RealGM

I've always been wondering this.Why did miami give away draft picks for lebron/bosh? when they could have signed normally. I mean they took a discount when they signed so there wasn't a point for a s&T

S&T = allowed to add extra year on the big 3 contracts. which they wanted.

The sign and trade allowed them to get 10.5% raises each year instead of 8% (plus the extra year). This meant they could make the same amount over the first 4 years (still less than the max) but make less the first year. By making less the first year, that opened up cap space to sign Miller and (more specifically) Haslem.

hra8700 wrote:The sign and trade allowed them to get 10.5% raises each year instead of 8% (plus the extra year). This meant they could make the same amount over the first 4 years (still less than the max) but make less the first year. By making less the first year, that opened up cap space to sign Miller and (more specifically) Haslem.

That's right! Here is the man behind the "salary cap" curtain

Elisburg has a really nice resume, but he needs to lose a few pounds. Carrying that much weight is not healthy.

2 peat is why. 3 finals in 3 years as well.

Seems pretty pointless to me as well, especially with the opt-out clauses. Imagine if we had all our picks...

Still, at that time, you had to do what you had to do.

Praise Big Secksy.

orangeparka wrote:Seems pretty pointless to me as well, especially with the opt-out clauses. Imagine if we had all our picks...

Still, at that time, you had to do what you had to do.

How can providing them salary raisers and escalations to satisfy their needs, seem pretty pointless? The only way to provide them the necessary credentials within their contracts at the time was to have their original teams sign them and trade them - and the asset we provided was a few picks. Any GM would pull that move over time and time again. Pretty pointless?

Not pointless at all. Not to mention we suck at drafting.

Flash3 wrote:

orangeparka wrote:Seems pretty pointless to me as well, especially with the opt-out clauses. Imagine if we had all our picks...

Still, at that time, you had to do what you had to do.

How can providing them salary raisers and escalations to satisfy their needs, seem pretty pointless? The only way to provide them the necessary credentials within their contracts at the time was to have their original teams sign them and trade them - and the asset we provided was a few picks. Any GM would pull that move over time and time again. Pretty pointless?

They sacrificed $15m to come to Miami, and yet the additional 2.5% raises are important?

And obviously, like I said, you do that a million times over if it's the only way they sign, but were the extra raises so important that we had to give up those picks?

Again, LeBron and Bosh sacrificed $15m each to come here and for us to sign other players. Does it make sense that they asked for those 2.5% extra raises over the picks to improve our team/assets?

RexBoyWonder wrote:S&T = allowed to add extra year on the big 3 contracts. which they wanted.

This

orangeparka wrote:

Flash3 wrote:

orangeparka wrote:Seems pretty pointless to me as well, especially with the opt-out clauses. Imagine if we had all our picks...

Still, at that time, you had to do what you had to do.

How can providing them salary raisers and escalations to satisfy their needs, seem pretty pointless? The only way to provide them the necessary credentials within their contracts at the time was to have their original teams sign them and trade them - and the asset we provided was a few picks. Any GM would pull that move over time and time again. Pretty pointless?

They sacrificed $15m to come to Miami, and yet the additional 2.5% raises are important?

And obviously, like I said, you do that a million times over if it's the only way they sign, but were the extra raises so important that we had to give up those picks?

Again, LeBron and Bosh sacrificed $15m each to come here and for us to sign other players. Does it make sense that they asked for those 2.5% extra raises over the picks to improve our team/assets?

From what I read, they sacrificed the total salary they could make in year 1 by a good $4-5M per year - but the escalated raises each year after that were only accomplished via the s&t feature - so yes, you do that a million times over and the giving up of those picks were vital in this transaction.

The point is that if they were giving up all that money they still wanted to be able to sign other guys. By allowing larger raises they could start them off with smaller salaries and making up for it on the back end. This allowed them to bring on two really good role players in Miller and UD. Had they not there is no way they get both those guys and who knows where we are.