OKC and Atlanta in talks - Dennis and Muscala for Melo - Deal Done (Not Fake News)

[AHF]

First, Carmelo has no real trade value.  We just got paid to take him.

Second, I have no doubt we told him we would buy him out.

Add those two together and there is very little upside to trying to hold and trade him but significant reputational risk if we held him against his wishes.  Just waive goodbye.

[sturt]

Just now, kg01 said:

IIUC, the clause stays with his deal.  IOW, when he waived it to get to OKC, it didn't do away with the no-trade. IOW, he still has a no-trade right now.

Agreed.

And so...

Can we agree it's highly unlikely he's going to invoke his no-trade clause to STAY with us if we were to work out something with HOU or MIA or whoever?

[Buzzard]

Just now, kg01 said:

I'm pretty sure this isn't accurate.  I mean like 99% sure.

You are right.

Quote

The Thunder are working on trade scenarios where Anthony, 34, would be moved as an expiring contract and be waived, becoming a free agent once his $27.9 million 2017-18 salary clears waivers. Oklahoma City needs Anthony's permission to waive his no-trade clause, which he has done to facilitate his exit, league sources said.

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/07/10/oklahoma-city-thunder-grant-permission-carmelo-anthony-no-trade-clause

[Atlantaholic]

8 minutes ago, kg01 said:

I'm pretty sure this isn't accurate.  I mean like 99% sure.

Yea, wouldn't make any sense for that to be the case really. As has been mentioned the clause is waived on a per trade basis... if it was any other way the clause would have almost no value. 

[sturt]

9 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

You need to get up to speed on your reading is all.

You mean like this?

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/07/10/oklahoma-city-thunder-grant-permission-carmelo-anthony-no-trade-clause

 

I'm taking the report verbatim. And it says he told them he was waiving it, and they told him he was free to talk to other teams himself as well.

 

I'm NOT denying that your assumption could be correct.

 

I just don't see that it is necessarily correct. We had no reason to talk to him, in reality, only OKC.

 

[Atlantaholic]

10 minutes ago, sturt said:

Agreed.

And so...

Can we agree it's highly unlikely he's going to invoke his no-trade clause to STAY with us if we were to work out something with HOU or MIA or whoever?

No team is paying Melo 27 million to play for them lol. Definitely not a contender. Only team that would be interested in Melo would be someone in our position, or someone picking him up for a vet minimum contract post buy out. The only trade partners we would find are teams willing to give us contracts like the one we were looking to shed by getting Melo in the first place.

[sturt]

20 minutes ago, AHF said:

I have no doubt we told him we would buy him out.

I just don't know why it's assumed we spoke with Melo at all.

We had no reason to.

Again, I'm at least granting you guys the possibility that we did.

But we had no reason to.

 

 

[AHF]

3 minutes ago, sturt said:

You mean like this?

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/07/10/oklahoma-city-thunder-grant-permission-carmelo-anthony-no-trade-clause

 

I'm taking the report verbatim. And it says he told them he was waiving it, and they told him he was free to talk to other teams himself as well.

 

I'm NOT denying that your assumption could be correct.

 

I just don't see that it is necessarily correct. We had no reason to talk to him, in reality, only OKC.

 

I've seen multiple reports pre-dating the announcement of this as a possible trade indicating that @sturt is correct and that Carmelo waived the clause over a week ago to kick off trade discussions.

[Buzzard]

Just now, sturt said:

You mean like this?

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/07/10/oklahoma-city-thunder-grant-permission-carmelo-anthony-no-trade-clause

 

I'm taking the report verbatim. And it says he told them he was waiving it, and they told him he was free to talk to other teams himself as well.

 

I'm NOT denying that your assumption could be correct.

 

I just don't see that it is necessarily correct. We had no reason to talk to him, in reality, only OKC.

 

Presti made a promise he would not send him to a team that did not agree to a buyout and waivers. Melo said cool, I waive my NT clause. I guess you think Presti broke his word just to move Melo to us? Honestly I don't know what you think. Maybe CBS, Yahoo, NBA,COM, ESPN, etc are all lying and it is just a conspiracy.

Now I will say this, there is nothing wrong for us to talk to Meloo and see if he is agreeable to something else once we have him. But that is a long shot at best. Say about 1000 - 1.

[sturt]

Just now, Buzzard said:

Presti made a promise he would not send him to a team that did not agree to a buyout and waivers.

Source?

15 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

Oklahoma City needs Anthony's permission to waive his no-trade clause, which he has done to facilitate his exit, league sources said.

Past tense.

[Buzzard]

Just now, sturt said:

Source?

You really need to read Sturt. Same article I posted before from NBA,COM

Quote

The Rockets meeting included coach Mike D'Antoni, who had a turbulent relationship with Anthony as New York Knicks coach. D'Antoni made it clear to Anthony that he thinks the circumstances together would be far different in Houston, and welcomed the idea of coaching Anthony again, league sources said.

The Thunder are working on trade scenarios where Anthony, 34, would be moved as an expiring contract and be waived, becoming a free agent once his $27.9 million 2017-18 salary clears waivers. Oklahoma City needs Anthony's permission to waive his no-trade clause, which he has done to facilitate his exit, league sources said.

He was never going to waive it if the bolded part was done.

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/07/10/oklahoma-city-thunder-grant-permission-carmelo-anthony-no-trade-clause

[sturt]

2 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

You really need to read Sturt. Same article I posted before from NBA,COM

He was never going to waive it if the bolded part was done.

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/07/10/oklahoma-city-thunder-grant-permission-carmelo-anthony-no-trade-clause

Not going to insult your intelligence as-if I can know things you don't... so please don't insult mine.

You are interpreting the report to say Presti made some promise. Who knows, maybe he did, but that's NOT necessarily something we can assume. BOTH SIDES, Melo and Presti, clearly were motivated to separate.

My reading is that once both sides had determined that for themselves, both sides extended to the other maximum capacity to figure out something... Melo waived his clause, and Presti waived his right to keep other teams from tampering.

And that Presti was investigating buyout opportunities only indicates further how complicated they knew it would be to find a team willing to make a deal otherwise.

[Buzzard]

Just now, sturt said:

Not going to insult your intelligence as-if I can know things you don't... so please don't insult mine.

You are interpreting the report to say Presti made some promise. Who knows, maybe he did, but that's NOT necessarily something we can assume. BOTH SIDES, Melo and Presti, clearly were motivated to separate.

My reading is that once both sides had determined that for themselves, both sides extended to the other maximum capacity to figure out something... Melo waived his clause, and Presti waived his right to keep other teams from tampering.

And that Presti was investigating buyout opportunities only indicates further how complicated they knew it would be to find a team willing to make a deal otherwise.

I am not going to go through a month or more worth of reporting to satisfy you. If you took that as a insult I apologize, But I have other things to do today.

[sturt]

No, not that I feel insulted. I don't. Feelings aren't relevant. When I say I won't insult your intelligence and you shouldn't insult mine, the point is, you CAN'T know what you SAY you know based on the report that both of us cited.

I"m at least acknowledging you COULD be correct in your assumption.

I'm only asking that you acknowledge you've made an assumption in the first place... so far, you're dug in, and not budging to see it.

We don't know that Presti said what you say he said. You made an assumption. It's a plausible one. But it's also completely plausible that he didn't say that at all. It's completely plausible that Presti gave up any rights against tampering and Melo gave up his no-trade clause, and having nothing to do with any promises beyond that.

[Buzzard]

9 minutes ago, sturt said:

No, not that I feel insulted. I don't. Feelings aren't relevant. When I say I won't insult your intelligence and you shouldn't insult mine, the point is, you CAN'T know what you SAY you know based on the report that both of us cited.

I"m at least acknowledging you COULD be correct in your assumption.

I'm only asking that you acknowledge you've made an assumption in the first place... so far, you're dug in, and not budging to see it.

We don't know that Presti said what you say he said. You made an assumption. It's a plausible one. But it's also completely plausible that he didn't say that at all. It's completely plausible that Presti gave up any rights against tampering and Melo gave up his no-trade clause, and having nothing to do with any promises beyond that.

I am not making an assumption Sturt, I read at least 10 articles on Melo but going to dig them up ain't happening. I am just as sure other posters here have read them to, which is why you are the only one who thinks we may trade Melo or even worse keep him.

Believe what you want to believe but I would bet a [lot] right now that if this trade goes through we buy him out. How bout you, are you up for that?

[AHF]

4 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

I am not making an assumption Sturt, I read at least 10 articles on Melo but going to dig them up ain't happening. I am just as sure other posters here have read them to, which is why you are the only one who thinks we may trade Melo or even worse keep him.

Believe what you want to believe but I would bet a [lot] right now that if this trade goes through we buy him out. How bout you, are you up for that?

Remember no dollar bets on the Squawk.  But I'm up for some action if sturt thinks there is a realistic chance the team won't buy him out.  (Will give two months of avatar of your choice if the Hawks trade him for one week of my choice of avatar if they cut him or buy him out).

[Buzzard]

Just now, AHF said:

Remember no dollar bets on the Squawk.  But I'm up for some action if sturt thinks there is a realistic chance the team won't buy him out.  (Will give two months of avatar of your choice if the Hawks trade him for one week of my choice of avatar if they cut him or buy him out).

Sorry. I tend to go overboard when I see a sure thing coming my way.

[HawkItus]

The problem with trading is would need to take back salary now.  We don't room for a trade that wouldn't hinder our future.

[EazyRoc]

10 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

Sorry. I tend to go overboard when I see a sure thing coming my way.

??? Me too

[nathan2331]

The problem with trading is would need to take back salary now.  We don't room for a trade that wouldn't hinder our future.

I agree. Our best chance of making a splash in free agency in the next couple of offseasons is being in position to add two players to what we have.