Post your best Chris Paul trade idea

[The Q]

Well CP3 does have a player option for 21-22 but you gotta think he accepts it, really the only obstacle in possibly making this deal bc they could get him off the books and still be able to sign a FA in 2021 even by making this deal.

Be interesting to see his market if he agreed to not exercise it.

 

[dtgold88]

The team that might actually swing a deal for CP3 is going to be a team that meets the following criteria:

A) thinks they are a piece away from being a solid playoff team
B) has short term bad contracts to give back
C) are not likely to land any significant free agents in the next 3 years

I see Minnesota as the best alternative out there.

Because:

Minnesota has to be in win now mode building around Townes.

Something like:

Teague, Dieng and either Wallace, or Layman

For CP3 and a couple first round picks

Could possibly make sense if Minnesota was willing to take in CP’s contract. Paul would be an upgrade over Teague and maybe Townes won’t hate him?

Seems reasonable, but also seems the Dallas trade you called terrible meets your needs for a deal.

 

[fordman84]

Be interesting to see his market if he agreed to not exercise it.

It would go from requiring OKC to sweeten the deal to OKC getting a good return. Of course OKC might just squat on a large expiring deal in that case.

 

[The Q]

It would go from requiring OKC to sweeten the deal to OKC getting a good return. Of course OKC might just squat on a large expiring deal in that case.

It’s expiring next year In that scenario, right?

 

[fordman84]

It’s expiring next year In that scenario, right?

True, I forget what year it is these days...everything I work on is months away. 19-20 season, then 20-21 season, and if he didn't opt in then he would be a FA.

 

[The Q]

True, I forget what year it is these days...everything I work on is months away. 19-20 season, then 20-21 season, and if he didn't opt in then he would be a FA.

Yeah I’m just thinking if he’s willing to forgo that last year to get traded

 

[bksballer89]

Be interesting to see his market if he agreed to not exercise it.

He can't be that stupid to turn down 44 mil at age 36 or 37.

Can't see him getting more than that if he opts out especially due to the age

 

[The Q]

He can't be that stupid to turn down 44 mil at age 36 or 37.

Can't see him getting more than that if he opts out especially due to the age

No. But he could languish in okc if he doesn’t.

 

[fordman84]

No. But he could languish in okc if he doesn’t.

Or they could trade him wherever. That option year can be his leverage to get where he wants to go, offer to forego it in exchange for ending where he wants. Doing so would net OKC more than if he tells prospective new teams he is certainly taking that third year.

 

[wildturkey]

Why would Denver give up those assets though?

Paul’s contract is a huge liability.

Even if Denver dealt contracts to get CP3, they would be the ones getting picks back. Not the other way around.

To win NOW. They'll eat the last year of the deal to go for it right now. That's the logic behind it. I thought I explained that. You're being stuck on Paul's contract being a liability for the wrong reasons. It's liability if you're a team going nowhere because that money is bad. But if you're a team that has the possibility to win in the immediate future, teams are more open to take the deal on. They know its a gamble, but a team in this situation is willing to risk it knowing they could go for the title next season (or the season after) and just live with the results on the final years of his contract. Paul is still a pretty good player. When he played without Harden on the court, his numbers were still near all star to all star caliber. Even with the money being what it is, at least you're getting someone that can play. It's not like John Wall, who has as equally as bad a contract but who literally may never be the same due to injury. Because Paul could still give you something, that could be enough to entice a team.

 

[tlance]

Seems reasonable, but also seems the Dallas trade you called terrible meets your needs for a deal.

It was terrible because it had Dallas giving away Brunson and a first round pick.

If Dallas kept Brunson and got a pick or 2 in return it would be a very reasonable idea.

OKC is not getting assets in any CP3 trade.

 

[tlance]

To win NOW. They'll eat the last year of the deal to go for it right now. That's the logic behind it. I thought I explained that. You're being stuck on Paul's contract being a liability for the wrong reasons. It's liability if you're a team going nowhere because that money is bad. But if you're a team that has the possibility to win in the immediate future, teams are more open to take the deal on. They know its a gamble, but a team in this situation is willing to risk it knowing they could go for the title next season (or the season after) and just live with the results on the final years of his contract. Paul is still a pretty good player. When he played without Harden on the court, his numbers were still near all star to all star caliber. Even with the money being what it is, at least you're getting someone that can play. It's not like John Wall, who has as equally as bad a contract but who literally may never be the same due to injury. Because Paul could still give you something, that could be enough to entice a team.

So then trade for Paul.

It isn’t the idea that is wrong, it is the package.

Paul’s contract has more negative value than the 2 Dallas sends out in your idea. Dallas would need to get the pick back.

 

[dtgold88]

It was terrible because it had Dallas giving away Brunson and a first round pick.

If Dallas kept Brunson and got a pick or 2 in return it would be a very reasonable idea.

OKC is not getting assets in any CP3 trade.

I wouldn't be so sure if a team thought he could help them take a big step forward and was a team that didn't think they had much of a chance to get a stud in FA.

Though I lean to them not getting an asset for him, as well.

 

[Shanemansj13]

I wouldn't be so sure if a team thought he could help them take a big step forward and was a team that didn't think they had much of a chance to get a stud in FA.

Though I lean to them not getting an asset for him, as well.

I would be shocked if a team gave them a 1st rounders and players.

 

[dtgold88]

I would be shocked if a team gave them a 1st rounders and players.

Probably would be, too, but was shocked OKC would even take him.

 

[thunderc]

Probably would be, too, but was shocked OKC would even take him.

I just have to think Presti has a plan here or he wouldn’t have made the deal. He could have eventually dealt Westbrook to Miami otherwise.

 

[wildturkey]

So then trade for Paul.

It isn’t the idea that is wrong, it is the package.

Paul’s contract has more negative value than the 2 Dallas sends out in your idea. Dallas would need to get the pick back.

I assume you mean Denver. The negative value isn't as big an issue in this scenario. What negative there is (the money late in Paul's deal) is offset by the belief that you can win a championship right now with him. What Denver is sending out, isn't really that huge of a loss. They're future isn't wrecked so long as you're not sending out tons of picks. Harris is a decent player, but not an all star. Porter, who knows at this point. Plumlee is salary filler. And a draft pick would be there because its incentive for OKC to take the deal in case those other assets bust out. Because without the pick and if Porter never gets over his injury woes, you could just be dealing for a decent starter (Harris). That's a bad misplay in asset management by OKC. You can get more for Paul that just a starter. Now if all those players hit (Porter is fine, which we won't know for awhile), its a huge haul for OKC but that's the risk you'd be willing to take in this scenario to win a championship if you're Denver.

FWIW, I said I wouldn't do it*. But its a topic about finding trade scenarios for Chris Paul. This is a plausible one.

*Trading for Beal is much more appealing if I'm Denver. The money is smaller making it easier to trade. I can basically sub out Porter and just deal Harris, Plumlee and a pick for Beal and its enough to make it work. Plus, Beal is a much better fit to the players they already have

 

[tlance]

I assume you mean Denver. The negative value isn't as big an issue in this scenario. What negative there is (the money late in Paul's deal) is offset by the belief that you can win a championship right now with him. What Denver is sending out, isn't really that huge of a loss. They're future isn't wrecked so long as you're not sending out tons of picks. Harris is a decent player, but not an all star. Porter, who knows at this point. Plumlee is salary filler. And a draft pick would be there because its incentive for OKC to take the deal in case those other assets bust out. Because without the pick and if Porter never gets over his injury woes, you could just be dealing for a decent starter (Harris). That's a bad misplay in asset management by OKC. You can get more for Paul that just a starter. Now if all those players hit (Porter is fine, which we won't know for awhile), its a huge haul for OKC but that's the risk you'd be willing to take in this scenario to win a championship if you're Denver.

FWIW, I said I wouldn't do it*. But its a topic about finding trade scenarios for Chris Paul. This is a plausible one.

*Trading for Beal is much more appealing if I'm Denver. The money is smaller making it easier to trade. I can basically sub out Porter and just deal Harris, Plumlee and a pick for Beal and its enough to make it work. Plus, Beal is a much better fit to the players they already have

There are a lot of teams that could be plausible.

But he definitely carries negative trade equity. That isn’t in question.

OKC would gladly give him away in an exchange for shorter term bad contracts. If any team actually gives away assets, then that GM did a terrible job.

Because nobody wants that contract.

Now there might be a team or two that would take it, but they need assets back in order to do so.

 

[CitySushi]

Trade 1

OKC trades: CP3 and Patrick Patterson
Receives: D'Angelo Russell and Reggie Jackson

Detroit trades: Andre Drummond and Reggie Jackson
Receives: Chris Paul and Patrick Patterson

Warriors trade: D'Angelo Russel
Receive: Andre Drummond


Trade 2

OKC trades CP3 and Patrick Patterson to the T-Wolves for Andrew Wiggins and Jeff Teague.

 

[The Q]

Trade 1

OKC trades: CP3 and Patrick Patterson
Receives: D'Angelo Russell and Reggie Jackson

Detroit trades: Andre Drummond and Reggie Jackson
Receives: Chris Paul and Patrick Patterson

Warriors trade: D'Angelo Russel
Receive: Andre Drummond


Trade 2

OKC trades CP3 and Patrick Patterson to the T-Wolves for Andrew Wiggins and Jeff Teague.

I’m thinking if they include Patterson it’s to clear out his entire deal.

Okc can get below the tax Just by dumping PP for zero salary.