Page 1 of 3
Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:37 pm
by mup
I know that a lot of people are in favor of gutting our roster, dispensing with any idea of a bench, and trading the house for Kevin Love to create a Big 3 with Irving and James. I've said 1000 times that I hate the idea with a passion.
Regardless of whether people are against it from a pure talent/fit/injury status standpoint, as I am, is a Big 3 even feasible after the new CBA?
If we create a Big 3, all on max contracts as they would be, we'd have 90-100% of the cap tied up in 3 guys. Any guys who survive the trade the house for Love purge will then be heading toward the end of their rookie contracts. Whether that be Thompson, Waiters, whomever, I can't believe we are going to match large RFA offers for these guys when the luxury tax is staring us in the face.
Accordingly, in my mind, a love trade means we lose not only the guys we actually trade, but everybody in that position, thus leaving us with our Big 3 and a bunch of vet minimums.
I know that Gilbert is willing to spend but I think we are underestimating the penalties built into the new cba. If we go for a big 3 and then re-sign any of our other guys, we are into the luxury tax and, worse, the repeater penalties. I think it's unrealistic to think any owner, even Gilbert, will pay those kinds of penalties year after year. The CBA was designed to prevent exactly what we are talking about trying to do.
So I think it's an awful risk. I know a lot of people respond by pointing out that Miami won 2 trophies playing this way, but I have 2 responses to that: (1) those wheels were in motion before the new cba and even Miami realized it couldn't compete; and (2) Miami was completely injury free during its two year run. In order for this gamble to work, we'd have to count on both Irving and love (and an aging Lebron) to play full seasons. Otherwise, it's a big 2, a bunch of vet minimums, and a 2nd round exit.
This whole situation has me anxious a bit because I think we are on the verge of making a big mistake. Right now, we are set up perfectly, not only from a talent standpoint, but financially. We don't have too much of our cap tied up in a couple of players, we have some depth, and we have key players (like wiggins) on manageable contracts for a long time.
Trading wiggins for love essentially gives us a 2 year window before we have to gut the team to 3 men and some vet minimums. My personal view is that we need to stop being so damn impatient, realize what we have, and enjoy the ride. This "we have to win this year at all costs!" Mentality is exactly what killed us the first time James was here. We do not have to win a championship this year. Just let it grow for once.
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:43 pm
by OhioGuy216
Excellent post.
Post new collective bargaining agreement a "big 3" has a very short shelf life due to salary caps and the increasing value of the tier-b players (of which you need atleast 2 to be competitive). Which I applaud...Stern's last big move.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:15 pm
by Temuhjan
Yes and no. Who cares about an Irving-James-Love Big 3 when we already have a Irving-Wiggins-James-Bennett Big 4? Judging from Bennett's Summer League performance, we need K-Love no more.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:17 pm
by OhioGuy216
Temuhjan wrote:Yes and no. Who cares about an Irving-James-Love Big 3 when we already have a Irving-Wiggins-James-Bennett Big 4? Judging from Bennett's Summer League performance, we need K-Love no more.
Dude, judging a player by a summer league performance is like judging a woman by her fat girl angle duckface pic. Be careful you see isn't always what you get
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:23 pm
by CavsKSU25
OhioGuy216 wrote:Temuhjan wrote:Yes and no. Who cares about an Irving-James-Love Big 3 when we already have a Irving-Wiggins-James-Bennett Big 4? Judging from Bennett's Summer League performance, we need K-Love no more.
Dude, judging a player by a summer league performance is like judging a woman by her fat girl angle duckface pic. Be careful you see isn't always what you get
Didn't you just a start a thread judging Wiggins on his SL?
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:24 pm
by OhioGuy216
CavsKSU25 wrote:OhioGuy216 wrote:Temuhjan wrote:Yes and no. Who cares about an Irving-James-Love Big 3 when we already have a Irving-Wiggins-James-Bennett Big 4? Judging from Bennett's Summer League performance, we need K-Love no more.
Dude, judging a player by a summer league performance is like judging a woman by her fat girl angle duckface pic. Be careful you see isn't always what you get
Didn't you just a start a thread judging Wiggins on his SL?
I'm not calling him the next KG bro. Big difference between discussing what you see and posting that AB is the next big thing.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:33 pm
by mup
Temuhjan wrote:Yes and no. Who cares about an Irving-James-Love Big 3 when we already have a Irving-Wiggins-James-Bennett Big 4? Judging from Bennett's Summer League performance, we need K-Love no more.
Ummm... I guess I agree? I don't think Bennett is part of anybody's big anything, but I agree I'd rather have Irving-wiggins-James-Bennett (given their contracts, that is) than Irving-Vet Minimum guy-James-Love.
Also, given that James and Irving are maxed and waiters and Thompson will be getting raises (short of a max), I think it's crucial that we don't trade the 3 draft picks we have next year. We will need cheap players cycling into the club (as David Blatt calls it). In fact, I'd love to package those picks to get into the top 10 next year. Could you imagine adding somebody like a Doug McDermott (not him obviously but next year's version of him) to this team we are building?? Or, better yet, a young 5 drafted top 10?
FOH K-Love. We don't need K-Love. I want wiggins, waiters, and our picks.
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:37 pm
by CavsKSU25
OhioGuy216 wrote:CavsKSU25 wrote:OhioGuy216 wrote:Dude, judging a player by a summer league performance is like judging a woman by her fat girl angle duckface pic. Be careful you see isn't always what you get
Didn't you just a start a thread judging Wiggins on his SL?
I'm not calling him the next KG bro. Big difference between discussing what you see and posting that AB is the next big thing.
no theres literally no difference at all.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:38 pm
by guest81
If we go for a big 3 and then re-sign any of our other guys, we are into the luxury tax and, worse, the repeater penalties. I think it's unrealistic to think any owner, even Gilbert, will pay those kinds of penalties year after year. The CBA was designed to prevent exactly what we are talking about trying to do.
Why? You should absolutely expect Gilbert to pay for it. Gilbert's worth 3.9 billion. With the luxury tax at 76 million, so its about 1% of his net worth. Comparison sake if you made 50 thousand a year it would be about 500 bucks.
A luxury tax team still has a payroll less then the Oakland A's. Don't fall for the owners propaganda
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:41 pm
by OhioGuy216
CavsKSU25 wrote:OhioGuy216 wrote:CavsKSU25 wrote:
Didn't you just a start a thread judging Wiggins on his SL?
I'm not calling him the next KG bro. Big difference between discussing what you see and posting that AB is the next big thing.
no theres literally no difference at all.
Yes one can see how I project a 43% or below shooting percentage as the same as calling him an all-star....lol, you are literally the worst poster here man. Congrats.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:44 pm
by CavsKSU25
Suspended... If it happens one more time, you are out of here. We are all getting tired of you.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:52 pm
by mup
guest81 wrote:If we go for a big 3 and then re-sign any of our other guys, we are into the luxury tax and, worse, the repeater penalties. I think it's unrealistic to think any owner, even Gilbert, will pay those kinds of penalties year after year. The CBA was designed to prevent exactly what we are talking about trying to do.
Why? You should absolutely expect Gilbert to pay for it. Gilbert's worth 3.9 billion. With the luxury tax at 76 million, so its about 1% of his net worth. Comparison sake if you made 50 thousand a year it would be about 500 bucks.
A luxury tax team still has a payroll less then the Oakland A's. Don't fall for the owners propaganda
You said it's 1% of his net worth then compared it to 1% of your salary. Net worth and salary are not the same thing.
Anyway, what are the repeater penalties? Those are the issue, not the luxury tax. Doesn't it go up to something like 500% and beyond in subsequent years? I'm asking because I don't have the numbers. I thought they also start taking away your mle and other exceptions at some point, no?
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:53 pm
by OhioGuy216
mup wrote:guest81 wrote:If we go for a big 3 and then re-sign any of our other guys, we are into the luxury tax and, worse, the repeater penalties. I think it's unrealistic to think any owner, even Gilbert, will pay those kinds of penalties year after year. The CBA was designed to prevent exactly what we are talking about trying to do.
Why? You should absolutely expect Gilbert to pay for it. Gilbert's worth 3.9 billion. With the luxury tax at 76 million, so its about 1% of his net worth. Comparison sake if you made 50 thousand a year it would be about 500 bucks.
A luxury tax team still has a payroll less then the Oakland A's. Don't fall for the owners propaganda
You said it's 1% of his net worth then compared it to 1% of your salary. Net worth and salary are not the same thing.
Anyway, what are the repeater penalties? Those are the issue, not the luxury tax. Doesn't it go up to something like 500% and beyond in subsequent years? I'm asking because I don't have the numbers. I thought they also start taking away your mle and other exceptions at some point, no?
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Not exactly sure how it works but it's bad enough that Arison dismantled the Heat's bench to avoid paying it.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:58 pm
by gflem
mup wrote:Temuhjan wrote:Yes and no. Who cares about an Irving-James-Love Big 3 when we already have a Irving-Wiggins-James-Bennett Big 4? Judging from Bennett's Summer League performance, we need K-Love no more.
Ummm... I guess I agree? I don't think Bennett is part of anybody's big anything, but I agree I'd rather have Irving-wiggins-James-Bennett (given their contracts, that is) than Irving-Vet Minimum guy-James-Love.
Also, given that James and Irving are maxed and waiters and Thompson will be getting raises (short of a max), I think it's crucial that we don't trade the 3 draft picks we have next year. We will need cheap players cycling into the club (as David Blatt calls it). In fact, I'd love to package those picks to get into the top 10 next year. Could you imagine adding somebody like a Doug McDermott (not him obviously but next year's version of him) to this team we are building?? Or, better yet, a young 5 drafted top 10?
FOH K-Love. We don't need K-Love. I want wiggins, waiters, and our picks.
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Great posts, you nailed both the reasons not to trade for Love, and the reasons for keeping the picks we already have. Don't forget the Haywood contract as well, using that and
maybe one of the picks to get a rim protector (Larry Sanders?) would be the final piece needed to really be considered a favorite to win the title.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 3:05 pm
by guest81
OhioGuy216 wrote:mup wrote:guest81 wrote:If we go for a big 3 and then re-sign any of our other guys, we are into the luxury tax and, worse, the repeater penalties. I think it's unrealistic to think any owner, even Gilbert, will pay those kinds of penalties year after year. The CBA was designed to prevent exactly what we are talking about trying to do.
Why? You should absolutely expect Gilbert to pay for it. Gilbert's worth 3.9 billion. With the luxury tax at 76 million, so its about 1% of his net worth. Comparison sake if you made 50 thousand a year it would be about 500 bucks.
A luxury tax team still has a payroll less then the Oakland A's. Don't fall for the owners propaganda
You said it's 1% of his net worth then compared it to 1% of your salary. Net worth and salary are not the same thing.
Anyway, what are the repeater penalties? Those are the issue, not the luxury tax. Doesn't it go up to something like 500% and beyond in subsequent years? I'm asking because I don't have the numbers. I thought they also start taking away your mle and other exceptions at some point, no?
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Not exactly sure how it works but it's bad enough that Arison dismantled the Heat's bench to avoid paying it.
Probably wasn't the smartest move considering it pissed Lebron off, the fact Miller could of made a difference, and the biggest part is that HE'S WORTH 6.2 BILLION DOLLARS!!!!! He could build his stadium out of paper mache of 20 dollar bills for crying out loud
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 3:07 pm
by OhioGuy216
guest81 wrote:OhioGuy216 wrote:mup wrote:You said it's 1% of his net worth then compared it to 1% of your salary. Net worth and salary are not the same thing.
Anyway, what are the repeater penalties? Those are the issue, not the luxury tax. Doesn't it go up to something like 500% and beyond in subsequent years? I'm asking because I don't have the numbers. I thought they also start taking away your mle and other exceptions at some point, no?
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
Not exactly sure how it works but it's bad enough that Arison dismantled the Heat's bench to avoid paying it.
Probably wasn't the smartest move considering it pissed Lebron off, the fact Miller could of made a difference, and the biggest part is that HE'S WORTH 6.2 BILLION DOLLARS!!!!! He could build his stadium out of paper mache of 20 dollar bills for crying out loud
6.2 billions dollars? That would be Warren Buffet level.
Arison is worth around 1.3 billion, Gilbert is somewhere in the Mid 3's. just for comparison's sake.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 3:09 pm
by guest81
OhioGuy216 wrote:guest81 wrote:OhioGuy216 wrote:
Not exactly sure how it works but it's bad enough that Arison dismantled the Heat's bench to avoid paying it.
Probably wasn't the smartest move considering it pissed Lebron off, the fact Miller could of made a difference, and the biggest part is that HE'S WORTH 6.2 BILLION DOLLARS!!!!! He could build his stadium out of paper mache of 20 dollar bills for crying out loud
6.2 billions dollars? That would be Warren Buffet level.
Arison is worth around 1.3 billion, Gilbert is somewhere in the Mid 3's. just for comparison's sake.
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/riches ... net-worth/
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 3:10 pm
by OhioGuy216
guest81 wrote:OhioGuy216 wrote:guest81 wrote:
Probably wasn't the smartest move considering it pissed Lebron off, the fact Miller could of made a difference, and the biggest part is that HE'S WORTH 6.2 BILLION DOLLARS!!!!! He could build his stadium out of paper mache of 20 dollar bills for crying out loud
6.2 billions dollars? That would be Warren Buffet level.
Arison is worth around 1.3 billion, Gilbert is somewhere in the Mid 3's. just for comparison's sake.
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/riches ... net-worth/
That website is notorious for how off it is, you might have well linked the onion.
He lost over a billion last year alone due to his cruise lines. It's also important to know that just because your company is worth a stated figure it does not mean you are. If that were the case Bill Gates would be worth about 100 billion dollars bud. Which is something that somebody should teach to said website.
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 3:17 pm
by guest81
OhioGuy216 wrote:That website is notorious for how off it is, you might have well linked the onion.
He lost over a billion last year alone due to his cruise lines. It's also important to know that just because your company is worth a stated figure it does not mean you are. If that were the case Bill Gates would be worth about 100 billion dollars bud. Which is something that somebody should teach to said website.
http://www.forbes.com/profile/micky-arison/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micky_Arisonhttp://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth ... net-worth/Those are 3 more that say he's around the 7 billion. Do you have anything that says he's only worth 1.3? (which is still a **** load BTW)
Re: Is a Big 3 even feasible anymore?
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 3:20 pm
by guest81
oh for other reference, Gates is worth 76 billion, and Warren Buffet is worth 62 billion.
So, despite how filthy rich the owners are, still can't touch those guys