Sixerscan wrote:Arsenal wrote:Sixerscan wrote:Well similar to my above point they knew about what the luxury tax was going to be, if this was an issue just don't trade for Harris and let Chandler and so on expire or trade them for someone more cost controlled like Warren or something. Or don't trade two cost controlled role players for Butler.
The overwhelming majority of the league doesn't pay the tax/does whatever they can to avoid paying the tax. Like I know you love crying about them being cheap but they have the 6th highest payroll this year. It's just a reality of this being a business and not a fantasy league. But if you're a team that doesn't want to pay the tax, then maybe don't make moves burning cost controlled assets that are obviously going to take you into the tax, and then get cold feet. That was the weirdest part of all this, the seeming indecision and getting blindsided by things they should have already known and been prepared for.
It's very unusual to trade real assets for a max free agent to be mid season, and the Sixers did it twice in one season. It's extremely difficult to completely change everything to accommodate a guy like that in-season. And it seems even more weird to do if you're not 100% into signing the guy long term (when you'll have an off season and a camp to get them more into the team). It does all speak to it all being driven by Harris who isn't a basketball person and maybe doesn't get something like that.
We had arguably the most talented team in the league last year and all the key players PUBLICLY said they wanted to run it back. Apparently the coach in the end agreed to run it back.
Then a headscratching series of moves ensue resulting in: 1) a much worse team, and 2) a much lower payroll.
6th highest payroll means JACK if you're trying to be an actual contender. The teams that win are usually 1st, 2nd, 3rd in payroll. 6th means NOTHING.
So no I'm not just "crying" that they are cheap. THEY ARE CHEAP. There is almost a decade worth of evidence to prove it.
Well 6 of the 8 teams left have a lower salary than the Sixers. Heat are paying less than $2 million more, Clippers a few hundred thousand.
But regardless my point is, if you want to be “cheap” that’s one thing. But don’t give away all of your controllable assets for guys you don’t have the budget to keep around long term. A “cheap” team shouldn’t be putting itself in a position where they have to spend a record amount of contracts in a single offseason.
I think you are both right. Any team operating at or near the tax needs to protect their cheap assets because they represent pretty much the only way to meaningfully improve the team going forward.
I do think one the appeals of not running it back was to delay the tax for a year so I think there is an element of cheapness at play here as well.
But really, the larger problem is that this organization has been completely schizophrenic since Hinkie left and constantly overreacting to every issue. They struck out in free agency the first time and so became convinced they had to spend assets trading for people (Butler, Harris). Then our lack of an even remotely playable backup center barely costs us the Toronto series so we spend $100 million on Al Horford.
You can point some actions and label them evidence of being cheap. You can point to others as evidence of a win now mentality where money doesn't appear to be an issue. Rather than deciding whether they are all-in or cheap, isn't it easier and likely more accurate to just say they are incompetent?