Trade & FA 2023-24: Stein-Ingram Trade Inevitable| LAL Want Lebron Back On Any Terms

[omahen]

So if Sacramento was getting back a neutral value player at the same cost as Holmes, do you think they would have sent the first?  I'm not arguing that Holmes is not a negative asset, I am arguing that you should not use a trade who's primary purpose was to generate cap space as a clear indicator of Holmes value in a trade where salary matching is occurring.  They are two different scenarios.  In fact, if they needed the cap space bad enough, they could have made that trade even if the market valued Holmes as a neutral asset.  It likely would have cost less than a first, but it would have cost something.

I think yes, since the buyer would only see receiving negative salary for a player that is planned as a back-up. Mavs would still eat 25 mil of bad salary. It is just likely that the deal wouldn't happen, because it only made sense for Sacramento to do the deal with getting cap space. For example, if Bullock had two years on his deal and he would be considered as neutral value due to "old glory" despite his bad season. I don't think Mavs would trade someone useful like that for Holmes without getting same level of compensation back.

I agree cap space has value and Sacramento would have to pay for creating it, even if Holmes would be seen as a neutral asset. I don't think that price would be much different.