Everything Derozan

[Sinbad]

I'm not pulling this out of nowhere.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle4279299/

"Whatever moves the Raptors make will have a long-term view, however, as the salary picture in the NBA is expected to change significantly during a season. The luxury tax threshold - where teams pay a dollar-for-dollar penalty for going over the salary cap - may drop as low as $61-million, compared with $71.1-million last season or the $69.9-million it will be this year.

"You have to find a way to get the right pieces in this year and roll forward and keep below that luxury tax level," Colangelo said. "It's going to get tighter and it's something to contend with."

One strategy might be to sign players for one-year contracts, possibly at a premium, to retain flexibility for next season.

"Maybe on a one-year basis you overpay a little bit," Colangelo said.

Bear in mind that this was in 09-10, during the dollar-for-dollar tax era, before the dreaded Repeater Tax and elevating tax thresholds based on how far over the cap teams were came into the picture. Then Colangelo tried to convince Bosh to sign an extension instead of becoming a UFA. Bosh declined, and the rest is history.

Masai amnestied Kleiza to duck under the tax line when he took office, though I don't hold it against him for doing so-- he was thinking rebuild, and Kleiza wasn't what he once was after his injury. But we can even go back to the Babcock days:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ticle18218310/

"Given that the Raptors were trying to deal Carter, who earns about $13-million, and salaries have to match within 15 per cent in trades, the Raptors and Hornets would have had to agree on a deal that involved a large number of players and potentially a third team to make any trade work.

As the number of players and contracts that would have been included in any deal increased, the likelihood of the Raptors making a trade decreased, given Babcock's stated intention of preserving some salary-cap flexibility and the organization's goal of avoiding the luxury tax."

Now, Babock was a horrible, horrible GM. Easily the worst in Raptors history. But the spectre of avoiding the luxury tax was looming over him. I remember wanting to tear my hair out when news broke that Babcock was passing up trades with avoiding the tax in mind. It just seems that MLSE has always had an aversion to paying the luxury tax. They'll say the right things publicly, but in practice, they'll steer clear of it.

[DanH]

Yeah, so, zero evidence of gymnastics by Masai to stay under the tax.

[Sinbad]

Yeah, so, zero evidence of gymnastics by Masai to stay under the tax.

Err, did you miss the part where he amnestied Kleiza to duck under the tax? I didn't include a quote, but here's one:

https://www.thestar.com/sports/rapto...ht_buycks.html

By using the amnesty clause on forward Linas Kleiza — effectively cutting him while still having to pay his $4.6 million salary this season — the Raptors cleared up a situation they didn’t want to have to worry about before the tax penalties are assessed a year from now.

While it’s only the team’s salary obligations on July 1, 2014 that count towards the tax, and other ways might come up to shave salary during the season, there was a sense that getting it out of way before the amnesty window closed Tuesday was best.

“We thought it was safer now to do it,” Raptors general manager Masai Ujiri said after Toronto’s 81-70 summer-league win over the Sacramento Kings on Tuesday. “Sometimes with those things it’s on your mind the whole time and you don’t want to end up doing something funny or losing something because you’re trying to get under the tax later on.”

I mean, it's obvious that the unofficial mandate from MLSE has been to avoid the tax. Once again, I'm not making this up. Maybe that changes going forward, for "the right player". Masai has repeatedly stated that he has permission to spend into the luxury tax on numerous occasions. But I'll believe it when I see it. That's all I'm saying.

[DanH]

Err, did you miss the part where he amnestied Kleiza to duck under the tax? I didn't include a quote, but here's one:

https://www.thestar.com/sports/rapto...ht_buycks.html



I mean, it's obvious that the unofficial mandate from MLSE has been to avoid the tax. Once again, I'm not making this up. Maybe that changes going forward, for "the right player". Masai has repeatedly stated that he has permission to spend into the luxury tax on numerous occasions. But I'll believe it when I see it. That's all I'm saying.

The amnesty was use it or lose it. They were running out of players to use it on, and the amnesty not only clears tax but also useable cap room. The choice was basically Bargs or Kleiza, and Bargs got us a first rounder. There's a difference between ducking the tax when you SHOULD be in the tax (ie cap gymnastics, like trading away a guy due a raise, like OKC did with Harden), and not paying the tax for a losing team. Just because BC left this team a smoking pile of garbage that was due to pay the tax somehow, and Ujiri made a common sense move to avoid doing so for a team that would lose a bunch of games to start the season and short of a James Dolan panic attack would have been blown up mid-season, doesn't mean he's done anything to "duck" the tax.

And somehow OKC seems to be right in the race to keep Durant in spite of making the most publicized tax-ducking move in the history of the NBA (which Durant had a front seat to), so I think your concerns are a little overblown.

The reality is, the team has never had a 50 win team before. They've literally never had a reason to go into the tax. If you are paying tax to scrape together 45+ wins, you have far bigger problems than ownership spending. If the owners put a mandate in to avoid the tax for those teams, good for them. If BC was free to spend willy nilly to try to make that team a winner we'd probably still be digging out of the crap he'd have buried us under.

[Miekenstien]

, Babock was a horrible, horrible GM. Easily the worst in Raptors history. But the spectre of avoiding the luxury tax was looming over him. I remember wanting to tear my hair out when news broke that Babcock was passing up trades with avoiding the tax in mind. It just seems that MLSE has always had an aversion to paying the luxury tax. They'll say the right things publicly, but in practice, they'll steer clear of it.

i agree babcock was a horrible gm but we have different owners now. the teacher's union was adamant on profits. bell/rogers owns all the media you read/see the raptors on except news papers, i think.

not going into the tax when the situation doesn't demand it is smart. the tax is made to punish repeat offenders so the longer you can remain a non taxed team the better when you do finally have the right situation. poker players don't go all in for nothing. being prudent is smart business.

hypothetical they don't amnesty klieza and pay luxury tax. are we a better team? was paying 9 million, assuming dollar for dollar, worth klieza? then the next year in the cap it is 1.5 so up to 12 million etc. etc.

http://blog.surepayroll.com/nba-payrolls-2015-2016/
this year's champions have a 54 000 000 tax bill. that is higher than both portland and orlando's salaries. next year their taxes will be higher.

[Mess]

I think it helps. US Olympic team coaching staff won't stand for non-effort defensively, ball-stopping, or garbage shot-selection. They'll stress sticking to his strengths and filling a specific role. If not, he'll get benched. Coach K, Thibodeau, and Boheim won't tolerate anything less.

Imagine a dream scenario where demar comes back from Team USA a complete player. Has a 3, Plays D, No forced shots. I'm not holding my breath but it's a fun thought. I think it comes from, as you say, not being the focal point/playing too many minutes, which requires them to share the ball and play smarter. When you're on a team with the finest you dont want to let the team down and the embarassment of screwing up. I really hope some of this experience gets carried over into the new season on Demar and Kyle's part.

Even Melo isn't a ballhog on the Olympic team. Of course, he can just gun from the outside all game while others feed him open shots. DD's role will be different than Melo's, and way different from what the Raps ask of him. If anything, if he excels doing more things on offense maybe Casey and the staff can learn from it and they'll be more willing to diversify the offensive system - and remind DD that good things can happen when he doesn't repeatedly try to iso Paul George because that's his job.

[JawsGT]

A couple of years ago the Raps were STARTING two rookies (JV and Ross). So Powell in his 3rd year and Poeltl/Siakim in their second year along with whatever you get out of Bebe and Caboclo in the company of Carroll and two all stars in Lowry and DeMar and JV, that's your nine roster spots for 2017/18 assuming you haven't signed anyone else or traded to upgrade. If Ross and Patterson are gone it's because you traded to improve the roster, probably at PF.

By 2017/18 JV is hitting from mid-range at least, Lowry and Carroll are shooting 3's and DeMar probably has a better stroke from 3. Poeltl and Siakim have midrange shots and Powell and Caboclo have three point shots. Powell, Poeltl, Siakim and Caboclo are all quick on their feet and athletic. If Delon is still on the Raps he is a good defender, a shooter and able to handle the ball. That is not a bad team to have. And Toronto won't have that team because Masai will have upgraded it, probably significantly.

Frankly, I don't see the concern.

well i've got some high hopes for the prospects as well. But right now, I'd only expect decent contributions from Powell, Wright and Poeltl. And both Powell and Wright need a move or two in order to open up minutes for them. Poeltl is a rookie. Bebe and Bruno aren't going to help, Bebe probably never, and Bruno needs another season of seasoning at least. Siakim is a big question mark for me.

And 2 years ago is alot different than now. We were on the verge of tanking, not trying to plan to be repeat conference finalists or better. I'm just trying to understand how we build a true contender under the situation of having a capped out starting lineup, which is the situation we would be in going into next offseason had we acquired Millsap. And any Millsap caliber player would likely command a high salary. So we'd have a very solid starting unit, but a very young and inexperienced bench that we would rely on to provide depth and fill key roles, and no avenue to get those good vets to round out the roster.

Few true contenders, as far as I know, are in this situation. OKC has relied on some young talent for sure, but they were backed by 2 of the top 5 players on the planet. The cavs are full of vets, as are the spurs and clips. GSW hit the gold mine in the draft, but also brought in the right vets at the right time to grow and nurture the younger guys, and didn't get to contender status until those young guys had experience and took the reins.

What's our path? We need depth to surround Lowry, Demar and JV cause these guys aren't superstars. And if we are gonna continue our trajectory should we be relying on rookies and sophomores to fill 3-4 key roles? There are 10 other roster spots to fill outside the starting unit. I don't mind operating like we did this year, with the end of bench filled with youngsters, but you gotta have some Pat's and Cojo's on the bench too. And those guys are hard to get when you go into the offseason with a capped out starting unit and bunch of low-salaried, inexperienced players in tow.

I'm preaching patience. Don't commit any more money long term this season. Get the kids some minutes next season. We haven't reached our window. We are at least two seasons away IMO. We are gonna need some of the youngsters to be key players on this team regardless. Maybe when they are ready for new contracts and we can use their bird rights to exceed the cap we will be the best position to really become contenders. We go all in too soon and I fear we'll find ourselves in a position that will be hard to improve upon.

[Hotshot]

Can't put a price on that.

[big boi]

Were the Warriors trying to sign Demar?

[big boi]

And the price was 139M over 5 years

[Hotshot]

And the price was 139M over 5 years

You don't get it but thanks for playing.

[big boi]

You don't get it but thanks for playing.

I think I do get it. You are commenting on how loyal Demar is and write that you can't put a price on loyalty. On the same day as Durant moved to Golden State. Okay.

Well as far as I'm aware Golden State weren't interested in signing Demar. So I'm not seeing an equivalency with Durant. As far as I can tell, OKC, San Antonio, Cleveland or Boston weren't beating down Demar's door either.

I don't think Demar had as many options as Durant. And someone posted that Demar signed the 4th biggest contract of all time. Again, for a shooting guard who can't shoot and can't guard.

As Chris Rock says: Men are only as faithful as their options. There weren't any 10's wanting to get with Demar. Only 5's, 6's or 7's. And Maybe the raps are an 8. And they also paid him $28M per.

[Barolt]

The Warriors weren't even thinking about signing DeMar unless Durant said no. Maybe they consider it if Durant is off the table and they don't want to commit to Barnes. But it seems like DeMar was at best their plan C.

[Hotshot]

I think I do get it..

Nope you don't.

You are commenting on how loyal Demar is and write that you can't put a price on loyalty. On the same day as Durant moved to Golden State. Okay.

Its not that you can't put a price on loyalty, but the fact that you can is the difference maker. When you have that option to keep a player that's been here a long time because he wants to be here, the money means squat if he doesn't.

DD had suitors but did not entertain them but signed on that dotted line while not getting the full amount which he could have.

I don't think Demar had as many options as Durant. And someone posted that Demar signed the 4th biggest contract of all time. Again, for a shooting guard who can't shoot and can't guard.

DD had plenty of options and its not about GSW but he decided to not even entertain them.

This is the 4th biggest contract of all time because the NBA is making the most amount of money all the time, you can't compare this season with any other time in NBA history.

As Chris Rock says: Men are only as faithful as their options. There weren't any 10's wanting to get with Demar. Only 5's, 6's or 7's. And Maybe the raps are an 8. And they also paid him $28M per.

This isn't about getting laid, this was a business decision as well as a personal one. If DD wanted to go to GSW he would have entertained that notion and met with them but he wouldn't have gotten the money he wanted. The fact that he didn't entertain anybody is the what I am trying to tell you why loyalty is not always about the money.

[big boi]

Demar got as much as he could have got from any other team.

Again. Demar did not have the same options as Durant did. So you're making a false equivalency.

If San Antonio, OKC, Golden State and Boston were all falling over themselves to sign Demar, which of course they weren't, and he chose to stay in Toronto anyway - then you could make that equivalency and be all judgey about Durant and bat your eyelids at how chivalrous Demar is.