# Suntimes:Jaric/Ely for Fizer



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

TRADE TALK: Bulls operations chief John Paxson, who made the trip to Los Angeles on Tuesday, is trying to deal Marcus Fizer, and the Clippers are trying to move Thornton High product Melvin Ely, as well as clear cap space to take a run at Kobe Bryant this summer. The Bulls like Clippers guard Marko Jaric, and the two sides will talk about a trade sending Fizer to the Clippers for Jaric and Ely, according to a league source.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-roman281.html


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

I hope to GOD this trade happens.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

We better not end up with Dooling and Ely:upset:


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>unBULLievable</b>!
> We better not end up with Dooling and Ely:upset:


No kidding. Jaric could end up being a permanant solution at SF, and all we'd be giving up is a guy who hasnt done ish in 4 years, and will be leaving in the offseason anyways. Works for me.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> No kidding. Jaric could end up being a permanant solution at SF, and all we'd be giving up is a guy who hasnt done ish in 4 years, and will be leaving in the offseason anyways. Works for me.


Scratch that, I just looked it up and saw hes only 6'5, I thought he was 6'7. He can be a permanant solution at SG, if JC is traded. It definitely gives us flexibility to do so.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Scratch that, I just looked it up and saw hes only 6'5, I thought he was 6'7. He can be a permanant solution at SG, if JC is traded. It definitely gives us flexibility to do so.


Well he plays the 3 at times out there and the Forwards are much larger than they are out east.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

That would be an awesome beautiful and fantastic deal.



And for the record, between them, Jaric and Ely can play the 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. :grinning:


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

This is a really good trade. I hope it goes down. Jaric is a very interesting young player who is best suited at SG. Given the minutes at that spot he could really be good. Of course then we will have a ton of Jaric vs Crawford threads on who should be the starting SG. Might not matter though trading for Jaric probably means JC gets moved for a SF. Hinrich/Jaric backcourt would be very good defensively.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
> That would be an awesome beautiful and fantastic deal.
> 
> 
> ...


But you gotta be _real_ good to play the 6 in the 4th Q.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

One question I have is what in the world do the Clips do at PG the rest of the season? They would only have Dooling and maybe Eddie House. Yikes!


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> One question I have is what in the world do the Clips do at PG the rest of the season? They would only have Dooling and maybe Eddie House. Yikes!


Doug Overton actually played the PG slot last night when Jaric wasn't in if I remember correctly.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> But you gotta be _real_ good to play the 6 in the 4th Q.


What happened to you? Are you just more busy lately or what? You dont post much around here anymore. Just wondering whats up, you used to be very active in the Bulls forum.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> What happened to you? Are you just more busy lately or what? You dont post much around here anymore. Just wondering whats up, you used to be very active in the Bulls forum.


I'm still very interested. I have just been VERY busy starting a new business. That's been consuming a lot of my time.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Pretty please let this happen. I know Jaric won't get to play the Bulls every night if he gets traded to us, but still, he's not too shabby at all. 14 points, 10 assists, 4 steals, 4 boards, 1 TO last night.

Of course he was playing against us, but that's not at all bad.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> 
> 
> Doug Overton actually played the PG slot last night when Jaric wasn't in if I remember correctly.




Oh well then, problem solved! :laugh: 


He's got a point though. I wouldn't like to play games with Dooling and House (both shooting guards, really) and Doug freaking Overton as my point guard rotation.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

Such a deal is ripe for expansion. And that means the Bulls may have to consider the inclusion of Crawford, if only to keep LA's core players (Brand, Maggette and Richardson) satisfied that this isn't just another one of those salary dump transactions.

Teams just don't trade a starter for a non rotation player from a 13-32 team. The Clips' key players would revolt. Jaric's no all-star, but his is a contributor and he seems content to sacrifice his own scoring so that their own Big Three get all the touches they want. If you replace him with Overton, House or Dooling vs. someone like Crawford, you'll see that team's morale drop like a rock.

The Clips fially seem to be trying to build something. A straight Fizer for Jaric/Ely trade would be viewed by other Clipper players as a step backwards.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> Such a deal is ripe for expansion. And that means the Bulls may have to consider the inclusion of Crawford, if only to keep LA's core players (Brand, Maggette and Richardson) satisfied that this isn't just another one of those salary dump transactions.
> 
> Teams just don't trade a starter for a non rotation player from a 13-32 team. The Clips' key players would revolt. Jaric's no all-star, but his is a contributor and he seems content to sacrifice his own scoring so that their own Big Three get all the touches they want. If you replace him with Overton, House or Dooling vs. someone like Crawford, you'll see that team's morale drop like a rock.
> ...


Much like including Crawford in such a deal would be seen by Bulls players and fans.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

This would be a great deal for the Bulls. Although I don't think that Fizer is worth both Ely and Jaric.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The OUTLAW</b>!
> This would be a great deal for the Bulls. Although I don't think that Fizer is worth both Ely and Jaric.





That's their problem. :grinning:


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> Much like including Crawford in such a deal would be seen by Bulls players and fans.


True, though I don't know if the Clips have demonstrated any dissatisfaction with Jaric's play the way the Bulls have with Crawford.

Bulls players could at least view Jaric as Crawford's replacement, like it or not. But if its a simple Fizer for Jaric/Ely deal, how can Clipper players view that as an improvement?


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Great deal for the Bulls, I hope they can pull it off. I would love it if they could expand it to be Brunson/Fizer for Jaric & Ely. 

I think the Clips motivation for doing this deal is to clear up cap to make a run at Kobe so I don't think talent levels and such really factor into it. LA wants an expiring contract and we have it. Pull the trigger Pax!


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

I can only guess Clipper fans and players would view it as an expiring contract (even though they don't need it). Who knows? But Fizer's value is the dollar sign. We might have to throw in a future 1st to make it work possibly.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> True, though I don't know if the Clips have demonstrated any dissatisfaction with Jaric's play the way the Bulls have with Crawford.
> ...


If they have any sense, they wouldn't unless they have some inside info on Kobe coming to town (they might, I've heard some talk that Maggette has even put on an in-game recruiting spiel before).

But the bigger question is so what? If the Clippers management is willing to do it, then do it. Their players don't get a vote.

If they aren't willing to do it unless it's Crawford/Fizer for Jaric/Ely, then I don't see how this deal helps us much excepts getting rid of one scapegoat to pave the way for a new one. Unless you really think that Crawford is no better and has no more upside than Jaric... a guy who as recently as yesterday you called garbage ... we're giving up too much in such a deal. Once again we're on the short end of the stick... the needy, desperate guy in the trade.

Either that or we just admit that ownership wants to reduce costs at the expense of putting a good team on the table... in which case this trade with the Clippers is well... appropos.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> If they have any sense, they wouldn't unless they have some inside info on Kobe coming to town (they might, I've heard some talk that Maggette has even put on an in-game recruiting spiel before).
> 
> But the bigger question is so what? If the Clippers management is willing to do it, then do it. Their players don't get a vote.
> ...


Nice post MikeDC. Kobe and Maggette are friends and quite honestly Kobe doesn't have many of those around the league 

The SunTimes article isn't anything new or something that hasn't been discussed here yet. But I will say that if the Clippers are serious about a run at Kobe, they need to package Q in a deal as well. As I proposed on the Clippers board recently, a Q-Jaric-Ely for Crawford-Fizer deal would free up 15M for them this offseason. They would then have the money to sign Kobe, have Bird rights on Crawford, and have the opportunity to sign another cheaper PG like Arroyo in case salary demands get out of control.

Kobe is as legit a #1 option in the league, Brand as #2, Maggette #3. Kaman at center, a young PG in Crawford/Arroyo and a lottery pick to boot. Not to mention a nice live body in Wilcox and shooter in House.

If the Clippers have the money to sign Kobe, they become the #1 option for him to sign. With apologies to the Phoenix Suns, the Clippers have more to offer. Now let's see if Sterling is serious about this or not.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

Fizer for Ely and Jaric??? How stupid would the Clips be to do that? Regardless of how confident they are they can sign Kobe, that would be a ridiculously bad deal for them. 

I wouldn't think anyone would give up more than a 2nd round pick for Fizer at this point. If we can get even Jaric alone for Fizer, I'd be tingly.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PC Load Letter</b>!
> Fizer for Ely and Jaric??? How stupid would the Clips be to do that? Regardless of how confident they are they can sign Kobe, that would be a ridiculously bad deal for them.
> 
> I wouldn't think anyone would give up more than a 2nd round pick for Fizer at this point. If we can get even Jaric alone for Fizer, I'd be tingly.


Me too. 

How about Fizer/Crawford for Ely/Jaric though?


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> If they have any sense, they wouldn't unless they have some inside info on Kobe coming to town (they might, I've heard some talk that Maggette has even put on an in-game recruiting spiel before).
> ...


For obvious reasons it can't be Crawford & Fizer for Jaric & Ely. Adding Richardson at least makes it CBA compliant. It also makes more sense in terms of roster balance for both teams.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> True, though I don't know if the Clips have demonstrated any dissatisfaction with Jaric's play the way the Bulls have with Crawford.
> ...


jaric was supposed to be the answer at pg this season 

yet they signed overton and jaric avg. under 30 min. a game 

that says dissatisfaction to me


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Including JC in this deal really defeats the purpose. The purpose of this deal for the Bulls, is to get something in return for a guy leaving in the offseason. Its not like Jaric and Ely are the perfect guys for our system, but if they can be had for a guy who has no place on our team, then they are definitely welcome. They can be worked in as bench players, and may even move up to being a starter at some point. 

By including JC, we might as well TARGET the players we want. By including JC, that puts the power in our hands to go out and get the players we want. 

If the Clips offer the original deal, then take it. If they start saying to include JC, then forget it. If we want to include JC in a deal, we'll decide the terms.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> jaric was supposed to be the answer at pg this season
> ...


Good point.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> For obvious reasons it can't be Crawford & Fizer for Jaric & Ely. Adding Richardson at least makes it CBA compliant. It also makes more sense in terms of roster balance for both teams.


I agree. That really makes it interesting. Clips get their natural starting PG. Bulls get their natural starting SG. Clips still free up room with the Fizer contract. Bulls still get Ely/Jaric. 

A Hinrich/Qrich/Jaric backcourt would be incredible. It would be like the Clips backcourt now, except with the savvy Hinrich running things. I think Hinrich would really enhance Qrichs game.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Scratch that, I just looked it up and saw hes only 6'5, I thought he was 6'7. He can be a permanant solution at SG, if JC is traded. It definitely gives us flexibility to do so.


I checked 6 different places on the web.his size was 4:2 in favour of 6-7.in euro site he was listed 200 cm(a little then 6-7),so I'd guess he's about 6-6.he plays the 3 sometimes but I think his best function should be backup for PG/SG.if he can give us 20 productive minutes at those spots and maybe some at SF it would be great.this season I guess he'll play more SF until w get one.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> Me too.
> ...


I wouldn't do that. That would basically be Jaric for Jamal, which means no.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bullet</b>!
> I checked 6 different places on the web.his size was 4:2 in favour of 6-7.in euro site he was listed 200 cm(a little then 6-7),so I'd guess he's about 6-6.he plays the 3 sometimes but I think his best function should be backup for PG/SG.if he can give us 20 productive minutes at those spots and maybe some at SF it would be great.this season I guess he'll play more SF until w get one.


Thats good. He looks 6'7, which is why I assumed it at first. I checked the quickest way possible, NBA.com. Those player profiles may not be too accurate though, because he DOES look 6'7.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> Me too.
> ...


I would not do that.Bulls get screwed.if we give Jamal we should do better talentwize,or get rid of ERob atleast.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Thats good. He looks 6'7, which is why I assumed it at first. I checked the quickest way possible, NBA.com. Those player profiles may not be too accurate though, because he DOES look 6'7.


6-7 and another 6-7 and in this one listed 6-7 and 217 pnds!


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> For obvious reasons it can't be Crawford & Fizer for Jaric & Ely. Adding Richardson at least makes it CBA compliant. It also makes more sense in terms of roster balance for both teams.


But the Clips are under the cap so the salaries don't have to match to make it CBA compliant!

Coupling that with the theory that they might consider Q as part of the "core", with Brand and Maggette, they might be unwilling to do the deal for chemistry reasons.

Thus, I took your post to be suggesting Crawford/Fizer for Jaric/Ely with no further consideration on their part (not a good deal for the Bulls IMO).

Even though I'm not too sure about Q for Crawford as a straight up proposition, I think I'd probably do Q/Jaric/Ely for Crawford/Fizer at this point. It doesn't hurt the Clips much more if they're going after Kobe, since Q woulc be redundant.

While we're at it, I'd inquire as to whether they'd take on Blount (team option and hence, expiring deal) if they added Peja Drobjnak, who's signed to a pretty reasonable deal and would give us a younger guy who can do nothing else our bigs can do... create a bit of space with his shot. Such a guy could come in handy playing next to Curry or Chandler. The downside on Peja is that he's more of a high post guy despite being like 270, and a lot of teams won't like that. Blount, on the other hand, would give them a veteran hand and a more traditional presence behind Kamen.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

nice thoughts all the way around!! 

If it is indeed, Fizer for Ely and Jaric then we do it. If it is Crawford and Richardson included, then I wonder what we do this summer with Richardson. He is RFA, same as Jamal. Would Paxson let him walk?? 

I question the fact that LAC make this trade now. Why? 19-24 and still in the playoff hunt. At least I would think they would be; however get this: ( I looked up their schedule)

They are 4-13 on the road. Awful. I mean worse than us on the road. (Well at least the same) And right now, they play 12 straight road games. By that time they will be out of the playoffs. Of this 12 game schedule, they play 9 games in 23 days. 

So if they are indeed throwing in the towel and making room for Kobe then this is a start. By trade could happen anytime between now and trade deadline. 

Jaric is signed through next season. Ely? We could have him all the way through, 06.07 if we wanted to. 

I would think they need some front court help. Is kaman their answer long term?Or is Brand and Wilcox enough to carry them to a title with Kobe? Drobnjak, can be included, when healthy


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> But the Clips are under the cap so the salaries don't have to match to make it CBA compliant!
> ...


Damn, I'd forgotten about the cap space they still have. Thanks for setting me straight. I am going to stick to my thoughts that a JC, MF for QR, MJ, ME deal makes more sense from a roster balance perspective, however. And you're right again that if Bryant ends up signing with the Clips, Q is basically out of a job.

Rlucas mentioned on the game thread that the Clips have two perimeter players who play above the rim and actually dunk from an offensive set while the Bulls have no one that fits that description. Q would certainly change that. To me a deal that includes Crawford and Richardson makes more sense while a straight Fizer for Jaric and Ely makes little sense other than to free cap space for Bryant.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> But the Clips are under the cap so the salaries don't have to match to make it CBA compliant!
> ...


The trade that you mentioned is the one that I think could happen by deadline. We rid ourselves of Fizer. Take back a couple of nice players and then add Richardson.

As for Blount. I think he will be traded by deadline to a contending team. He could be useful to a team in the playoff hunt. Expiring contract and a pick.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> Damn, I'd forgotten about the cap space they still have. Thanks for setting me straight. I am going to stick to my thoughts that a JC, MF for QR, MJ, ME deal makes more sense from a roster balance perspective, however. And you're right again that if Bryant ends up signing with the Clips, Q is basically out of a job.
> ...


Agree 100%. Although I'm iffy on Q for Crawford, the overall deal I think, is still a good one for the Bulls.

Regarding the Blount/DRob deal, check out my post in the other thread... I could be wrong, but based on my back of the envelope calculations, they'd still need to clear a bit more space to match what Kobe will get from the Lakers. Just moving Ely and Crawford probably wouldn't get them there. Or, it might get them there but they'd have to renounce Jamal to sign Kobe, which would still leave them with a hole at the point. By moving DRob for Blount, I think they can get far enough under the cap to offer Kobe what he's making from the Lakers and still keep Crawford's bird rights. 

And if Crawford doesn't come, they could always make a run back at the guy they just traded to us, Q, or someone like Manu.

Come to think of it, if I were the Clips, I'd almost insist on this addendum to the deal... otherwise they could well be half-in and half-out of the boat... giving up good young players to get under the cap, but not under the cap enough to get the guy they really want.

Either that or I could have just added all the numbers up wrong


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I am with C Blizzy here I think. Including JC and Qrich to the Fizer for Jaric/Ely rumors makes the most sense if the Clips are setting up to get Kobe. Flipside of this is what lineup would Clips play after the trade for the rest of this season? I know ours would be stout.


Hinrich,Jaric,Brunson
QRich,Gill,Jeffries
Dupree,Robinson,Pippen
Davis,JYD,Blount
Curry,Chandler,Ely


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

For what it's worth, the Clippers gave Jaric the starting job at point, and although he's still got it, he has pretty much shown this year he isn't good enough to handle it consistently. But a very nice bench player to have. Takes Brunson and Pip out of the rotation immediately. A bench of Jaric/Gill/ERob (or Doop) is a nice thing.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> Regarding the Blount/DRob deal, check out my post in the other thread... I could be wrong, but based on my back of the envelope calculations, they'd still need to clear a bit more space to match what Kobe will get from the Lakers. Just moving Ely and Crawford probably wouldn't get them there. Or, it might get them there but they'd have to renounce Jamal to sign Kobe, which would still leave them with a hole at the point. By moving DRob for Blount, I think they can get far enough under the cap to offer Kobe what he's making from the Lakers and still keep Crawford's bird rights.


I don't think dRob needs to be included in the deal.

<b>Q-Ely-Jaric for Fizer-Crawford</b>

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/la_clippers.htm

Guaranteed deals in 04/05: Brand 12.1M, Maggette 6.2M, Drobnjak 2.8M, Kaman 2.6M, Wilcox 2.2M, House .8M

Not back w/ team: Fizer, Dooling

Pending: Crawford, Wang (he was cut but may partially count against the cap, perhaps 1M next season)

If Wang will count about 1M, this puts the cumulative salaries at around 27.7M, pending the signings of a PG and Kobe. This is 14M to spend on a 42M cap and 16M to spend on Ford's guess of the 44M cap.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think dRob needs to be included in the deal.
> ...


You might be right, but when the free agent period begins, even though Crawford is a restricted free agent, he will still count against the Clipper's cap room:

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#27
and
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#28

In fact, depending on whether his salary is above or below the league average, Jamal would count like 200% of his salary this year! Jamal's making $2.5M or therabouts, so this would mean he has to count $5M against the Clippers' cap for free agency purposes.

Thus, I think he would put the Clipper's in a position where they have to reounce him (and sever his Bird rights) to sign Kobe or forgo Kobe in order to re-sign Crawford.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

If the Clipps are setting up for Kobe they dont need to deal Q.Thats a Bulls fan pipe dream right there .The clipps can just deal jaric and Ely which they want to do and keep Q's birds right and then still make their push for Kobe .The same thing would happen if they had jamal who is a rfa also so why do that trade killing their options right now.

They could just deal jaric and ely to us for fizer get their cap space ,still be in the kobe hunt ,keep Q's birds right and if they cant get Kobe sign jamal to a huge offer sheet and resign Q using his birds rights.

There really is no reason for the clipps to help us more than giving us jaric for Fizer and the only way they would is if they KNEW they already had Kobe coming .


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> You might be right, but when the free agent period begins, even though Crawford is a restricted free agent, he will still count against the Clipper's cap room:
> ...


Thanks Mike. That pretty much blows away the Crawford to the Clips theory. There's always more in that CBA that I'm aware of.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> Thanks Mike. That pretty much blows away the Crawford to the Clips theory. There's always more in that CBA that I'm aware of.


Not necessarily, it just makes it a little more difficult. I think if both sides agreed to a Blount-Drobjnak swap, they might make up the additional distance they need to go, but I'd really have to sit down and take a careful look to be sure.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> You might be right, but when the free agent period begins, even though Crawford is a restricted free agent, he will still count against the Clipper's cap room:
> ...


Wouldn't this apply to Fizer as well? Fizer and/or Crawford would count against the cap until he is either signed with another team or renounces the player, right?


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Wouldn't this apply to Fizer as well? Fizer and/or Crawford would count against the cap until he is either signed with another team or renounces the player, right?


Yeah, I'm confused. Does this apply to restricted free agents but not unrestricted? I mean, Rasheed can't cost a team that trades for him between 22 and 30 mil against the cap this summer. What is, then, an expiring contract. 

Help!


----------



## Kramer (Jul 5, 2002)

Let's hope the Clipps are stupid enough to do the Jaric/Ely for Fizer trade. I don't want Jamal or Q included because: 

1. Jamal has a bigger upside. 
2. I HATE Q's stupid head-tapping thing!


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> Wouldn't this apply to Fizer as well? Fizer and/or Crawford would count against the cap until he is either signed with another team or renounces the player, right?




Yes, it'd reply to Fizer as well, but the presumption is that with Fizer they won't care if they renounce his rights (thus immediately taking him off the books when they need to sign Kobe).

The other thing they can do to clear money is to time the re-signings of their contracts.

Say, for example, that Jamal is counting $5M as a free agent but he's willing to re-sign for $4M if it means he gets to play with Kobe. Under that scenario, the Clips could carve out another Million to pay Kobe.



> Originally posted by <b>Darius Miles Davis</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah, I'm confused. Does this apply to restricted free agents but not unrestricted? I mean, Rasheed can't cost a team that trades for him between 22 and 30 mil against the cap this summer. What is, then, an expiring contract.
> ...


Rasheed will theoretically count against a team's cap, but only in the case that they want to re-sign him. He's still valuable as an expiring contract because the team that holds his expiring contract can renounce his rights and sign someone else if they negotiate a deal.

Just for the hell of it, imagine we've got Sheed and we're otherwise "under the cap" by the amount of his contract... say $15M for simplicity.

This means that to start the free agency period, he theoretically counts like $22M under the cap. However, we know we can renounce him at a moment's notice. So we go out and make an offer to Kobe for $15M. He accepts. Now in order to make room for Kobe, we need to renounce our intention to re-sign Sheed. Once we undertake that act, he comes off the books and loses his Bird status with us, dropping the $22M from our cap number so that we're a total of $15M under the cap- just enough to sign Kobe.

The whole thing is pretty complicated, but that's a basic illustration of how it'd work, I think. If someone more knowledgeable says I'm wrong however, I suppose I could be.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks Mike. Very clear explanation.

5 stars. I wonder why I didn't give you that a year ago...


----------



## Wild Wild West (Jun 30, 2003)

I think there are several reasons to belive this deal will happen as first mentioned Fizer for Jaric and Ely.

Talent wise it seems foolish for the Clippers, but rightly or wrongly they just want cap space to go after a bigger fish.

I would prefer Fizer for Jaric straight up, but consider taking on a relative underperformer with a modest contract to be a very reasonable price to get a player who could contribute at three positions, but more likely be a nice three guard rotation with Hinrich and Crawford.

With that three guard rotation you would always have two ballhandlers, good three point shooters for two of the three with Jaric being decent, and a bigger body to guard 2's that Crawford is a little too small to handle. In essence Jaric brings many of the traits that B. Barry a popular FA choice for us would bring, not being quite as good a three point threat but much younger.

The main reason I think it will happen as proposed is the talk of Jay signing a buyout this week that would free up a roster spot. To do a 1 for 2 we need a roster spot. The timimg of these two rumors at the same time makes me think they are related. Otherwise throwing in Brunson might salvage the deal, or if we could talk them into Jeffries, but I doubt it.

If we make this deal the offseason focus would clearly be on the SF position, with at least one from the first round pick and MLE devoted to that position. We have multiple problems there. Not enough talent and too many contracts. We have four now which is already one too many, and yet no answers. 

If we draft one or spend the MLE on one, we apparently will still have Pippin, Robinson and Jeffries under contract for next year. That makes 4 not including Dupree, who we may want to keep.

Obviously getting rid of one of those contracts is critical to adding a SF in the draft or free agency and keeping Dupree. It is quite a problem, we need to acquire better players there, but have no room at the inn, with Robinson and Jeffries wasted spots. They won't eat Robinson's contract, but they might for Jeffries, similar to what they did with Bagarich. They also could bribe Charlotte into taking one of those players. For example I would surrender this year's second round pick or say the rights to Austin to induce Charlotte to take Jeffries or Robinson.

Anyway this trade would retain four young starters and in Jaric, Williams and Davis give us solid backups at 4 of the 5 positions with Jaric covering PG and SG. I am taking Dupree's performance so far with a shaker full, but is starting to look like he could be a long term piece, and possibly has a good enough handle to play SG and SF, so I hope we find a roster solution to allow us to keep him.

If Jay signs the buyout and the deal as described is still on the table, do it!


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Here is how I see things if this Fizer for Ely/Jaric deal goes down. Oh and I like the Brent Barry comparision there WWW that is good. I still think JC/ERob are sent for a SF.


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

also look for one or more of these players to be moved after this deal AD,JYD,EC,Blount. 

i also hope that PIP retires very soon like today as that frees up a roster spot and some cap..


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Basically we are looking at two scenarios next season if this happens:


Hinrich,Jaric,Brunson
Crawford,Gill,Pippen
2004 Pick,Dupree,Robinson


or


Hinrich,FA,Brunson
Jaric,Gill,Pippen
(JC+ERob trade),2004 pick,Dupree


Now the big questions are what quality of SF could JC and Erob bring in a package(Al Harrington?) and is there a SF in the lottery other than maybe Deng who could start from day one and be effective?


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

also if the LAC deal goes thur i say we send EC and JC out to GS for JRich and Troy Murphy..


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

Jaric is 6'7 and I've seen him play here in Europe

He'll be our SF if he becomes a Bull

In Fortitudo Bologna he played PG and SF..aka Point Forward

We might be looking for a stronger shooting guard

One thing is for sure:marko can play very good defense and has a high basketball IQ


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I proposed a JC/Erob/Curry for Dunleavy Jr/Dampier/Pietrus trade the other day. I liked it then and now with this Jaric trade. I love that Hinrich/Jaric/Dunleavy Jr trio on the perimeter. Throw in two defenders like Pietrus and Dupree. WOW!


Hinrich,(Jaric),Brunson
Jaric,Pietrus
Dunleavy Jr,Dupree
Chandler,JYD
Dampier,Davis,Ely


----------



## bulls (Jan 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> I proposed a JC/Erob/Curry for Dunleavy Jr/Dampier/Pietrus trade the other day. I liked it then and now with this Jaric trade. I love that Hinrich/Jaric/Dunleavy Jr trio on the perimeter. Throw in two defenders like Pietrus and Dupree. WOW!
> 
> 
> ...


that leaves us with out a clear cut leader we would be in the same boat we are in now.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>bulls</b>!
> 
> 
> that leaves us with out a clear cut leader we would be in the same boat we are in now.


I disagree with you and agree with Basghettis. Respectfully so. Dunleavy is a classic point forward who is getting alot better and has a very consistent J that is improving and versatility. Dampier would give the Bulls a solid 5 who would come off the books this summer. Pietrus would give the Bulls a 2 guard who can knock down 3s and defend. It would balance the team out alot. It would define Chandler and Hinrich as the youngsters that we have picked that work. Dunleavy and Pietrus would be here to complement them, even though I believe either guy could develop into a star in his own right. Add in a draft pick of Okafor and the possiblilty of Dampier leaving or playing for us (either is ok) and this is a good trade. And GS desperately wants a young pg and getting Curry for them would be great. They might just do it

Okafor
Chandler
Dunleavy
Pietrus
Hinrich

Bench
Jaric
Davis
JYD
Dampier/FA
Dupree


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Thanks rlucas but one question, I did not think Dampier came off the books this summer. I know Foyle does but I thought Damp was on the books for two more years. I could be wrong though. Either way I really like the deal.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

I think insider said Damp has a player option. It's for 8 or 9 mil so he might not opt out, but he's been awfully good this year. He might get a competitive offer as a FA if he wants out of GS (or here, hypothetically).


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Thanks VF I was not aware of that. This makes my proposal even better IMO. Basically if we are in position to draft Okafor then we can just let Damp walk and be in very good shape financially.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> Thanks rlucas but one question, I did not think Dampier came off the books this summer. I know Foyle does but I thought Damp was on the books for two more years. I could be wrong though. Either way I really like the deal.


what i read, and i could be wrong, is that the reason he is playing so great is cause he is in a contract year


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Hinrich,Jaric,Brunson
Pietrus,Gill,Jeffries
Dunleavy,Dupree,Pippen
Chandler,JYD,Blount
Okafor,Davis,Ely


Come on that is one deep versatile basketball team. And absolutely sick defensively.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Just for information's sake, if we get Jaric, I'd expect nothing less than instant performance from him.

He looks like a good defender, but if this is as good as he's going to get, he's nothing but a short-term solution. I wouldn't even re-sign him when his rookie contract ends unless it was on the cheap and in a bench role.

He's turning 26 and should be near the prime of his game. By the end of this season, he would have to be convincing me of why he's totally worth keeping, because right now I just see a streaky shooter with very solid defense and good passing vision... and we already have one of those, except better and younger and with more NBA experience.

Jaric is not a long-term solution at SF. He IS a great bench talent, a 6th man type that can fill in at three positions, and someone that can keep us in games and be a smart general in a second unit. He's also a defensive weapon to be sic'd on guys when Hinrich, Gill, or Dupree don't have the size to keep up, and he's a backup PG/SG/SF. The guy will get his minutes, but he's not a starter.

Ely is much the same way. He's a very good rebounder, he can put together a very nice string of games if a starter gets injured, and he can be relied on to play very solid basketball. 

My only problem is that when we get a young SF answer, and hopefully as Chandler and Curry continue their development, the VETS are the ones who are supposed to play those roles off the bench. There is enough room on the team, and hopefully too much talent is a problem that we'd love to have, but it's something to consider. Ely at his best will be what AD is to us post-prime... JYD is a high energy defender as well, although Jaric offers some different skills for sure.

Hinrich/Crawford/__SF__/Chandler/Curry
Jaric/Dupree-Gill/JYD/Ely/AD

So we really push guys like ERob and Pippen completely out of the picture, or we drop one of Gill or Dupree. We'd be totally committing to pushing ERob or Pip out, though.

And is there room in that lineup for a draft pick?

The answer is yes, there is: at the ___SF___ spot.

If we pull this trade, we MUST try to get a hold of Luol Deng. It has to be that level of player.

But if we DO get a Deng like talent, we've got depth and consistency at enough positions to say that I could see this team in the NBA Finals in a few years. I really could see it.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> Hinrich,Jaric,Brunson
> Pietrus,Gill,Jeffries
> Dunleavy,Dupree,Pippen
> ...


Id go with the 3 guard rotation

Hinrich and Pietrus with Jaric backing up both. All 3 are defensively sound.

At the 3 Dunleavy and Dupree. Pippen is done

Chandler, Okafor Ely and Davis would man the 4/5 with JYD in there as well. 

I would drop JYD and not resign Dampier. Use the money for capspace in the next FA class. Read Tmac.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Gee you take a break from the boards and all of a sudden people really think Fizer = Ely and Jaric 

Has everyone been dropping acid ?

Fizer and Ely are a wash value wise and you could let sleeping dogs lie with this deal 

Any talk of Jaric has to equal another offering from us 

Who is also an expiring contract and you hold the bird rights to that would enable a nice consolation prize if you miss out on Kobe ?

Yeah that's right - Jamdrop 

What's the quid pro quo ?

Well I don't think on actual performance and contribution (psssssssssssiddddddeee aside ) Jamal doesn't have much more value than Jaric , yet , because of the P word or the U word or whatever ... we would likely need to demand some corresponding bowl of hope at the trade table 

So ...

If we're all moist and gooey about Jaric ( who looks like a baddie from a James Bond film by the way ) and the price is Crawford then the quid pro quo has to be their draft pick ( top 10 protected ) that they sling back our way 

Fizer and Crawford for Ely , Jaric and a draft pick ( say #10 - #14 )

Then when the Clips miss on Kobe , they can sign Jamal to something reasonable , resign Q to something reasonable and preserve cap space for the following summer and then go bring Eddy Curry to town

When that happens and if Kaman continues to develop they could use Kaman as a piece to bring back Darius Miles from Portland ( who bereft of Centers as they are could be interested ) 

And whatayaknow.. the headthumping good guy buddy cup Jon and Ponch partner wetdream surpasses Aramis , Porthos ,D'Artagnan ( and I forget the 4th guy's name ) as the most formidable spit swapping 4 foursome in the history of good guy all for one and one for all manlove fantasy 

* Eddy, Jamal , Q, and Darius * ooohhh now I'm hard

*

Eddy
Elton
Corey
Q
Jamal

Wilcox
Darius
Dooling
*
Please excuse me while I go flog my dolphin


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)




----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Ripper my Flipper


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> Hinrich,Jaric,Brunson
> Pietrus,Gill,Jeffries
> Dunleavy,Dupree,Pippen
> ...


Good defensively, but no offense. If you could position the team to make a run for great FA, then that's OK.


----------



## Parabull (Nov 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


--

Last night it looked like Q and Maggette could handle the ball once someone takes it past halfcourt. They were both reasonable passers and could dribble decently. Jaric was no pure PG, even though he got ten assists. I think the Clips could manage.


----------



## comptons (May 30, 2002)

Keep on rollin' Marcus. . . soon you'll be away from all this hate.


----------



## ViperBoy84 (Jan 29, 2004)

:sigh: I had playoff dreams at the begining of the season and now... Well actually I still say chandler comes back healthy inspires curry and since the bulls are an eastern team still make playoffs! It could happen! 

I heard rumors that pax is shopping curry I mean come on the kid has talent I hate to wait 2 years for him but wouldnt you I mean he has the potential to be top 3 center in the league! How many big guys have currys scoring ability he has better touch than Shaq although not close in power, and Shaq is the best!

The bulls are in bad need of chandler he is are best player and makes everyone else on the court play better especially curry they are awsome together!

I was so surprised at how awsome hinrich has played and right from preseason! He is like the only highlight in a long miserable wreck of a half season.

If we do the fizer for ely/jaric trade dont you guys think we should try to trade davis or blount (or even both) to a contender. There are always teams in the west that want big guys say denver, san antonio, or minnesota just to name a few that need shaq hackers.

Personally I think the bulls should shy away from trading any of the 3 C's and see how we do with chandler coming back.
We do badly need to trade atleast one of our PF's for a center atleast someone over 6-9! We got crushed when curry and chandler were out even eastern confrence teams killed us inside I dont know how davis played center for toronto he is just to small.

GO BULLS!!!


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

If Crawford is playing elsewhere, one scenario that could ease the loss would be if the Clippers agree to trade Marko Jaric and Melvin Ely for Marcus Fizer. That seems like a lot to give up for the up-and-down Fizer, but the Clippers may be clearing more cap room for a free-agent run at Kobe Bryant.

After scoring 10 points in 10 minutes in Los Angeles on Tuesday, Fizer played 21 minutes and contributed 16 points against Denver.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...sgamer,1,4416523.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

The trade officially has legs! Interesting how KC Johnson's picked up on the rumor originally reported on by the SunTimes. Can both papers be wrong at the same time??? :meditate: :whoknows: :idea:


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

It's been all over the place and i think it will probably happen by Monday...assuming Jay Williams signs the paperwork on Friday

Hw about the Clippers doing us a favour now??I mean we gave them Elton Brand


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

wow sucks to be fizer. he gets a change of scenery and BOOM, it's back to playing behind brand :\


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

But you know, playing BEHIND Brand is a lot different than playing WITH Brand, which is what he was forced to do.

"Fizer, you're a small forward now. You seem pretty athletic for a big guy, so we think you'll make a pretty decent SF. Stop eating altogether, and learn how to make 3 pointers. It's not that hard; ask that 2nd rounder we just drafted, AJ. That way we can make it seem like we meant to draft you, even though the only decent player we've got plays your natural position." -JK

It's different when you have to co-exist with Brand, but if he's BACKING him up, then he can do his SF impression for about 8-12 mpg, and then just back up brand for about 12 mpg, rounding out to about 20-24 mpg.

And he won't get re-signed, for sure. So it's only temporary. Then a team like Seattle or Charlotte or Dallas might make a run at him.

Think of it this way, though: if the Clippers turn Melvin Ely and Marko Jaric into KOBE BRYANT, it seems worth it.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

Richardson, Fizer, and Crawford all will be restricted free agents next summer, provided that their respective teams make qualifying offers for them. Up until the point they are signed or renounced (making them unrestricted free agents w/o Bird rights), here is what they will count against the salary cap.

Richardson: $5.42 million or 1/4 of the salary cap, whichever is less
Crawford: $7.73 million or 1/4 of the salary cap, whichever is less
Fizer: $11.18 million or 1/4 of the salary cap, whichever is less

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#28

The Clippers have seven players (Brand, Maggette, Drobnjak, Ely, Kaman, Wilcox, House) under contract next season for $29.2 million. However, if they want to hold on to their draft pick and Marco Jaric's non-guaranteed contract, that likely will add another $3.5 to $4.0 million. Throw in two minimum salary players to get them up to the minimum of 11 salary cap holds, and they are at $33.5 to $34.0 million, not including cap holds for their own free agents and draft picks.

Given that the salary cap is likely to be between $44 and $46 million, this leaves them with $10 to $12.5 million in salary cap space. And Kobe will be able to command a starting salary of $14.2 million. Thus, in order to be sure to be able to offer Bryant a maximum salary, the Clippers (barring a trade) will need to renounce all of their free agents (including Richardson), release Jaric, and trade their draft pick. Trading for Crawford (if they intend to keep him) only makes things worse.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

So trading for Fizer and letting him walk makes absolute sense from the Clippers perspective. That extra cap room can only benefit them in the long run and the fact that they're relieving themseleves of Ely who is under contract and getting rid of Jaric who would also count. However, would that leave them enough room to grab Kobe and a decent PG. Or would they just have enough to grab Kobe.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>T.Shock</b>!
> So trading for Fizer and letting him walk makes absolute sense from the Clippers perspective. That extra cap room can only benefit them in the long run and the fact that they're relieving themseleves of Ely who is under contract and getting rid of Jaric who would also count. However, would that leave them enough room to grab Kobe and a decent PG. Or would they just have enough to grab Kobe.


Assuming they renounce Fizer, Dooling, Richardson, and their other free agents, this trade would likely put them at $30 to $30.5 million counting their draft pick. That would put them $13.5 to $16 million under next year's projected salary cap, in range for the $14.2 million Kobe Bryant.

So maybe Jaric and Ely for Fizer does work for the Clippers. Note, however, that Bryant would have to be willing to come to a team whose starting point guard would be a rookie or a minimum salary player. Moreover, given Sterling's frugality, Bryant would not be able to assume that Kaman or Wilcox would be resigned or that the MLE would be used in the future to shore up the roster. That sounds like a mighty big gamble for Bryant, unless he get assurances from Sterling that Sterling would capitalize on signing Bryant by selling the team.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Assuming they renounce Fizer, Dooling, Richardson, and their other free agents, this trade would likely put them at $30 to $30.5 million counting their draft pick. That would put them $13.5 to $16 million under next year's projected salary cap, in range for the $14.2 million Kobe Bryant.
> ...


Wow, I was way off on the numbers concerning Crawford. That would make it more difficult to take Jamal, but not impossible.

Going back to my original idea, including Drobjnak in the trade probably wouldn't be enough to let them keep Crawford unless they also gave up their pick (I'm assuming the pick will be at about $2M).

Thinking things through, if they added Peja for Blount (whose team option they wouldn't pick up) would shave about $2.5M off the cap (Peja is due $2.8M - 300k for a min wage replacement).
That'd put them down to $28M for Brand, Maggette, Kaman, Wilcox, House, and their pick). If they were to offer us their pick for Crawford ($2M) or so, or otherwise dispose of it (say for a future pick), that would put them down to $26M or so.

If we assume the cap is going to be $44-$45M, that means the Clips need to be at $30-31M to sign him.

As noted, Crawford's "FA Value" will be almost $8M, but the operative value isn't necessarily this amount but rather what he'll sign for. That is, if Crawford would re-sign for a lower amount (I don't think he'll command $8M on the market!), his cap value would immediately decrease and they could potentially sign Kobe.

Under the scenario we've outlined, Jamal would put the Clips at about $34M until he signed a new contract. However, if he signed a new contract for a starting salary of $4-5M, the Clips total cap value would come down to the $30-31M the need to sign Kobe, and they could keep Jamal at the same time. 

Of course, if Jamal got a significantly better offer (although at this point, I doubt he'd get a lot more than $5M) and decided to take it, the Clips would still have to renounce him. But if it was a minor difference, they could always make it up by giving him bigger raises in the out years.

So the bottom line, I think, is that although it would be complicated, it's still within the realm of feasibility.

The Bulls trade:
Fizer, Crawford, Blount, 2005 #1 (or 2006 #1, conditional on the Bryce Drew trade)

The Clippers trade:
Q, Jaric, Ely, Drobjak, 2004 #1

------------

I think this scenario would give the Clips the flexibility to sign Kobe and still keep Jamal assuming he'll accept a realistic deal (which would, of course, also permit him to play the point on an absolutely star studded team in LA).

----------

For the Bulls, I think this could be a pretty good deal too. We'd get three players who could probably improve us a bit immediately in Q, Jaric, and Drobjak. Ely is a low-risk gamble. We also leverage ourselves into another draft pick this summer, which will help speed up the rebuilding process.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Wow, I was way off on the numbers concerning Crawford. That would make it more difficult to take Jamal, but not impossible.
> 
> Going back to my original idea, including Drobjnak in the trade probably wouldn't be enough to let them keep Crawford unless they also gave up their pick (I'm assuming the pick will be at about $2M).
> ...


But the biggest problem with this whole scenario is that Crawford would have to realize right at the beginning of his market that he would eventually sign for only a $4 to $5 million starting salary. Call me crazy, but I think it will take a lot of education for him to get to that point.

Otherwise, Bryant has to wait out Crawford's market before he signs with the Clippers. That is possible, but it seems a bit unlikely.

Moreover, suppose Crawford's market value really ends up being a six-year deal worth $40 million and starting at a hair over $5 million. Another team could offer Crawford $6.67 million a year for six years and the Clippers would not be able to match it and keep Crawford. Any team trying to sign Crawford could easily find a way to structure a deal that the Clippers could not match and keep their options open for Crawford.


----------



## Natty Dreadlockz (Jul 21, 2003)

> I think this scenario would give the Clips the flexibility to sign Kobe and still keep Jamal assuming he'll accept a realistic deal (which would, of course, also permit him to play the point on an absolutely star studded team in LA).


I've got to admit.. I'm warming up to the idea.. What suck's is that.. *There's no guarantee's in this biz!*


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> But the biggest problem with this whole scenario is that Crawford would have to realize right at the beginning of his market that he would eventually sign for only a $4 to $5 million starting salary. Call me crazy, but I think it will take a lot of education for him to get to that point.
> ...


You're completely right, that's a significant risk. But this would all depend on how willing Crawford is to work with them.

First, I don't think anything has to be done right at the beginning of the FA period. IIRC, even though guys like McGrady and Grant Hill came to agreements pretty quickly, the official signings didn't take place until a while later so all sides could work out the best options.

All that would be necessary here is a committment from Kobe and from the Clips to renounce Jamal if he doesn't agree to compatible terms. They don't have to actually execute the agreement immediately however, and can give Jamal time to explore his options. So I don't think it depends on an immediate agreement.

Regarding the contract structure terms, this could make a difference, but if contracts are comparable in value and guaranteed, I don't see why Jamal would sign one over the other (if they're both $40M/6 year deals in the end, is he really going to care that he starts low and finishes high in one and gets an even distribution in the other?). That's a pretty marginal difference... the only reason he'd take the deal that starts at $6.67M is if he didn't _want_ to come back to the Clippers and play with Elton, Kobe, and Maggette. I suppose that's a possibility, but it doesn't seem likely to me. If the bottom line is $40M/6 years guaranteed in either place, and the one place is where you're at and where Kobe, Elton, and Corey are, I'd bet 95 out of 100 NBA players would take what the Clips would be offering.

But what's the worst case scenario... say Jamal does go somewhere else... well, if he does, then the Clips are at $26M plus the $14 or so they'd need for Kobe, so they probably have another $4-6M left in cap space to go other players before they hit the cap. That's not too shabby either.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> You're completely right, that's a significant risk. But this would all depend on how willing Crawford is to work with them.
> 
> First, I don't think anything has to be done right at the beginning of the FA period. IIRC, even though guys like McGrady and Grant Hill came to agreements pretty quickly, the official signings didn't take place until a while later so all sides could work out the best options.
> ...


That last paragraph is right on the mark. With $4 to $6 million, the Clips would do just fine in the market for a Crawford replacement.

But I still think the timing is problematic. The longer Bryant stays out on the market, the more time teams have to come up with creative ways to get under the salary cap or do sign and trades with the Lakers.

Remember that Utah has a lot of money under the salary cap and teams could offer them very good players, such as Detroit offering Hamilton, Williamson, and Milicic for Bell, Pavlovic, and Borchardt plus perhaps a future draft pick. This would give the Pistons enough space to add Bryant and re-sign Okur. A starting lineup of Billups/Bryant/Prince/Wallace/Okur with Atkins/Bell/Delfino/Pavlovic/Borchardt/Campbell off the bench has far more championship potential than anything the Clippers could put together, in particular with the Pistons being in the Eastern Conference.

The point I was making about the contract structure is that the Clippers would basically lose the advantage of Crawford being a restricted free agent, since there would be a lot of reasonable offers for Crawford that they could not match and keep room open for Bryant.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> That last paragraph is right on the mark. With $4 to $6 million, the Clips would do just fine in the market for a Crawford replacement.
> ...


NCB, putting financial stats aside for a minute... isn't the Clippers the <i>ideal</i> destination for Kobe? I do not think Kobe is seriously considering a move to the Eastern conference. Someone please prove otherwise. By staying in Los Angeles and playing at the Staples Center, he gets to keep his roots in LA and stick it to the Lakers for the next decade. He can be the Alpha option on a young team, and get credit for taking the lowly Clippers to an elite level. We know he's friends w/ Maggette and Brand has started a campaign for him (here's hoping it goes better than it did w/ TMAC )

I cannot see Utah or Phoenix being as good an environment to land in as going to the Clippers. Denver? Nope. Chicago? We can only dream


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

All things being equal, playing for the Clippers might be Kobe's preference, but I don't see how anyone can "prove" or "disprove" that. But all things are not equal in this case.

He would be playing for Donald Sterling who would be tempted to never spend another dime on the Clippers' franchise after signing his cash cow in Bryant. Contrast that with playing for Dumars who has a proven track record of being able to sign good players to MLE-type contracts.

Bryant has to win at least one championship before he would be "sticking it to the Lakers." Would you trust Sterling to get you the players to make that happen?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> All things being equal, playing for the Clippers might be Kobe's preference, but I don't see how anyone can "prove" or "disprove" that. But all things are not equal in this case.
> 
> He would be playing for Donald Sterling who would be tempted to never spend another dime on the Clippers' franchise after signing his cash cow in Bryant. Contrast that with playing for Dumars who has a proven track record of being able to sign good players to MLE-type contracts.
> ...


Very true about Sterling. But he did take a step in the right direction by locking up Brand and Maggette last offseason. Making a run for Kobe would be a HUGE step, albeit a risky one.

Who knows, where there's smoke there's fire. The Lakers traded their young starting center Divac for Kobe. 1 year later then signed Shaquille O'Neal in a *wink*wink type of deal. The Clippers signing Kobe would be reminisicent of that.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

The misconceptions continue on Sterling...

Sterling has a history of not paying players, but those were players who didn't deserve the pay they were commanding.

We've paid big money to a coach and to Mags and Brand, all deserved what they got, and we've seen the results

Sterling, Elgin, and the Clips are not done...


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> 
> 
> .
> ...


the lakers signed shaq the same summer they traded away vlade for kobe back in 96


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> the lakers signed shaq the same summer they traded away vlade for kobe back in 96


Yup that sounds right. Thanks for the clarification


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> The misconceptions continue on Sterling...
> 
> Sterling has a history of not paying players, but those were players who didn't deserve the pay they were commanding.
> ...


And Denver made one of your discards (Andre Miller) their top free agent acquisition and have leapfrogged the Clippers to become a possible playoff team in the West.

Sterling only spend a few million more than he had to, according to the CBA. We are a long way from finding out whether he is willing to take the risks to make the Clippers a contender. So far, the early evidence is not good.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Based on everything we've gone through in this thread, does it surprise anyone else that the Clippers are supposedly asking for Crawford for Jaric/Ely rather than Fizer.

If they just get rid of Jaric and Ely, the numbers seem to indicate that they wouldn't be able to hold onto either Q or Crawford if they got Kobe. They're also not certain to have enough to get Kobe in the first place.

If they were able to unload Drobjnak and their pick, they could potentially get Kobe and hang onto one of Q or Crawford (and in that case, it would seem that Crawford would be the guy they'd want, since he's a potential running mate for Kobe while Q probably isn't) or have a nice chunk of money after Kobe signs with which to fill out their roster.

Based on these estimates, I can only conclude one of the three is the case:
1. There has to be a bigger trade or several more trades involved.
2. The Clips aren't serious about Kobe.
3. The Clips don't understand the salary ramifications very well.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Based on everything we've gone through in this thread, does it surprise anyone else that the Clippers are supposedly asking for Crawford for Jaric/Ely rather than Fizer.
> 
> If they just get rid of Jaric and Ely, the numbers seem to indicate that they wouldn't be able to hold onto either Q or Crawford if they got Kobe. They're also not certain to have enough to get Kobe in the first place.
> ...


i would wager the clips know exactly what they are doing and that if they ever got their hands on kobe they would if need be get under the cap by enough by trading a number of their young players for picks or for nothing like the magic did when they wanted hill and Tmac

i would also bet that they could and would make and duo out of kobe and either Q or JC work pretty well, especially with a front line of corey, brand, kaman

all other pieces can be added later


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

is it outside the realm of possibility that Kobe could act as a point guard/forward for the Clips? Imagine the height and athleticism of Kobe, Q, and Maggette. Sounds like a younger, less dominant 21st century version of Jordan/Pippen/Harper to me. Kobe has done a lot of the ballhandling for the Lakers in past years.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ViciousFlogging</b>!
> is it outside the realm of possibility that Kobe could act as a point guard/forward for the Clips? Imagine the height and athleticism of Kobe, Q, and Maggette. Sounds like a younger, less dominant 21st century version of Jordan/Pippen/Harper to me. Kobe has done a lot of the ballhandling for the Lakers in past years.


That's a pretty good point


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

I'm not saying it's the likely route, but it is something to keep in mind...Kobe arriving doesn't completely necessitate Q leaving, given Kobe's ability to bring the ball up. Would Kobe sign on if he knew he'd be playing that role, and not a more cut-and-dried role as the primary scorer off the ball? Who knows. Since it's Kobe we're talking about, he might think he can impersonate MJ and Magic at the same time.


----------



## Wild Wild West (Jun 30, 2003)

The original proposal is interesting beyond the initial impact for the Bulls. I like it and hope it happens. If it does then while pursuing Bryant the Clips will probably have to let Q walk. There are only a few team in the bidding for more than MLE salaries, the Clips, Utah, Denver, San Antonio, Phoenix and maybe one or two more. If Kobe goes to the Clippers they are done. Obviously R. Wallace will use up one of those other team's slots. K. Martin might leave New Jersey because of the sale, if so another team out of the market.

If you assume San Antonio won't have big money because they have to sign Ginoboli, and maybe they want to keep other free agents, and Kobe, Wallace and Martin move to one of those teams with cap space, then there is only one other bidder for players who want more than the MLE. There are several players who could get that spot, among them Boozer, Thomas, B. Barry, Dampier, Okur, Camby, Crawford, and Q. Some of those are marginal as to if they are worth more than the MLE, but my point is, it is pretty likely that this year as in the past there will be a number of players with market values above the MLE that may have to settle for it, because there are only a few spots for contracts exceeding that amount.

Wallace moving is a given, and if Kobe and Martin stay put maybe a couple more of the above get more than the MLE. The main point is this scenario could leave Q with the MLE as his only option, and unlike most situations where it would be matched, the clippers if they get Kobe probably can't or won't.

So if I want to be an optimist, we get the original deal for Jaric and Ely for Fizer, unlike the Clips we can and do match whatever Crawford gets, and then we sign Q with the MLE to play SF for us, and the Clips don't match. the prposed trade, and Kobe moving to the Clips could be very good for us on a number of fronts. the trade is good, it allows the Clippers to go after Kobe, which is good because it takes one suitor for other free agents off the market, pushing someone to MLE level, and it increases the odds Q would not be matched by the Clips and at the MLE I like our chances.


----------

