Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Not to Spend - Cheapskate Edition

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why Not to Spend - Cheapskate Edition

    So I've been pretty adamant that right now is not a good time to spend money, and actually is the best to AVOID it.

    Everyone else seems to disagree because the 2016/2017 vet max (30%) will only be 24.5% of the salary in 2017/18, effectively making the max, not max.

    Let's look deeper. Let's start at the 2016 free agent mix and break it into 4 Tiers: Note this is opinion, and I probably forgot someone.

    True Max:
    Durant
    Horford
    Conley

    Market Max:
    DeRozan
    Batum
    Whiteside
    Drummond
    Barnes
    Wade
    Beal

    Mid Market:
    Mahinmi
    Ezeli
    Fournier
    Motiejunas
    Jones
    Meyers Leonard
    Mozgov
    Rondo
    Deng
    Hibbert
    Joe Johnson
    Jeff Green
    Ryan Anderson
    Jennings

    8-14 Mil:
    Jordan Hill
    Chalmers
    Pachulia
    Courtney Lee
    Nene
    Noah
    Jefferson
    David Lee
    Eric Gordon
    Mayo
    Ilyasova
    Marvin Williams
    Henderson
    Crawford
    __________________________________________________ __________

    Now comes the thought experiment.

    My Raptors standard for playoffs is Eastern Conference finals with one dominant round (first or second). Why? Because they need to show some serious progress because the last two years have been not so great...whole body of work here. What are you paying for?

    Say DD put up about market max numbers, but we fizzle in the playoffs again. Clearly what we are doing isn't working.

    3 options:
    - Give him the max and hope we put it together in attempt number 4
    - Give him the max to trade him mid season or in the following offseason
    - Let him walk

    Number 1 is a terrible decision.

    Number 2 is an even worse decision. Why? Because the time-delay between the salary cap, and the player's salaries will be delayed by at least 2 more years. This doesn't mean that DD's contract won't be tradeable, actually that will be easy.

    What will suck is the returning salary. We are going to have to take on at least two of those 3+ year contracts in the 8-14 mil range or the Mid Market range. Looking at that list of players doesn't inspire a lot of "yay let's turn a player into one of those great contracts!". We will come out of the deal with some bloated, long term contracts that will hinder resigning players and trades for the following two years after the deal. We could even end up with the whole process adding up to 3-4 years where we:

    - dont change after 3 playoff disappointments (by keeping DD)
    - can't change due to shitty contracts of mediocre players

    That leaves number 3, my favorite: Do Not Spend Money.

    You don't compete with this roster? You have the perfect opportunity to actually go in a new direction. Anything to try and recover assets out of DD will just delay the opportunities for the team developmentally, and hinder our ability to compete in the future free agent markets, or even take advantage of those over-spenders from the next two offseasons....


    Now this is all moot if we turn into a serious contender in this years playoffs...but honestly I just don't see it with how we play. But I'm predicting another flub because I see many of the same problems as last year, just not masked behind Vasquez and Lou...

    Also, what if we compete despite DD? Totally possible..

    Anyways, this offseason is not a good time to spend money.

  • #2
    Wait, wouldn't option two provide the opportunity to trade DD for almost no returning salary the following summer when every team gets another 20M cap boost?
    twitter.com/dhackett1565

    Comment


    • #3
      Or, we could be big spenders on actually good players (DD, Batum say) when everyone else is stuck below the cap competing for the remaining dregs. It's not my money, and I want this team to further establish itself as one of the elite franchises by shelling out some serious dough.

      Comment


      • #4
        DanH wrote: View Post
        Wait, wouldn't option two provide the opportunity to trade DD for almost no returning salary the following summer when every team gets another 20M cap boost?
        CBA FAQ wrote:
        For non-taxpaying teams (again, they must be under the tax level after the trade), the salaries that can be acquired depend on the total salaries the team is trading away:

        Non-Taxpaying Teams
        Outgoing salary Maximum incoming salary
        $0 to $9.8 million 150% of the outgoing salary, plus $100,0004
        $9.8 million to $19.6 million The outgoing salary plus $5 million2
        $19.6 million and up 125% of the outgoing salary, plus $100,000
        As I understand it, if we sign DD to 26.7 mil (30% of 89), even if the other team can fully absorb his contract and stay under the cap, we will still need to take back approximately 33.5 mil

        In order to get to that number we are going to have to take back some really, really ugly contracts...and a lot of them.

        You're right, those contracts won't be felt by us as much under the subsequent cap years, but we will still be operating near the cap by having a ton of shitty (ie production per pay - even adjusted) long term contracts. To risky

        No thanks

        Comment


        • #5
          SkywalkerAC wrote: View Post
          Or, we could be big spenders on actually good players (DD, Batum say) when everyone else is stuck below the cap competing for the remaining dregs. It's not my money, and I want this team to further establish itself as one of the elite franchises by shelling out some serious dough.
          it's not about just spending money. Ask brooklyn.

          it's about spending money at the right time.

          And I think your point is reasonable, if you can get some good players before everyone gets tons of cap space, then there's validity to that approach.

          I don't know what to do about the Derozan situation. Earlier this season if he'd demanded max i'd say you laugh and let him walk. He has played much better since, but giving him the max still seems like a mistake for this team unless other changes are made.

          Comment


          • #6
            What's your definition of "true-max" lol?

            Comment


            • #7
              OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
              As I understand it, if we sign DD to 26.7 mil (30% of 89), even if the other team can fully absorb his contract and stay under the cap, we will still need to take back approximately 33.5 mil

              In order to get to that number we are going to have to take back some really, really ugly contracts...and a lot of them.

              You're right, those contracts won't be felt by us as much under the subsequent cap years, but we will still be operating near the cap by having a ton of shitty (ie production per pay - even adjusted) long term contracts. To risky

              No thanks
              You don't know what you're talking about here.

              If you have the cap space to absorb a player's contract without going over the cap you do not need to send back any salary in a trade.

              Those percentages you quoted are for teams that are under the luxury tax threshold but do not have enough cap space to absorb the player's contract outright.

              It would probably be wise to gain a moderate understanding of the cap before sounding the alarm to all the negative cap implications of re-signing DeRozan.

              Comment


              • #8
                JWash wrote: View Post
                You don't know what you're talking about here.

                If you have the cap space to absorb a player's contract without going over the cap you do not need to send back any salary in a trade.

                Those percentages you quoted are for teams that are under the luxury tax threshold but do not have enough cap space to absorb the player's contract outright.

                It would probably be wise to gain a moderate understanding of the cap before sounding the alarm to all the negative cap implications of re-signing DeRozan.
                Sure, but how many nba teams will be willing dance partners and can absorb 25 million without going over the cap? Pretty much unheard of
                It's Klaw Season. Time to hunt.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Why Not to Spend - Cheapskate Edition

                  Funny how your favourite option is the worst/most terrible option (in my opinion).

                  How this improves our team is beyond me. So we go in a new direction (which you seem to fantasize about for the last few years)... But where???

                  Do we go in a new direction for the sake? lol. Put the team in JV's hands and hope for the best? Hope Lowry doesn't walk the following year? Hope we're bad enough to get a high draft pick? Man.....not again!

                  The last few years there were holes in our rosters. We needed better defenders. We needed a legit SF. We need a legit PF.

                  There's a saying I heard when I was child.... It goes.... If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.

                  Fix the holes. If that doesn't work. Fix the coaching. If that don't work....well we cross that bridge when we get to it.

                  This team is VERY good. Currently sitting in 2nd place.

                  Why are some people so sure that we're gonna get bounced in the first or second round?

                  The last few years have been a wait and see by Masai. Let's not act like we went all in.







                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                  Last edited by special1; Tue Jan 19th, 2016, 10:04 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    BUT yes no reason to not sign a 26 year old all star in your possession at market value.
                    It's Klaw Season. Time to hunt.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      KeonClark wrote: View Post
                      Sure, but how many nba teams will be willing dance partners and can absorb 25 million without going over the cap? Pretty much unheard of
                      There could actually be plenty depending on who spends, and how much they spend in 2016 FA. The cap is set for another 20M jump, so a team would need to just be 5M under the cap prior to the jump to have that much room. That's why basically every single team in the league has a ton of cap space the offseason, because of that jump, and another one is happening in 2017.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Really option 3 to me sounds like the "anything but DD" option. Where the future may or may not be better, but as long as DD isn't a part of it, that's something to work with. That's just the way it reads to me but hey, whatever.

                        Really to be option 3 is moronic. Pick a path. Re-sign DD and look to build on top of/with/by trading around what we have now. Or blow the whole fucking thing up. This idea to let DD walk and then see if we can still build a decent team sounds very treadmill-y to me.

                        - Giving away an asset for nothing, check.
                        - Still don't have a ton of flexibility in FA to make any improvements, check.
                        - Logical step forward to contention not evident, check.
                        - Lowered talent level of the team, check.

                        Horrible plan. If you aren't happy with the state of the team in the offseason and think it can't be improved to a contending level through any realistic means.... blow. it. up. At the end of the day the problem is that we don't have a superstar, so if you're letting DD go because you want to try a new direction to get to contention, then let that contention be through tearing it down and tanking for a superstar. Because you're only going to be that much less desirable to free agents the following year with an expiring and aging Kyle Lowry and hopefully all-star level Jonas as your only pitch to FAs.
                        Last edited by JWash; Tue Jan 19th, 2016, 10:11 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          KeonClark wrote: View Post
                          BUT yes no reason to not sign a 26 year old all star in your possession at market value.
                          And doesn't the re-signing team have the option to offer a fifth year, while bringing down the annual average salary (the "DanH DeRozan option") .... so, arguably, at least one tool ("good-will" and stability aside) to keep its All Star player (possibly/arguably), at a below market annual salary?
                          Last edited by Wild-ling#1; Tue Jan 19th, 2016, 10:17 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            JWash wrote: View Post
                            What's your definition of "true-max" lol?
                            The worth of superstars is greater than the max and has been well documented.

                            KeonClark wrote: View Post
                            Sure, but how many nba teams will be willing dance partners and can absorb 25 million without going over the cap? Pretty much unheard of
                            Ya teams love to spend up to the cap. Sounds great in theory that we will have lots of trade partners but it's not really how the NBA works.

                            27 teams this season are above the cap

                            Some teams will have cap room to go after 2017 free agents and we may be able to send DD to them...or they could just give the max to someone else who is better

                            Remember the underlying assumption is that DD is not actually worth 24.5% of the cap...teams won't just want that

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              OldSkoolCool wrote:
                              right now is not a good time to spend money, and actually is the best to AVOID it.
                              Can I also ask, what is the correct time to spend? Which offseason do you think will be a good year to spend money in?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X