Around the NBA 12

[SWedd523]

I don't really care how much they do or should make.

I don't want to keep non-all-star caliber players around long term as top 7 rotation players*.


*Unless we have the star players ready to compete for deep playoff runs where overpaying for role players makes (somewhat) more sense.

Celtics giving Grant Williams a 4/60 to be their main big man sub and keep their stars happy as they push for titles? Makes sense.

Hornets giving PJ a 4/60 to spend another 4 years hoping to make the playoffs? Doesn't make sense.

[JMAC3]

I don't really care how much they do or should make.

I don't want to keep non-all-star caliber players around long term as top 7 rotation players*.


*Unless we have the star players ready to compete for deep playoff runs where overpaying for role players makes (somewhat) more sense.

Celtics giving Grant Williams a 4/60 to be their main big man sub and keep their stars happy as they push for titles? Makes sense.

Hornets giving PJ a 4/60 to spend another 4 years hoping to make the playoffs? Doesn't make sense.

Yeah, how dare they not have a top 7 full of all-stars.
I think you need to do some roster Construction research my man.
15 million per year is nothing in today's NBA. As mentioned this is what low end starters/good rotation players make whether there are stars on their team or not.

[SWedd523]

You and I have had this exact back and forth at least three times. We clearly disagree so I'm not going to continue rehashing it with you.

Timing is the important factor. Every good team gives PJ type contracts AFTER they get their stars, not before.

Zero good teams have a bunch of sub-all-stars on middle of the road contracts.

You talk about roster construction and "average contract value" over and over again either forgetting the chicken vs egg concept or willfully ignoring it to be obtuse.

Again:

PJ on a 4/60 for the Celtics, Heat, Sixers is good value.

PJ on a 4/60 for the Hornets, Rockets, Pistons is not good value.

[LofJ]

We'll have our stars with Wembanyama, LaMelo, and a discounted Miles. A PJ, Mark, and Wemby frontcourt rotation is worth whatever we'll pay PJ (within reason).

Spoiler:

I know this isn't going to happen, just let me be happy for about a week longer.

[JMAC3]

You and I have had this exact back and forth at least three times. We clearly disagree so I'm not going to continue rehashing it with you.

Timing is the important factor. Every good team gives PJ type contracts AFTER they get their stars, not before.

Zero good teams have a bunch of sub-all-stars on middle of the road contracts.

You talk about roster construction and "average contract value" over and over again either forgetting the chicken vs egg concept or willfully ignoring it to be obtuse.

Again:

PJ on a 4/60 for the Celtics, Heat, Sixers is good value.

PJ on a 4/60 for the Hornets, Rockets, Pistons is not good value.

Sigh...
How does letting PJ walk for nothing when we have the money to sign him help?
Are you using that money to sign a star player? Seems pretty doubtful.
So just let all our non-allstars leave hoping that somehow that leads to a star magically. Then spend the next 3 years trying to get guys like PJ to play around the star? That logic makes no sense my man.

Celtics are paying Smart 18 million, White 16, Brogdon 22, Horford 26 million.
Nuggets paying KCP 14 million, Gordon 20 million
Kings are paying Huerter 14, Barnes 18
Grizz are paying Adams 18, Jones 15, Kennard 14
Clippers are paying Powell 16, Morris 16, Gordon 20.
I can list more if you really don't believe successful teams are doing this....

Why are you acting like paying a guy 15 million is the death of a team?

If we draft a star in the next two years having PJ on a market level deal seems like a good thing, not a bad thing.

[SWedd523]

We'll have our stars with Wembanyama, LaMelo, and a discounted Miles. A PJ, Mark, and Wemby frontcourt rotation is worth whatever we'll pay PJ (within reason).

Spoiler:

I know this isn't going to happen, just let me be happy for about a week longer.

Ironically, drafting Wemby definitely makes me more amenable to retaining a guy like PJ since our starting bigs would be on rookie deals throughout the duration

[NCHeels2008]

Depending on what he commands in a S-n-T/his contract I'd be fine letting him go if we don't land a top 2 pick. The next few guys all play the 2-4 positions, that compounded with Miles return, leads to an overpaid bench guy in PJ. If he signs at a low starter salary (12-17$m/year) though I think you keep him and see how next year plays out.

[yosemiteben]

Every good team gives PJ type contracts AFTER they get their stars, not before.

Zero good teams have a bunch of sub-all-stars on middle of the road contracts.

Can you name a single team that got a star that they knew would be a franchise player and then had the cap space to give substantial role player FAs to join? Seems like you're going to need big, moveable contracts to pair with picks to accomplish that.

[yosemiteben]

We'll have our stars with Wembanyama, LaMelo, and a discounted Miles. A PJ, Mark, and Wemby frontcourt rotation is worth whatever we'll pay PJ (within reason).

Spoiler:

I know this isn't going to happen, just let me be happy for about a week longer.

Ironically, drafting Wemby definitely makes me more amenable to retaining a guy like PJ since our starting bigs would be on rookie deals throughout the duration

Maybe there's some different assumptions going on. Are you planning on getting your star with cap space?

[SWedd523]

Does it matter how you get your star players?

The teams mentioned prior by another poster:

Celtics--Tatum and Brown put you in a position to eat (paying Smart 18 million, White 16, Brogdon 22, Horford 26 million)
Nuggets--Joker and Murray put you in a position to eat (paying KCP 14 million, Gordon 20 million)
Kings--Fox and Sabonis put you in a position to eat (paying Huerter 14, Barnes 18)
Grizz--Morant and JJJ put you in a position to eat (paying Adams 18, Jones 15, Kennard 14)
Clippers--Kawhi and George put you in a position to eat (paying Powell 16, Morris 16, Gordon 20)

The worst team on that list won 48 games, two others are title favorites. Going over the cap to sign high end role players makes sense for them because they're trying to get a title.

The Hornets are one of the worst teams in the league (this year) and have one "star" player. Even with Miles back they're a fringe playoff team who has been destroyed in two play-in games. Does it seem like a sound investment to you to lock into that core group long term?

[Diop]

I could see both sides and was on the fence, but I think I'm leaning towards SWedds way of thinking.
If we land Wemby, I'd pay the money to have PJ as a solid multipositional player. If we don't and we're still building and looking for a star to pair with Ball/lead this team, then I'd be tempted to let him walk so we don't have another overpaid role player on the books.
PJ is a Marv Williams type player, solid 3 n D with occasional outbursts of high scoring.

[yosemiteben]

Does it matter how you get your star players?

If your complaint is it is a waste of cap space, then how you plan to use cap space is central to your complaint.

If you plan to get your star via FA, that both generally seems unlikely and will almost certainly eat up the lion's share of whatever cap space you have available.

If you plan to get your star via the draft, you're going to want to not let talent walk for nothing / you're going to want larger contracts to bundle with picks to upgrade the roster.

If you plan to get your star via trade, you're going to want larger contracts to bundle with picks to get the star.

[vexco]

too bad we won't go after a good coach

[SWedd523]

Does it matter how you get your star players?

If your complaint is it is a waste of cap space, then how you plan to use cap space is central to your complaint.

If you plan to get your star via FA, that both generally seems unlikely and will almost certainly eat up the lion's share of whatever cap space you have available.

If you plan to get your star via the draft, you're going to want to not let talent walk for nothing / you're going to want larger contracts to bundle with picks to upgrade the roster.

If you plan to get your star via trade, you're going to want larger contracts to bundle with picks to get the star.

-You can't sign a star with available space if you don't have available space.

-I'm not necessarily advocating for maintaining a bunch of open cap space y2y

-I AM advocating, however, to maintain flexibility by (first) only signing star players/all-star caliber guys to long term deals and having roster rollover with vets and role players on cheaper and/or shorter deals while rotating rookie scale guys to see if they have star potential.

-PJ on a long term contract is no longer an asset

-The FO lost their leverage by not trading him last year or the year prior (which I've already touched on)

-At this point they're stuck between making a bad decision (letting him walk for nothing) or presumably a worse decision (retaining him on a long term contract).

[yosemiteben]

-You can't sign a star with available space if you don't have available space.

-I'm not necessarily advocating for maintaining a bunch of open cap space y2y

-I AM advocating, however, to maintain flexibility by (first) only signing star players/all-star caliber guys to long term deals and having roster rollover with vets and role players on cheaper and/or shorter deals while rotating rookie scale guys to see if they have star potential.

I guess my divide is I personally don't think it is realistic to expect to be able to sign stars into cap space (or at least it is much less likely than being able to draft or trade for them), so I see benefits to having larger but moveable contracts.

-PJ on a long term contract is no longer an asset

Seems like some major bias leaking out here, obviously it depends on the number. I very much disagree that signing PJ to something like a 4 year, $80M deal would mean he couldn't be moved as part of a package for a bigger piece.

[Goodecharlotte]

I'm surprised know one has mentioned Mike Budenholzer being fired, he'd be upgrade over Clifford. If it has been mentioned somewhere I apologise in advance

[JMAC3]

Does it matter how you get your star players?

The teams mentioned prior by another poster:

Celtics--Tatum and Brown put you in a position to eat (paying Smart 18 million, White 16, Brogdon 22, Horford 26 million)
Nuggets--Joker and Murray put you in a position to eat (paying KCP 14 million, Gordon 20 million)
Kings--Fox and Sabonis put you in a position to eat (paying Huerter 14, Barnes 18)
Grizz--Morant and JJJ put you in a position to eat (paying Adams 18, Jones 15, Kennard 14)
Clippers--Kawhi and George put you in a position to eat (paying Powell 16, Morris 16, Gordon 20)

The worst team on that list won 48 games, two others are title favorites. Going over the cap to sign high end role players makes sense for them because they're trying to get a title.

The Hornets are one of the worst teams in the league (this year) and have one "star" player. Even with Miles back they're a fringe playoff team who has been destroyed in two play-in games. Does it seem like a sound investment to you to lock into that core group long term?

You are all over the place.

Zero good teams have a bunch of sub-all-stars on middle of the road contracts

Names teams that fit that mold
"Well those don't count because they have stars already...."

If the top 5 pick we have and Melo become Stars in the next 2 years, is PJ on the roster preventing that from happening? How does getting rid of PJ now help us magically get a Star?

[amcoolio]

-You can't sign a star with available space if you don't have available space.

-I'm not necessarily advocating for maintaining a bunch of open cap space y2y

-I AM advocating, however, to maintain flexibility by (first) only signing star players/all-star caliber guys to long term deals and having roster rollover with vets and role players on cheaper and/or shorter deals while rotating rookie scale guys to see if they have star potential.

I guess my divide is I personally don't think it is realistic to expect to be able to sign stars into cap space (or at least it is much less likely than being able to draft or trade for them), so I see benefits to having larger but moveable contracts.

-PJ on a long term contract is no longer an asset

Seems like some major bias leaking out here, obviously it depends on the number. I very much disagree that signing PJ to something like a 4 year, $80M deal would mean he couldn't be moved as part of a package for a bigger piece.

Au contraire, I think Donavon Mitchell would be a Hornet if we had the pure cap space to trade for him, Utah didn't want any of our **** contracts back, settled for Markkanen's contract and it turned out very well for him

Teams trading their disgruntled stars don't want bad contracts back. PJ would instantly be a bad contract the moment he signs his 4/80 with us. Similar to Duncan Robinson

[JMAC3]

-You can't sign a star with available space if you don't have available space.

-I'm not necessarily advocating for maintaining a bunch of open cap space y2y

-I AM advocating, however, to maintain flexibility by (first) only signing star players/all-star caliber guys to long term deals and having roster rollover with vets and role players on cheaper and/or shorter deals while rotating rookie scale guys to see if they have star potential.

I guess my divide is I personally don't think it is realistic to expect to be able to sign stars into cap space (or at least it is much less likely than being able to draft or trade for them), so I see benefits to having larger but moveable contracts.

-PJ on a long term contract is no longer an asset

Seems like some major bias leaking out here, obviously it depends on the number. I very much disagree that signing PJ to something like a 4 year, $80M deal would mean he couldn't be moved as part of a package for a bigger piece.

Au contraire, I think Donavon Mitchell would be a Hornet if we had the pure cap space to trade for him, Utah didn't want any of our **** contracts back, settled for Markkanen's contract and it turned out very well for him

Teams trading their disgruntled stars don't want bad contracts back. PJ would instantly be a bad contract the moment he signs his 4/80 with us. Similar to Duncan Robinson

Cavs offer was way better than Hornets could have offered. Regardless of the contracts we had to include. I think that is wishful wishful thinking that is the reason the trade didn't happen.

[yosemiteben]

Au contraire, I think Donavon Mitchell would be a Hornet if we had the pure cap space to trade for him...

You think Utah would have just traded into our cap space with pick assets and no contracts over what they got from CLE? That seems highly unrealistic.

Even ignoring that issue, it also seems very impractical to consistently let talent walk so we can stay $30-35M below the cap (what would have been required to take Mitchell into cap space) in order to facilitate that sort of a deal. That whole approach to team building doesn't make sense to me.

Teams trading their disgruntled stars don't want bad contracts back. PJ would instantly be a bad contract the moment he signs his 4/80 with us. Similar to Duncan Robinson

Fine to disagree, I'll just point out that PJ does much, much more than Duncan Robinson.