2014 off-season Compendium

[Mapko]

Sorry, but your post was full of blatant bullshit lies. Do you remember Rob Babcock? That's why Vince quit on the team. We had the worst GM in NBA history running the show. He did such a horrendous job he was fired shortly thereafter. It's much easier to see things from Vince's side in hindsight. He was on a team going nowhere with the worst GM ever at the helm.

That was also 15 years ago. Vince has been nothing but a great teammate in Dallas, and is beloved by the players and ownership there. If we don't get Vince it's because Dallas outbid us. Not something they would do for a no talent, no character momma's boy, but far be it from you to look at the evidence.

Agreed!
At the time of VC trade, I was (as were most fans I assume) more than pissed at Vince. Lets face it:
VC acted like a prima dona, mama's boy, spoiled brat etc....He was a bit more than a frustrated, spoiled kid.
But he also put Raps on NBA map. Look at the number of young Canadian kid playing at a high level in NCAA...A lot of credit goes to him.
Did VC have a reason to me frustrated with team? I am sure our "esteemed GM at time" has a lot to do with it.
I am going to try to put some value on that trade:
-A Williams, basically a 2nd rounder (if you had to buy a 2nd rounder -what 500K max at the time);
-E Williams, at most a late 1st rounder (if you were to buy 1 -under 3 mil easy);
-J Graham -a 1st rounder another 3 mil.
All in all we received max 6.5 mil for an elite player. And, lets not forget, 'genius GM" paid Zo 10 mil to get lost (even an idiot would have known Zo had 0 interest in playing for Raps).
In summary: Babcock sent an all star & 10 mil for 6.5 mil value?????????????
Idiotic!
His argument: Everybody knew we had to deal Vince, that is why could not get more. Really:
How about Vince to Clippers for a 2nd rounder. Stupid? I agree, but still better than loosing him for nothing and loosing $$$.
As you said: this is more on Babcock than anybody else.
If VC wants to come back on a 1 year deal with an option at Vets minimum or slightly above -great. Still worth it for 15-20 mins a game. If he becomes a locker room issue -I highly doubt it. If so just release him. Not a lot to loose.

[Mapko]

True. But I'm thinking more about the playoffs, and Terrence or DD can't guard biggers small forwards. It cost us the first round this season so there is no reason why it won't cost us in the playoffs next season. I do know we can get a good small forward in the draft but that player is going to take time to develop and will probably struggle hard in the playoffs like Terrence did. Everything we do at this point we should be thinking playoffs and how it will help us in the playoffs. But you are very correct that 2015 has the better prospects and we will have more cap space. I guess we can handle another first round exit if it means better things in the future.

See bold: lets hope Ross learns from his nightmare experience & gets better. This (and maybe a vet like VC) will buy No 20 time to mature.

[MACK11]

[Mapko]

Hayes and Fields will be gone after next season, as will Marcus Camby's contract, so they'll be gone in time for the 2015 summer bonanza. I probably wouldn't want to take on Pachulia's contract. It's pretty bad, but if we can somehow pry Ilyasova away without giving up much (maybe for Salmons, Hansbrough's contracts and a future 2nd or two), I'd be very happy. I just figured that they would insist that we take on Pachulia's contract to get Ilyasova, which upon further review, I would not.

Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk

So, if Bucks GM offers Zaza (5.2 mil, 5.2 mil) & Ilyasova (7.9 mil, 7.9 mil, 8.4 NG) for Fields (6.25mil) & Hayes(6 mil), you'd say no?

[007]

I mean, Fields is an expiring next season, right?

That means...we could see him gone come Trade Deadline maybe? Lol.

We could trade him to a tanking team for a better player because Fields would be expiring?

Just say a serviceable wing (aka better offence than Fields and better everything than Fish).

[phiLLy]

We could trade him to a tanking team for a better player because Fields would be expiring?

Just say a serviceable wing (aka better offence than Fields and better everything than Fish).

That, could be useful.

Think we could pry away a Second Rounder, and maybe like a slightly longer, but shorter contract?

So, instead of Fields for 1-Yr 6.5 M, trade deadline, we trade him for a Second Rounder, and maybe somebody on like a 2-Yr 4M contract?

Hopefully a little more serviceable to us.

[Mapko]

I see decolo maybe going back to sanantonio. Is it just me or does he look misplaced and scared on the bench. There might be like a chemistry issue here. In sanantonio he's got his French brothers diaw and Parker.

And I would rather fill that 3rd string point guard position with an unproven d leager or overseas player or a nun drafted player (whoever made it out of camp) similar to how stone and buycks did this year. Who knows they could be the next linsanity

Why would you consider that?
Assuming we keep both Kyle & Vasquez, what if 1 gets hurt? De Colo can give you solid 12-18 minutes. I am not sure Stone or Buycks could do that.

[Abused Raptors Fan]

No, that rule only applies to rookie contract extensions. Both Patterson and GV would be signing as free agents.

Also wrong... (Lol)

The standard maximum contract length is 4 years, however, as players who qualify for their full Bird Rights, both can be offered 5 year contracts.

Edit: also, in reference to the original poster, each team can assign a designated player to a 6 year max contract extension.

[magoon]

People who think Fields is going for anything other than pure trash are dreaming. When he was assumed to be a productive player everybody thought he was overpaid, and the structure of his contract (paying $8m for a $6m cap hit) makes it even harder to trade him. He simply has no shot, has had no shot for two seasons, plus he has a history of being injured, and for all his other fine qualities as a player if you have no shot and get injured a lot, you have very little value in the NBA.

It's a shame because he's clearly a high-character guy and wants desperately to contribute, but it is what it is. His only value is his expiring contract and even that doesn't have that much value because his contract isn't big enough to make a huge difference in 2015.

(If I was Landry I'd be actively working to find a college coaching job. I think he'd make a fine coach, precisely because he's smart and he's a good glue guy on a team - that's what you want in a coach.)

[DanH]

Also wrong... (Lol)

The standard maximum contract length is 4 years, however, as players who qualify for their full Bird Rights, both can be offered 5 year contracts.

Edit: also, in reference to the original poster, each team can assign a designated player to a 6 year max contract extension.

Huh? Players with Bird Rights are free agents. By signing them to their max of 5 years, we avoid the designated player issue. I don't understand what you thought was wrong with the post.

And a 6 year contract extension is a five year contract (one year of the current contract counts in the length), so mcHAPPY's question was a valid one.

[S.R.]

Holy crap I'm so confused by this new super thread I don't know what to comment on.

[007]

People who think Fields is going for anything other than pure trash are dreaming. When he was assumed to be a productive player everybody thought he was overpaid, and the structure of his contract (paying $8m for a $6m cap hit) makes it even harder to trade him. He simply has no shot, has had no shot for two seasons, plus he has a history of being injured, and for all his other fine qualities as a player if you have no shot and get injured a lot, you have very little value in the NBA.

It's a shame because he's clearly a high-character guy and wants desperately to contribute, but it is what it is. His only value is his expiring contract and even that doesn't have that much value because his contract isn't big enough to make a huge difference in 2015.

(If I was Landry I'd be actively working to find a college coaching job. I think he'd make a fine coach, precisely because he's smart and he's a good glue guy on a team - that's what you want in a coach.)

We're only saying he would have some value as an expiring.

[thead]

No, that rule only applies to rookie contract extensions. Both Patterson and GV would be signing as free agents.

Dan do you have a source for that? My understanding was that you could have 1 designated 5 year deal on a rookie and 1 other 5 year deal on an acquired player and that everyone else had to be 4 year deals

[DanH]

Dan do you have a source for that? My understanding was that you could have 1 designated 5 year deal on a rookie and 1 other 5 year deal on an acquired player and that everyone else had to be 4 year deals

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q25

Scroll to the table at the bottom of that question, and you'll see Bird free agents can be signed to 5 year deals.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q59

Note that this section is about extensions, which must be done before the final year of a rookie contract, so it is too late to extend GV or PP. Nevertheless, it states that:

Rookie scale contracts may be extended for up to four seasons beyond the last option season in the contract, bringing the total contract length to five seasons. Teams can also select one player (called their "Designated Player") who can receive a five-year extension, bringing the total contract length to six seasons. A team can have at most one player on its roster whom they have designated for a longer extension, plus at most one player designated by another team whom they acquired in trade.

Note that this restriction applies only to extensions, not free agency.

[The Great One]

This is so STUPID. Where are all the threads?? where's the VC thread? and why put them all together? what's the POINT? so confusing. It's ridiculous.