Discussion in 'Personnel moves' started by Section 101, Jul 2, 2017.
Once he signs the offer sheet the sign and trade isnt allowed.
Agreed, and that's what they would be getting across Jackson, Papagiannis, Russell, & Whitehead (Booker & Hamilton expire after this season), but you may be right about Jackson not being able to be traded right now.
The question is would the Nets be able to beat Richardson or Papagiannis for Porter? Hollis-Jefferson & LeVert are probably on the table form their side. Maybe even Russell.
Way too much with Porter also getting the max imho. If they want to extract value out of him but are squeamish about keeping him at that price they are going to have to settle for far less. Malachi is about as far as I think we'd budge, but even that I believe would be generous. More like we'd take a crap contract back from them. I am not sure if we'd have to make two separate transactions so that they still got a trade exception, as those only apply to teams over the salary cap.
Hell no on a sign and trade! They are the ones with their backs against the wall. We're not sending a first round prospect back to them in some sort of consolation prize. If they match, oh well... wasn't meant to be.
btw, found this tidbit interesting from Larry Coon's faq (emphasis mine):
Your confused. Porter doesnt need it to get the money. The kings offer is on the table. If the wiz decide to not match before porter signs the offer they could ask for a sign and trade to get a trade exemption. The only thing that would traded is a future second round pick or the rights to one of the guys in europe. Wizards have zero leverage.
I'm not too high on either guy to be honest. Think they are role players at best.
But you're also forgetting that we're not the only ones after Porter. He's supposed to be meeting with two other teams. Those teams could be willing to do a sign and trade which then puts us in the position of beating the offer.
Porter decides where he goes not the wizards
So there is no conversation that would be had with Sacramento and Brooklyn along the lines of, "we will be matching the max offers for Porter you sent out, but we'd be open to seeing what you'd give up in a sign and trade? We'll keep him if you don't give up anything."
Perhaps @Capt. Factorial can help clarify...
If we want to change the culture of this franchise, it needs to start from the top.
Honest question though is what can Brooklyn offer? Most teams can't take back a bad contract. Brooklyn might be able to offer a pick but they are swapping with Boston for another year or two so they won't be very good ones. They just took on LA's junk for Russell so they aren't going to move him I wouldn't think.
Who knows who the mystery third team is.
First Porter would have to be willing to sign a 5 year. Which he would because of the extra pay increases year by year and the 5th year on the contract.
It's why the second team he is meeting with is Washington probably.
So they'll talk about that.
Then Washington would reach out to the Nets or Kings. If nothing they like is coming back, then Porter would sign the 4 year max most likely.
Washington may prefer this actually because it won't be as expensive with the 5% annual raises we can offer.
To counter this the Kings or Nets would put perks in there like player options etc.
Then the agent/Porter can say this will all be avoided if you max us at 5 years etc.
But I guess what if the Wizards were willing to keep Porter at the max level, but would prefer to move him for an asset or two. So I guess their list of priorities would be (considering Porter will be maxed):
1. Trading Porter for a young asset or two
2. Keeping Porter at the max
3. Losing Porter for nothing
How does this not give the Wizards some leverage against teams like Sacramento & Brooklyn (who are able to sign him outright)?
Should be noted he won't sign an offer until he has to, they'll talk this out first.
Well they've never paid the luxury tax, and seem to be cheap.
I can respect that.
They may simply want him for the 5% annual raise over 4 years over anything else.
Porter/Agent want 5 years if they can get it.
Kings will toss a perk in the contract.
Right now everyone is playing poker.
Dangerous for Washington messing around like this, but as an organization, if its not your franchise player, you should attempt to be as frugal as possible.
On the S&T talk, I'd consider Malachi only. Hell no to everyone else.
To me there's no way Washington doesn't match. They are not sure he's worth a max contract? They will match and trade him in the future, getting assets in return instead of letting him walk for free. They want Cousins next year? Porter's contract would be great in a sign and trade with the Pelicans.
I have zero expectations about it, but of course I always hope a miracle happens.
Knowing we are the Kings, the Wizs probably won't match and he will accept Brooklin's offer...
I agree with you. I don't see why we should give up something of value. Remember what we got for Tyreke? Gravis Vazquez and Robin Lopez, who actually was the best player we got but of course our genious GM cut him immediately. And what did we get for Isaiah? I don't even want to mention it...
The wizards cant do anything. Porter decides who he will sign with period. Then a sign and trade could be worked out. Otherwise porter just signs the deal.
Fyi. Sign and trades are 4 year deals. Only staying with a team gets 5 if they qualify.
Sure, he decides who he will sign with but he doesn't decide what team he will end up on. That power lies with the Wizards.
Considering that power lies with the Wizards, how do they have zero leverage when trying to pull off a sign and trade?
Number one needed to happen before he was a free agent.
Because the sign and trade has to be the team of porters choice.
This is all under the assumption they wont match.
Yeah, I understand what you're saying, but it'd be great if you would go a little bit into the "why"
Okay, so let's say he wants to sign with the Kings, and the Wizards say they will match the max contract but they'd be willing to part ways with him for Richardson & Papagiannis. How do they have zero leverage in this situation? The leverage is that the Kings would not get Porter at all. Sure, the Kings can see if they're bluffing and not offer them anything but they run the risk of losing out on Porter.
I'm just curious why they would have zero leverage. I must be missing something.
I think some posters are forgetting Porter is a restricted free agent. If the Wizards match an offer sheet, he stays a Wizard.
Because it's against the cba. Read what was posted above by pdxkingsfan.
So, I am trying to melt down some facts:
1. The Wiz get to decide to match or not; no one else can decide anything else.
2. If the Wiz decline, Porter could come to the Kings or whatever other team gives him a max offer, right?
3. The Wiz CANNOT or CAN do a sign and trade with Porter?
The wiz can only do a sign and trade before the offer is signed. And only if the team and porter agree to it. If thr wiz plan to match it ends the discussion.
Hmm that seems very subjective to me. Seems like there would be a lot of loop holes. What constitutes "scaring?" Any contact between teams? Telling a team they are going to match the offer sheet? Telling a team they will match but telling them they'd be willing to do a sign and trade if the price is right?
Also, didn't the Wizards already say they would match all offers for Porter? According to that quote you referenced, that would go against the CBA unless of course it's just "sources say." It all seems very subjective and something that could easily still happen.
Is there anything against the Kings going to the Wizards first and offering the sign and trade? If fearful that they will match (without the Wizards having any contact with the Kings), could the Kings reach out and offer a sign and trade to give them a little more incentive to let Porter go? Not saying it would be the ideal approach, but it seems like it would still be allowed under the CBA.
I would think Bullets would do a S&T for a future second rounder or something. The question still remains the same... Do the Bullets want to keep Porter and pay the luxury tax?