Why Not to Spend - Cheapskate Edition

[Mess]

3 options:
1) Give him the max and hope we put it together in attempt number 4 -> "predicting another flub"
2) Give him the max to trade him mid season or in the following offseason -> for "some bloated, long term contracts")
3) Let him walk -> "new direction", "compete despite DD? Totally possible"

Paraphrased.

Your views on the first 2 options you presented are basically the darkest timelines - though granted they at least have a little bit of precedent (1 more than 2). Your top choice, the 3rd option, is of course the best case scenario about a future with JV and a limitless ceiling.




No matter how many new threads are made it seems everyone is just says the same thing over and over again in a slightly different way. Not much of a "thought experiment".

[OldSkoolCool]

Re 20 mil in deals they dont have

Ie teams wont have 20 million in expiring contracts because those are all too small because they were signed under the old cap and there arent many Joe Johnsons in 2017...

That means the 20 mil (or even less, say 15) is going to have to cone from recently signed contracts...which teams will be less inclined to move (because they just signed them for a reason)...and because there are less of them...and they are 3 years+, and they are for players who I would rather give their PT to young guys

Does that make sense?

Dominoe effect

[LJ2]

I don't agree. This is one of the most boring teams to watch offensively.

But the team's strategy is a coaching thing.

They use to say the same thing about the Spurs, of all teams, lol.

[DanH]

Re 20 mil in deals they dont have

Ie teams wont have 20 million in expiring contracts because those are all too small because they were signed under the old cap and there arent many Joe Johnsons in 2017...

That means the 20 mil (or even less, say 15) is going to have to cone from recently signed contracts...which teams will be less inclined to move (because they just signed them for a reason)...and because there are less of them...and they are 3 years+, and they are for players who I would rather give their PT to young guys

Does that make sense?

Dominoe effect

So... You didn't read my post at all then?

Teams will still be flush with cap room the following summer. Absolutely flush with it, probably more raw cap room than even this coming summer. We will absolutely not have to bring back 20M in junk contracts in a DD deal, or even 15M. In all likelihood what little salary matching will be required (and there may well not be any at all) will come in the form of the rookie scale deals any prospects sent our way are attached to.

[Lark Benson]

I agree.

I watch a lot of games on league pass.

Raps aren't the worst but far from the entertaining group.

Any time your offense routinely has the ball in one players hands with 4 others watching, that is not good offense....nor is it a system.

Fun to watch is subjective, basketball doesn't have to always be aesthetically pleasing to be worth watching.

[Snooch]

They use to say the same thing about the Spurs, of all teams, lol.

They said the spurs werent flashy

We are boring

Dont see people jumping out of their seats and high fiving on a drawn foul play.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

[Snooch]

So... You didn't read my post at all then?

Teams will still be flush with cap room the following summer. Absolutely flush with it, probably more raw cap room than even this coming summer. We will absolutely not have to bring back 20M in junk contracts in a DD deal, or even 15M. In all likelihood what little salary matching will be required (and there may well not be any at all) will come in the form of the rookie scale deals any prospects sent our way are attached to.

Depends on the deals signed in 2016

I wouldnt say there will be more cash available in 2017...not less...but not necessarily more

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

[LJ2]

No, I've heard more than one source say they were boring.

[Mess]

No, I've heard more than one source say they were boring.

That's just a hangover from the way they used to play years ago.

[KHD]

They use to say the same thing about the Spurs, of all teams, lol.

that stems from the era of the "throw it to Timmy and wait" offence, coupled with the stingy defence. Also around the time they played the Pistons in the finals and only once in 7 games did a team get above 100 points.

Point is they were playing a totally different style then.

[LJ2]

That's just a hangover from the way they used to play years ago.

That's what I'm referring to with regards to the comment. It was from years ago and not the current team.

My point was that even the team most consider the gold standard of basketball could be considered boring to watch, but they were consistantly good and coached by the greatest coach in the sport.

As such, our team might be considered boring to watch by some, but their offence could change in years to come and be more pleaseing to those folks whom don't like the current offence.

[KHD]

That's what I'm referring to with regards to the comment. It was from years ago and not the current team.

My point was that even the team most consider the gold standard of basketball could be considered boring to watch, but they were consistantly good and coached by the greatest coach in the sport.

As such, our team might be considered boring to watch by some, but their offence could change in years to come and be more pleaseing to those folks whom don't like the current offence.

At least they were boring and successful though. We're boring and unsuccessful.

Also, personal preference, I'd rather watch a "boring" post-up oriented team than this iso jumpshit dumpster fire of an offence.

[LJ2]

that stems from the era of the "throw it to Timmy and wait" offence, coupled with the stingy defence. Also around the time they played the Pistons in the finals and only once in 7 games did a team get above 100 points.

Point is they were playing a totally different style then.

I don't think the Raptors are any different, in that their offence can't change over time.

[KHD]

I don't think the Raptors are any different, in that their offence can't change over time.

well, not with this coach.

We've had minimal success but no changes to the offence have been made.

[slaw]

Option #3 reminds me of the Underpants Gnomes: