Full Roster with a Trade Exception (updated)

by wilbjammin on Feb 18, 2009 7:01 PM PST

The addition of Michael Ruffin means one thing for certain - the Blazers are not done. There are several ways that this can go, but I have my doubts that Ruffin will ever even suit up as a Blazer.

Teams are trying to dump salary. As a means of doing this, RLEC is a great chip but may not be enough. The trade exception allows teams to throw in players that they're wanting to get rid of in addition to whichever player we may actually want.

With 15 players on the roster, I assume that the Blazers are looking at a situation of potentially dumping RLEC, Sergio and/or Travis in exchange for taking on a big contract in addition to $3 million of a less desireable player with a less desireable contract. This move screams to me that whoever we're trying to deal with is likely desperate to save money.

I see this going down this way - Ruffin gets waived, we send out two players and receive back three (or 3 for 4?). Otherwise, I'm lost and Pritchard and Penn have even confused me. This opens up a world of possibilities.

Update: Jason Quick agrees with me - "They have 365 days to use the exception, and you can bet in these cash-crunched times there will be teams willing to unload a $3 million player onto the Blazers."

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

trade

Fry and Ruffin plus 3 million cash for either Eaton Thomas or Mike James and the wizards lottery pick!

by oldfart on Feb 18, 2009 7:25 PM PST reply actions

if you could combine that with the deal for Butler

by raging WebTed on Feb 18, 2009 8:20 PM PST up reply actions

Are we sure Ruffin would get waived, and not Shav?

Jerryd Bayless has two emotions: Kill and Win.

"I want to put points on your face."
-Rudy to Pau Gasol

TRADE TRAVIS OUTLAW FOR A CHAIR

by rockingharder on Feb 18, 2009 7:55 PM PST reply actions

No, but that's my guess

given the positions they play.

Chris Dudley for three!

by wilbjammin on Feb 18, 2009 8:03 PM PST up reply actions

shav is a better player

IMO

Being a Blazer fan is fun!

by Blazermaniac77 on Feb 18, 2009 8:11 PM PST up reply actions

shav's a nice throw in to have....if we needed to thow him in.

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out burns out farms and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

by faith on Feb 18, 2009 8:28 PM PST up reply actions

Younger and more potential than Ruffin

Who is really just a throw in

Brandon is one of those quiet assassins. - Chris Paul

by Norsktroll on Feb 18, 2009 9:43 PM PST up reply actions

Portland could waive them both, but Michael Ruffin would be shown the door before Shavlik Randolph.

by AK1984 on Feb 18, 2009 8:18 PM PST up reply actions

yes....take a look at ruffins stats...

no way he stays

by Tiny Man on Feb 18, 2009 11:27 PM PST up reply actions

OMG!!!!

Come on u guys!!! Ruffin has not played a single game this year!!! He has been hurt! If anyone is getting waived its him.

by ggassen85 on Feb 18, 2009 8:11 PM PST reply actions

agreed

Being a Blazer fan is fun!

by Blazermaniac77 on Feb 18, 2009 8:11 PM PST up reply actions

Ruffin has insurance paying 80% of his remaining games.

If he is waived does Portland still get that money?

by parkinglotj on Feb 18, 2009 11:43 PM PST up reply actions

save the trade exception until next year

when we have a more realistic chance of going deeper in the playoffs and grab a vet to bolster the bench would really help

Woof

by Charles Barkley McLovin on Feb 18, 2009 9:58 PM PST reply actions

Or he can use the trade exception

to acquire a draft pick. if the exception is packaged with a good palyer or two it could be a very nice draft pick.

by raoulduke on Feb 18, 2009 10:34 PM PST reply actions

Can anyone explain why the trade exception is 3 mill (or 3.13 mill)?

Diogu’s salary is 2.91 mill, Ruffin’s salary is 1.14 mill. Wouldn’t the trade exception be the difference, or 1.77 mill? Does it have something to do with Ruffin making the veteran’s minimum? (Just a guess, I don’t even know if he is paid the veteran’s minimum)?

i understand why the trade works under the CBA as a 3 team trade since no team took back more than 125% + 100K of the salaries traded. If I understand the CBA correctly, Diogu could not have been traded for Ruffin straight up. The other teams had to be involved. I read that Chicago is now 200K under the luxury tax cap which explains why Ruffin was included in the trade. I am not sure why Sacramento includes Portland in this trade unless they just like Diogu.

Can anyone explain? Quick’s explaination is incomplete.

by chemistrymajor on Feb 18, 2009 10:38 PM PST reply actions

we gave them some cash

Chris Dudley for three!

by wilbjammin on Feb 18, 2009 10:51 PM PST up reply actions

yep

We give them cash. Maybe they see some upside in Ike? I liked him. They get cash, get under the luxury tax. That is big for them. This exception could expand players we can target with RLec, or be used in a package to gain a lottery pick. (Not saying we need more young talent, but drafting another great young piece still gives us something with significant trade value, and KP knows how to pick good players. Clearly helps both teams. Given the timing, I would not be surprised if it was used tomorrow. If not, I expect it will be used for a lottery pick.

by lurtsman on Feb 18, 2009 11:41 PM PST up reply actions

We gave them cash...

for the difference in salary that they’d pay for Diogu, compared to Ruffin. Cash included in trades does not affect the contract #’s for the trade, for salary comparison purposes.

We were eligible for the trade exception because there was a difference in salary, and we were only trading away one player (neither of which were BYC).

Sixty-percent of the time, it works one-hundred percent of the time.

by rudydrops3s on Feb 19, 2009 1:07 AM PST up reply actions