RealGM

TorontoBarneys wrote:https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3934719/og-anunoby
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/2991230/fred-vanvleet
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3149673/pascal-siakam

They are making 36.6m, 42.8m, and 42.1m each, respectively.
Not a single one of these guys are worth their current contract. All 3 are overpaid role players.

Since people are starting to give BBQ flak, you have to look at it from a relative perspective. BBQ are younger and on fairer contracts with a higher ceiling than the trio that preceded them. Regardless of this being Masai's plan B or not, we are definitely in a better position now than we were before.

Our rebuild may not be perfect and started out rocky, but be thankful of the current situation - it could have been much worse.

Tor_Raps wrote:Who the heck has argued that we should have paid to keep that core intact? The logical argument was that it took Masai too long to figure that out himself.

The rebuild needed to happen the year we traded for Poeltl instead. We'd be in a much better position with more assets at our disposal.

sbsat wrote:

TorontoBarneys wrote:https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3934719/og-anunoby
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/2991230/fred-vanvleet
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3149673/pascal-siakam

They are making 36.6m, 42.8m, and 42.1m each, respectively.
Not a single one of these guys are worth their current contract. All 3 are overpaid role players.

Since people are starting to give BBQ flak, you have to look at it from a relative perspective. BBQ are younger and on fairer contracts with a higher ceiling than the trio that preceded them. Regardless of this being Masai's plan B or not, we are definitely in a better position now than we were before.

Our rebuild may not be perfect and started out rocky, but be thankful of the current situation - it could have been much worse.

None of the GMs of those three teams agree -- they are paid a hefty pricetag because they provide their respective teams exactly what they need right now

Indeed wrote:Explain what Siakam needs to do for worth his current salary?

Indeed wrote:Explain what Siakam needs to do for worth his current salary?

YogurtProducer wrote:

sbsat wrote:

TorontoBarneys wrote:https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3934719/og-anunoby
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/2991230/fred-vanvleet
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3149673/pascal-siakam

They are making 36.6m, 42.8m, and 42.1m each, respectively.
Not a single one of these guys are worth their current contract. All 3 are overpaid role players.

Since people are starting to give BBQ flak, you have to look at it from a relative perspective. BBQ are younger and on fairer contracts with a higher ceiling than the trio that preceded them. Regardless of this being Masai's plan B or not, we are definitely in a better position now than we were before.

Our rebuild may not be perfect and started out rocky, but be thankful of the current situation - it could have been much worse.

None of the GMs of those three teams agree -- they are paid a hefty pricetag because they provide their respective teams exactly what they need right now

Agreed. The 3 of them together would be problematic, but other than Indiana (more Haliburton than Siakams fault anyways) NYK and HOU are completely fine with those contracts.

FVV is only overpaid when you ignore why he got that deal, and NYK is completly fine with OG at $36M considering IQ re-signed for $33M.

sbsat wrote:

Tor_Raps wrote:Who the heck has argued that we should have paid to keep that core intact? The logical argument was that it took Masai too long to figure that out himself.

The rebuild needed to happen the year we traded for Poeltl instead. We'd be in a much better position with more assets at our disposal.

this is true too -- masai waited too long to disband the previous core

Tor_Raps wrote:Who the heck has argued that we should have paid to keep that core intact? The logical argument was that it took Masai too long to figure that out himself.

The rebuild needed to happen the year we traded for Poeltl instead. We'd be in a much better position with more assets at our disposal.

Appostis wrote:

YogurtProducer wrote:

sbsat wrote:
None of the GMs of those three teams agree -- they are paid a hefty pricetag because they provide their respective teams exactly what they need right now

Agreed. The 3 of them together would be problematic, but other than Indiana (more Haliburton than Siakams fault anyways) NYK and HOU are completely fine with those contracts.

FVV is only overpaid when you ignore why he got that deal, and NYK is completly fine with OG at $36M considering IQ re-signed for $33M.

Yeah there's a little bit of context you've let's out about OG's contract...

36.5 but then..39.5/42.5/45.4 and a final year 48.3 as a PO.
Vs IQ with 32.5 flat.

First year..100%. after that? Even with the increasing cap that's a hard pill to swallow. OG had them by the short and curlies...

YogurtProducer wrote:

Appostis wrote:

YogurtProducer wrote:Agreed. The 3 of them together would be problematic, but other than Indiana (more Haliburton than Siakams fault anyways) NYK and HOU are completely fine with those contracts.

FVV is only overpaid when you ignore why he got that deal, and NYK is completly fine with OG at $36M considering IQ re-signed for $33M.

Yeah there's a little bit of context you've let's out about OG's contract...

36.5 but then..39.5/42.5/45.4 and a final year 48.3 as a PO.
Vs IQ with 32.5 flat.

First year..100%. after that? Even with the increasing cap that's a hard pill to swallow. OG had them by the short and curlies...

Well considering the cap is supposed to increase 10% per year and OG's contract increases 7.5% per year IDK why it would get harder to swallow.

But in comparison to IQs contract yes, but Brunson also took a huge discount so it kind of evens out

Appostis wrote:

YogurtProducer wrote:

Appostis wrote:

Yeah there's a little bit of context you've let's out about OG's contract...

36.5 but then..39.5/42.5/45.4 and a final year 48.3 as a PO.
Vs IQ with 32.5 flat.

First year..100%. after that? Even with the increasing cap that's a hard pill to swallow. OG had them by the short and curlies...

Well considering the cap is supposed to increase 10% per year and OG's contract increases 7.5% per year IDK why it would get harder to swallow.

But in comparison to IQs contract yes, but Brunson also took a huge discount so it kind of evens out

Still a flat 32.5 vs a average of 42.5 on OGs deal(with that PO in year 5). That cap increasing also makes IQs deal look like a bargain in year 5. In that 5th year 15.79% of the cap vs 23.5%.

Your post is misleading. *Shrug*. IQs flat contract and lack of a PO adds a ton of potential value to his deal.

I still think OG is worth a contract assuming his random unlucky injury history doesn't strike again.

Appostis wrote:

YogurtProducer wrote:

Appostis wrote:

Yeah there's a little bit of context you've let's out about OG's contract...

36.5 but then..39.5/42.5/45.4 and a final year 48.3 as a PO.
Vs IQ with 32.5 flat.

First year..100%. after that? Even with the increasing cap that's a hard pill to swallow. OG had them by the short and curlies...

Well considering the cap is supposed to increase 10% per year and OG's contract increases 7.5% per year IDK why it would get harder to swallow.

But in comparison to IQs contract yes, but Brunson also took a huge discount so it kind of evens out

Still a flat 32.5 vs a average of 42.5 on OGs deal(with that PO in year 5). That cap increasing also makes IQs deal look like a bargain in year 5. In that 5th year 15.79% of the cap vs 23.5%.

Your post is misleading. *Shrug*. IQs flat contract and lack of a PO adds a ton of potential value to his deal.

I still think OG is worth a contract assuming his random unlucky injury history doesn't strike again.

Dennis 37 wrote:

Appostis wrote:

YogurtProducer wrote:Well considering the cap is supposed to increase 10% per year and OG's contract increases 7.5% per year IDK why it would get harder to swallow.

But in comparison to IQs contract yes, but Brunson also took a huge discount so it kind of evens out

Still a flat 32.5 vs a average of 42.5 on OGs deal(with that PO in year 5). That cap increasing also makes IQs deal look like a bargain in year 5. In that 5th year 15.79% of the cap vs 23.5%.

Your post is misleading. *Shrug*. IQs flat contract and lack of a PO adds a ton of potential value to his deal.

I still think OG is worth a contract assuming his random unlucky injury history doesn't strike again.

If you can have OG for 82 games plus playoffs, then you could justify the pay. His history just wasn't that.

YogurtProducer wrote:

Appostis wrote:

YogurtProducer wrote:Well considering the cap is supposed to increase 10% per year and OG's contract increases 7.5% per year IDK why it would get harder to swallow.

But in comparison to IQs contract yes, but Brunson also took a huge discount so it kind of evens out

Still a flat 32.5 vs a average of 42.5 on OGs deal(with that PO in year 5). That cap increasing also makes IQs deal look like a bargain in year 5. In that 5th year 15.79% of the cap vs 23.5%.

Your post is misleading. *Shrug*. IQs flat contract and lack of a PO adds a ton of potential value to his deal.

I still think OG is worth a contract assuming his random unlucky injury history doesn't strike again.

I suppose, my post also ignored RJ. So in total they are paying less to OG than they would be to RJ and IQ.