Ghost of Kleine wrote:lilfishi22 wrote:
Grayson plus Royce is 2 of our 3 high volume high % 3PT shooters. I don't need to explain to you how critical our shooting has been to our success so far this season. We're 11th in the league in 3P% and 8th in volume. We lose both of them and our 3PT tanks. That's what I mean by key pieces
Like I said, if our only focus is cutting salary and this season be damned, then fine. We could cut him the moment the ink dries on the trade papers and we're only on the hook for this season's salary. But if he manages to play 41 games then $17m is guaranteed next season, another 10 games and it's $25m guaranteed and so on. The only way we can guarantee we get full benefit of salary dumping key players is if we're confident Zion is not going to sniff 41 games or we cut him right away.
Yes, both Allen and O'neale are key players to our 3 pt shooting schemes. And both have been really good at times too. And 3 point shooting is really important for our offensive success. However, we don't even know what the framework would look like in a Zion trade, and it's quite possible that we'd keep one of those two possibly if buying low ( Zion's lowest value ever currently).
Also, let's not act like as good as they are as role players for us, that 3 point shooting specialists are very difficult to obtain. There's plenty of 3 point shooting guards that we could pick up/ seek from trade, free agency, buyout pool, or possibly even the unsigned nba players lists.
As you know I've extensively formulated various for specific players and roles for our needs in the past. They've been solid for us, but emotional attachments aside, are far from irreplaceable.
But even if we theoretically did have to lose those two in a Zion trade premise, the sheer gravity that Zion creates when on the floor pulls multiple defenders in so much that any of our shooters would have much more wide open looks.
And this would allow for much better efficiency from our other shooters or shooters we might acquire to replace those two players in a worst case scenario.
As for the idea of cutting Zion, that should be more of an alternative than the primary goal. Let's not forget that in reality, we are a low key rebuilding team with play in projections that absent recency bias, has exceeded expectations. But has still shown our true ceiling when playing the actual Legitimate top teams.
Sure, we're good for maybe a 2nd round exit if very lucky having everything break our way. But ultimately, we're a low end playoff fodder team with limited cap space, no draft assets, a 29 yr old centerpiece star and still having real weaknesses at the power forward and guard positions.
We've done really well so far. But in reality, we should still be trying to improve creatively when possible. And to do that requires some level of risks. Unless everyone is happy being a treadmilling playin team until Booker leaves or asks out eventually.
You mention that If Zion plays 41 games then we'll be on the hook for $17 million. I don't know about you, but $17 million for a player that's virtually unstoppable in the frontcourt/ going to the rim, who pulls major gravity, and puts up near triple double production is one hell of a bargain for us given our current situation!
And if he plays 51 games then $25 million for an unstoppable player with triple double production for Booker and J Green to play off of? I'll take that everyday of the week in comparison to our current conditions. Zion averages nearly a triple double whenever he plays.
How often do our beloved key players (Allen and O'neale) average that even combined? We'd be getting that production needed from multiple players out of a singular player in Zion. This would give us more options to help carry the load in case of potential injury.
And the very severe implied risks involved in a worst case scenario are again nullified if he can't/ doesn't play. So either your getting top tier triple double production, or worst case scenario, your clearing upwards of 39-40 million if things somehow didn't work out here.
That 40 million now being able to be applied to resigning Gillespie and Williams without going as deeply back into the tax.
The other considerations that apparently no one seems to bring up is that
1- if Zion can do well here and experience a renaissance of sorts or shows durability, not only does he drastically elevate our ceiling outcome, but he becomes a premium trade chip for us to possinly reqcquire more future assets WITHOUT HAVING TO TRADE BOOKER.
2- Given our current cap situation, there's no real guarantee that we wouldn't look to still offload Allen and O'neales' salaries in order to create cap flexibility towards resigning Gillespie and Williams. Unless you believe the consensus is they're viewed as more valuable than Gillespie and Williams have been for us.
My point being that our roster changing (even possibly after this very season is inevitable man! Our situation is just not financially sustainable unless Ishbias' willing to get back into the tax to field a "fun to watch" play in team. The contracts that we have alongside of Booker's supermax deal dictate that some players will have to he moved.
I like our roster, but I'm not oblivious to the needs of our future or the necessity to get better and elevate ourselves competitively with talent to try and maximize Booker's remaining time here, and to add more talent (assets) that can be moved to reacquire some semblance of a future for us! To reap any rewards, you have to take risks.
