Heat Already Looking For Sign-and-Trade Offers For Thomas

The Miami Heat are reportedly already looking at sign-and-trade options for free agent PG Isaiah Thomas.

"Our priority is to keep him," Heat GM Parka said. "But both sides understand that this is a business, and we've already made it clear that we won't exceed what we believe to be reasonable."

The market will likely determine Thomas' value when Free Agency hits, but the Heat will reportedly trade Thomas in a sign-and-trade if a deal can't be reached.

"The team would love to have him back," Heat superstar Kevin Durant said. "But we're in no place to say what's best for him. He's gotta decide that on his own."

Team sources say that the Heat are mainly looking for draft picks, and that the New Orleans Pelicans have emerged as the frontrunners to land Thomas.

The Heat can offer a fifth year as well as higher raises than any other team.

Wow we are front runners? News to the Pelicans' front office!

 

Rizzo (NO) wrote:Wow we are front runners? News to the Pelicans' front office!

Hehe

Will be interesting to see where IT ends up.

Well, obviously a 5th year via S&T will go a long ways towards locking up a free agent, bit it's no guarantee.

Sounds like PHX is a legit option too, but doubt they give up anything to accomplish a S&T.

Yeah, I don't see Jestor giving up anything Miami would want to get Thomas. He's just going to throw all his money at him in free agency and hope it works.

Yeah we really don't have any incentive to S&T IT.  Either we get him outright and we have a young foundational piece, or we don't, and continue along the slow build path.

I'd say OP shot himself in the foot slightly but confirming no smokescreen that he won't be paying IT. Teams with cap won't bother knowing they can just sign him outright.

bt (TOR) wrote:I'd say OP shot himself in the foot slightly but confirming no smokescreen that he won't be paying IT. Teams with cap won't bother knowing they can just sign him outright.

No one can offer more money for IT though. So for example, even if PHX offers a ton, I could just match that with like a five year deal instead and SnT him elsewhere.

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:

bt (TOR) wrote:I'd say OP shot himself in the foot slightly but confirming no smokescreen that he won't be paying IT. Teams with cap won't bother knowing they can just sign him outright.

and SnT him elsewhere.

My point exactly. Not to a team with cap space but elsewhere.

bt (TOR) wrote:

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:

bt (TOR) wrote:I'd say OP shot himself in the foot slightly but confirming no smokescreen that he won't be paying IT. Teams with cap won't bother knowing they can just sign him outright.

and SnT him elsewhere.

My point exactly. Not to a team with cap space but elsewhere.

Even to a team with cap space. Point is no one can sign him outright unless I decide not to offer.

Right, but keep in mind, S&T's will be handled differently in the sense that IT's preferences will (or should, no doubt) also need to apply to the new team.

This also means that, though IT has a high Loyalty rating, it wouldn't apply if you're S&Ting him, which would be a huge advantage for teams like PHX.

What are Isaiah Thomas' ratings in loyalty, PFW, etc. anyways? I haven't even looked at him yet.

Huh? Are we doing PAs for this FA too?

Rizzo (NO) wrote:What are Isaiah Thomas' ratings in loyalty, PFW, etc. anyways? I haven't even looked at him yet.

Greed - 65 (relatively high)
Loyalty - 70 (very high)
Play for Winners - 50 (relatively low)
Playing Time - 70 (relatively high)

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:Huh? Are we doing PAs for this FA too?

Myles mentioned in the "Offseason Update" thread.

But even if we weren't, this is logic the mods/admins should apply to S&T decisions, since it's something that explicitly occurs outside of the engines ability to govern.

For example: It would be kinda silly to have a super competitive team and a player with high loyalty and a desire to play for a winner S&T that player to a bottom feeder - it specifically circumvents that player's desire to (a), play for a winner and (b) his loyalty to the team that signed him (but then immediately traded him).

Another reason why I'm pumped for PAs, personally. In real life, S&T's rarely occur and, when they do, there is very little compensation that ever comes back to the team facilitating the trade. Also, the S&T's are usually necessary because the team the player is being traded to has no cap space (think Steve Nash to LAL, Amare Stoudemire to NYK).

Sun Scorched (CHA) wrote:

Rizzo (NO) wrote:What are Isaiah Thomas' ratings in loyalty, PFW, etc. anyways? I haven't even looked at him yet.

Greed - 65 (relatively high)
Loyalty - 70 (very high)
Play for Winners - 50 (relatively low)
Playing Time - 70 (relatively high)

Doesn't care about playing for a winner? Guess he would love Charlotte!

Sun Scorched (CHA) wrote:

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:Huh? Are we doing PAs for this FA too?

Myles mentioned in the "Offseason Update" thread.

But even if we weren't, this is logic the mods/admins should apply to S&T decisions, since it's something that explicitly occurs outside of the engines ability to govern.  

For example: It would be kinda silly to have a super competitive team and a player with high loyalty and a desire to play for a winner S&T that player to a bottom feeder - it specifically circumvents that player's desire to (a), play for a winner and (b) his loyalty to the team that signed him (but then immediately traded him).

Another reason why I'm pumped for PAs, personally.  In real life, S&T's rarely occur and, when they do, there is very little compensation that ever comes back to the team facilitating the trade.  Also, the S&T's are usually necessary because the team the player is being traded to has no cap space (think Steve Nash to LAL, Amare Stoudemire to NYK).  

True. The S&T should make sense. In the example of PHX and NOP, they're pretty much in the same situation though, so it looks like money would be the main factor.

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:

bt (TOR) wrote:

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:

bt (TOR) wrote:I'd say OP shot himself in the foot slightly but confirming no smokescreen that he won't be paying IT. Teams with cap won't bother knowing they can just sign him outright.

and SnT him elsewhere.

My point exactly. Not to a team with cap space but elsewhere.

Even to a team with cap space. Point is no one can sign him outright unless I decide not to offer.

You've missed my point unless your no smokescreen from the other thread was BS   

bt (TOR) wrote:

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:

bt (TOR) wrote:

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:

bt (TOR) wrote:I'd say OP shot himself in the foot slightly but confirming no smokescreen that he won't be paying IT. Teams with cap won't bother knowing they can just sign him outright.

and SnT him elsewhere.

My point exactly. Not to a team with cap space but elsewhere.

Even to a team with cap space. Point is no one can sign him outright unless I decide not to offer.

You've missed my point unless your no smokescreen from the other thread was BS   

Huh? I'm confused. Basically what I'm trying to say is that if someone offers something beyond what I'd pay, then I'd S&T Thomas to another team and not lose him for nothing.

So for example, if team A comes in with like a $10+m/year offer (which I wouldn't find reasonable), then I'll match that and S&T Thomas elsewhere, because I sure as hell wouldn't pay that for him.

Honestly OP - think that it's strange you wouldn't pay $10m for Thomas.

You offered Splitter $11.5m and he's a pretty average big.

Sun Scorched (CHA) wrote:Honestly OP - think that it's strange you wouldn't pay $10m for Thomas.  

You offered Splitter $11.5m and he's a pretty average big.

Nah, Splitter's pretty underrated coz he's been really underused. I feel he's really going to surprise a lot of people this year, and is one of the main reasons I felt comfortable dealing Chandler. He also has a lotta upside left too, which contributed to the deal.

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:

Sun Scorched (CHA) wrote:Honestly OP - think that it's strange you wouldn't pay $10m for Thomas.  

You offered Splitter $11.5m and he's a pretty average big.

Nah, Splitter's pretty underrated coz he's been really underused. I feel he's really going to surprise a lot of people this year, and is one of the main reasons I felt comfortable dealing Chandler. He also has a lotta upside left too, which contributed to the deal.

Well, I could be wrong, but he's relatively old (27, iirc) and I'm not sure how much more time he has to grow. I kinda figured that potential died at/around the mid-20's.

Sun Scorched (CHA) wrote:

orangeparka (MIA) wrote:

Sun Scorched (CHA) wrote:Honestly OP - think that it's strange you wouldn't pay $10m for Thomas.  

You offered Splitter $11.5m and he's a pretty average big.

Nah, Splitter's pretty underrated coz he's been really underused. I feel he's really going to surprise a lot of people this year, and is one of the main reasons I felt comfortable dealing Chandler. He also has a lotta upside left too, which contributed to the deal.

Well, I could be wrong, but he's relatively old (27, iirc) and I'm not sure how much more time he has to grow.  I kinda figured that potential died at/around the mid-20's.

He's 29 this year, so yeah he's not young by any means. His experience, however, is low, which is what made me believe he could still grow a lot.

I had high hopes for him but he hasn't improved as much as I thought he would over the past year. Sadly, it's looking more and more likely he may end up not filling out his potentials.

Does somebody know exactly when players stop to develope?