Summer 2019 Free Agency Thread

[PhilasFinest]

DeAndre Jordan for the veteran min. Cmon people!

[Negrodamus]

Not surprising, but:

Read on Twitter

[the_process]

Jimmy is getting the full 5-188. Tobias is going to get something north of 5-150 (I just hope it’s south of 5-188). Scott and Redick are likely to be retained.

The tricky part is they have to build depth that Brett will trust with just a 24 pick, 4 2nds, Jon Simmons’ salary for trade salary matching purposes (5.7M * 1.75), and the taxpayer MLE (roughly 5.7M).

[ZarcMumoff]

Jimmy is getting the full 5-188. Tobias is going to get something north of 5-150 (I just hope it’s south of 5-188). Scott and Redick are likely to be retained.

The tricky part is they have to build depth that Brett will trust with just a 24 pick, 4 2nds, Jon Simmons’ salary for trade salary matching purposes (5.7M * 1.75), and the taxpayer MLE (roughly 5.7M).

Wouldn't we have the full MLE even if we are paying the tax? We just can't go over the apron, which we shouldn't...especially if Harris takes less than the max.

[youngcrev]

Rank 'em as full MLE targets (I expect most of these guys to end up getting more):
Terrence Ross
Dewayne Dedmon
Darren Collison
Patrick Beverly
Bojan Bogdanovic
Thad Young
Al-Farouq Aminu
Danny Green
Rudy Gay
Trevor Ariza
Jeremy Lamb

1. Pat Beverly
2. Danny Green
3. Dewayne Dedmon
4. Terrence Ross
5. Bojan Bogdanovic
6. Al-Farouq Aminu
7. Rudy Gay
8. Thad Young

Interested but definitely not at the full midlevel:
1. Darren Collison
2. Trevor Ariza
3. Jeremy Lamb

I'd go:
#1 Danny Green
#2 Patrick Beverley
- Both of these guys would put us on another level. Adding an elite 3 and D guard to the lineup and shifting JJ to a 6th man role would make us the class of East IMO.

#3 Terrence Ross
#4 Bojan Bogdanovic
- Ross gets the nod due to age, but it's close. I like his fit in a Ben-centric lineup as an athlete that can get out on the break while being a guy that can shoot on the move in the halfcourt. Bogdanovic is just really good. Elite shooter with good size.

#5 Jeremy Lamb
#6 Darren Collison
#7 Dewayne Dedmon
-Wings come at a premium, and things finally looked to be clicking for Lamb this year. He also gets the Ross age bump. Collison is a legit starting level PG that can play on and off the ball. Don't like how small he is, as I think our size advantage caused issues for the Raptors in the playoffs, but he can guard the point of attack decently and has shot over 40% from 3 for the past 4 seasons. We'd get the lowest amount of utility out of Dedmon and you can probably find equally talented options for cheaper, but he's an amazing fit, and keeping Embiid healthy has to be a priority.

#8 Al-Farouq Aminu
#9 Thad Young
#10 Rudy Gay
#11 Trevor Ariza
They're all pretty similar in terms of the role they'd fill here, so I just ranked them in terms of age. Each would be a sizeable upgrade over Mike Scott as your top forward off the bench.

[youngcrev]

Jimmy is getting the full 5-188. Tobias is going to get something north of 5-150 (I just hope it’s south of 5-188). Scott and Redick are likely to be retained.

The tricky part is they have to build depth that Brett will trust with just a 24 pick, 4 2nds, Jon Simmons’ salary for trade salary matching purposes (5.7M * 1.75), and the taxpayer MLE (roughly 5.7M).

Wouldn't we have the full MLE even if we are paying the tax? We just can't go over the apron, which we shouldn't...especially if Harris takes less than the max.

No, the tax payer MLE is less. If they choose to just cut Jon Simmons rather than trade him they should have the full MLE to work with though.

[the_process]

Jimmy is getting the full 5-188. Tobias is going to get something north of 5-150 (I just hope it’s south of 5-188). Scott and Redick are likely to be retained.

The tricky part is they have to build depth that Brett will trust with just a 24 pick, 4 2nds, Jon Simmons’ salary for trade salary matching purposes (5.7M * 1.75), and the taxpayer MLE (roughly 5.7M).

Wouldn't we have the full MLE even if we are paying the tax? We just can't go over the apron, which we shouldn't...especially if Harris takes less than the max.

If they max Butler, go north of 5-150 for Harris, and want to bring back Redick and Scott... then there’s no way.

[ZarcMumoff]

Jimmy is getting the full 5-188. Tobias is going to get something north of 5-150 (I just hope it’s south of 5-188). Scott and Redick are likely to be retained.

The tricky part is they have to build depth that Brett will trust with just a 24 pick, 4 2nds, Jon Simmons’ salary for trade salary matching purposes (5.7M * 1.75), and the taxpayer MLE (roughly 5.7M).

Wouldn't we have the full MLE even if we are paying the tax? We just can't go over the apron, which we shouldn't...especially if Harris takes less than the max.

No, the tax payer MLE is less. If they choose to just cut Jon Simmons rather than trade him they should have the full MLE to work with though.

I know the tax payer MLE is less. But isn't the "tax payer" MLE only for teams that are also above the apron, which is $6 million above the luxury tax line?

[ZarcMumoff]

Jimmy is getting the full 5-188. Tobias is going to get something north of 5-150 (I just hope it’s south of 5-188). Scott and Redick are likely to be retained.

The tricky part is they have to build depth that Brett will trust with just a 24 pick, 4 2nds, Jon Simmons’ salary for trade salary matching purposes (5.7M * 1.75), and the taxpayer MLE (roughly 5.7M).

Wouldn't we have the full MLE even if we are paying the tax? We just can't go over the apron, which we shouldn't...especially if Harris takes less than the max.

If they max Butler, go north of 5-150 for Harris, and want to bring back Redick and Scott... then there’s no way.

If they max Butler, get Harris to take $4 million less per year (5/170), sign Redick to 2/24, Scott for 2/10 ($5M the highest we can go), use the full MLE, sign two vet min guys, convert Shake, and only have one of the 2nd rounders make the team...they would be at $135M, which is below the apron.

[the_process]

Wouldn't we have the full MLE even if we are paying the tax? We just can't go over the apron, which we shouldn't...especially if Harris takes less than the max.

No, the tax payer MLE is less. If they choose to just cut Jon Simmons rather than trade him they should have the full MLE to work with though.

I know the tax payer MLE is less. But isn't the "tax payer" MLE only for teams that are also above the apron, which is $6 million above the luxury tax line?

No, you just have to be over the tax line. Hence why it’s called the taxpayer MLE.

What you’re thinking of is the rule that says teams that use the full MLE are hard capped at the apron. Whereas if you only use the taxpayer MLE, you can go over the apron.

[ZarcMumoff]

No, the tax payer MLE is less. If they choose to just cut Jon Simmons rather than trade him they should have the full MLE to work with though.

I know the tax payer MLE is less. But isn't the "tax payer" MLE only for teams that are also above the apron, which is $6 million above the luxury tax line?

No, you just have to be over the tax line. Hence why it’s called the taxpayer MLE.

What you’re thinking of is the rule that says teams that use the full MLE are hard capped at the apron. Whereas if you only use the taxpayer MLE, you can go over the apron.

"In the 2017 CBA, the MLE was initially set at $8.406 million in the 2017–18 season for teams that are over the cap either before or after the signing, but under the luxury tax apron, set at $6 million above the tax line. Teams can use this exception to offer contracts of up to four years. Teams above the apron have an MLE initially set at $5.192 million, allowing contracts of up to three years."

This makes it seem like a team just has to be under the apron to use the full MLE *shrug*

[PhilasFinest]

Really do not get why people keep clamoring for Mike Scott being brought back.

Unless its on a dirt cheap 1 year deal, id let him go explore his options.

Despite the "Tough guy" label, he's not a good defender and outside of a streaky outside shot he provides very little else on offense.Seriously think we can do better. Not like he is a stout rebounder or charge taker like Ersan was.

[ZarcMumoff]

Really do not get why people keep clamoring for Mike Scott being brought back.

Unless its on a dirt cheap 1 year deal, id let him go explore his options.

Despite the "Tough guy" label, he's not a good defender and outside of a streaky outside shot he provides very little else on offense.

Totally agree. The juice isn't worth the squeeze when we could conceivably bring in a vet min guy, like Wilson Chandler, who would cost half of what Scott does.

[PhilasFinest]

Really do not get why people keep clamoring for Mike Scott being brought back.

Unless its on a dirt cheap 1 year deal, id let him go explore his options.

Despite the "Tough guy" label, he's not a good defender and outside of a streaky outside shot he provides very little else on offense.

Totally agree. The juice isn't worth the squeeze when we could conceivably bring in a vet min guy, like Wilson Chandler, who would cost half of what Scott does.

Id rather try to get someone like Markieef Morris (If cheap) or draft a Dedric Lawson and let them play that role. Both offer you a much more diverse skillset while still spacing the floor.

If that doesn't work, can always look at someone like Jeff or Jamychal Green on a 1 year deal.

[BullyKing]

No, the tax payer MLE is less. If they choose to just cut Jon Simmons rather than trade him they should have the full MLE to work with though.

I know the tax payer MLE is less. But isn't the "tax payer" MLE only for teams that are also above the apron, which is $6 million above the luxury tax line?

No, you just have to be over the tax line. Hence why it’s called the taxpayer MLE.

What you’re thinking of is the rule that says teams that use the full MLE are hard capped at the apron. Whereas if you only use the taxpayer MLE, you can go over the apron.

Isn't this just a question of the sequence though? You renounce all of the capholds of everyone but Redick, Harris, Butler and Scott (and theoretically resign Redick at a number lower than his caphold). Then you use the full MLE as you won't be in the tax before finalizing the other deals, which what pushes you into the tax.

[BullyKing]

Really do not get why people keep clamoring for Mike Scott being brought back.

Unless its on a dirt cheap 1 year deal, id let him go explore his options.

Despite the "Tough guy" label, he's not a good defender and outside of a streaky outside shot he provides very little else on offense.Seriously think we can do better. Not like he is a stout rebounder or charge taker like Ersan was.

It's the same thing as Redick. There are only so many avenues to improve the team - MLE, BAE, trading J. Simmons, the draft picks. If you use one of those avenues to replace Scott, there's less avenues for upgrading the rest of the team. Now if you can get a similar player cheaper then sure. But otherwise, not bringing him back is just creating an issue elsewhere.

[XtremeDunkz]

The way being over the cap works (which we will be over the cap) is bringing back your own productive players is a much easier thing to do than to find cheap minimum players off the streets.

[PhillyFan11]

I’m not gready...

(In no order)

Wes Matthews
James Ennis
Jeff Green
Javale McGee
Dwayne Dedmon
Mike Scott
Rodney Hood
Corey Joseph
Jeremy Lin
Jamychal Green
Reggie Bullock
Trevor Ariza
Noah Vonleh
Elfrid Payton
Jeremy Lin
Ed Davis
Justin Holiday
Marcus Morris
Jeremy Lamb
Garrett Temple
Darren Collinson
Rudy Gay
KCP
Thad Young
Markief Morris
Robin Lopez
Danny Green
Aminu
Ish Smith
Wayne Ellington

There’s obviously more guys to target, but that’s my most realistic group. If Elton can get us prettu much any G, F, Big Man combo out of that group and I’d be happy. If we go the “run it back” route I think we’ll always have enough scoring on the floor that depth will always be more important.

[PhilasFinest]

Really do not get why people keep clamoring for Mike Scott being brought back.

Unless its on a dirt cheap 1 year deal, id let him go explore his options.

Despite the "Tough guy" label, he's not a good defender and outside of a streaky outside shot he provides very little else on offense.Seriously think we can do better. Not like he is a stout rebounder or charge taker like Ersan was.

It's the same thing as Redick. There are only so many avenues to improve the team - MLE, BAE, trading J. Simmons, the draft picks. If you use one of those avenues to replace Scott, there's less avenues for upgrading the rest of the team. Now if you can get a similar player cheaper then sure. But otherwise, not bringing him back is just creating an issue elsewhere.

While I agree to an extent, Comparing Redick to Scott is like comparing Ben Simmons and TJ.

JJ plays an integral role on our team and our offense. Sure he's an older player and has his limitations on defense, but he possesses an elite skillset and his fit on this team is so much more important than Mike Scott's.

JJ Redick has been a starter for 2 years and has averages of 17+ PPG shooting 40%+ from 3 on extremely high volume. HIs off-ball movement and threat of making a shot commands a defenses attention. He should be a priority to bring back and if not, we need to use our best resource(s) at trying to fill his role.

Im not necessarily against Mike Scott.....i am just against paying him more than what he is worth. He was nothing special for this team and can be replaced using 1 of our cheaper avenues available. If he wants more than a min contract, I probably let him walk.

[BullyKing]

Really do not get why people keep clamoring for Mike Scott being brought back.

Unless its on a dirt cheap 1 year deal, id let him go explore his options.

Despite the "Tough guy" label, he's not a good defender and outside of a streaky outside shot he provides very little else on offense.Seriously think we can do better. Not like he is a stout rebounder or charge taker like Ersan was.

It's the same thing as Redick. There are only so many avenues to improve the team - MLE, BAE, trading J. Simmons, the draft picks. If you use one of those avenues to replace Scott, there's less avenues for upgrading the rest of the team. Now if you can get a similar player cheaper then sure. But otherwise, not bringing him back is just creating an issue elsewhere.

While I agree to an extent, Comparing Redick to Scott is like comparing Ben Simmons and TJ.

JJ plays an integral role on our team and our offense. Sure he's an older player and has his limitations on defense, but he possesses an elite skillset and his fit on this team is so much more important than Mike Scott's.

JJ Redick has been a starter for 2 years and has averages of 17+ PPG shooting 40%+ from 3 on extremely high volume. HIs off-ball movement and threat of making a shot commands a defenses attention. He should be a priority to bring back and if not, we need to use our best resource(s) at trying to fill his role.

Im not necessarily against Mike Scott.....i am just against paying him more than what he is worth. He was nothing special for this team and can be replaced using 1 of our cheaper avenues available. If he wants more than a min contract, I probably let him walk.

It doesn't involve comparing the players, only the concepts. It's easy to say to just one of our other avenues but which one? Are we going to trust a rookie 2nd round pick to fill the role adequately? If not, how are we upgrading guard, wing, and center backups if one of the MLE, BAE, and 1st is being used on a Scott replacement.

If Scott wants $3 million and giving it to him won't impact our ability to make other moves, and let's say the best vet available for the minimum is a guy like Channing Frye, I don't see why the extra million would stop you from bringing back Scott. It's just an arbitrary breaking point that makes no sense to me.