yardbarker

Why do we care so much about the money?

Moderators: Yuri Vaultin, tsherkin, Alfred, FluLikeSymptoms, Rhettmatic, itbobby007, Undefeated, DG88, Morris_Shatford

Post#76 Re: Why do we care so much about the money?
Tue Jan 8, 2013 1:36 pm by lucky777s

The 1.5 million per year, per contract may be exactly why the Raps cannot complete a Rudy Gay trade today.

Teams looking to dump quality players are usually doing it for character or salary cap reasons. If all you have is poor value contracts it makes it much harder to take advantage of those situations.

Cap room is just as important for trades as it is signing FA's too. And if your team is always close to the tax line and one of your draft picks explodes into max money range you have to jettison other big contracts to avoid the tax.

Paying crap players 5+ Mill for no reason whatsoever is the dumbest thing a GM can do. The Fields signing is just insane. The Kleiza signing and Barnes pursuit was years too late and made no sense at the time.

Yes you can move any contract. But having to do that usually costs you something - a draft pick, a downgrade in talent, a dead weight contract, a lost year as you are forced to wait out an expiring to re-tool once again. The lost opportunity of signing the right guy.

The Raps may never tank hard enough to get a first overall pick, but we could have taken on a contract like BDavis and got that first overall pick with salary cap space. that one move may save the CLE franchise who have otherwise not drafted that well. And now they have cap space again this summer and a guy in Varajeo that many, many teams would want.
lucky777s
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,587
And1: 680
Joined: Jun 20, 2009
Top

Post#77 Re: Why do we care so much about the money?
Tue Jan 8, 2013 1:36 pm by SDM

Kleiza, Calderon, Bargnani, Fields, and Amir are, collectively, $25M overpaid this season, at least. Next year, DD and Fields will be a good $10M overpaid, collectively. These guys aren't overpaid slightly... it's 30%+.

This isn't "meaningless whining". This team sucks because $5M is riding the bench, $7M can't get off it, $10M is perpetually injured, and $6.5M can't play more than 25 minutes a game, and next year, $9M can't hit a three ball or pass.

Also, I hope no one currently bitching about Calderon's deal plans to be relieved in the offseason. All that money is gone and invested in another guy who didn't deserve the contract-- Derozan. It's just an endless cycle of garbage. A smart GM saves the capspace if confronted with a Derozan or nothing proposition, gets a league average SG at the minimum (like, gee, Alan Anderson), and waits for teams to dump picks and contracts on them. When you're a very bad team, it is always better to take a shot at two guys you don't know, instead of committing to the devil who keeps pounding you in the butt.
Image
SDM
RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 18,758
And1: 615
Joined: Jan 8, 2004
Top

Post#78 Re: Why do we care so much about the money?
Tue Jan 8, 2013 2:45 pm by Scase

416 wrote:
Scase wrote:Are you effing kidding me?

It's called VALUE. If a player is paid more than he's worth that's bad VALUE. Thus making him a hindrance instead of an asset. And if said hindrance isn't working out his VALUE is lower due to being overpaid and harder to TRADE. Thus shackling the team with that bad VALUE contract that no one wants. Having an entire team of these causes a team to become what the raps are. A crappy team going nowhere fast.

How you have made it to the age you have and not learned the value of a dollar is beyond me.


I know you can handle it, so going to be a devils advocate here.

Getting good value players is a good rule of thumb, but not the golden measuring stick that most make it out to be.

If that was true, you can compose a whole team with serviceable players on rookie contracts; it'll meet the criteria of players > value of contract. However this team won't probably go anywhere.

Some finance savvy folks will say that if you have assets > book value, then you can flip them for better assets. That is entirely true given that the market is liquid. However the NBA is not like the stock market where you can flip assets whenever you choose to. Illiquidity is a cost, and thus a premium has to be charged on that.

Then there is gaming. This really @#$%s up the fair value of assets. Colangelo trying to block a Nash trade to NY by offering Landry a bloated contract will mess up his value because the contract value isn't tied directly to the value of the asset (the player) anymore. This is one example where there are other factors than intrinsic value of the player dictating the value of the contract.

Also on the point of intrinsic value, I agree that this is the "truest" way to equate contract value with the player/asset. However without a crystal ball/hindsight, valuation in this manner will most likely be off. This is because intrinsic value tries to capture both the current value of the asset as well as the future value of the asset. Since it is too difficult to predict what the future value of any player is going to be, in practice, there is a mismatch between player and contract value.

The only alternative that is left then is comparative value. This method is using similar assets to value your own. The downside here is that, unless you are comparing your assets with another that is accurately valued, player/contract value will be misaligned once again.

And the list goes on to as why contracts are valued improperly. A GM's job on the line, injuries, cognitive biases, etc all play into this.

This is why it is difficult to offer contracts based on wins/dollar, in a vacuum it works, in practicality it only serves as a guideline at best.

Very good post.

But, I'm not talking about EXACT values for player contracts. As you stated there are many outlying factors that go into determining what a contact ends up being, the Fields one for instance had virtually nothing to do with his play at all and 90% about cock blocking the Knicks. The issue being, is that means his contract only has value to US. No other team (hilariously enough especially not the Knicks) is going to look at his contract and think "Well the value is bloated due to the Nash shenanigans let's pick him up anyways." quite the opposite actually.

Fields' contract is very bad value, the reasons are irrelevant after the t's have been crossed and the i's dotted. The fact remains that a player with his skillset and achieving the numbers he has can be acquired for roughly half the money, which becomes more apparent when you do as you suggested and gauge value by comparing contracts to players with similar numbers/impact.

As for predicting future performance and gauging that into the value of a contract, yes it can be a gamble but many times it's not enough to drastically affect the overarching value of the contract. Generally after a player has been in the league for 5 years you can pretty much assume that's the type of player they are, while there are exceptions they are exactly that, exceptions. Except for one type of contract......rookie extensions. This also seems to be an area of weakness for BC in particular too. Case in point Bargs and DD's contract extensions, both bloated with an unlikely chance of them ever becoming worthwhile let alone valued assets.

I'm not suggesting we go straight moneyball on this because, quite frankly in the NBA that simply doesn't work. It's a superstar dominated league where one player can affect the entire outcome of a team. But when constantly saddling a team with numerous Fields "like" contracts the ability to acquire one of said superstars is drastically lower.


As for all the people clamoring "WELL TELL ME WHICH FA WE COULD HAVE SIGNED HUH GENIUS NONE OF THEM WANNA COME HERE!". Hate to break it to you guys but having valued contracts and cap space aren't JUST for FA signings, package numerous valued contracts and get a single much better player in return. Now you tell me how many of THOSE we would have been able to do with all those terrible contracts over the years we've been subjected to.
Image
Props TZ!
(1 of 10)
Scase




Lead Assistant
User avatar
Posts: 4,640
And1: 1,553
Joined: Feb 2, 2009
Location: Ottawa by way of MTL
Top

Post#79 Re: Why do we care so much about the money?
Tue Jan 8, 2013 2:53 pm by Tofubeque

I can't believe how many people here are doubting the worth of "value" and completely missing the point.

Do you want this team to get better, in any way? Here are our options: we can trade players for draft picks and tank, trade players for established talent, or trade players along with our own future picks for expirings and go after free agents. When you're a capped-out team, that's all there is for you to do.

Having overpaid players makes every single one of those options harder. Every trade we try to complete, we'll have to make greater sacrifices and get less in return, because we're putting other teams at the disadvantage of paying for our mediocre talent. It's common sense.

The only way you wouldn't be offended by our awful contracts is if you think Derozan, Ross and Valanciunas are all going to become all-stars, so it's all good. In which case you're an idiot, and even then, surrounding them with overpaid role players would hinder our ability to contend.
Image
props Turbozone
Tofubeque
Assistant Coach
User avatar
Posts: 4,298
And1: 542
Joined: Jul 17, 2009
Location: at the Pizza Hut. At the Taco Bell. At the combination Pizza Hut and Taco Bell
Top

Post#80 Re: Why do we care so much about the money?
Tue Jan 8, 2013 7:14 pm by ruckus

Tofubeque wrote:I can't believe how many people here are doubting the worth of "value" and completely missing the point.

Do you want this team to get better, in any way? Here are our options: we can trade players for draft picks and tank, trade players for established talent, or trade players along with our own future picks for expirings and go after free agents. When you're a capped-out team, that's all there is for you to do.

Having overpaid players makes every single one of those options harder. Every trade we try to complete, we'll have to make greater sacrifices and get less in return, because we're putting other teams at the disadvantage of paying for our mediocre talent. It's common sense.

The only way you wouldn't be offended by our awful contracts is if you think Derozan, Ross and Valanciunas are all going to become all-stars, so it's all good. In which case you're an idiot, and even then, surrounding them with overpaid role players would hinder our ability to contend.


I have to ask, who are our awful contracts? Which of our players are so grossly overpaid that we have to give more to get less? Is Derozan (after this season) really that overpaid? As avid fans, we know his true deficiencies, but, on paper, isn't a 18-20ppg, 4-5 rebound, 2-3 assists per game shooting guard worth at least 10 mil? Same goes for Bargs. I can't stand his game but, around the league, a 20 ppg, 5 RPG pf would probably cost you around 10 mil on the open market.


Maybe I'm in the wrong here but, cap space and team direction are not intrinsically linked. Yes, cap space is a tool but, really when your payroll is in the bottom sixth of the league, how much are your bad contracts really hampering you?

I said it in an earlier post, bc's overall vision is flawed. His cap management is not.



Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
ruckus
Lead Assistant
User avatar
Posts: 5,390
And1: 428
Joined: May 18, 2007
Location: From the Slums of Shaolin...
Top

Post#81 Re: Why do we care so much about the money?
Tue Jan 8, 2013 7:48 pm by lobosloboslobos

SDM wrote:Kleiza, Calderon, Bargnani, Fields, and Amir are, collectively, $25M overpaid this season, at least. Next year, DD and Fields will be a good $10M overpaid, collectively. These guys aren't overpaid slightly... it's 30%+.


Our total salary is $59m, 26th in the league. If our guys are $25m overpaid then we should be coming in at about $34m according to you, which would put us far, far, below the smallest team salary total in the league. So either you're right, and BC screwed up by not having us paying out 30% less than the 29th lowest team salary in the league, or...possibly...money isn't as big a problem as you think.

SDM wrote:This isn't "meaningless whining". This team sucks because $5M is riding the bench, $7M can't get off it, $10M is perpetually injured, and $6.5M can't play more than 25 minutes a game, and next year, $9M can't hit a three ball or pass.

Also, I hope no one currently bitching about Calderon's deal plans to be relieved in the offseason. All that money is gone and invested in another guy who didn't deserve the contract-- Derozan. It's just an endless cycle of garbage. A smart GM saves the capspace if confronted with a Derozan or nothing proposition, gets a league average SG at the minimum (like, gee, Alan Anderson), and waits for teams to dump picks and contracts on them. When you're a very bad team, it is always better to take a shot at two guys you don't know, instead of committing to the devil who keeps pounding you in the butt.


see my sig
lobosloboslobos
Analyst
User avatar
Posts: 3,723
And1: 673
Joined: Jan 8, 2009
Location: 9999 ftw
Top

Post#82 Re: Why do we care so much about the money?
Tue Jan 8, 2013 9:03 pm by FluLikeSymptoms

I was fine with Jose's and Andrea's contracts when they were signed, so I don't complain now. PGs were rare before the 2009 draft, he was a true PG, an elite shooter and high % finisher at the rim. Andrea is a huge talent (wasted, sure) so the risk/reward was there. I think both of those guys would have been paid at least what they got on the market. $9M and $10M per? No problem, quite justifiable. I could handle the trade kickers, too (JC 10%, AB 5%).

Thanks for the deets, Sham.

Never had a problem with Amir's contract. Look at the deals Charlie, Gooden and Baby Al got that summer. Yuck.

Hedo, Kapono, Fields, LK - terrible, WTF money. I can deal with paying extra money for the right fit, but these were all bad players AND bad fits at SF. Complete waste. $2-3M vets on 1+1 deals would yield the same results without handcuffing us.

Demar's extension was plain unnecessary. He was never going to outplay 4/40M and were we're the only team which could have offered a 5th year next summer. Why, Bryan?

I've always felt that if Toronto is not a desired FA destination, just put the money into coaching and scouting.
FluLikeSymptoms
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
User avatar
Posts: 9,050
And1: 1,590
Joined: Nov 26, 2004
Location: TBD
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Toronto Raptors


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: albinorap, Aquafina, Assassin [IX], Badonkadonk, Boomshakalaka23, bozothepope, carl_english, Chriscross, chuckdevlin, Courtside, Crazomali, Danny1616, hell_razor, Indeed, J.R., JackedFinancier, Jstock12, kayliecee, koolguy, Los Manos, Mikestro, Moneytalks, Morse Code, Mr Burns, Mr. Perfect, Mr_NC, MS13, Muhammad_Ali, NinjaBro, no_hops_23, NorthernNemesis, Northface82, One And Done, Qhawe, Raps in 4, raptors3, raptors89, Rare, Rejected, right between the eyes, RomaniaLuvTR, sauga_raptor, Skeezo, Snakeyes, strudel forever, TDots_Finest, TDotsfinest97, tesla4, The Watcher, The1llness, Throwback24, TottiGOAT, truth18, Tyrone Slothrop, VC15Era, vietsensfan, WhiskeyFingers