Lance Stephenson

[SmashMouthRod]

From what I read its being reported that Indy can only offer him 6.5 million and it could be 8.5 with the buyout of Scola; Doesnt seem like a good chance that they keep him on that salary. What options does the team have? Are they just planning to resign Turner if Lance leaves? Bird in that press conference stated that he feels Turner could average 17 pts a game if he played 30 mins a game but he needs playing time to get warmed up. Dont know how I feel about Turner; but after the playoffs I dont have much confidence in him. How much would they have to pay Turner? Thoughts..

[Moooose]

Honestly, I think Lance can be had for a price lower than 8.5 mil. His value dropped after the all-star break and though Larry seems like he wanted Lance back, I don't think Lance is in a position to make a demand. I think +/-20M for 3 years is just right. I want the Pacers to sign him to a lengthier contract but nobody knows how he will pan out once he signs a bigger contract.

Larry said that he can see Turner averaging 17ppg in 30 mins but he did not sound like he wants him back and is willing to make changes just fot Turner to get those minutes. He basically explained his logic for making that trade with Philly. Unfortunately, he was not a good fit with this team. And Larry made it clear that keeping Lance is his top-most priority. The two can't co-exist so I do not see Larry trying to make a play for Turner.

[8305]

That doesn't sound right to me. Last time I looked at the Hoopshype team salary it showed Indiana at 65 mil before resigning Lance or Evan. I also think the Luxury Tax threshold is projected to be 77 mil. With that math I think we could pay Lance 10 mil or so and still be under the luxury tax threshold. Maybe someone who understands this more completely can chime in.

[Scoot McGroot]

From what I read its being reported that Indy can only offer him 6.5 million and it could be 8.5 with the buyout of Scola; Doesnt seem like a good chance that they keep him on that salary. What options does the team have? Are they just planning to resign Turner if Lance leaves? Bird in that press conference stated that he feels Turner could average 17 pts a game if he played 30 mins a game but he needs playing time to get warmed up. Dont know how I feel about Turner; but after the playoffs I dont have much confidence in him. How much would they have to pay Turner? Thoughts..

Let's rough it out....according to Larry Coon the current estimate is a $63.2m salary cap with a $77m luxury tax.

That would mean that Paul George's 1st year salary would be $17.06m. I'll use rounded numbers the rest of the way:

Paul George - $17.06m
Roy Hibbert - $14.9m
David West - $12m
George Hill - $8m
Luis Scola - $4.9m (I'm roughly taking the old Coon information of $2.5m guaranteed)
Ian Mahinmi - $4m
Chris Copeland - $3.1m
CJ Watson - $2.1m
Solo Hill - $1.3m
Donald Sloan - $.95m (non guaranteed)
2 roster holds for minimum requirements - $1m
Total committed and in holds - $69.31m, thus, $7.9m under the tax.

Now, re-signing Lance would remove ONE minimum roster hold, which frees up another $500k, meaning $8.4m, TOTAL under the luxury tax (and this assumes that the 12th spot would be for a rookie free agent only, not a guy like Rasual Butler who would cost an extra $400k on the books).

Waiving Sloan would free up about $450k (his $950k salary subtracting an immediate $500k roster hold that would replace him). Waiving Scola would apparently save us anywhere from $2.4-4m (I would lean towards Coon's information of the $2.4m total), but a minimum roster hold would then replace him of $500k on the books, meaning only saving about $1.9m.


tl;dr
Ultimately, we could get to about $10.2m under the luxury tax before re-signing Lance by waiving Scola and Sloan.
But, that would also need to be for re-signing Lance, AND signing at least 3 other players to fill out the roster requirements. 2 vet minimum guys like Butler and one rookie minimum guy eats up another $800k, meaning we have about $9.4m TOTAL to re-sign Lance, barring other moves.

[Jake0890]

Thanks for the breakdown Scoot.

Its gonna be a tight squeeze under the tax. Has there been any more talk of Herb Simon being willing to go over the tax?

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

[SmashMouthRod]

Hopefully they work something out to bring him back. I wonder if theyre considering using the stretch provision on anyone. If im in the GM chair I definitely would consider it on Mahinmi and sign Lavoy; and look for another cheap rim protector. I think if the thunder was able to get Hasheem Thabeet signed to a 3 year / $3.65 million; Indy can def do better than giving Mahinmi 4 mill a year.

[basketballwacko2]

From what I read its being reported that Indy can only offer him 6.5 million and it could be 8.5 with the buyout of Scola; Doesnt seem like a good chance that they keep him on that salary. What options does the team have? Are they just planning to resign Turner if Lance leaves? Bird in that press conference stated that he feels Turner could average 17 pts a game if he played 30 mins a game but he needs playing time to get warmed up. Dont know how I feel about Turner; but after the playoffs I dont have much confidence in him. How much would they have to pay Turner? Thoughts..

Turner Didn't get a chance to do anything in the playoffs, IDK why we made the trade to get him. As for Lance I'd trade hibbert and cut some salary or trade George Hill. If they keep Hibbert and Hill then a smaller move must be made moving Ian or Cope, but we have to have a backup Center so I'm not great with trading Ian.

[Scoot McGroot]

Hopefully they work something out to bring him back. I wonder if theyre considering using the stretch provision on anyone. If im in the GM chair I definitely would consider it on Mahinmi and sign Lavoy; and look for another cheap rim protector. I think if the thunder was able to get Hasheem Thabeet signed to a 3 year / $3.65 million; Indy can def do better than giving Mahinmi 4 mill a year.

Waiving Ian under the stretch isn't very attractive, considering any usable backup center is going to cost relatively equal money to Ian. Thabeet costs less because he's clearly a 3rd string or emergency center at this point. At that point, you're either going to get worse tremendously on court to save money, or add salary to stay equal and to make a change for the sake of change.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[SmashMouthRod]

Hopefully they work something out to bring him back. I wonder if theyre considering using the stretch provision on anyone. If im in the GM chair I definitely would consider it on Mahinmi and sign Lavoy; and look for another cheap rim protector. I think if the thunder was able to get Hasheem Thabeet signed to a 3 year / $3.65 million; Indy can def do better than giving Mahinmi 4 mill a year.

Waiving Ian under the stretch isn't very attractive, considering any usable backup center is going to cost relatively equal money to Ian. Thabeet costs less because he's clearly a 3rd string or emergency center at this point. At that point, you're either going to get worse tremendously on court to save money, or add salary to stay equal and to make a change for the sake of change.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

How about bonus money; Is there anyway they can give him stipulation bonus money in his contract without it counting against the cap? Example like in the NFL signing bonuses dont count against the cap

[Scoot McGroot]

Hopefully they work something out to bring him back. I wonder if theyre considering using the stretch provision on anyone. If im in the GM chair I definitely would consider it on Mahinmi and sign Lavoy; and look for another cheap rim protector. I think if the thunder was able to get Hasheem Thabeet signed to a 3 year / $3.65 million; Indy can def do better than giving Mahinmi 4 mill a year.

Waiving Ian under the stretch isn't very attractive, considering any usable backup center is going to cost relatively equal money to Ian. Thabeet costs less because he's clearly a 3rd string or emergency center at this point. At that point, you're either going to get worse tremendously on court to save money, or add salary to stay equal and to make a change for the sake of change.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

How about bonus money; Is there anyway they can give him stipulation bonus money in his contract without it counting against the cap? Example like in the NFL signing bonuses dont count against the cap

Nope. And all the bonus money counts against the cap in the NFL at some point too. It can just be pushed off a couple years in terms of cap hit. If you pay a player money, it has to be accounted for at some point. In NFL, this is the reason there are large amounts of "dead money" on caps after players are waived.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[basketballwacko2]

The solution is to trade Roy for a cheaper more mobile big man. Who? IDK? But I'm betting a deal can be made.

[SmashMouthRod]

This could end up being a big time lost; especially considering that West is only under contract for one more year; and could retire in the near future. This will leave Indy fans saying what if... in a few years; like OKC fans say about Harden now. Hill is going into his 30's in the next couple years. Stephenson is only 23. Him and Paul could be the future to keeping Indy relevant after West leaves. Hibbert is a question mark. As a fan I would feel much better about this team knowing that Stephenson and George will likely be there after West retires. Maybe Hibbert will develop more consistency; but Stephenson and George has so much potential that they would likely stay in contention for a while even after West retires and Hill's contract ends. Much is made about Stephenson being a crazy player; but the moment one of those big markets get him; all will be forgotten. The media will forget about his antics; or even encourage it; Imagine the Lakers with him. I doubt that Hill gets another contract similar to the one he has now. The role players will likely be a revolving door for the next decade; but the nucleus of Stephenson; George; Hibbert needs to be set; and stay consistent until age and/or performance forces a change.

[ThePacer31]

Our top priority should be to re-sign Lance. If we cannot, we're screwed. Him and PG ARE our future. There is no doubt about it. If he leaves, we're screwed unless PG turns out to be like Durant on offense. (his defense is 2nd to none.)

[Moooose]

I am hoping Lance's ego would make him choose Indiana over bigger offers.

[Scoot McGroot]

Our top priority should be to re-sign Lance. If we cannot, we're screwed. Him and PG ARE our future. There is no doubt about it. If he leaves, we're screwed unless PG turns out to be like Durant on offense. (his defense is 2nd to none.)

Right now, I view Lance as almost to a Ron Artest level of distraction. Clearly a very good player, but the "other stuff" you have to deal with could lead you to let him go and it be a "net positive".


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[mikepacernation]

Our top priority should be to re-sign Lance. If we cannot, we're screwed. Him and PG ARE our future. There is no doubt about it. If he leaves, we're screwed unless PG turns out to be like Durant on offense. (his defense is 2nd to none.)

Right now, I view Lance as almost to a Ron Artest level of distraction. Clearly a very good player, but the "other stuff" you have to deal with could lead you to let him go and it be a "net positive".


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I still say we should sign him. An if he keeps getting worse I think maybe they should look into trading him then but right now I say we sign him.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Scoot McGroot]

Our top priority should be to re-sign Lance. If we cannot, we're screwed. Him and PG ARE our future. There is no doubt about it. If he leaves, we're screwed unless PG turns out to be like Durant on offense. (his defense is 2nd to none.)

Right now, I view Lance as almost to a Ron Artest level of distraction. Clearly a very good player, but the "other stuff" you have to deal with could lead you to let him go and it be a "net positive".


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I still say we should sign him. An if he keeps getting worse I think maybe they should look into trading him then but right now I say we sign him.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I understand, and theoretically agree with you. It's just not as simple as "sign him" or "don't sign him". It all depends on the cost to do so. If he signs elsewhere for $10m per, I won't be too upset at letting him walk. If we let him walk for $6-7m-ish per? I'd be a little upset at that.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[SmashMouthRod]

Our top priority should be to re-sign Lance. If we cannot, we're screwed. Him and PG ARE our future. There is no doubt about it. If he leaves, we're screwed unless PG turns out to be like Durant on offense. (his defense is 2nd to none.)

Right now, I view Lance as almost to a Ron Artest level of distraction. Clearly a very good player, but the "other stuff" you have to deal with could lead you to let him go and it be a "net positive".


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I dont know if he deserves that label. And there wont be any positives to losing probably the second best player on the team. Indy cant contend without him. In fact if you take him away; The wiz wouldve sent Indy home a round earlier. I would say he definitely deserves 10 mil when you consider that Hill is getting 8. The bar was set when Hill got 8 per; and him being the 4 or 5th best player on the team; now everyone else should and would expect more.

[Scoot McGroot]

Our top priority should be to re-sign Lance. If we cannot, we're screwed. Him and PG ARE our future. There is no doubt about it. If he leaves, we're screwed unless PG turns out to be like Durant on offense. (his defense is 2nd to none.)

Right now, I view Lance as almost to a Ron Artest level of distraction. Clearly a very good player, but the "other stuff" you have to deal with could lead you to let him go and it be a "net positive".


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I dont know if he deserves that label. And there wont be any positives to losing probably the second best player on the team. Indy cant contend without him. In fact if you take him away; The wiz wouldve sent Indy home a round earlier. I would say he definitely deserves 10 mil when you consider that Hill is getting 8. The bar was set when Hill got 8 per; and him being the 4 or 5th best player on the team; now everyone else should and would expect more.

Just because you overpaid once doesn't mean you should blissfully overpay from here 'til eternity.

At some point, you have to be fiscally sane. $10m+ on a guy that (may not be an Artest level) is still a knucklehead that wouldn't even respond to his self professed perfect voice (Bird) is extremely risky. Giving it to him and then planning on trading him later if he screws up again is extremely risky, as another screw up and he'll have little to no value on the market in a trade.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that losing Lance screws us. It sets us back, as losing any player can. But it could also set us up for our best success in 2-3 years if we do it right.

There's options. Lance, as weird as it sounds to say about a young starter like him, is ultimately replaceable.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[blaha112]

It's hard for us to sign really good free agents. David West is the best one since I can remember? If Lance goes away we don't make it to the ECF for years. I don't like that. If we are worried about money, shipping Hill away for someone else wouldn't set us back as far.