Over the past few weeks, I have started a few different deadline pieces from the standard long Deadline Primer to some more narrow pieces on potentially important factors. While putting those together, it eventually became clear that this deadline will be both a little less active and maybe a little more interesting due to the strange alignment of teams with assets and teams with desire for them so the traditional pieces may not be the best fit. Instead, here are some thoughts on what we could see moving forward:

This year, the teams that are “buyers” generally lack the assets to get the players they want

No teams exemplify this conundrum than the two New York teams. Both the Knicks and the Nets have fierce pressure to win in the short-term coming from their owners and in the case of the Knicks a star player who can leave with no compensation at the end of the season if he likes. However, the same short term pressure left both teams basically bereft of draft assets to move and shockingly few contracts that even work as filler. Combined, the Knicks and Nets have about $20 million in expiring contracts and 75 percent of that comes from one man: Paul Pierce. Young teams with desirable players are not exactly falling over themselves to give up pieces like Rajon Rondo for matching salaries that carry over to 14-15 and beyond.

This same problem shows up for the Indiana Pacers (who have very little financial flexibility for the next two seasons) and Oklahoma City Thunder (same but with Kendrick Perkins on the books for next year as well), so many of the logical buyers have too few assets to make deals palatable.

The unique case of Philadelphia

The Sixers have a special place in the deadline this year because of their unusual combination of resources and cap space. At the present, their salary sits below the “floor” meaning that they can add salary without it functionally costing them anything because the gap between team salary and the floor itself gets distributed among the players on the team should it exist at the end of the season, meaning they have to spend that money anyway. On top of that, they are looking to get long-term assets for two of their three most expensive players: Evan Turner and Spencer Hawes. While procuring assets for either or both of them and then using their current space and the potentially additional space made by trading them separately would be a dream, we could see those two tools come together in one deal. For example, the Bobcats may balk at trading a first round pick for Evan Turner by himself but the savings of adding in Ben Gordon’s expiring contract could be enough to make it happen. Philadelphia GM Sam Hinkie must be playing all options at the same time to figure out the best overall combination of moves for the future of the franchise. Philadelphia should be at the center of most of the discussion and potentially a series of different impactful moves.

Can some of the franchises that appear to be buyers but should be sellers come to their senses?

Over the last eight months, we have seen a few teams try to accelerate their rebuilding process by spending and trading to disastrous results. The Cleveland Cavaliers have become the poster child for this problem but other organizations fit the bill like the Sacramento Kings, New Orleans Pelicans and Milwaukee Bucks. While the Bucks have clearly thrown in the towel from a wins perspective, none of the four will likely make the playoffs, yet we hear shockingly little about any of them giving up short-term assets for long-term pieces. Even a shallow pool of buyers should not prevent them from moving players to more logical destinations. Most notably, Cleveland would be wise to aggressively shop Luol Deng since he appears incredibly likely to head elsewhere in free agency at this point. Even moving him for a similarly expiring contract and a pick should be sufficient though I do not suspect it would be for owner Dan Gilbert.

Will some team be crazy enough to trade an expiring contract for Carlos Boozer? Will it take a sweetener?

Clearly, the Bulls see this summer as a big chance to set the next core of the franchise. Unfortunately, they have one more year of Carlos Boozer clogging up the books and making that difficult. Chicago has retained their amnesty but paying a player almost $17 million not to play for you does not sound like owner Jerry Reinsdorf at all. Moving Boozer now would effectively kill two birds with one stone since It also would make the team worse and ideally strengthen their draft pick. However, it takes two to tango and they would need another team willing to take on that deal since adding a multi-year player would actually decrease Chicago’s salary flexibility due to losing the amnesty possibility. This gap has led to the possibility of a sweetener (pick or player) to help make a deal happen which would be somewhat shameful since a big market franchise would be giving up resources just to save their owner money. In the larger scope, this could be one of the biggest turning points in the next few days.

What players are available for just trade exceptions?

When thinking about players who could be moved just for the savings dumping them would provide, we must consider what needs to be in place for both sides of the trade to agree to it. First, the player being moved has to be worth the cost to the acquiring team. Since this situation dictates that the new addition be unaccompanied by any salary offset (because then we are in a different conversation), they must add to the team’s costs and that can ramp up because of the luxury tax. Even if a trade exception existed that could fit Amar'e Stoudemire, no team would do so straight up because he would not be worth it at present. Second, the team trading the player must have the proper incentives to do so. If winning this season holds significance for them, it would follow that they would likely be unwilling to trade a player who could contribute to that. This keeps talents on some winning teams like Brooklyn and Oklahoma City off the list.

If the Lakers do not move Pau Gasol for someone less expensive, guys like Steve Blake could check both boxes. Shockingly, there have been rumors that they would consider moving Jordan Hill to save money (Adrian Wojnarowski reported discussions with Brooklyn’s Disabled Player Exception from Brook Lopez). Since the combination of Blake and Hill would take the Lakers below the luxury tax threshold and keep them out of the dreaded repeater tax for at least the next two seasons, that financial pressure could yield a major opening for another team. We could also see TPE deals work as precursors to larger trades if a team is pushing right up against the salary cap or the tax line, so keep an eye on teams like Milwaukee, Golden State, Chicago, Indiana, the Clippers, Memphis, Minnesota and Washington who are all close to one of the two.

Will the Clippers actually pay the luxury tax?

I have always said that I will believe an owner will pay the luxury tax when it actually happens. Chicago’s Jerry Reinsdorf made that statement in 2012 by keeping their team intact and Donald Sterling could this year. At present, Lob City sits only about $2 million above the tax line. That seems perilously close for a notoriously spendthrift owner. Staying above that threshold would make a big statement, particularly since their core pieces have long term contracts that could make them repeaters down the line.

What will the buyout group look like?

The deadline also serves the function of setting the table for buyouts that occur between Thursday and the March 1 Playoff Eligibility Waiver Deadline. Any player that wants to be somewhere else with the ability to play in the postseason must be there by March 1st, so the clock starts ticking quickly for talented vets in lost situations. As those players inevitably go to the best teams standing with flexibility, it could have a major effect on the playoffs in a year with many teams at about the same talent level. Guys like Steve Blake, Luke Ridnour, Caron Butler, Emeka Okafor, and maybe even Pau Gasol could all take a little less money to get onto a contender if they end up in desolate situations when the dust settles.

Lastly, remember the difference between a quiet deadline and an insignificant one. The current CBA changed the game for teams paying the tax and this could be a year where two large market teams (the Bulls already and the Lakers) move below the line because of the severe penalties. Those kinds of transactions and the buyout process in late February could have a huge impact on both the champion this year and how we should anticipate teams grappling with the luxury tax for seasons to come.