The Right time to make a BIG Move

[azuresou1]

Kyrie would be an idiot to not sign his extension.

$90 million guaranteed contract over the next 5 years... or a mere guaranteed $7 million next season? What if he tears his knee and never plays again? He just boned himself out of $83 million, when to date he's made only about $13 million in his career.

Heck, even short term, if he signs his extension, he'll get paid DOUBLE just next season... not even accounting for future seasons.

And Kyrie is supposed to turn down generational wealth for what? So he doesn't have to play for Cleveland? Cry me a river.

[MaceCase]

Players like Ben Gordon and Harden turned down their deals but that's because they wanted more money and/or to be considered starters. There isn't any more money that Kyrie could be offered, a guy with his injury history can't take the risk of playing out his final year and then taking the QO in the hopes that he remains injury free and a team he wants to be a part of actually has the cap to offer him a nearly as lucrative a deal. Most teams are set up for the 2015 free agency though and deals signed then obviously will carry over. He can talk the talk of wanting to be elsewhere but if he signs a deal then the Cavs will have a big ole **** eating grin from being saved close to 30 million on a deal for him. Only leverage he has is negotiating early opt outs like the Big 3 did, anything else is just a huge gamble instead.

[atlantabbq99]

I hate it when people think they can predict what players are going to do just because of money. people were wrong about Dwight last year, they were wrong about Harden in OKC, Lebron in Cleveland, Shaq in Orlando.

From what i notice is that average players like Joe Johnson or Boozer follows the money, but elite players have way more factors to influence their decision then just money.

[theatlfan]

Can someone help me out with two items in regards to Kyrie?
1) Why would he make more $$ next season? In the NBA extensions generally kick in after the current contract expires. This seems in line with the ole Coon FAQ (Q59):

Rookie scale contracts may be extended for up to four seasons beyond the last option season in the contract, bringing the total contract length to five seasons. Teams can also select one player (called their "Designated Player") who can receive a five-year extension, bringing the total contract length to six seasons. A team can have at most one player on its roster whom they have designated for a longer extension, plus at most one player designated by another team whom they acquired in trade.

From some reference, John Wall is a Designated Player for WASH and his extension did *not* have any extra $$ this season - but next season it doubles. Is there something I'm missing?

2) Are we sure Kyrie can't make any more $$ by waiting? I mean he's been voted as an AS starter once, if it happens again then he's subject to the Derrick Rose provision which means his max goes up from 25% to 30% of the cap that is used for max calculations. I don't think he has met any of other stipulations for the provision (MVP 1x or 1st, 2nd, or 3rd team All-NBA 2x) so he needs to win the NBA MVP or get voted in to get it. If he gets it though, then his contract jumps by somewhere in the $17M range (~$3M diff in base which also equats to $.2M in raises every year). That's a large chunk of change to leave on the table... especially IF 1) is true and it doesn't actually buy you anything to sign early.

Not to say that CLE doesn't hold all more cards that Kyrie here - they do. But if Kyrie can simultaneously hold out for more $$ while looking unhappy while doing it, then he will in all likelihood win in the court of popular opinion. For a team that lost LeBron somewhat recently, that's a tough pill to swallow.

[Jamaaliver]

It's also worth remembering, CLE wouldn't want to keep a disgruntled Kyrie around with a young franchise player in Wiggins coming in.

It would be a debacle on and off the court. If Kyrie turns down a max contract...HE WILL BE TRADED. He'll still get his money once he's traded to another team.

There's no benefit to keeping KI on the roster for another year if he refuses to commit to the team. They've been getting trade offers for months.

My best guess, LAL trades #7 overall for Kyrie. They then offer him a max salary which he gladly signs.
CLE drafts Wiggins and Julius Randle.

Kyrie and Kevin Love both end up with the Lakers...

[MaceCase]

Can someone help me out with two items in regards to Kyrie?
1) Why would he make more $$ next season? In the NBA extensions generally kick in after the current contract expires. This seems in line with the ole Coon FAQ (Q59):

Rookie scale contracts may be extended for up to four seasons beyond the last option season in the contract, bringing the total contract length to five seasons. Teams can also select one player (called their "Designated Player") who can receive a five-year extension, bringing the total contract length to six seasons. A team can have at most one player on its roster whom they have designated for a longer extension, plus at most one player designated by another team whom they acquired in trade.

From some reference, John Wall is a Designated Player for WASH and his extension did *not* have any extra $$ this season - but next season it doubles. Is there something I'm missing?

2) Are we sure Kyrie can't make any more $$ by waiting? I mean he's been voted as an AS starter once, if it happens again then he's subject to the Derrick Rose provision which means his max goes up from 25% to 30% of the cap that is used for max calculations. I don't think he has met any of other stipulations for the provision (MVP 1x or 1st, 2nd, or 3rd team All-NBA 2x) so he needs to win the NBA MVP or get voted in to get it. If he gets it though, then his contract jumps by somewhere in the $17M range (~$3M diff in base which also equats to $.2M in raises every year). That's a large chunk of change to leave on the table... especially IF 1) is true and it doesn't actually buy you anything to sign early.

Not to say that CLE doesn't hold all more cards that Kyrie here - they do. But if Kyrie can simultaneously hold out for more $$ while looking unhappy while doing it, then he will in all likelihood win in the court of popular opinion. For a team that lost LeBron somewhat recently, that's a tough pill to swallow.

1) I think Azu is already in the 2014-15 season (only two teams are still playing so why not) so I believe he's referring to 2016 as next season.

2)The Rose provision can kick in retroactively. Paul George already signed his extension last summer but he just qualified for the provision by making the All NBA team again. A max designation is a max designation, signing an extension now still means that he'd get the percentage of whatever the cap actually is when it's determined in 2015, same goes for the Rose provision.

Reading up on George, the Pacers actually knew he'd make another All NBA team and negotiated to pay him 27% rather than the full 30% he'd be eligible for. This all still goes in line that extensions can be done well before you're actually eligible.

[ATLHawksfan21]

I hate it when people think they can predict what players are going to do just because of money. people were wrong about Dwight last year, they were wrong about Harden in OKC, Lebron in Cleveland, Shaq in Orlando.

From what i notice is that average players like Joe Johnson or Boozer follows the money, but elite players have way more factors to influence their decision then just money.

Harden had no clue he was being traded and okc offered him far less than the max. Lebron left to team up with wade and bosh (there is no option like this for kyrie right now) and this was after he had already played out his first extension, Shaq went to L.A. because they were paying him more and he got pissed about that newspaper article where all of orlando said he didnt deserve as much money as he thought he did.

None of these guys declined a max offer after their rookie contract so im not even sure why they are being compared.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using RealGM Forums mobile app

[MaceCase]

I hate it when people think they can predict what players are going to do just because of money. people were wrong about Dwight last year, they were wrong about Harden in OKC, Lebron in Cleveland, Shaq in Orlando.

From what i notice is that average players like Joe Johnson or Boozer follows the money, but elite players have way more factors to influence their decision then just money.

You're confusing unrestricted free agents with restricted free agents.....and just generally wrong on some other points such as Shaq whom Orlando didn't value paying more than Horace Grant and only anted up when he was a second away from signing a more lucrative deal in LA after they had already insulted him.

The only three RFAs you mentioned were Joe, Boozer and Harden and yes, you noticed that they all went where the money is. Phoenix low balled Joe so he took the max in Atlanta, Cleveland was prevented from offering Boozer a big deal due to cap rules regarding 2nd rounders back then (the Arenas provision tried to close that loophole later, Daryl Morey has abused it since) so he took the bigger deal in Utah and OKC of course weren't willing to commit the max to Harden.

There's a big difference opting out of 15-20 million over the life of a new deal when you're already on your second contract that has brought your career earnings up to 100 million than there is opting out of 15-20 million when you've made less than that total amount in your career to date.

[MaceCase]

It's also worth remembering, CLE wouldn't want to keep a disgruntled Kyrie around with a young franchise player in Wiggins coming in.

It would be a debacle on and off the court. If Kyrie turns down a max contract...HE WILL BE TRADED. He'll still get his money once he's traded to another team.

There's no benefit to keeping KI on the roster for another year if he refuses to commit to the team. They've been getting trade offers for months.

My best guess, LAL trades #7 overall for Kyrie. They then offer him a max salary which he gladly signs.
CLE drafts Wiggins and Julius Randle.

Kyrie and Kevin Love both end up with the Lakers...

"Disgruntled" and "cancer" are on entirely different ends of the spectrum. One suggests inherent character flaws the other suggests a displeasure over current circumstances. Circumstances in the NBA can change over night.....character flaws not so much.

[PandaKidd]

you forget he may not be sacrificing ANYTHING. You think his agent is not already talking through back channels to teams he may want to go to?

What if the Hawks called the Cavs and said we will trade you Millsap and the 15th pick for KI right now, you dont think Atlanta would instantly sign KI to the SAME (max money) extension that they could ?

I think they would.

Any team that lands KI is going to offer the same deal to him that the Cavs are offering. (minus the 1 year)

[Jamaaliver]

^BINGO!

It's not as if CLE would just hold on to KI as punishment for not signing their deal. It's not like another team would trade an arm and a leg for Kyrie without having already discussed a potential extension with his representatives.

KI will get his extension, it's just a matter of who pays it to him.

[MaceCase]

you forget he may not be sacrificing ANYTHING. You think his agent is not already talking through back channels to teams he may want to go to?

What if the Hawks called the Cavs and said we will trade you Millsap and the 15th pick for KI right now, you dont think Atlanta would instantly sign KI to the SAME (max money) extension that they could ?

I think they would.

Any team that lands KI is going to offer the same deal to him that the Cavs are offering. (minus the 1 year)

Uhm......why does Cleveland take that deal again? Heres the thing, if Cleveland trades Kyrie then it's for the best deal possible because whatever team gets him will then now have the same power that Cleveland currently has over him.

They are not held over a barrel with Kyrie whereas Kyrie will either have to risk playing on a one year deal before he's unrestricted or enjoy playing in Milwaukee or Sacramento because he's not in a position at all to dictate where he wants to play.

[PandaKidd]

you forget he may not be sacrificing ANYTHING. You think his agent is not already talking through back channels to teams he may want to go to?

What if the Hawks called the Cavs and said we will trade you Millsap and the 15th pick for KI right now, you dont think Atlanta would instantly sign KI to the SAME (max money) extension that they could ?

I think they would.

Any team that lands KI is going to offer the same deal to him that the Cavs are offering. (minus the 1 year)

Uhm......why does Cleveland take that deal again? Heres the thing, if Cleveland trades Kyrie then it's for the best deal possible because whatever team gets him will then now have the same power that Cleveland currently has over him.

They are not held over a barrel with Kyrie whereas Kyrie will either have to risk playing on a one year deal before he's unrestricted or enjoy playing in Milwaukee or Sacramento because he's not in a position at all to dictate where he wants to play.

I was being hypothetical. The same thing happened with Harden.

The Cavaliers will say "heres KI, we will trade him NOW" to a team that wants to contend. The discussions will be what is he worth. The Cavaliers will have to decide if he walks for nothing, or they get something for him (same thing OKC did with Harden).

There are plenty of teams out there that will trade for KI and CLE will listen (if KI doesnt sign the extension). Its actually in both parties interest to make each other happy because KI wants $$ and a different location, cle will want assets

You dont think that the Rockets agreed to the deal without asking Harden if he would sign an extension? They were losing Kevin Martin anyway IIRC, so, Harden was a rental, but I dont care what Harden says, there was some discussion BEFORE he was traded about him resigning with Houston

[MaceCase]

I was being hypothetical. The same thing happened with Harden.

The Cavaliers will say "heres KI, we will trade him NOW" to a team that wants to contend. The discussions will be what is he worth. The Cavaliers will have to decide if he walks for nothing, or they get something for him (same thing OKC did with Harden).

There are plenty of teams out there that will trade for KI and CLE will listen (if KI doesnt sign the extension). Its actually in both parties interest to make each other happy because KI wants $$ and a different location, cle will want assets

You dont think that the Rockets agreed to the deal without asking Harden if he would sign an extension? They were losing Kevin Martin anyway IIRC, so, Harden was a rental, but I dont care what Harden says, there was some discussion BEFORE he was traded about him resigning with Houston

There is barely a fraction of a percentage of a hope that Kyrie walks for nothing.

Harden didn't tell OKC, hey I would love to go to Houston or I'm gone.

OKC had the deal worked out.

They asked Harden "hey, will you sign for less?"

Harden said "no."

OKC traded him without his knowledge or approval within hours. KD was crying about finding out on twitter even.

They also had deals worked out with Washington and Golden State without Harden's knowledge, difference being that neither of those teams thought Harden was worth either the package to get him and/or the contract he wanted.


Again, that was a situation where OKC simply did not want to have to pay Harden. They knew what he was worth but they didn't want to have to pay close to that. They were sweating bullets already from what they had already offered him. They did not want him getting to free agency either where some other team would have paid him what he was worth and they would be forced to match and pay him what they already didn't want to pay him or watch him walk.

The impetus here is that OKC did not want to pay Harden.


This isn't the case for Kyrie. Cleveland wants to pay him, they have no issues there at all.


Now of course Harden was perfectly fine with ending up in Houston because they did want to pay him and they were going to let him be the man like he had hoped in OKC....but he would never have been a rental. Houston had RFA rights on him, he would have to play the same unprecedented game that you guys think Kyrie will if he ever wanted to get out of Houston....

If Cleveland decides they simply don't want the distraction (the distraction, not the fear that they will actually lose Kyrie) then they will move Kyrie to wherever the hell they decide, not Kyrie, and said team will play the same game of saying "sign the dotted line or watch us match you......or you can go ahead and risk a year without security......and then hit free agency and hope somewhere you want to be has the money you'd like....and that somewhere might still most likely be right here where you're standing."

Is Kyrie so desperate to get out of Cleveland that he will risk financial security or play long term for a worse franchise and locale just to get out? Seems raaaaaaaaaaather dramatic. Cleveland is **** but 90 million isn't going to make Detroit any nicer.

[PandaKidd]

Do you think that KI believes ANY OTHER FRANCHISE is better than CLE? IF he does, then he doesnt sign.

Also, he KNOWS what CLE will want for him. CLE isnt trading him for 2 2nd rounders. If he refuses to sign, he KNOWS hes getting traded to a team with assets and cap space or both.

I dont know, his best play if hes REALLY unhappy may be to not sign and force CLE to deal him where he will sign for 80 million anyway.

[azuresou1]

Do you think that KI believes ANY OTHER FRANCHISE is better than CLE? IF he does, then he doesnt sign.

Also, he KNOWS what CLE will want for him. CLE isnt trading him for 2 2nd rounders. If he refuses to sign, he KNOWS hes getting traded to a team with assets and cap space or both.

I dont know, his best play if hes REALLY unhappy may be to not sign and force CLE to deal him where he will sign for 80 million anyway.

Option A: $90 million guaranteed over 5 years
Option B: $7 million guaranteed, $85 million unguaranteed over 6 years

Which do you take? Because if you're even close to remotely sane, you take Option A 100 times out of 100.

Cleveland is the only team which can pay him guaranteed money now. If he tears his ACL and never plays a second, he would have still made his $90 mill by signing his contract.

Furthermore, the earliest Kyrie can leave Cleveland if they want to keep him is 2016/2017, and that's if he signs a one-year deal in free agency (2015-2016). Cleveland can match ANY contract he signs and he will HAVE to play for them.

And in the event that Kyrie stays healthy, he hits his new FA a year earlier, where he can make even more bank via another long-term guaranteed contract.

Who takes less guaranteed money over more years, all because they don't like their current team? Even if you hate your current team you sign the extension and then try to force a trade internally. That's the smart thing to do.

[azuresou1]

By the way, I didn't make up those numbers. That's what Kyrie would actually make in those scenarios.

A: $90,562,500
B: $92,514,480

Also, when you take into account time-value of money and discounting, Option A gets even better.

A: $69,953,452
B: $65,477,903

Again, keep in mind that A is 100% guaranteed, while B is less than 8% guaranteed.

[Jamaaliver]

I can't emphasize this point enough:

If Kyrie doesn't sign the extension with Cleveland...he WILL be traded and then extend with that team.

If Kyrie Irving truly wants to be on a different team next season he can probably make it happen.

The Cleveland Cavaliers will offer Irving a maximum contract extension once they're allowed to on July 1, and if he hasn't signed it by October, the team will likely be forced to trade him before the Oct. 31 deadline for third-year players to extend their contracts.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10514819/cleveland-cavaliers-lose-kyrie-irving

We're not looking at an either-or situation. He can take that same $90 million extension from whomever trades for him. It won't cost him a dime.

[PandaKidd]

Option A: $90 million guaranteed over 5 years
Option B: $7 million guaranteed, $85 million unguaranteed over 6 years

Which do you take? Because if you're even close to remotely sane, you take Option A 100 times out of 100.

Ok lets simplify this, MAYBE im not being clear and I am wrong but explain it to me:

Option A: Signs with Cleveland for 90 Million over 5 years (18 million per year)
Option B: Refuses to sign, Cleveland KEEPS him at 7.8 MIllion Salary next year
Option C: Cleveland knows that if KI wont sign option A, no amount of money is keeping him in CLE, and they TRADE HIM to "TEAM B"

Team B:
Option A: Offer a MAX CONTRACT extension to KI in the form of 4 years (MAX MONEY whatever that is)
Option B: Tell a disgruntled All Star MVP that they will pay him $7 million on his rookie contract and pray he stays with them (WILL NOT HAPPEN unless KI gets traded to say........the Pistons).


its not as clear as you guys are making it. You are sticking your head in the sand if you dont think CLE and KI agent are already hitting teams up seeing if they would trade for him. CLE will want best value, KI will want best destination/money.

They will intersect somewhere. Because NO TEAM will trade assets to CLE for KI unless KI is already onboard saying I WILL SIGN AN EXTENSION the second i step off the plane

[MaceCase]

its not as clear as you guys are making it. You are sticking your head in the sand if you dont think CLE and KI agent are already hitting teams up seeing if they would trade for him. CLE will want best value, KI will want best destination/money.

They will intersect somewhere. Because NO TEAM will trade assets to CLE for KI unless KI is already onboard saying I WILL SIGN AN EXTENSION the second i step off the plane

Actually......it is that clear you just aren't trying to hear it.

I won't bog you down with the history of why restricted (the definition is right there in the word) free agency exists in the first place but it's specifically to give teams the advantage in keeping their young stars. This helps small markets and poor locales specifically and creates an air of parody in the NBA otherwise every kid out there would run to a big market or warm weather city rather than stay any amount of years with the team that drafted them.

Did you read that? It gives the team the advantage.

Kyrie's only option is that he will play the long game and wait out Cleveland or whatever team he may be on.

That's it. That's his entire leverage, foregoing money now in the hopes that it is available 2 years later.

An NBA team's leverage does not end at the moment a player decides to not take the extension, it doesn't even necessarily end at the moment said player accepts his QO. Cleveland knows this, Kyrie knows this, everyone knows this, why don't you?