RealGM

jerrod wrote:That wall quote is absolute genius. Love it!

Haven't seen you around in a while!

Ruzious wrote:

PG Graveyard wrote:Can someone who is smarter than me lay out the contract extension options for Giannis this offseason?

He'll get the "supermax" (30% of the team cap) which is expected to be 247.3 mil over 5 seasons (42.6 mil, then 46.0, 49.5, 52.9, and 56.3). Normally, you need 10 years of experience to get the supermax, but when he made All-NBA 1st team twice in a row, that qualified him for the supermax.

It's a good thing imo he's eligible now for supermax instead of signing a 2 year extension to hit that 10 year mark.

MickeyDavis wrote:

Ruzious wrote:

PG Graveyard wrote:Can someone who is smarter than me lay out the contract extension options for Giannis this offseason?

He'll get the "supermax" (30% of the team cap) which is expected to be 247.3 mil over 5 seasons (42.6 mil, then 46.0, 49.5, 52.9, and 56.3). Normally, you need 10 years of experience to get the supermax, but when he made All-NBA 1st team twice in a row, that qualified him for the supermax.

It's a good thing imo he's eligible now for supermax instead of signing a 2 year extension to hit that 10 year mark.

Yeah, I kind of like that rule since it really protects teams and give them an out for not handing out the super max because they can. It basically limits it to guys hitting those qualifications since 10 years is typically 30 years old and not many teams are willing to give 5 years to a guy at that age that hasnt previously made the all-nba team 2x.

After the break: Is Giannis the Peyton Manning of the nba?

When LeBron was in high school, people were saying he was the best high school athlete of all time. Won his 1st ring in his 9th season.

machu46 wrote:A supermax must be 5 years, which is why I tend to think he won't agree to sign the supermax.

His options this offseason are:

1. Supermax: 5 years/$224 million
2. A short-term deal to keep pressure on Bucks front office/maintain flexibility: 2 years/$67 million + options or whatever he wants
3. Play out his deal and choose one of these options after he's met with other teams, or sign with another team (other teams could offer a max of 4 years/$141 million)

Yeah, machu46's numbers all look like they're in the ballpark of what he could sign assuming the cap stays flat for the next two years ($109m), which probably isn't a bad guess given how much uncertainty there is around everything.

A little more background: Giannis is eligible for the 35% supermax this offseason via the designated veteran extension (must be 5 years), which would kick in starting in 21/22 based on whatever the cap is at that point. Next year's cap number doesn't set his supermax figure, though obviously the broader revenue issues that impact next year's cap will presumably have some impact on the year after as well.

Previously there was an estimate that the 21/22 cap would be around $125m which would have put the supermax value at $253m over 5 years (you can see the "old" cap projections are still in the RealGM cap table). Obviously the league isn't likely to grow at the rate over the next couple years to get to that, but we don't know what the figure will be. For argument's sake, if the cap is held constant the next two years the supermax value would fall to $222m for deals starting in either year.

Of course, the same factors reducing the supermax will also reduce the regular max contract he could get elsewhere in 2021. The four year max with a $125m cap and 5% raises would be $161m, whereas with the current cap it's "only" $141m. I do think a depressed cap over the next two years could lead superstars to take shorter deals (like the old 1+1) to give them the option of signing new contracts if the cap is expected to make a significant jump (ie if it increases by more than the annual % raises in their contract). For example, if you thought the cap was going to rise by 15%+ from 21/22 to 22/23, then financially you're better off not locking in a long-term max in 21/22, assuming you ignore the risk of injury/value of security, etc. There isn't typically this type of disincentive for long-term deals since the cap generally rises a modest amount each year; typically you're better off signing a max deal with your current team with 8% raises, though guys sometimes try to get back into free agency when their cap share jumps (ie 0-6 eligible for 25%, 7-9 for 30%, 10+ for 35%).

Given the long-term questions around the Bucks' roster/management, I've been thinking for a while now that a shorter extension might be more likely than a supermax -- he apparently turned down a 5-year rookie max extension previously -- though I'd also say that losing in the second round increases the likelihood that he just rides it out. Note that he can also sign a shorter extension at any point before 2021 free agency starts (like Bledsoe, who signed his extension in-season), but the supermax is only available to be signed in the offseason (either this offseason as an extension or next offseason as a new contract).

Prez wrote:

Ruzious wrote:

Ron Swanson wrote:You don't "buy" that Giannis played like absolute crap in this series? I don't even know how to respond to that, so better to just move on.

Correct. It's absurd to blame the series loss on Giannis. The Bucks lost because they had an inferior backcourt and relied far too much on past their prime veterans.

Who is blaming the series entirely on Giannis? I don't think anyone is disputing that the backcourt sucked, coaching sucked, and there were a lot of other factors leading to the loss. But Giannis dramatically underperforming relative to his regular season play is one of them. In the 3 straight games to go down 0-3 he put up 22.7 on 45/15/54 shooting, that's awful by his standards tbh. If he even just slightly underperforms we're probably up 2-1 after 3 games.

That's talking out of both sides of your mouth. You're either blaming him or you're not blaming him. Going by your last sentence, you are blaming him.

Let me help the discussion a bit.

Giannis' game style is such that by default he will always "underperform" in the playoffs compared to the regular season. This is also due to the fact his numbers in the regular season are monstrous.

If anyone expects Giannis to carry over the regular season numbers in the playoffs (per 36mins) they are going to be perpetually disappointed.

There is a big difference between "could have played better" and "is responsible for losing the series"

MickeyDavis wrote:Saying he wants to build a championship here and saying yes I am signing an extension are completely different things.

It’s not all he said

The only thing I get is that GIannis will not be forcing his way out of Milwaukee this offseason. I do not think anyone here really expected anything different.

The contract extension is a totally different matter.

fam3381 wrote:

machu46 wrote:A supermax must be 5 years, which is why I tend to think he won't agree to sign the supermax.

His options this offseason are:

1. Supermax: 5 years/$224 million
2. A short-term deal to keep pressure on Bucks front office/maintain flexibility: 2 years/$67 million + options or whatever he wants
3. Play out his deal and choose one of these options after he's met with other teams, or sign with another team (other teams could offer a max of 4 years/$141 million)

Yeah, machu46's numbers all look like they're in the ballpark of what he could sign assuming the cap stays flat for the next two years ($109m), which probably isn't a bad guess given how much uncertainty there is around everything.

A little more background: Giannis is eligible for the 35% supermax this offseason via the designated veteran extension (must be 5 years), which would kick in starting in 21/22 based on whatever the cap is at that point. Next year's cap number doesn't set his supermax figure, though obviously the broader revenue issues that impact next year's cap will presumably have some impact on the year after as well.

Previously there was an estimate that the 21/22 cap would be around $125m which would have put the supermax value at $253m over 5 years (you can see the "old" cap projections are still in the RealGM cap table). Obviously the league isn't likely to grow at the rate over the next couple years to get to that, but we don't know what the figure will be. For argument's sake, if the cap is held constant the next two years the supermax value would fall to $222m for deals starting in either year.

Of course, the same factors reducing the supermax will also reduce the regular max contract he could get elsewhere in 2021. The four year max with a $125m cap and 5% raises would be $161m, whereas with the current cap it's "only" $141m. I do think a depressed cap over the next two years could lead superstars to take shorter deals (like the old 1+1) to give them the option of signing new contracts if the cap is expected to make a significant jump (ie if it increases by more than the annual % raises in their contract). For example, if you thought the cap was going to rise by 15%+ from 21/22 to 22/23, then financially you're better off not locking in a long-term max in 21/22, assuming you ignore the risk of injury/value of security, etc. There isn't typically this type of disincentive for long-term deals since the cap generally rises a modest amount each year; typically you're better off signing a max deal with your current team with 8% raises, though guys sometimes try to get back into free agency when their cap share jumps (ie 0-6 eligible for 25%, 7-9 for 30%, 10+ for 35%).

Given the long-term questions around the Bucks' roster/management, I've been thinking for a while now that a shorter extension might be more likely than a supermax -- he apparently turned down a 5-year rookie max extension previously -- though I'd also say that losing in the second round increases the likelihood that he just rides it out. Note that he can also sign a shorter extension at any point before 2021 free agency starts (like Bledsoe, who signed his extension in-season), but the supermax is only available to be signed in the offseason (either this offseason as an extension or next offseason as a new contract).

Rides it out as in signs the max or waits the entire year to sign a deal?

TD75 wrote:The only thing I get is that GIannis will not be forcing his way out of Milwaukee this offseason. I do not think anyone here really expected anything different.

The contract extension is a totally different matter.

I would guess many were concerned he could force a trade. However if he is non commital, that could force the Bucks hand and result in a trade. So it is the same in many ways.

when is the earliest that Giannis can sign the supermax extension?

mke_design wrote:

MickeyDavis wrote:Saying he wants to build a championship here and saying yes I am signing an extension are completely different things.

It’s not all he said

Yes, but he did NOT say anything about signing the extension, which is all that matters. Like Mitchell did. It would have ended all speculation and questions about his future. It doesn't mean he's leaving certainly.

So... at first glance it would be silly for Giannis to sign an extension this Summer... BUT, if he did, would that create a huge cap advantage for the bucks moving forward assuming super max deals get more expensive for everyone else again after this Summer?

Not saying but just saying, maybe the Bucks should lean into this fact. It could create the type of cap advantage that helps the Bucks build a big winner for Giannis.

Like imagine 2-3 years of the post-Lebron era where the Bucks get Giannis on a good deal, relative to other superstars.

humanrefutation wrote:

jerrod wrote:That wall quote is absolute genius. Love it!

Haven't seen you around in a while!

When everything is going great there's not much to talk about! I'm trying to get back into realgm being a part of my routine. It's a little more fun than the subreddit

fam3381 wrote:

machu46 wrote:A supermax must be 5 years, which is why I tend to think he won't agree to sign the supermax.

His options this offseason are:

1. Supermax: 5 years/$224 million
2. A short-term deal to keep pressure on Bucks front office/maintain flexibility: 2 years/$67 million + options or whatever he wants
3. Play out his deal and choose one of these options after he's met with other teams, or sign with another team (other teams could offer a max of 4 years/$141 million)

Yeah, machu46's numbers all look like they're in the ballpark of what he could sign assuming the cap stays flat for the next two years ($109m), which probably isn't a bad guess given how much uncertainty there is around everything.

A little more background: Giannis is eligible for the 35% supermax this offseason via the designated veteran extension (must be 5 years), which would kick in starting in 21/22 based on whatever the cap is at that point. Next year's cap number doesn't set his supermax figure, though obviously the broader revenue issues that impact next year's cap will presumably have some impact on the year after as well.

Previously there was an estimate that the 21/22 cap would be around $125m which would have put the supermax value at $253m over 5 years (you can see the "old" cap projections are still in the RealGM cap table). Obviously the league isn't likely to grow at the rate over the next couple years to get to that, but we don't know what the figure will be. For argument's sake, if the cap is held constant the next two years the supermax value would fall to $222m for deals starting in either year.

Of course, the same factors reducing the supermax will also reduce the regular max contract he could get elsewhere in 2021. The four year max with a $125m cap and 5% raises would be $161m, whereas with the current cap it's "only" $141m. I do think a depressed cap over the next two years could lead superstars to take shorter deals (like the old 1+1) to give them the option of signing new contracts if the cap is expected to make a significant jump (ie if it increases by more than the annual % raises in their contract). For example, if you thought the cap was going to rise by 15%+ from 21/22 to 22/23, then financially you're better off not locking in a long-term max in 21/22, assuming you ignore the risk of injury/value of security, etc. There isn't typically this type of disincentive for long-term deals since the cap generally rises a modest amount each year; typically you're better off signing a max deal with your current team with 8% raises, though guys sometimes try to get back into free agency when their cap share jumps (ie 0-6 eligible for 25%, 7-9 for 30%, 10+ for 35%).

Given the long-term questions around the Bucks' roster/management, I've been thinking for a while now that a shorter extension might be more likely than a supermax -- he apparently turned down a 5-year rookie max extension previously -- though I'd also say that losing in the second round increases the likelihood that he just rides it out. Note that he can also sign a shorter extension at any point before 2021 free agency starts (like Bledsoe, who signed his extension in-season), but the supermax is only available to be signed in the offseason (either this offseason as an extension or next offseason as a new contract).

Frank from the top rope.

TD75 wrote:Let me help the discussion a bit.

Giannis' game style is such that by default he will always "underperform" in the playoffs compared to the regular season. This is also due to the fact his numbers in the regular season are monstrous.

If anyone expects Giannis to carry over the regular season numbers in the playoffs (per 36mins) they are going to be perpetually disappointed.

There is a big difference between "could have played better" and "is responsible for losing the series"

I'm not quite sure you can make this argument when the other greats have had monstrous regular seasons and still performed in the playoffs. I think Giannis just still has a long way to go. The Heat essentially game-planned him out of a series and made him try to force the issue. When Giannis starts forcing the issue, it's ugly. The issue is he doesn't know how to make his teammates better. He probably makes the "correct" play 1 out of 5 times.

MickeyDavis wrote:

mke_design wrote:

MickeyDavis wrote:Saying he wants to build a championship here and saying yes I am signing an extension are completely different things.

It’s not all he said

Yes, but he did NOT say anything about signing the extension, which is all that matters. Like Mitchell did. It would have ended all speculation and questions about his future. It doesn't mean he's leaving certainly.

Although it was reported that Utah formally offered the extension - the Bucks had literally just lost and he spoke about it. They’re probably in negotiations but he’s made it apparent he wants no part in the basketball business side of things.

Krispy Kreme wrote:

TD75 wrote:Let me help the discussion a bit.

Giannis' game style is such that by default he will always "underperform" in the playoffs compared to the regular season. This is also due to the fact his numbers in the regular season are monstrous.

If anyone expects Giannis to carry over the regular season numbers in the playoffs (per 36mins) they are going to be perpetually disappointed.

There is a big difference between "could have played better" and "is responsible for losing the series"

I'm not quite sure you can make this argument when the other greats have had monstrous regular seasons and still performed in the playoffs. I think Giannis just still has a long way to go. The Heat essentially game-planned him out of a series and made him try to force the issue. When Giannis starts forcing the issue, it's ugly. The issue is he doesn't know how to make his teammates better. He probably makes the "correct" play 1 out of 5 times.

The biggest issue is that he abandoned whatever decent job he was doing all year in the mid-range. He was taking mid-range jumpers at a higher frequency than ever before. Turn-arounds, fadeaways, 16-17 foot set shots, etc. This was the most promising development of his game as his post-up work looked more confident. Raw still, to be sure, but he was showing confidence from 18-feet and in. This is the development he needs desperately to continue.

The smart basketball people are all talking about this. He's not LeBron/Durant/Harden/Luka. He shouldn't be a super high-usage guard masquerading as a big. He should be a fairly high-usage big with the added asset of being able to handle and distribute the ball like a guard in transition thanks to his good vision (still solid), handles and incredible athleticism.

In this Miami series, not one of their players should've been able to guard him 1-on-1. He should've been getting doubled 18-feet and in.

His calling is evolutionary Garnett with handles and a transition game. He doesn't have to abandon the three pointer. 2-3 attempts a game in the flow of the offense (preferably off-ball) is just fine. Develop 2-3 reliable post moves where he can generate a quality look. With his ridiculous wingspan and length anything within 18-feet is usually 2 steps away from the rim. He has good enough touch where he can finish at an elite rate in the paint without having to begin his motion from 26 feet out.

And it's on record that for most of his career he was a 72-74% career FT shooter. If he can simply return to that level of FT efficiency opposing teams wont even consider the hack-a-freak stuff (or play him nearly as physically). A lot of this is mental at the FT line. Hire a sports psychologist or whatever. Bottom line, this obsession with him handling the ball like a point and shooting multiple threes is stunting his growth.

I'm just a bit skeptical if Bud and his system are the complimentary fit for him.