Derrick Rose, Jeff Teague headline nine potential summer trade targets – CBSSports.com
The 2016 NBA offseason is going to be chaotic. With the deluge of TV money coming in, the salary cap is jumping roughly $22 million this coming summer. It’ll jump another $15-20 million or so in the summer of 2017. It’s going to be a great time to be a free agent because even average players are about to go from afterthoughts to Brinks truck drivers.
For NBA executives, there is more money to go around than there are players you’d want to sign. So unless you want to throw big money at guys who might normally be hoping for a mid-level exception, you have to get creative with how you reach the salary floor and also how you prove to your owner and the fan base that you’re adding impact players in a summer in which almost every team has cap flexibility.
That creativity will come from the trade market. Finding bigger money contracts to fill that cap space while dealing first-round picks or rookie deals as prime assets (rookie deal contracts do not increase with the higher salary cap) could be a big market this summer. That means targeting potential rentals whose contracts will expire in 2017. Most teams won’t be looking to shed money this summer because it’s basically unnecessary with the cap jump. Unless you’re needing room for two max deals to convince Kevin Durant and Al Horford to come sign with you this summer, you’ll be asset hunting.
For the sake of looking at potential trade targets this summer, we won’t be delving into guys who will be coming off rookie deals and hitting the restricted free agency market. Those deals are smaller in dollar amount, so they don’t really qualify for finding ways to use your cap space with a big acquisition. We’re looking at players who will potentially leave their current team when free agency happens for them, or could be hot commodities on the trade market in exchange for assets.
In no particular order, here are the 2017 free agents-to-be who should end up as prime trade targets:
The trade rumors including Jeff Teague have already begun with the report that the Philadelphia 76ers and Atlanta Hawks could be exploring a Teague for Nerlens Noel swap as the framework for a possible multi-player move. For the Hawks, they’re in a tricky spot. If Al Horford decides to leave in free agency this summer, the team will be thrown into a quick rebuild. There has been interest in turning over the keys to the offense to Dennis Schroder, which makes Teague expendable. If they’re looking for a big man option like Noel in exchange, it helps soften the blow of the potential Horford loss, should it happen.
Teague revealed that he played much of last season with a tear in his patella. That would explain the regression in his play from the previous year. While his offensive numbers were fine, his defense was a pretty big hole for the Hawks at times. Once the knee is healthy, you’d assume the defensive end of the floor would be corrected. His $8 million price tag doesn’t fill up your cap space, but it does make his contract/rental incredibly affordable. And if he ends up leaving in the summer of 2017, you probably haven’t had to give too much up for him, unless you’re risking a prospect of Noel’s caliber.
The key to this is figuring out where you think Teague sits in a league full of excellent point guards. The teams that could potentially need a point guard are the Sacramento Kings, Los Angeles Lakers (depending on whether or not D’Angelo Russell is used as a lead guard or not), Utah, Indiana, Orlando, Milwaukee, New York, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, Dallas, Memphis (if Mike Conley bolts) and Houston (does Pat Beverley fit with Mike D’Antoni?). Some of those teams have an established point guard (Pacers, Mavs, Rockets, etc.), but Teague would be an upgrade. You still have to decide the value of an asset you’d be willing to part with and how big of a contract you’re comfortable offering in a re-sign.
Who wants to take a chance on Derrick Rose in 2016? If the Bulls are interested in finding a new direction with the team and not enduring the pressure of having to re-sign Rose to another big deal in 2017, this could be a sneaky, if costly, and high-reward risk for some team to make. Here’s the upside of trying to make Derrick Rose a force again: if it works out then you have a superstar falling into your lap with the necessary flexibility and upper hand to re-sign him in 2017. Granted, it’s been about a half decade since Rose was a force in this league, but he was certainly a franchise-changer when he was.
The downside is the injuries have likely robbed him of his consistency moving forward and he’ll never be what he was. He’s a non 3-point shooting point guard in a league relying more and more on the 3-point shot. However, Russell Westbrook manages to make it work and a healthy Rose could have a similar impact on a team. You’ll have to spend the money anyway next season, so the $21.3 million price tag is a lot but not horrendous for one year. It helps you get above the salary floor at worst. The tricky part is figuring out proper value in return that would make the Bulls interested if they are indeed ready to move on from the Rose era.
If you’re a team like Philly or Brooklyn in need of a potential star, doesn’t a one-year gamble make a ton of sense?
Speaking of Chicago Bulls players, Taj Gibson could be an extremely valuable addition to a roster without having to part with too much. The reason he could maybe be poached from this Bulls roster is we’re now in a league of stretch big men and that often means guys who can shoot 3-pointers. That’s not Gibson at all. He’s 1 of 22 from 3-point range in seven seasons, and he’s much more of a defensive role player than someone who will give you a lot of offense. So does he fit in with the future of what Fred Hoiberg wants to do? And if not, how easy will it be to acquire him?
Gibson’s scoring rates have dropped the last two seasons, as has his shot blocking. But his rebounding is as good as ever, and despite not being a 3-point threat, Gibson is very good at shooting the midrange jumper (over 40 percent the last three seasons). He can defend the 4 and the 5 positions, and if you get into trouble, he can probably stick with some 3s as well.
The likelihood the Bulls look to move someone like Gibson when they could potentially lose Pau Gasol and Joakim Noah in the same offseason is low. However if they get into a position of needing extra cap room to sign a big free agent, teams would jump all over trying to grab Gibson.
How much do you trust the health of Danilo Gallinari? It’s been three full seasons since he tore his ACL. The first season he missed entirely because of some medical treatment he wasn’t crazy about. The second season, he played 59 games and was an average 3-point shooter while playing about half the game. Last season, he played in just 53 games, but his shooting numbers returned to form and he got to the free throw line a ton.
His versatility is the exact type of wing player you want in today’s NBA. He can drive the ball, get to the free throw line consistently, shoot 3-pointers, and he’s a good playmaker for others. Defensively, he’s slipped a couple steps, but perhaps a full offseason of training properly now that he’s relatively healthy can help return the strength, quickness, and endurance for him to consistently defend. With the money going around, you’d have to assume he’d opt out in the summer of 2017 unless the health concerns persist next season.
It’s hard to believe the Memphis Grizzlies would actually move such an affordable contract for a plus player in the new salary cap landscape. But if Conley ends up leaving in free agency, we could see a real overhaul of the core of this roster. Marc Gasol becomes the guy you’re building around 100 percent (before I think you can argue they’re building around the Gasol-Conley duo), and David Fizdale’s new team may not need that slow, grind-it-out style with Randolph as the second big. If that’s the case, even in the new perimeter-oriented NBA Z-Bo can be an effective weapon.
Maybe the easiest way to decide to integrate him, if you’re able to move him out of Memphis, is the sixth man role he embraced last season. Randolph averaged 15.6 points and 7.8 rebounds in 30.5 minutes as a starter this season. He put up 14.1 points and 7.7 rebounds in 26.7 minutes as a reserve. He’s a weapon off the bench that nobody else has, so acquiring him gives you a lot of flexibility. Maybe he wouldn’t be as keen to sacrifice his role on a new team as he was on the team he’s loved playing for over the years, but that is a very low-risk, high-reward gamble if you’re able to convince Memphis it’s time to move on.
This might be premature, but would the Bucks be willing to part with Greg Monroe just one season after signing him? The cons of this are it makes you look like you made a mistake, and maybe you did. Monroe is a very good offensive big man, although he’s more suited for a game with his back to the basket when you have shooters surrounding him. He didn’t have a lot of shooting surrounding him in Milwaukee. If Monroe gets dealt just one year after signing that big deal with Milwaukee, would that show a level of distrust to agents and their clients around the league that the Bucks may not want you shortly after signing you?
As for the weapon you’d be acquiring, it comes with a grain of salt. He can score and he can rebound. He could also be a pretty good passing big man in most offenses with a lot of movement. The problem is his defense is horrendous. You either need a system like the Charlotte Hornets have under Steve Clifford where you can make someone like Al Jefferson work as the defensive anchor, or just hope your offense is so good that it doesn’t matter how many points at the rim your team gives up. There were far too many possessions last year in which Monroe wandered away from the big man hanging around the rim and it turned into an easy basket. You can’t have that if you’re acquiring him.
He may opt out, though, to cash in again in 2017 with an even bigger contract. Even with the defensive issues, there will be too much money to go around and he’s still very talented. Do you need a guy who can get you a bucket inside and will rebound well, especially on the offensive boards? There are worse gambles to make in free agency.
The Rudy Gay discussion is a polarizing one. He may be the ultimate Eye Test vs. Analytics case study because what he does on the court can certainly look impressive. He’s a 6-foot-8 wing who can play both forward positions, and is a big-time scorer, especially at the end of games. He also can be a very willing defender at both positions, and has the size, speed and athleticism to defend multiple positions well.
But there is something keeping him from being universally accepted as a weapon everybody would want. Gay has only been an average or better 3-point shooter a couple of seasons in his career, but his career 34.4 percent shot behind the arc looks a lot better when you consider him to be a stretch-4 than a flat-out small forward.
The problem though is he and the Kings were much better this past season when Gay played the 3. According to Nylon Calculas, Gay’s effective field goal percentage was 5.5 percent higher as a small forward than a power forward. He spent 58 percent of his minutes at power forward in 2015-16 and the team was a couple points per 48 minutes worse with him playing the 4. That could’ve just been the Kings being a bit of a mess. It also could’ve been because the eye test of Gay at the 4 doesn’t live up to what the analytics say.
There are a couple reasons you’d pursue a deal for him though. 1) His production for $13.3 million next season is a good bargain, as long as you feel confident he’ll fit into the team culture. If you’re a good team with a good defense, you can make Gay fit in a lot better, especially if you have a distributing point guard to balance out the offense with him on the floor.
Also, teams seem to get better when they trade Gay, so the Kings can maybe improve simply by moving him and for the team taking him on if he doesn’t work out, you can move him before the deadline and have a killer second half to the season.
I don’t actually believe Gordon Hayward is available for trade right now. The Jazz team can be a playoff team next year, and would’ve been this year if they didn’t have a string of tough injuries in the middle of the season that derailed their campaign. But Hayward has openly questioned whether the Jazz can keep him with the upcoming financial landscape and the bevy of young players they’ll need to pay as this core starts moving away from rookie deals. If the Jazz do decide to get out in front of the Hayward situation and think they can’t re-sign him long-term, he’d be an amazing addition to any team.
Hayward was one of 10 players this season to put up 19 points, 5 rebounds and 3.5 assists per game. Of those players, he had sixth-highest true shooting percentage. He’s a really good playmaker in the pick-and-roll and a steady hand at the end of games. He’d be crazy not to opt out in the summer of 2017. Nicolas Batum and DeMar DeRozan are expected to get max deals this summer. Hayward is better than both of those guys. That makes it risky on a one-year rental, but if he went to a good team, he’d likely want to continue being a part of a winner.
First and foremost, the Atlanta Hawks would be crazy to trade Paul Millsap with the way their team is currently constructed. He’s arguably the best player they have (depending on how high your opinion is of Al Horford) and it’s pretty tough to replace what he does on a basketball court. However, if Horford ends up walking, they lose Kent Bazemore to a contender in free agency, and the Hawks end up getting a good deal for Teague as they hand to keys over to Schroder, perhaps a quick rebuild is the way to go. You can do that with Millsap, or you can include Millsap in the mass exodus and get quite the haul for him.
Even with his player option looming and the possibility of him leaving next summer, adding him to your squad would be a huge addition. The way you pitch it to the Hawks is by waiting for the summer exodus to happen, and then come at them with a package of young players and lots of draft picks to kickstart the rebuild. The Boston Celtics come to mind with that package right away, but the draft will have already happened, so it’s a bit tougher to complete with this draft’s assets not totally being flexible and on the table in the discussion.
I’m not sure you can give up too much for Millsap, though. He can get you an efficient 20 points every night, he can easily turn his dip in 3-point percentage this season back into being a real threat, he’s a very good passer for a big man, and he can defend multiple positions. He’s also on the wrong side of 30 (31), so it’s understandable if the age gets to you when negotiating a fair trade package, but his game should translate quite nicely for another four years.
