# Something Big is about to happen



## Benis007 (May 23, 2005)

www.insidehoops.com

"Rob Babcock admits he has been in "meaningful" trade discussions with other NBA general managers in the last few weeks as the league braces for a wave of speculation and perhaps some deals later this week. Under terms of the collective bargaining agreement, any player who signed as a free agent before the season began can't be traded until Thursday, but once that moratorium is lifted and about 100 players flood the market, there might be some movement. And the Raptors could be involved." Toronto Star 

"For the first time, Babcock said the team's future first-round draft picks could be moved in the right package. "Nothing's untouchable," he said. "We could move one of those picks if we need it to facilitate a very good trade for our team." Toronto Star 

"The Raptors have only three players who will be eligible to be traded Thursday — free-agent signees Jose Calderon, Matt Bonner and Pape Sow. Rookies Charlie Villanueva and Joey Graham have been tradable for more than a month." Toronto Star 

"And while it's inconceivable Babcock would deal Calderon, Sow might fetch something because he's leading the D-League in rebounding. And Bonner has a manageable contract that might be attractive as cap ballast in a multi-player deal." Toronto Star 

"(Eric) Williams could hold the key. He isn't being used now — coach Sam Mitchell is loath to take him off the inactive list and steal minutes from Morris Peterson and Graham — but he is coveted by some teams." Toronto Star


----------



## Ballyhoo (May 30, 2003)

Artest?


----------



## trick (Aug 23, 2002)

Ballyhoo said:


> Artest?


hope not


----------



## Ballyhoo (May 30, 2003)

Why not? Artest and O'Neal lead the Pacers to 61 wins in 2004. Artest and Bosh would be just as good a combo. Artest is young, has a bargain contract, and is a great player. His antics don't affect his on-court performance. Besides the Raptors desperately need someone who knows how to play defense.


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

Ballyhoo said:


> Why not? Artest and O'Neal lead the Pacers to 61 wins in 2004. Artest and Bosh would be just as good a combo. Artest is young, has a bargain contract, and is a great player. His antics don't affect his on-court performance. Besides the Raptors desperately need someone who knows how to play defense.


 I have no problem with Artest on our team... but I'm worried about it screwing us out of a top-5 pick.


----------



## trick (Aug 23, 2002)

Ballyhoo said:


> Why not? Artest and O'Neal lead the Pacers to 61 wins in 2004. Artest and Bosh would be just as good a combo. Artest is young, has a bargain contract, and is a great player. His antics don't affect his on-court performance. Besides the Raptors desperately need someone who knows how to play defense.


How many wins did Artest and O'Neal lead his team thus far? His antics may not seem like it affect his on-court performance, but it's widely known that the Pacers have had chemistry issues for quite some time and that counts for alot when half of this team is made up of young'ins, who'll end up becoming more young as the years go on. And for a guy whose known as a defensive specialist, his reasoning to wanting out is pretty far-fetched (e.g. he wants to be able to score more).

I had some positive expectations for the guy before the season started. I thought he could deal with his past and play like he did with the Pacers during that 61 win season, but even he can't get over his own past.

Only reason why I wouldn't mind acquiring Artest is if we trade him right away for a package more suited to put this team in better success for the future, like trade him right away if he's acquired through means that don't hinder this franchise through mediocrity in the future.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

I think there's a good chance something will happen but I doubt it'll be that big.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

yeah, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Raps involved in the possible Artest trade, I just don't see us as the team that gets him.

Perhaps a multi-team deal goes down and maybe we are involved that way. I would doubt that Babcock would do something as foolish as bring Artest to Toronto, unless of course he has no faith in his plan.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

No artest. He does not fit with the plan in terms of contract and age. His contract lasts for 2 years and can opt out on the 3rd. It does not work, and won't happen.

We could be in a 3-way, but not for him.


----------



## changv10 (Apr 25, 2005)

Other than possible character issues, I don't see Artest not fitting Babcock's plan. 

- Babcock wants a young team that focuses on defense. Ron Artest is 26 and is one of the best defenders in the league. 
- Babcock doesn't want bloated salaries. Ron Artests has a very good salary for his production. 
- Babcock doesn't want to hurt the 2007 cap UNLESS it is used to acquire a good player. Hypothetically, if say Corey Magette/Andre Iguodala are available, would Babcock not try to trade for them even though his salary runs over the 2007 year?. Of couse he would ... because it improves the team. 

If I were the pacers gm, i would first look to put artest in a good (not great team) so that it causes troubles for others. I wouldn't trade him into my own division. I would think about a trade with washington for say Haywood, Hayes + 1st rounder ... so that Arenas/Artests/Jamison make some noise in Miami's conference. Or I would send him to the west so that I don't have to deal with him that much.


----------



## lucky777s (Nov 13, 2003)

I wouldn't be so absolute in saying he doesn't fit. Depends entirely on what we have to give up. Ron is only 26 so his age isn't an issue at all.

We could just rent him until the trade deadline and give him an opportunity to showcase himself here and improve his image by mentoring our guys on the art of D.

Ron could be a huge piece to have at the trade deadline. Imagine if Tayshaun Prince went down for DET, or Posey/Walker for MIA, or Bowen for SAS. Ron would look pretty darn nice to one of those teams.

We know the Knicks want him and it would definitely juice the wheels for a Jalen trade with something nice coming back.

I don't see him as a Raptor long term but we could get creative with him and come out far ahead in trading him.


----------



## trick (Aug 23, 2002)

Obviously if the right deal came along we should take Artest as future trade bait to try and move some of our other "old-guy contracts" as Babcock put it. Any package of consisting of one rookie + 1 future first rounder is asking for too much though. And obviously Bosh should not be on the bargaining table.

However, you would also have to figure in that if Indiana can't get the right value for him, it wouldn't look too good for Toronto either.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

Dude has 2 years left, this is when we will be built to compete. Not until then. He does not make us a contender now. 

This is the same argument as the Magloire trade, except after 2 years what evidence is there that he would stay?

Besides what would you be willing to give up? Bosh? The Rooks? No way.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

I seriously doubt Rob is looking very hard at Artest. The whole team concept he's developing, with young, character players, doesn't seem in line with what bringing an Artest to our team might be like.

And I think a competitive team in the West like either team from LA or Sactown will offer a good package to get him.


----------



## superdude211 (Apr 3, 2004)

Budweiser_Boy said:


> I have no problem with Artest on our team... but I'm worried about it screwing us out of a top-5 pick.


I would take Artest over any player we could get in the Top 5, this years draft class is pretty weak I wouldnt mind giving up a draft pick to get Artest


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

superdude211 said:


> I would take Artest over any player we could get in the Top 5, this years draft class is pretty weak I wouldnt mind giving up a draft pick to get Artest


not our first pick thats for sure. 

I am completely undecided about the "true warrier" somtimes i think he would be an exceptional addition with his scoring and defense and intensity. But then i think about all the baggage he brings along with him, especially things like this, wanting a trade and things liek that....and the fact that tells me that he would bolt to new york right when he can...so i guess the bad outweighs the goood, so i really dont want artest...i liek robs plan and how its ufolding...


----------



## lucky777s (Nov 13, 2003)

His value is low right now. Real low. I believe Indy has deactivated him and will not play him until he is traded. That means they want this done quick. They are in very much the same situation as Toronto was with VC. Lots of general interest but no real value will be offered.

They wouldn't even ask for Bosh, that's a joke. MoP and the DEN pick would be the best package I would offer. But there are other moveable parts on both teams that could work into a bigger trade.

I think they will be lucky to get a Bonzi Wells or Peja out of this. Or Al Harrington back from ATL. Their best bet may be Maggette who was supposedly on the outs with the Clips. But why would they risk disrupting that chemistry. Sam and Ron could be an explosive situation for poor old Dunleavy.

We have MoP. Is he that much worse than the other options available to them? Are they really willing to wait til the deadline and have the Ron distraction with them all year?

MoP, Jalen, Hoff, Bonner, Sow, Slokar, EWill, Woods, Aaron, and the DEN pick. We have a lot of pieces to work a trade with.

They have Ron, Croshere, Bender, Pollard, DavidHarrison, Anthony Johnson, Fred Jones.

Babs should at least explore how cheaply we could get Ron.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

^ I think Jon Bender is retiring.

But you're right--for Peterson/Denver/A-Train, or a package like that, we couldn't pass. Killer trade.


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 27, 2005)

artest > you


----------



## Turkish Delight (Mar 17, 2004)

Getting Artest now would remind me a lot of how we got Antonio Davis a few years back. If you are content with mediocracy for years to come and nothing more, go for it. 
I'll pass.


----------



## crimedog (Jun 3, 2003)

superdude211 said:


> I would take Artest over any player we could get in the Top 5, this years draft class is pretty weak I wouldnt mind giving up a draft pick to get Artest


how do you know? in december of 2003, were you pondering bosh, wade, hinrich, ford or melo? 

nope, you were saying draft looks pretty weak after lebron. 

by the way, i agree. i'd love to get ron. it's a gamble, but it would bring some big time excitement to our team and some much needed D. 

BUT, i don't think we're involved.


----------



## Rhubarb (Mar 19, 2005)

SkywalkerAC said:


> I think there's a good chance something will happen but I doubt it'll be that big.


Werd up.


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

crimedog said:


> how do you know? in december of 2003, were you pondering bosh, wade, hinrich, ford or melo?
> 
> nope, you were saying draft looks pretty weak after lebron.
> 
> ...


i agree with you 100%, we know NOTHING about this draft class right now...absolutely nothing. If you think the draft will end up ANYTHING like it will in May ur dreaming, for all we know Adam Morrison and LaMarcus Alrdridge or even Rudy Gay for that matter, could all go in the second round like Taft and Andrusevicious last year...so no i wouldnt trade out pick not at all, the denver pick id part with though.


----------



## Rhubarb (Mar 19, 2005)

Turkish Delight said:


> Getting Artest now would remind me a lot of how we got Antonio Davis a few years back. If you are content with mediocracy for years to come and nothing more, go for it.
> I'll pass.


If you're referring to the picks we'd likely have to trade to make anything happen, I sincererly doubt Babcock will look to pass over our likely top 5 pick ahead of the Denver pick, which carries far less market value.

A package like Mo Pete + Denver is highway robbery.

I can't see any trade eventuating, but Ron isn't exactly over the hump in terms of age or his career. Losing out on a pick in the 15-20 range and a player like Mo for a Artest-calibre player is more than worth it.


----------



## AReallyCoolGuy (Jul 25, 2004)

I've heard Gordon is unhappy with his role in Chicago, and there was some trade speculation involving him not too long ago. It'd be great if we could pick him up from Chicago. And same type of situation for Dorell Wright in Miami.

Doesn't seem like a Babcock move to try pick up Artest from Indiana; but hey if you can add a great talent like that you gotta go for it. 

Does anyone see Magloire being moved before this coming offseason or next trade deadline? Any possibility of an Artest/Magloire swap?

Back to the Raptors; I get the feeling there will be a deal done, but we'll have to wait until the 15th to see, the big question is; are we waiting to trade one of our recently signed players or trade for a recently signed player.

Hypothetical question here. Would you trade Jose for Jarret Jack?


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

AReallyCoolGuy said:


> I've heard Gordon is unhappy with his role in Chicago, and there was some trade speculation involving him not too long ago. It'd be great if we could pick him up from Chicago. And same type of situation for Dorell Wright in Miami.
> 
> Doesn't seem like a Babcock move to try pick up Artest from Indiana; but hey if you can add a great talent like that you gotta go for it.
> *
> ...



there would have to be throw in from Indiana...seeing as Mags gets 10M a year and artest gets 6.5


----------



## Primetime23 (Feb 3, 2004)

No way we get Artest thats a pipe dream especially with offers like Mo and Denvers pick, he'll fetch more than that for sure


----------



## Unknownone (May 14, 2005)

speedythief said:


> I seriously doubt Rob is looking very hard at Artest. The whole team concept he's developing, with young, character players, doesn't seem in line with what bringing an Artest to our team might be like.
> 
> And I think a competitive team in the West like either team from LA or Sactown will offer a good package to get him.


Artest is a walking time bomb personality-wise - he's 2nd on the Pacers in scoring, how will he accommodate playing 2nd fiddle to Bosh on the Raptors... I've expended enough energy expounding all of the character deficiencies he brings to a lockerroom elsewhere so I'll just sum it by saying that Reggie commented on the dysfunctional dissension w/ the Pacers after retiring: do you think he's referring to O'Neal, Bender, Croshere, Tinsley, etc.? Or is it Artest, who flew out to NYC every so often during his league-enforced suspension to record his imminent rap record? His demand to be traded should also be considered as a slap in the face to both Walsh and Bird, both of whom stood by Artest despite his issues stemming from the brawl...

2004: costs the Pacers the chance to advance to the finals by committing a flagrant foul to Richard Hamilton in the Conference finals...

6 + suspensions by the Pacers for conduct detrimental to the team...

Knicks select Frederic Weis over Artest during the draft despite enjoying ample opportunities to analyze and be privy to his game - hometown team (the same Knicks that Artest so desperately wants to play for) takes a Gallic big man w/ little upside over a defensive presence from Queens-based St. John's, gotta be more to the story than just talent, right?


----------



## nwt (Apr 24, 2005)

AReallyCoolGuy said:


> Hypothetical question here. Would you trade Jose for Jarret Jack?


No


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

adhir1 said:


> i agree with you 100%, we know NOTHING about this draft class right now...absolutely nothing. If you think the draft will end up ANYTHING like it will in May ur dreaming, for all we know Adam Morrison and LaMarcus Alrdridge or even Rudy Gay for that matter, could all go in the second round like Taft and Andrusevicious last year...so no i wouldnt trade out pick not at all, the denver pick id part with though.


Nope. Morrison, Aldridge, Gay will be top 5/10,,, no doubt about it.

Taft going early last year only pointed to one thing ... NBAdraft.net does not actually watch basketball games.


----------



## madman (Oct 20, 2003)

i seriously dont want artest on this team he will be a distraction and will **** us over, if babs does this it completly goes against what he has already done


----------



## kirk_2003 (Jun 23, 2003)

I think something big is not Artest... I don't see anything big hapenning at all, unless you think trading Jalen Rose/Matt Bonner/Eric Williams/Aaron Williams/Loren Woods/Denver's First is big...


----------



## aizn (Jun 19, 2005)

who would want to take on jalen's contract? it's gonna b very hard to find suitors for him


----------



## MjM2xtreMe (Sep 1, 2005)

im not sure about all this artest talk, i say babcock will do his usual classic move and will end up suprising us. Araujo-VC-Villanueva-James-?????


----------



## JL2002 (Nov 30, 2003)

i think Rafer was too much for us to handle already, i just can't imagine what will happen with Artest....


----------



## TRON (Feb 29, 2004)

OK, now after all the Artest talk

what I found most interesting was Babcocks comments about not being opposed to trading either of the first round picks. Very interesting to say the least. Giving up a pick would ususally be associated with bringing back some serious talent.

If it was just the Eric Williams to Philly talk, I doubt there would picks from us involved, so this could be developing into something substantial, but what???????


----------



## adhir1 (Dec 28, 2004)

TRON said:


> OK, now after all the Artest talk
> 
> what I found most interesting was Babcocks comments about not being opposed to trading either of the first round picks. Very interesting to say the least. Giving up a pick would ususally be associated with bringing back some serious talent.
> 
> If it was just the Eric Williams to Philly talk, I doubt there would picks from us involved, so this could be developing into something substantial, but what???????


it could also be a lot of junk, but i see wat your saying. Babcock ussually does that, he warms the people up to the idea of what he is going to do, before he does it, so if he is really willing to part wiht OUR pick, he better be getting some serious talent back, but i doubt it, i think he is talkign about the Denver pick.


----------



## Big Dub (Nov 20, 2005)

i woud love to have Artest on this team its not like hes an old man or anythin the guy is 27 plus he is the beat defender in the league. the guys as big as most power forwards 6'8 260. so why not get him if we can i would give up our first pick for him easily.


----------



## Benis007 (May 23, 2005)

aizn said:


> who would want to take on jalen's contract? it's gonna b very hard to find suitors for him


Teams like expiring contracts.



Primetime23 said:


> No way we get Artest thats a pipe dream especially with offers like Mo and Denvers pick, he'll fetch more than that for sure


From what ESPN is reporting, Toronto is not in the Top 5 teams in the running for Ron. You never know though, he is on the inactive list and yesterday Mark Stein reported a deal should be done within the next 7 days, so if Indy doesn't like what is being offered to them, Toronto may come out of nowhere. One thing that is for sure is that Indiana does not want to trade him to a good team, especially in the East, where Ron can burn them in the near future.

Truth of the matter is that this guy is undoubtebly a Top 10 player in the league, he is 26 and has not had his pay day. For the next two seasons I think that he is going to be on his best behaviour so that after 06-07 he hits the jackpot.


----------



## MjM2xtreMe (Sep 1, 2005)

Pacers agree that they should move Ron from their team. The guy has been such a distraction even Jermaine doesnt like him. To put the icing on top of that he was placed in the inactive list wehre he cant practise or travel with the team. I sure wouldnt want that happening here.

Here's the link:

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051213/SPORTS04/512130456/1088


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

Gawd I hope Artest doesn't become a Raptor.


----------



## McFurious (Mar 25, 2004)

Forget about Artest.. if were going to trade our picks I WANT *AL HARRINGTON*!!!


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

TRON said:


> what I found most interesting was Babcocks comments about not being opposed to trading either of the first round picks. Very interesting to say the least.


i also read those and while they could be meaningless, they could have some meaning too. it immediately got me thinking about the talent (or lack thereof) he's managed to see overseas. could his interest in moving draft picks (which are very important to us and our "rebuilding") be a reflection on the weak european talent pool coming over in '06? it's not something that i want to believe but it's not something that i can completely disregard, either.

he definitely has a better view on next june than do the rest of us, he's seen some players we haven't, and it would be painful for me (most of us, i reckon) to accept another diluted draft pool.

no doubt, i could just be reaching here, his comment(s) might not mean that at all, but i wouldn't be surprised if they did- to a certain extent, anyway.

peace


----------



## TRON (Feb 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by* Ballocks !*
> 
> could his interest in moving draft picks (which are very important to us and our "rebuilding") be a reflection on the weak european talent pool coming over in '06? it's not something that i want to believe but it's not something that i can completely disregard, either.


Another posssibility is that Babcock predicts that the current projections of both our draft picks are currently at the best postion to be involved in a trade. For example, right now say, we are projected to pick 2nd and 12th, but Babcock feels both Denver and the Raptors will be on the move up, maybe leaving us with a 6th and 17th at the end of the year. 

Therefore, right now our picks might have the most precieved value, since we are precieved as one of the worst team in the league. It's kinda like last year, where the Clippers pick would have got you a lot more then, than you would get now.


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

JL2002 said:


> i think Rafer was too much for us to handle already, i just can't imagine what will happen with Artest....


BINGO!

I love Artest's game, but he needs a strong established coach, a stable situation, and besides, he won't want to come to Toronto.


----------



## Ballyhoo (May 30, 2003)

We can't trade our own pick anyway, Charlotte owns it. It's not ours until the protection kicks in at the end of the season. The only pick we can trade is Denver's.


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

How about we get rebounding and shot-blocking? Dalembert?


----------



## The_Notic (Nov 10, 2005)

McFurious said:


> Forget about Artest.. if were going to trade our picks I WANT *AL HARRINGTON*!!!



Wtf, So trade our picks who could very well be nice players for our future for Al Harrington who will 100% leave Toronto after this season as he is an unrestricted Free Agent

I bet if Artest was a marketable guy, with a game that could be appreciated by average NBA fans, he would undoubtedly be a top 5 player

The man can score 20, grab 5 boards, dish out 5 assists, shoot high %, AND shut down the opposing teams best player. Only other 2/3's that can do that are Kobe and Paul Pierce to a certain extent.
I say if we want greatness we are going to have to take some chances on players, you dont become a great team making the obvious moves. Look at Detroit, when they got Rasheed, he pretty much pushed them over the top and helped them get a championship. Flame Away!


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

The_Notic said:


> I say if we want greatness we are going to have to take some chances on players, you dont become a great team making the obvious moves. Look at Detroit, when they got Rasheed, he pretty much pushed them over the top and helped them get a championship. Flame Away!


you said it, Sheed pushed Detroit over the top and got them a championship and when we are anywhere near a championship, this team should look to add a player like Artest. Untill then, stay the course.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

Ballyhoo said:


> We can't trade our own pick anyway, Charlotte owns it. It's not ours until the protection kicks in at the end of the season. The only pick we can trade is Denver's.


Not true. You can trade any pick as long as you have a 1st not your first, with the CHA pick outstanding. We could trade ours and keep Denver's or vice versa.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

McFurious said:


> Forget about Artest.. if were going to trade our picks I WANT *AL HARRINGTON*!!!


Why? he is a Free Agent this summer.


----------



## aizn (Jun 19, 2005)

McFurious said:


> Forget about Artest.. if were going to trade our picks I WANT *AL HARRINGTON*!!!


u want another player who plays power forward/small forward?


----------



## Ballyhoo (May 30, 2003)

blowuptheraptors said:


> Not true. You can trade any pick as long as you have a 1st not your first, with the CHA pick outstanding. We could trade ours and keep Denver's or vice versa.


No, what I mean is we owe Charlotte our first round pick. Technically we could still make the playoffs this year and therefore have to give them our pick this year. Therefore we can't trade our own pick. I'm talking about now, during the season, not on draft day.

Edit: I did some more checking, and I think we might be able to trade our pick conditionally. So if we traded it the receiving team would get our pick if we didn't make the playoffs, and if we did make the playoffs Charlotte would get it.


----------



## kindred (Dec 26, 2004)

u guys know that artest said he will go to ny or cleveland after his current contract expires, right?


----------



## lucky777s (Nov 13, 2003)

BUTR, the DEN pick is protected so I do not think we can say we 'have' a pick this year. Denver could miss the playoffs and keep the pick this year.

Our own pick is not ours to trade until we miss the playoffs this year. Until then it could belong to CHA. 

Is a 'conditional' trade possible? I doubt it. Never heard of such a thing in the past. And the nba doesn't let teams skirt around the rules like that very often.


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

lucky777s said:


> BUTR, the DEN pick is protected so I do not think we can say we 'have' a pick this year. Denver could miss the playoffs and keep the pick this year.
> 
> Our own pick is not ours to trade until we miss the playoffs this year. Until then it could belong to CHA.
> 
> Is a 'conditional' trade possible? I doubt it. Never heard of such a thing in the past. And the nba doesn't let teams skirt around the rules like that very often.


If the Nets were able to trade a conditional Nugs pick to us, why could we not send that same conditional pick to another team? ... I feel like I'm missing some key point in your post, because my point seems kind of obvious.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

lucky777s said:


> BUTR, the DEN pick is protected so I do not think we can say we 'have' a pick this year. Denver could miss the playoffs and keep the pick this year.


The Denver pick is only top six protected, so they could miss the playoffs and still lose their pick.


----------



## aizn (Jun 19, 2005)

today is december 15th...lets see if any trades go down.


----------



## Rhubarb (Mar 19, 2005)

aizn said:


> today is december 15th...lets see if any trades go down.


I sincerely doubt any trade goes through today. Give it a few days though..


----------



## Ballyhoo (May 30, 2003)

There's a headline on ESPN that says "Rumor Central: Artest Could Be Toronto Bound". I don't have insider to see the article or if there is anything new there.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

lucky777s said:


> BUTR, the DEN pick is protected so I do not think we can say we 'have' a pick this year. Denver could miss the playoffs and keep the pick this year.
> 
> Our own pick is not ours to trade until we miss the playoffs this year. Until then it could belong to CHA.
> 
> Is a 'conditional' trade possible? I doubt it. Never heard of such a thing in the past. And the nba doesn't let teams skirt around the rules like that very often.


Every pick is conditional.

We can trade our pick conditional to it not qualifying to become charlotte's. Ie if CHA is lottery protected, they can have it if it lands 1-14.

We can trade the Denver pick because it has it's own restriction, which are top 5 this year, top 3 the next and none after that.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

^Thanks for the info, butr.

I've been going around the board saying that we can't trade the pick, so I must look pretty dumb now.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

vigilante said:


> ^Thanks for the info, butr.
> 
> I've been going around the board saying that we can't trade the pick, so I must look pretty dumb now.


yeah, I'm pretty sure it was you who contradicted what I've said on the Pacers board? maybe it was the bulls board? either way, good job at making me look like a dink! lol....i knew i was right...


----------



## lucky777s (Nov 13, 2003)

OK, i looked it up and it seems like the rule is this:

Each team has to have a first round pick every other year minimum. You can't go 2 consecutive years without a first round pick. Doesn't have to be your own pick, can be one that you pick up in trade. 

So you cant' make any trade that would leave you with no first round picks for 2 straight drafts.

Having the DEN pick either this summer or next means we don't need either of our own picks this year or next. So even though we owe CHA a pick we could still trade either the 2006 or 2007 Raptor pick today if it is number 1-14. Otherwise CHA gets it and the other team gets it the next year.

Can't imagine what trade would be worth giving up a potential top 3 pick for though.

I suppose we could make it conditional on being pick 4-14 this year and next.


----------

