Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work?

Moderators: Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat, loserX, Andre Roberstan, FNQ, HartfordWhalers, moocow007, pacers33granger, Texas Chuck

tidho
General Manager
Posts: 7,648
And1: 2,363
Joined: Jun 12, 2009

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#81 » by tidho » Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:25 pm

Cklbmk wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:It would need to look something like this:

SAS out: Pau, Patty, Murray, Gay (opt in), 18, 2019 SAS 1st, 2021 SAS 1st
SAS in: LeBron, Daniels, Clarkson

ATL out: 2nd prot
ATL in: Patty, Murray, 2019 SAS 1st

CLE out: LeBron, Clarkson
CLE in: Rudy, 18, 2021 SAS 1st

PHX out: Daniels
PHX in: Gasol, multiple 2nds from Spurs



Cavs would get cut out in this. It wouldn't cost us 18 + 2021 pick + eating Clarkson to dump Rudy, and if we did in combination with the other trades then we could just sign Lebron outright


LeBron doesn't get his money unless Cleveland is the one signing him.
pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 9,401
And1: 3,136
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#82 » by pacers33granger » Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:27 pm

Chinook wrote:
phraoh wrote:Forget LMA...no one is taking him, and yes he is a bad contract...making 75 million over the next 3 years (25 mill ave for non math majors) for a guy who will be 33 BEFORE the 18-19 season starts.


He's guaranteed $55 Million and he just made an All-NBA team. I'm willing to take a lot of things and file them under "differing opinions", but there comes a point in which an opinion can just be wrong, and viewing LMA as a bad contract is one of those times.


It's not a bad contract, but it's not a good one either. I can't see anyone giving up much value for him and the sheer size of the deal makes it super tough to salary match without SA taking back some bad money.
Cklbmk
Head Coach
Posts: 6,203
And1: 1,269
Joined: Sep 16, 2004
     

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#83 » by Cklbmk » Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:29 pm

tidho wrote:
Cklbmk wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:It would need to look something like this:

SAS out: Pau, Patty, Murray, Gay (opt in), 18, 2019 SAS 1st, 2021 SAS 1st
SAS in: LeBron, Daniels, Clarkson

ATL out: 2nd prot
ATL in: Patty, Murray, 2019 SAS 1st

CLE out: LeBron, Clarkson
CLE in: Rudy, 18, 2021 SAS 1st

PHX out: Daniels
PHX in: Gasol, multiple 2nds from Spurs



Cavs would get cut out in this. It wouldn't cost us 18 + 2021 pick + eating Clarkson to dump Rudy, and if we did in combination with the other trades then we could just sign Lebron outright


LeBron doesn't get his money unless Cleveland is the one signing him.



Wrong. You're thinking of the old CBA.
Cklbmk
Head Coach
Posts: 6,203
And1: 1,269
Joined: Sep 16, 2004
     

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#84 » by Cklbmk » Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:32 pm

Chinook wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:If Spurs can make the space that's cool. But there's no reason for the Cavs to take a net zero package for an opt in and trade unless the Spurs already have the space. I don't see anyone eating Mills deal without the equivalent of two firsts as it's over 30 million in mostly dead money.


It's not a net-zero package. It's a first (one that way higher than most picks moved in deals like this), a prospect who was just taken in the first last year, and taking back Thompson.

Plus, it doesn't have to be a very good package to be where Cleveland "should" take it. It shouldn't be zero, but like very slightly positive shouldn't be an issue.



I don't see the Cavs staying in the repeater tax for a slightly positive package.
Cklbmk
Head Coach
Posts: 6,203
And1: 1,269
Joined: Sep 16, 2004
     

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#85 » by Cklbmk » Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:33 pm

pacers33granger wrote:
Chinook wrote:
phraoh wrote:Forget LMA...no one is taking him, and yes he is a bad contract...making 75 million over the next 3 years (25 mill ave for non math majors) for a guy who will be 33 BEFORE the 18-19 season starts.


He's guaranteed $55 Million and he just made an All-NBA team. I'm willing to take a lot of things and file them under "differing opinions", but there comes a point in which an opinion can just be wrong, and viewing LMA as a bad contract is one of those times.


It's not a bad contract, but it's not a good one either. I can't see anyone giving up much value for him and the sheer size of the deal makes it super tough to salary match without SA taking back some bad money.



I could definitely see the Jazz making a competitive offer for LMA

Maybe Hornets too if they decide to keep Kemba
pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 9,401
And1: 3,136
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#86 » by pacers33granger » Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:44 pm

Cklbmk wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:
Chinook wrote:
He's guaranteed $55 Million and he just made an All-NBA team. I'm willing to take a lot of things and file them under "differing opinions", but there comes a point in which an opinion can just be wrong, and viewing LMA as a bad contract is one of those times.


It's not a bad contract, but it's not a good one either. I can't see anyone giving up much value for him and the sheer size of the deal makes it super tough to salary match without SA taking back some bad money.



I could definitely see the Jazz making a competitive offer for LMA

Maybe Hornets too if they decide to keep Kemba


I suppose that depends on your definition of competitive. Charlotte can at least match easily with Dwight's contract, but I doubt they give up 11 (at least they shouldn't). I'm not sure what the Utah offer could be other than Burks and a few of the NG deals with a future pick or two, but they could just as easily resign Favors for a lot less money and keep those assets.
Cklbmk
Head Coach
Posts: 6,203
And1: 1,269
Joined: Sep 16, 2004
     

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#87 » by Cklbmk » Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:59 pm

pacers33granger wrote:
Cklbmk wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:
It's not a bad contract, but it's not a good one either. I can't see anyone giving up much value for him and the sheer size of the deal makes it super tough to salary match without SA taking back some bad money.



I could definitely see the Jazz making a competitive offer for LMA

Maybe Hornets too if they decide to keep Kemba


I suppose that depends on your definition of competitive. Charlotte can at least match easily with Dwight's contract, but I doubt they give up 11 (at least they shouldn't). I'm not sure what the Utah offer could be other than Burks and a few of the NG deals with a future pick or two, but they could just as easily resign Favors for a lot less money and keep those assets.



I was thinking SnT Favors to Spurs + Burks + whatever incentive they need to 3rd team

LMA fits next to Gobert way better than Favors

and Favors fits next to Kawhi/Lebron better than LMA
Chinook
Analyst
Posts: 3,006
And1: 1,334
Joined: Jan 12, 2015
       

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#88 » by Chinook » Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:30 pm

Cklbmk wrote:
Chinook wrote:
MoneyTalks41890 wrote:If Spurs can make the space that's cool. But there's no reason for the Cavs to take a net zero package for an opt in and trade unless the Spurs already have the space. I don't see anyone eating Mills deal without the equivalent of two firsts as it's over 30 million in mostly dead money.


It's not a net-zero package. It's a first (one that way higher than most picks moved in deals like this), a prospect who was just taken in the first last year, and taking back Thompson.

Plus, it doesn't have to be a very good package to be where Cleveland "should" take it. It shouldn't be zero, but like very slightly positive shouldn't be an issue.



I don't see the Cavs staying in the repeater tax for a slightly positive package.


They're not in the repeater tax in any of these scenarios.
Chinook
Analyst
Posts: 3,006
And1: 1,334
Joined: Jan 12, 2015
       

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#89 » by Chinook » Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:47 pm

pacers33granger wrote:
Chinook wrote:
phraoh wrote:Forget LMA...no one is taking him, and yes he is a bad contract...making 75 million over the next 3 years (25 mill ave for non math majors) for a guy who will be 33 BEFORE the 18-19 season starts.


He's guaranteed $55 Million and he just made an All-NBA team. I'm willing to take a lot of things and file them under "differing opinions", but there comes a point in which an opinion can just be wrong, and viewing LMA as a bad contract is one of those times.


It's not a bad contract, but it's not a good one either. I can't see anyone giving up much value for him and the sheer size of the deal makes it super tough to salary match without SA taking back some bad money.


It's a good one. Aldridge was the 36th-highest-paid player last year. This year, he'll be no higher than 35th. The next year, he's already down to 25th (actually 26th, but Millsap will probably be paid). Then after that, his contract is only partially guaranteed. He was by many measures at top-10 or at least top-15 performer last year. In a world where stars about to enter cross the $40-Million barrier in annual salary, a consistent All-Star who averages $24 Million for two years is not a bad contract.
pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 9,401
And1: 3,136
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#90 » by pacers33granger » Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:58 pm

Chinook wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:
Chinook wrote:
He's guaranteed $55 Million and he just made an All-NBA team. I'm willing to take a lot of things and file them under "differing opinions", but there comes a point in which an opinion can just be wrong, and viewing LMA as a bad contract is one of those times.


It's not a bad contract, but it's not a good one either. I can't see anyone giving up much value for him and the sheer size of the deal makes it super tough to salary match without SA taking back some bad money.


It's a good one. Aldridge was the 36th-highest-paid player last year. This year, he'll be no higher than 35th. The next year, he's already down to 25th (actually 26th, but Millsap will probably be paid). Then after that, his contract is only partially guaranteed. He was by many measures at top-10 or at least top-15 performer last year. In a world where stars about to enter cross the $40-Million barrier in annual salary, a consistent All-Star who averages $24 Million for two years is not a bad contract.


Who takes that contract on and gives assets to do so? Citing his spot on the highest paid player list doesn't support a single thing (nor do I understand him being "down to 25th" as a better thing..). It really has zero bearing on his value that guys like Whiteside are overpaid.
Chinook
Analyst
Posts: 3,006
And1: 1,334
Joined: Jan 12, 2015
       

Re: Hypothetical: LeBron to San Antonio: Can they make the salaries work? 

Post#91 » by Chinook » Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:24 pm

pacers33granger wrote:
Chinook wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:
It's not a bad contract, but it's not a good one either. I can't see anyone giving up much value for him and the sheer size of the deal makes it super tough to salary match without SA taking back some bad money.


It's a good one. Aldridge was the 36th-highest-paid player last year. This year, he'll be no higher than 35th. The next year, he's already down to 25th (actually 26th, but Millsap will probably be paid). Then after that, his contract is only partially guaranteed. He was by many measures at top-10 or at least top-15 performer last year. In a world where stars about to enter cross the $40-Million barrier in annual salary, a consistent All-Star who averages $24 Million for two years is not a bad contract.


Who takes that contract on and gives assets to do so? Citing his spot on the highest paid player list doesn't support a single thing (nor do I understand him being "down to 25th" as a better thing..). It really has zero bearing on his value that guys like Whiteside are overpaid.


I don't know who takes him. I do know that folks here constantly underrate him. He was supposedly bad value last year because his deal was expiring, but now that it's not, it's bad value because his contract is not expiring. It's ludicrous. Aldridge on his deal may be too costly to take without a team having to give back contracts, and those contracts will have value that will affect how much they will be willing to give up in terms of picks or prospects. And some teams may not see a need in LMA's services for other reasons. It doesn't make him overpaid, though.

But yes, what LMA makes in relation to his peers totally determines if he's paid fairly. If there are a lot of other players who aren't as good making more, and if everyone better than him is either making more already or soon will, then he's not overpaid.

Return to Trades and Transactions