can get is a player exception which means nothing in this salary cap.

[NBASupes]

Honestly a SnT makes a lot of sense for Bazemore if we don't use the cap before then

[AHF]

3 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Honestly a SnT makes a lot of sense for Bazemore if we don't use the cap before then

For us.  Not for the team that would give us assets to acquire him when they can just sign him outright.

If we were going to sign someone for less than $24M, the only assets we would give up in a S&T are guys we would want to dump anyway.  We would just sign someone outright otherwise and keep our positive value assets.

[MrYellow]

New 94 M cap will male SnT less likely if we refer to a basic economics model.

Then of course what happens, happens, it's basketball and not maths.

[Plainview1981]

2 hours ago, skimaskway23 said:

92.9 mtnioned a sign and trade of Horford to okc for Kanter.  I nearly threw up in my mouth

Hello no to Kanter.

[sturt]

I'll say it again.... what matters is the number of years involved. Bird rights carry a high value, no matter the cap era. It makes all the difference in the world to us right now w/ Baze (... not that we had any choice in his case, but just making the point that had things been different when we got him, we definitely would be feeling much better right now w/ those Bird rights we can only wish we could have). You want to have that advantage in the next round of negotiations. If you think enough of a player to want to sign him now, you almost certainly want to protect your future prospects of keeping him.

Edited July 1, 2016 by sturt

[DrReality]

And the minimum cap space used is also higher.   Teams have to lay out the cash.