RealGM

I've been following the Raps since the beginning and in recent years, it seems that so much of the hardcore fans' focus is on the player's worth in comparison to their contracts.

My question as a Raps fan is, does it matter? For the life of me, I can't remember any contract that the Raps have had that have hamstrung anything they've wanted to do nor have we ever been in any situation where we've capitalized on having oodles of cap space.

So, does it really matter that Jose makes 10 mil or that DeMar got a big extension? As we all know by now, the size of a contract doesn't really matter. You'll always find a taker eventually.

Another side to this is that winners spend money. In any sport, you'll see that the majority of the teams at the top are the biggest spenders. With a market the size of Toronto's and a company with the resources of MLSE, we should be doing whatever it takes to build a team.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

Feeling is that MLSE will not be a tax payer. As a result every dollar spent poorly (aka Fields signing) hurts the Raps ability to put a really good team on the floor. Bad team = lots of losses = fans not happy.

Because if the overpayment puts us in a positions where we are right up against the tax the Raptors will not spend any more money even if we need extra players due to injuries or just plain crappiness. I remember something like this happened in 2009.

The salary cap forces a team to only spend so much on free agents and taking on salary during trades, if we blow all our money on mediocre players then it essentially leaves no room to sign or trade for better ones. Thats the simplest way to describe it

It's not just the Raptors. If you talk to hardcore Leafs fans (similar to the Raptors fans on this forum), you will find the same thing.

What separates the hardcore fan from the casual fan is that they look at the game from a variety of angles. In a league where the cap dictates player movement more than anything else, it is no wonder that fans turn towards discussing them.

As for the second part of the post, I think it is premature to say that a contract has never held us back. If player X makes half the money, does his trade market change? Yes. If the team is under the cap, do they have the ability to take back a contract for incentives? Yes.

Look at the Baron Davis trade that got Cleveland the number 1 overall pick.

Example:

Demar Derozan was a major trade chip in last offseason even though RAPS wanted to keep him.... now though, teams will not give nearly as much for him because he is considered overpaid. His trade value just halfed out.

i actually think OP makes a good point. have we actually been hamstrung from anything we could have done by bad contracts?

and i'd also add that i think people think far too many players are overpaid.. not sure what the salary cap is, but is $6MM really that much when a team spends $60 to $70 million.

and of course, the top players in the league are drastically underpaid. i think half the teams in the league would take lebron for the entire salary cap and fill the rest of the roster with pure NBDL journeyman types. and there are a few guys who are notf ar behind (i.e. spend 80% of salary cap on chris paul, kevin durant, slightly younger kobe)

Kills team's flexibility, ability to sign additional talent.
Weakens players trade value.

Would you rather pay 50 grand for a toyota camry or 50 grand for a volkwagen. (Directly taken from Colangelo's Car Sales book)

I know they say there's no such thing as a stupid question, but this is getting pretty close.

The more money you spend on mediocre players the less money you have to spend on players that are worth it.
The average cost of an NBA win is 1.8m dollars. More of those millions spent on players that can't come close to averaging enough wins vs their salary, makes it nigh on impossible to have a winning team.

A practical example.... Jalen Rose was massively overpaid here, (not by us, but we traded for him and his contract). We had to give away a first rd pick just to get him off the team and get some flexibility.... AND it was considered a good trade for us / Isaiah massively criticized for taking him. So thats how bad the contract was.

lucky777s wrote:Feeling is that MLSE will not be a tax payer. As a result every dollar spent poorly (aka Fields signing) hurts the Raps ability to put a really good team on the floor. Bad team = lots of losses = fans not happy.

This "feeling" is complete nonsense. MLSE is owned by the some of the largest and richest corporations in Canada. One of which - Rogers - just spent a metric truckload of money on the Blue Jays. Clearly they are willing to spend.

carl_english wrote:Would you rather pay 50 grand for a toyota camry or 50 grand for a volkwagen. (Directly taken from Colangelo's Car Sales book)

Not sure what you mean as a Camry is a model and Volkswagen is a brand. If you want to compare the Camry to the Passat, I'd probably take the Camry just due to the reliability issue (that's if Toyota's got that braking thing nailed down).

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

The salary doesn't matter, but their role matters, and they are not performing at the required level.
Eg. Bargnani should be the 2nd option, but shot poorly in the early season.

Scase wrote:I know they say there's no such thing as a stupid question, but this is getting pretty close.

The more money you spend on mediocre players the less money you have to spend on players that are worth it.
The average cost of an NBA win is 1.8m dollars. More of those millions spent on players that can't come close to averaging enough wins vs their salary, makes it nigh on impossible to have a winning team.

I don't believe in this dollars per win/money ball nonsense. That's small market thinking. We are not a small market.

I'd rather be known as a team that goes all out to win instead of the team that tries to pick and choose free agents and still gets shot down in the end.


Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

ruckus wrote:

Scase wrote:I know they say there's no such thing as a stupid question, but this is getting pretty close.

The more money you spend on mediocre players the less money you have to spend on players that are worth it.
The average cost of an NBA win is 1.8m dollars. More of those millions spent on players that can't come close to averaging enough wins vs their salary, makes it nigh on impossible to have a winning team.

I don't believe in this dollars per win/money ball nonsense. That's small market thinking. We are not a small market.

I'd rather be known as a team that goes all out to win instead of the team that tries to pick and choose free agents and still gets shot down in the end.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

And hoe do you go about pursuing top free agents when all your money is tied to average players?

gei wrote:

lucky777s wrote:Feeling is that MLSE will not be a tax payer. As a result every dollar spent poorly (aka Fields signing) hurts the Raps ability to put a really good team on the floor. Bad team = lots of losses = fans not happy.

This "feeling" is complete nonsense. MLSE is owned by the some of the largest and richest corporations in Canada. One of which - Rogers - just spent a metric truckload of money on the Blue Jays. Clearly they are willing to spend.

Not every organization has a Paul Beeston pulling executive strings.

Also, despite a "large" budget (different economics entirely in baseball and good timing for Toronto thanks to big TV money coming in 2013), the Jays aren't remotely close to incurring any tax penalties. That's a pretty different sell to the beancounters (i.e. justifying the value is harder) and nothing in the Raptors history has indicated that they'd be willing to go there.

That aside (i.e. even if they were), it's just harder to dig out from under the burden of onerous contracts. It kills your flexibility until you get creative or lucky enough to escape. Making a bad decision is more likely to cost you a high pick or something else of value to regain that flexibility if you've gambled poorly.

how much MLSE is willing to pay and how the cheque is handed out is a gauge on how much they value a player and their expectation from such player.
When BC bid against himself on a average SG because he's "improving and he wants to play here" i smell trouble because it's like handing over the key of the franchise to a medicore player.
How do you expect to get respect around the league when you want your poster boy to be demar? And people wonder why we always get the short end from the refs.

this is essentially my grips with BC and the whole Demar thing. DD was pampered believe it or not, as much as bargnani since he step into the league and done very little to warrant it. He has pretty much every major flaw Bargnani has on court and everyone just focuses on Bargs because he was the whipping boy and demar supposedly have "a good work ethic". Young Guns?? GTFO...
I turn on the TV late into a meaningless game and hear from Devlin and Jack about how demar has finally "reach that level" after he drains a inconsequential jumper. it makes me feel hopeless about this franchise because all they've been doing is feed regurgitated marketing gimmicks to us fans year and and year out.

carl_english wrote:Would you rather pay 50 grand for a toyota camry or 50 grand for a volkwagen. (Directly taken from Colangelo's Car Sales book)

BC chose a Fiat for 80 grand

gei wrote:This "feeling" is complete nonsense. MLSE is owned by the some of the largest and richest corporations in Canada. One of which - Rogers - just spent a metric truckload of money on the Blue Jays. Clearly they are willing to spend.

Until they actually do it for the Raps your opinion is no more valid than any other. Paying players market value is one thing. Paying 3 times market value due to tax is another. Plus there is a clear opening in the American League East to make a move and a big upside for attendance. In the NBA we have a dynasty type team in MIA to get through plus some other very good teams.

Raps are up near the tax line with a 30 win team right now. How much more do you think they will spend when attendance is already pretty good? A 10 million per year player costs you minimum 20 with tax, plus you lose 5-10 more million in distribution payments from the league. So that one guy, not even a true star at that price, could cost you 30 Million. That could put the Raps into a money losing position for all we know. They are not doing that unless they think they are guaranteed an ECF appearance and we are not even close to that.

So for the near future at least spending every dollar wisely matters. A lot.