Nuclear Option: Stretching Blake Griffin

Laimbeer · Post #1 » by **Laimbeer** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 4:04 pm

The Detroit Pistons could view next season as a trial period to determine whether Blake Griffin has the capacity to return to something close to full health. There’s virtually no chance they’ll be able to trade him and the remainder of his contract regardless of how well he plays, but they may have a move at their disposal that opens up cap space for the summer of 2021...

That season, he’ll have a salary of $38.96 million. Stretching takes the remaining year of a contract, multiplies it by two and adds one and divides it over that span. This means that stretching a contract with one year left would divide that year’s salary over that season plus two more.

This means that stretching the final year of his contract would leave the Pistons paying $12.987 million for the 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 seasons...

In that summer, just about every star in the NBA will become a free agent. While most teams will have space, it’s possible that if the Pistons play their cards right they may be one of few teams to have two max slots available...

It’s a known fact that the Detroit Pistons have never and will never be a free agent destination, but multiple max slots speak volumes to prospective free agents (as does a willingness to pay superstar money to a mere star or stars, which is the Detroit Premium). Even if they strike out in the free agent market, they could use their space to acquire bad value contracts, incentivized with draft picks, and rebuild by playing the asset game.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/duncansmith/2020/02/28/the-detroit-pistons-have-a-nuclear-option-stretching-blake-griffin/

Billl · Post #2 » by **Billl** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 4:15 pm

Saw that, but it's just dumb cap management. Just suck it up for 1 more year and start with a clean slate.

440BB · Post #3 » by **440BB** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 4:32 pm

Should the Pistons have a very successful draft and the young players develop at an unusually fast rate, that may be an option after next year. I consider it extremely unlikely. We have a year to debate it.

edmunder_prc · Post #4 » by **edmunder_prc** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 4:37 pm

Bad teams have bad management that make bad moves. There is no equity in sports.

Blake was traded for, even with the terrible Uber MAX contract. Suck it up and deal with it.

This team is playing for 2022-2023 season.

Thanks SVG!

Or instead the Pistons could hurt themselves for the next 5 years! Even worse but again, bad teams are bad because they double down or triple down on bad moves.

MotownMadness · Post #5 » by **MotownMadness** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 4:42 pm

Only way i would do that is if i knew there was some star wanting to come here for some bat **** crazy reason

vege · Post #6 » by **vege** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 5:35 pm

Hell no. Let him expire, I don't want another Josh Smith situation destroying our cap for several years.

DBC10 · Post #7 » by **DBC10** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 6:08 pm

No thanks, just let him rot/expire and be a vet presence. Hell pay him to stay away like the Grizzlies-Iggy did if he starts moping which I doubt.

We know we aren't doing anything with him whether healthy or not. Might as well let the young guys learn from him if he's up for that.

bstein14 · Post #8 » by **bstein14** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 6:19 pm

Awful idea. Our worst case if we can't find a suitor by the trade deadline, is to simply do a buyout of his contract at 80% to 90% of what he is owed. Or simply just let him expire. Stretching is an awful idea.

chrbal · Post #9 » by **chrbal** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 7:02 pm

Dear god please no. He’s a free agent in 2021, i think. Having his contract on the books forces us to actually work towards rebuilding the team. Stretching his contract comes off as desperate.

Let him have time to see if he can get relatively healthy. If we can’t somehow miraculously trade him at the 2021 deadline, but him out( if somehow he is actually healthy).

NYPiston · Post #10 » by **NYPiston** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 7:02 pm

The only way this makes sense is if there's a mass panic to clear cap space immediately for a must have player like Giannis and it's the absolute last option to clear space.
Otherwise, it makes zero sense.

Post #11 » by **Snakebites** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 7:06 pm

No.

This administration is still dealing with the consequences of SVG stretching Josh Smith, consequences that won’t fully play themselves out until the end of this season. And that buyout happened OVER FIVE YEARS AGO. This won’t be quite that bad since we stretched multiple years of Smith’s deal, it’ll be less years but more money per year.

Extra space won’t help us in the next 2 years. Having all of the space after 2 years might.

Please don’t get dumb on us, Ed.

By the way, for clarity, assuming he doesn’t opt out (he won’t), he’s on our books until summer 2022 with no buyout, on our books until 2024 with one. Christ, I’d be almost 40 by the time he came off.

Laimbeer · Post #12 » by **Laimbeer** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 9:10 pm

I'm generally against it, the only caveat being cap space is arguably worth more in the 2021 free agent market. We'd have to have a really nice signing or bad contracts with assets deal lined up, though.

Moses ShamMoses · Post #13 » by **Moses ShamMoses** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 9:17 pm

Gosh I hope this doesn't happen. We don't need the cap space the next 2 years for a rebuild. This just makes matters worse.

Manocad · Post #14 » by **Manocad** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 9:45 pm

Holy mother of god no. Don’t kick the can down the road.

Pharaoh · Post #15 » by **Pharaoh** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 11:08 pm

Terrible idea and it boggles my mind this is out there in the universe.

Any cap gurus want to work this out?

Cause reading that terrifies me as a fan!

Seems the FO is thinking a top 5 pick + retaining Wood + 1 free agent signed (FVV?) is enough to get us moving back into the light...

Then we stretch Blake and add 2 max free agents for "stars" (even states it would be a overpay ffs)

Wood
Sekou
"Star"
"Star"
FVV

With Luke, Brown, Svi, Bone, 2020 & 2021 Picks...

We'd be capped out again and still suck!

FMD

Sent from my SM-A520F using RealGM mobile app

Spider156 · Post #16 » by **Spider156** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 11:25 pm

I'd rather keep Blake and tank again then we have a large amount of cap space with really talented players.

Uncle Mxy · Post #17 » by **Uncle Mxy** » Mon Mar 9, 2020 11:58 pm

If we want to nuke ourselves, stretching Blake would be a fine idea.
That's especially true if we use the cap savings to sign the likes of BG and CV.

chrbal · Post #18 » by **chrbal** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:38 am

How long before we stop paying josh smith?

Post #19 » by **Snakebites** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:39 am

chrbal wrote:How long before we stop paying josh smith?

It’s over in the offseason. The buyout took place December 2014.

whitehops · Post #20 » by **whitehops** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:41 am

yeah... maybe it's just the sour taste in my mouth from the whole josh smith stretching but i would just bite the bullet and hope and pray blake declines his player option.

it might just be me being foolish and naive but as far as leaving money behind but blake has a lot of reasons to do it. after next season he'll have made almost $230 million in salary alone, never mind his endorsements and investments. so while he would be leaving behind like $30 million (typing that out just made me realize how wrong i am), playing for a competitor might be better for him given that he probably only has a couple years left until his body finally collapses.

nvm blake is probably going to cash in his last $80 million the next two years and then retire.