Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything VanVleet

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

  • But...

    Van Vleet is comparable to American taxation.
    He would work ok with the elite rich teams,
    not in middling ones like the Raps.

    Comment


    • I don’t want Fred on this team, but losing him for nothing like Stein is reporting is about to happen… wow. You have to at least retain the asset for trades. This is a colossal organizational failure and a total misread of the trade deadline

      Comment


      • BrydenB wrote: View Post
        I don’t want Fred on this team, but losing him for nothing like Stein is reporting is about to happen… wow. You have to at least retain the asset for trades. This is a colossal organizational failure and a total misread of the trade deadline
        I don't think so if the rumors of the offers being like Brandon Boston and a 2nd round pick for Fred.

        You could retain him, but $40M per year is a lot for a team that will be basically be at the luxury tax if they re-sign Fred at $40M and Poeltl. If it was $30M, might be different.

        Comment


        • A.I wrote: View Post

          I don't think so if the rumors of the offers being like Brandon Boston and a 2nd round pick for Fred.

          You could retain him, but $40M per year is a lot for a team that will be basically be at the luxury tax if they re-sign Fred at $40M and Poeltl. If it was $30M, might be different.
          So what's a realistic offer the Raps can make then? $30M x 4yrs? Can they go over $30M per without being in the luxury tax?

          Comment


          • BrydenB wrote: View Post
            I don’t want Fred on this team, but losing him for nothing like Stein is reporting is about to happen… wow. You have to at least retain the asset for trades. This is a colossal organizational failure and a total misread of the trade deadline
            Hold on sec, what did stein say, common now, don't b doing this 2 me, this is like winning a championship, when it's official and if when he signs on the dotted line with another team than I can celebrate.
            As for compensation, they messed that up at the deadline..but now I could care less, hell I would give up compensation 2 get this guy off this roster.
            "Never apologize for coming to me. Office hours are for patients.
            My kitchen is always open to friends"

            Comment


            • LJ2 wrote: View Post

              So what's a realistic offer the Raps can make then? $30M x 4yrs? Can they go over $30M per without being in the luxury tax?
              I think that's realistic. I believe we have the room to do Jak at 20 and Fred at 30, with a bit of leeway under the tax from what I remember.

              Comment


              • BrydenB wrote: View Post
                I don’t want Fred on this team, but losing him for nothing like Stein is reporting is about to happen… wow. You have to at least retain the asset for trades. This is a colossal organizational failure and a total misread of the trade deadline
                There's more opportunity cost involved than you're making it out to seem. Most trades at the deadline either would have had us taking on salary for the upcoming season or had miniscule sweetener. Him simply walking gives us a lot of flexility under the tax that we can e.g. use on a free agent with the full MLE. Retaining the asset works too, but the idea that you have to trade every asset before you lose them is a pretty good example of loss aversion bias.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion

                Comment


                • SkywalkerAC wrote: View Post

                  There's more opportunity cost involved than you're making it out to seem. Most trades at the deadline either would have had us taking on salary for the upcoming season or had miniscule sweetener. Him simply walking gives us a lot of flexility under the tax that we can e.g. use on a free agent with the full MLE. Retaining the asset works too, but the idea that you have to trade every asset before you lose them is a pretty good example of loss aversion bias.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion
                  I know what loss aversion is, I work in the financial markets.

                  You don’t have to trade every asset when they are coming up. Taking stock of the best case scenario for this team with Fred staying, along with the risk of him leaving, the prudent move would have been to move him imo.

                  Also, I’ve said this on the forum before: the real opportunity cost was not trying to get further into the lottery and losing next year’s pick (most likely) too.

                  Comment


                  • Let's see what is Plan B
                    Only one thing matters: We The Champs.

                    Comment


                    • Absolute disaster if they have nobody to replace Fred.
                      Only one thing matters: We The Champs.

                      Comment


                      • MixxAOR wrote: View Post
                        Absolute disaster if they have nobody to replace Fred.
                        It’s only a disaster if they plan on replacing him and running it back to stay competitive. If they want to rebuild and trade Siakam it’s not really a disaster.

                        But as posted above could have tanked post all star game last year and had a better pick than 13.

                        anyway could all still be noise

                        Comment


                        • If they need to up their bid from 4/120, which is what I've been assuming, they have two options.

                          Go to 5 years, 5/157 with a starting salary of 27M. That likely still lets them operate under the tax, if barely.

                          Or, stick to the 4 year offer but up the salary. If 4/120 doesn't do it, is 4/140 enough to outbid 2/83? Another 60M guaranteed is not nothing and much less likely to be earned back if he takes the short term offer. That's a 31.3M starting salary, about a 4.2M hit compared to previous assumptions. So they trade Boucher for someone making 7M or less, or nothing at all. Or you can waive and stretch Otto, that would save exactly 4.2M this year (at the cost of 2.1M the next two years after, which would be annoying). Of course, the more you pay Fred the more interesting the next couple years get in terms of fitting everybody in...
                          twitter.com/dhackett1565

                          Comment


                          • MixxAOR wrote: View Post
                            Absolute disaster if they have nobody to replace Fred.
                            If "absolute disaster" means finishing bottom 6 and retaining our 2024 FRP while getting the young guys more experience, then maybe that's the way to go.

                            Comment


                            • golden wrote: View Post

                              If "absolute disaster" means finishing bottom 6 and retaining our 2024 FRP while getting the young guys more experience, then maybe that's the way to go.
                              Sadly, it's not realistic unless they lose Jak and trade Pascal too, and even then it will depend heavily on avoiding getting useful players back in that trade and having enough guys "hurt" throughout the year.
                              twitter.com/dhackett1565

                              Comment


                              • Can a 3 way trade work:

                                Houston has cap space and doesn’t need a sign and trade. But Miami might waive streatch Kyle Lowry. Would they send a 2’d round pick to Houston to save hit from streatching?
                                Fred goes to Houston. Second rounder from Miami.
                                Kyle Lowry to Raptors.
                                No one to Miami. They need to cut costs

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X