Offseason Rumors/News

Status
Not open for further replies.

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,952
Isle of Plum
KD is a top 3 player, but 34 year-olds with injury histories decline rapidly all the time. You're probably getting a 2 year window with KD as The Guy.

The Nets just had that guy for two straight postseasons, and won 1 series. Yes, there were health problems, but that's the thing with short windows: shit happens, and suddenly the window has closed.

I know the common wisdom was that this would be an unprecedented haul, but I'm not seeing it. Teams seem very, very reluctant to part with young stars to get that, particularly if they're expected to give up picks too.

Totally agree that "run it back" has a greater chance than people think, at least to start the year. Rehabilitating Simmons before dealing KD would also be useful.
Re the bolded, I'm actually not saying KD will start a rapid decline, I'm saying you have no idea what the voices in his head will say after one year.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
The funny thing is that Beal isn't good enough for his reputation to be tarnished by not winning a title.
Yeah, it's funny. He's a nice player but he's one of the more forgettable "stars" you'll ever find at the NBA level. Kind of reminds me of a modern day Mitch Ritchmond, a guy who was really good in the 90s but who I haven't really ever thought about for 20+ years.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,104
The funny thing is that Beal isn't good enough for his reputation to be tarnished by not winning a title.
I remember when Mike Conley signed what was then the largest contract in NBA history in 2016 when the cap jumped, despite never having made an All-Star game at that point if his career. That’s just how these max deals work.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
I love the posters saying $150 million is trivial. First off, these guys do pay taxes on their salary, so $250 million is actually more like $125 million, and that doesn't include agent fees, lawyers, and the other things of that nature. You can't take for granted this one opportunity to make money in your life and ensure your grandkids' grandkids' grandkids can go to whatever college they want, never have to worry about housing in their life, etc.

Are any of us taking less money to work for the most efficient company? Or the best performing team? Shit no. And you can tell me it's not the same, but then I'm sure someone working as a cashier in a grocery store is looking at our cushy jobs and wonders why we fight for raises in our positions when our salary would be plenty for them. Why should athletes not fight for every cent they can get? They have the most rare skills on earth.
Agree with all of this. I do love the fencing anecdote though. As if deciding where to fence in college has anything to do with deciding between 1/4 billion dollars or something less
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Re the bolded, I'm actually not saying KD will start a rapid decline, I'm saying you have no idea what the voices in his head will say after one year.
Yeah, he has many risk factors. Even the conventional ones are pretty big, but the unconventional ones are there too.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
I remember when Mike Conley signed what was then the largest contract in NBA history in 2016 when the cap jumped, despite never having made an All-Star game at that point if his career. That’s just how these max deals work.
To an extent, BUT... Beal to me is a player you never should have even considered giving the largest max to, and certainly not a kicker and a no trade on top (literally the only one in the league).
WAS absolutely should have sold him to the highest bidder before last year... they were going nowhere with or without him and could have re-set wonderfully. Now they're stuck in purgatory for years, and made it harder to trade him for any value when he inevitably wants out. At least John Wall had some indications he could be an elite 2 way player when he signed that deal, that was just injury luck, this is a bad contract the moment it was signed.
 

Everetts Dinosaurs

New Member
Jan 22, 2006
226
To an extent, BUT... Beal to me is a player you never should have even considered giving the largest max to, and certainly not a kicker and a no trade on top (literally the only one in the league).
WAS absolutely should have sold him to the highest bidder before last year... they were going nowhere with or without him and could have re-set wonderfully. Now they're stuck in purgatory for years, and made it harder to trade him for any value when he inevitably wants out. At least John Wall had some indications he could be an elite 2 way player when he signed that deal, that was just injury luck, this is a bad contract the moment it was signed.
Yup. They committed the cardinal sin in the NBA: guaranteeing themselves that they're bad enough to never be real contenders and good enough to never pick in the top 8. There's no realistic way to break that cycle outside of some insane luck in either direction. As someone who enjoys smaller franchises getting their chances to thrive and thinks that dynamic is good for the sport, it sucks to see.

What might make the situation worse is that this is completely obvious and the wound is self-inflicted. Its different if you're seeing a guy make a case as a top-10 talent and he gets injured after the fact. You have all of the data you need to not make this decision...
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
Did they really think Beal wouldn’t sign that contract without a full no trade?

Yikes.
Also... I mean if you're worried about the fans... nothing turns a fanbase faster than: "we offerred him the largest total value contract in the NBA (until Jokic's deal goes through), and he turned us down to take $30M less to play for fucking Detroit or something"
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
WAS absolutely should have sold him to the highest bidder before last year... they were going nowhere with or without him and could have re-set wonderfully. Now they're stuck in purgatory for years, and made it harder to trade him for any value when he inevitably wants out.
I don't know this for sure but from what I understand (Boss is huge Wiz fan) that what you call "purgatory," they call a "business model."

WAS has had several chances to bottom out and they won't do it for whatever reason.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,673
This is a weird conversation. I have no objection to Beal opting for the insane money; the crazy part isn't that Beal was willing to lower his chances of playing on a competitive team by taking the Wizards money, the crazy part is the Wizards offering the money and control to a player who isn't worth it.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
Yup. They committed the cardinal sin in the NBA: guaranteeing themselves that they're bad enough to never be real contenders and good enough to never pick in the top 8. There's no realistic way to break that cycle outside of some insane luck in either direction. As someone who enjoys smaller franchises getting their chances to thrive and thinks that dynamic is good for the sport, it sucks to see.
Teams trade their way out all the time. The 2005-2007 Celtics had insanely bad luck, but good management got them out of purgatory. Similarly the late 90s Celtics had insanely bad management and still turned themselves into a playoff team with slightly less shitty management. It’s doable.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Teams trade their way out all the time. The 2005-2007 Celtics had insanely bad luck, but good management got them out of purgatory. Similarly the late 90s Celtics had insanely bad management and still turned themselves into a playoff team with slightly less shitty management. It’s doable.
Yeah, the turnover in the NBA is insane.
 

Everetts Dinosaurs

New Member
Jan 22, 2006
226
Teams trade their way out all the time. The 2005-2007 Celtics had insanely bad luck, but good management got them out of purgatory. Similarly the late 90s Celtics had insanely bad management and still turned themselves into a playoff team with slightly less shitty management. It’s doable.
Sure, but its not a spot you want to be in, and the Wizards are missing an important tool: that your organization or city is a destination landing.

Could Washington find a taker for that contract in 3 years after they attach some picks? Sure. Hard to see how that's a recipe for becoming competitive, though.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
I mean much worse areas get themselves out of trouble all the time, while teams like the Knicks, in a real destination city, have been bad for a generation.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
3,190
Beal must have threatened to take less money somewhere else and WAS found it credible in order to get the no trade + trade kicker. WAS could offer more money than other teams, but they had to feel money alone wasn't enough.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
Beal must have threatened to take less money somewhere else and WAS found it credible in order to get the no trade + trade kicker. WAS could offer more money than other teams, but they had to feel money alone wasn't enough.
It's probably Leonisis, Wiz blogs say it's his MO, happened with Arenas and others, GM tries to draw lines and Ted just over rules them because he likes getting credit for keeping their guys even if it means perpetually sitting 7th to 11th
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
701
I am unsure why everyone is making a big deal out of the no trade. They wouldnt rade him to somewhere he didnt want to go anyway.
Two reasons. Its a complete capitulation on Washington's part in situation where the player did not have that much actual leverage. There is no reason to give a player of Beal's stature and ability every single thing.
Two, you are right Washington would not trade to him places he absolutely did not want to go. But now he gets to dictate exactly where he goes. Those are not the same thing.
 

DisgruntledSoxFan77

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2015
1,885
Quincy
If Baynes is healthy and has anything in the tank, I’d love to see him on this team, bringing lots of physicality and toughness, plus a team oriented approach.
I mean I can’t imagine anyone really offering anything above the minimum after everything he went through. It would be a hell of a story at the very least
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
I am unsure why everyone is making a big deal out of the no trade. They wouldnt rade him to somewhere he didnt want to go anyway.
This is not really true either. Stars in their prime usually don't get traded where they don't want very often, BUT... once they start to tail off or suffer a major injury? Imagine if Wall had a no trade for example? Westbrook has been traded multiple times now without any real input, Oladipo, Porzingis, Kemba, Horford to OKC, McCollum, Paul George to OKC, Kawhi to TOR. A lot of max guys have gotten traded to places they didn't particularly want. This deal takes him well into his 30s, there is a decent chance they want to move him before it's over.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,436
Windhorst's "checkbook win" comment about the Warriors makes more sense now - he was channeling an owner. Joe Lacob was interviewed on Tim Kawakami's Athletic podcast and said that the rest of the NBA owners are unhappy with the Warriors because they spent so much on player salaries.

He had an interesting spin on not re-signing GP2 or Otto Porter, saying that the Warriors only have room for mid-level guys, so if they sign mid-level guys and those guys play well, they become unaffordable to re-sign. He claimed to be very excited about white Donte and suggested he was out of their budget, but was worth the money.

He also made clear that they are very aware that they are going to have an issue next summer when Poole and Wiggins are both FAs.

And as you'd expect, his stated plan for this year is for Wiseman, Kuminga and Moody to play major minutes.

Here's a Twitter thread with a lot of the most interesting quotes: View: https://twitter.com/fakelogic/status/1545237763837923328?t=r92y_ZpgiXwp0lMOuloLfg&s=19
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,125
Santa Monica
Don't give Ben Hogan a stiffy, please.
I'd need to take a full bottle of blue thunder with a bro-tein shake to get there after watching the shell of Aron play for the Raptors 2yrs ago.

The Olympic scare would make it a great story but he'd be a Haslem signing at this point.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I don't know this for sure but from what I understand (Boss is huge Wiz fan) that what you call "purgatory," they call a "business model."

WAS has had several chances to bottom out and they won't do it for whatever reason.
Yes, I’ve pointed out for years and years how we used to mock Grunfeld for not playing a hand but the truth has always been that he simply followed the barking orders from Leonsis.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Seems like a lot of guaranteed money to not force Philly to pay.

I think he'll end up fine, but if he looks at all toasty this year, the bottom will completely fall out of his market.

Then again, he's made about $400M to date (pre tax), so it's not a typical situation.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,184
Washington
Good for Philly.

Also, maybe Harden will be extra motivated on a short deal to get and stay in shape.

An extra bonus on top of the financial thing.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464

jmcc5400

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
5,219
What a ridiculous tweet. He was already guaranteed $47 million this year, so he’d only have to get $17 million next summer to equal the total compensation of the accepted 1+1 deal. He’d have to get injured or completely crater as a player to not get that.
Yeah, I'm a Harden detractor but it's hard to characterize this as anything but a player taking less money to allow his team to be more competitive, not unlike what Brady did for years.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
14,292
Very generous of Harden.

What does it allow the 76ers to do logistically?
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
Did Rubin got out of ownership so he can pay these guys under the table to take less official $?

Strong work....
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
14,292
They already did it. Opened up MLE and BAE to add Tucker, Melton and House without going over hard cap.
They can't do anything else, though? None of those moves really moved the needle for me.

House is a JAG, Melton was awful in the playoffs, Tucker is old af & has a player option in the 3rd year, etc.

I guess there's only so many avenues for incremental improvement, though.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,849
NYC
Dame will be 37 in ‘27, is 6-2, and is coming off a season where he played poorly (by his standards) and dealt with a nagging core injury that required major surgery. Yikes.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
14,292
Dame will be 37 in ‘27, is 6-2, and is coming off a season where he played poorly (by his standards) and dealt with a nagging core injury that required major surgery. Yikes.
Eh - he won't turn 37 until the offseason after that season, everythingisfine.jpg
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
I don't doubt that the Blazers want to compete at the highest level. That said, I think the Lillard extension is more about Portland keeping fans engaged than locking up wins.

The Blazers fans have shown incredible support of their franchise by virtue of their good attendance numbers year after year but given where they are in Dame's career arc, they likely made the business decision that keeping him around is preferable to a reset. While the latter may well help the team compete more quickly than bottoming out after Lillard is gone, its hard to argue that its also the best thing for the bottom line.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
Dame threatened to demand a trade if he didn't get that deal I have to assume, otherwise it makes absolutely zero sense.

He is under contract for 3 more years at huge numbers he may not be worth. And they just added on 2 more years after that at even more absurd numbers.... wild.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.