Nice & Smooth IS Funky: Cap jumping $20m or more in 2016
- Thread starter Infield Infidel
- Start date
BigSoxFan said:
You complete me.
That said, I don't see the Warriors letting him go, especially if they can deal David Lee which begs an interesting question. If you are the C's would you take the last year of David Lee's $15mm contract if the Warriors were to package Harrison Barnes along with him? Barnes, who is 22, is having a nice season as their starting SF. He is athletic and has quietly improved each season as both a defender and shooter so while some folks are down on him, I think he has upside and could be a solid starter on a contending team. The Warriors would love to keep him, of course, but they need to move Lee to keep Green.
While my dream of Draymond to the Celtics is probably not going to happen, I think Barnes would be a decent consolation prize and while Lee has obvious flaws in his game, he is still a decent offensive player if somewhat of a dinosaur in the stretch four NBA.
Harrison Barnes is Jeff Green. They are the identical player. No thank you.
Yeah I can't imagine the Warriors not paying Draymond. He's a perfect fit with Stephen.....plays off him so well.
Yeah I can't imagine the Warriors not paying Draymond. He's a perfect fit with Stephen.....plays off him so well.
BigSoxFan said:
Zach Lowe mentioned something--vaguely--on Simmons' podcast this week about the language contained in max contracts. He didn't go into detail, but seemed to imply that there's at least a chance that max contracts signed under the current cap will become true max contracts in the new CBA as well. In other words, the max contracts of this summer are not necessarily going to be the bargains everybody expects them to be in 2 years.
Something like this?Grin&MartyBarret said:
I mean, it's not news that "a max contract" is cap percentage. Green's good, but he's not that good.
Blacken said:
Yup. But I think the common interpretation has always been that max deals are a percentage of the cap on the day you sign your contract, and that they then have 7.5% annual raises built in. So the idea that deals signed this year might not remain a percentage of the current cap is definitely news to me.
My biggest problem with this jump is that it seems to provide a financial "get out of jail free" card to teams who mishandled things with contracts. All of a sudden they can recover - which devalues the efforts of teams who were more fiscally conservative/responsible.
Selfishly, it would also seem to reduce the need to work with teams like the Celtics to maneuver around those issues. I like Danny being able to get players like Zeller just because Lebron wants to go home... or something like that.
Selfishly, it would also seem to reduce the need to work with teams like the Celtics to maneuver around those issues. I like Danny being able to get players like Zeller just because Lebron wants to go home... or something like that.
A part of me thinks NBA front offices will be smart enough to use the money to front load contracts. And then the other half considers that teams like the Nets, Lakers and Knicks are going to go hard after any half decent guy out there and create a market where everyone ends up getting overpaid.
So perhaps the smart teams will be the ones who simply farm out their cap space to the idiot GM's around the league when they realize in two years that giving a max deals to Paul Millsap and Al Jefferson wasn't as smart as they thought.
So perhaps the smart teams will be the ones who simply farm out their cap space to the idiot GM's around the league when they realize in two years that giving a max deals to Paul Millsap and Al Jefferson wasn't as smart as they thought.
I wouldn't call those GM's stupid necessarily. If they are on a short deal and need to make an immediate impact in their roster construction than overpaying a Millsap or Jefferson is the correct move. It's saving cap space for your replacement after you are fired that would be the stupid one.
Let's not forget that many of these decisions on spending to improve in the now are direct mandates from above.
Let's not forget that many of these decisions on spending to improve in the now are direct mandates from above.
I was interested in the suggestion that a max contract "floats" with the cap (which seemed strange), so I asked Larry Coon:Grin&MartyBarret said:
https://twitter.com/LarryCoon/status/579698247985299456
Everything I've heard for the past few months has been that it will go down in 2017-18, So I'd guess those numbers are correct.jon abbey said:
I guess we should be expecting more labor turmoil in 2018, after teams dole out another slew of ridiculous contracts the immediately preceding years. We need to have amnesty in order to control costs baby!