it's time to state the obvious...

teven_1 · Post #1 » by **teven_1** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:33 pm

Kevin Love's deal shouldn't even be a discussion, he wants the max, i say give it to him (if he doesn't deserve it, who does?). I know we have until the deadline but I don't see the point in waiting the way we did with Al Jeff.
To the talented cap heads on this forum, does anyone know how much flexibility we would have with Love getting the max? would we be able to retain Rubio, D Will for the future? and in the nearer future does signing Love to a max allow us to still go after a mid level guy?

whatever the answers I consider any contract discussion with Love a formality. (give him the max!)

EddyCool · Post #2 » by **EddyCool** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:37 pm

teven_1 wrote:I know we have until the deadline but I don't see the point in waiting the way we did with Al Jeff.

? I'm pretty Al signed his extension shortly after he arrived. He got a lot of quick good will when it came out that he didn't feel he was a max player, and signed quickly.

teven_1 wrote:To the talented cap heads on this forum, does anyone know how much flexibility we would have with Love getting the max? would we be able to retain Rubio, D Will for the future? and in the nearer future does signing Love to a max allow us to still go after a mid level guy?

Off the top of my head, this probably isn't a cap question as much as a Glen question. I expect - with $10 MM or so available to come off the books in Miller/Webster (not saying it will) and $10+ MM being added to Kevin's salary and the cap staying the same for next season, we'll be over the cap (rookie contract raises, resigning or replacing Beasley/Randolph, etc).

If the team is winning, we have no reason to believe Kahn won't be able to spend up to the luxury tax to make it as competitive as possible, and as long as we don't acquire or sign any contacts that go longer than 3 years after this one, we should be able to give Rubio whatever he needs and give a good look at Derrick. If Kahn does his job properly, there shouldn't be any risky contracts that go past Ricky/Derrick's extension eligibility, but we should be able to gamble and be aggressive on iffy contracts between now and then if it improves our talent but not our cap.

Four years would be GREAT for the franchise because the flexibility in planning that it allows could make a positive difference in being legit for 10 years, but it's not so important that if it's make or break for Kevin, you withhold it.

Remember what it's like to have an amazing player without another to help him out? I'm not going back! Pay him.

Biff Cooper · Post #3 » by **Biff Cooper** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:53 pm

teven_1 wrote:does anyone know how much flexibility we would have with Love getting the max? would we be able to retain Rubio, D Will for the future? and in the nearer future does signing Love to a max allow us to still go after a mid level guy?

As long as ownership is willing to open their pocketbooks and pay luxury taxes, there really won't be any restrictions on us re-signing / extending any of our current guys in the future. The only restriction will be that you can only have one 5 year extended guy on your team at the same time. If we do get into lux tax range, we will be limited to a mid level exception around $3mil as opposed to around $5mil if we are over the cap but under the lux.

shrink · Post #4 » by **shrink** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 4:21 pm

Strib says the only reason the signing has been delayed is because Glen Taylor is out of town.

yowyOw · Post #5 » by **yowyOw** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 4:31 pm

Yes. You can't lure superstars since they all want bigger markets, specially L.A. & NYC, or to join other superstars. And not being able to give Rubio a five year contract is not a problem. He'd be 28yo when he hits FA unrestrictedly. A lot of things can happen in 7 years. DWill will never be a max contract player.

The only 2 problems I see are 1) Getting the right pieces to fill the roster. I just hope that we will move with intelligence in the off-season because we need BADLY a C and a scoring SG. And 2)Beas future, since he becomes an unrestricted free agent next off-season and might have a great end of season this year (but nobody can guarantee he'd repeat that the following years).

.

Krapinsky · Post #6 » by **Krapinsky** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:59 pm

yowyOw wrote:Yes. You can't lure superstars since they all want bigger markets, specially L.A. & NYC, or to join other superstars. And not being able to give Rubio a five year contract is not a problem. He'd be 28yo when he hits FA unrestrictedly. A lot of things can happen in 7 years. DWill will never be a max contract player.

The only 2 problems I see are 1) Getting the right pieces to fill the roster. I just hope that we will move with intelligence in the off-season because we need BADLY a C and a scoring SG. And 2)Beas future, since he becomes an unrestricted free agent next off-season and might have a great end of season this year (but nobody can guarantee he'd repeat that the following years).

.

Thought the same thing about Love when he was a rookie.

I think this will get done monday or tuesday.

Post #7 » by **Calinks** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:35 pm

Yea, I can no longer write players off from a rookie season. Evan Turner looked useless last year now he's getting numbers. Tyreke Evans and Jennings looked like world beaters their rookie years, now I'm iffy on them. Love looked like he would be a 14 point, 10 rebound guy at best his rookie year and today he is a top 3 PF. Got to give young players time before making rash judgments.

Saltine · Post #8 » by **Saltine** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:14 am

I think they need at least 5000 minutes of game time to really see if they have a future, AR only has 2600 minutes played, the jury is still out... They should really use the D-league far more often on these guys, basketball needs a real AAA system besides college. If AR and Lee are going to be 14th and 15th on the bench once Webster, Beas, JJ and Miller come back it makes far more sense for them to be playing fulltime developing their game somewhere else.

SP

sisibilio · Post #9 » by **sisibilio** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 3:45 am

Saltine wrote:I think the need at least 5000 minutes of game time to really see if they have a future, AR only has 2600 minutes played, the jury is still out... They should really use the D-league far more often on these guys, basketball needs a real AAA system besides college. If AR and Lee are going to be 14th and 15th on the bench once Webster, Beas, JJ and Miller come back it makes far more sense for them to be playing fulltime developing their game somewhere else.

It would be an option if the D-league were competitive and teams were filled with decent players, but most of those players go to Europe-China-wherever if they can't get a spot in the NBA. Any semi talented player dominates easily there, and without a real challenge they can't improve much, it might even create bad habits.

moss_is_1 · Post #10 » by **moss_is_1** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:07 am

^ Yeah the D-league is a joke. It would probably just make AR look like a god because he'd take a bunch of shots and just go 1 on 1 versus guys that are way less talented than him. It's like the summer league games basically.

MagnusPinus · Post #11 » by **MagnusPinus** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:10 am

He is probably gonna take the max, but to me he is not an ideal player to give the max too.. He is not that dominant offensively(he is not the kind of guy that can really kill people in the post).. He is not a great defender(he got destroyed by Millsap and Al).. He is a dominant rebounder, but all around he is not that effective defensively and offensively(read bad shooting percentage). The way this league is built he is probably a max player.. But for sure not an ideal max player to have.

Saltine · Post #12 » by **Saltine** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:51 am

sisibilio wrote:It would be an option if the D-league were competitive and teams were filled with decent players, but most of those players go to Europe-China-wherever if they can't get a spot in the NBA. Any semi talented player dominates easily there, and without a real challenge they can't improve much, it might even create bad habits.

true, perhaps we need a system where each nba team has an affiliated team[s] in europe they can loan players too to get playing time. It works in soccer fairly well... the current system is just myopic.

Narf · Post #13 » by **Narf** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:54 am

Love is clearly worth the mini-max (played under 6 years, no MVPs). The BIGGER max I can see an argument. But the smaller max....well that's just silly.

bball_jay · Post #14 » by **bball_jay** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:00 am

no. kevin love isn't worth a max deal. he doesn't make other players better. he doesn't produce wins on his own. he's a stat producer.

Narf · Post #15 » by **Narf** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:04 am

And by "stat" you mean "possessions for his own team" right?

teven_1 · Post #16 » by **teven_1** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:23 pm

what I'm saying is don't alienate the one star player excited about sticking around.

SO_MONEY · Post #17 » by **SO_MONEY** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:16 pm

I don't like words like deserve.

In free market enterprise he is worth what the max equates to (maybe more), but the NBA isn't a free market and if you pay everyone who is any good the max you are breaking the system to keep salaries in check.

It raises the price for others who are less skilled, but serviceable to then be paid what the good players should make.

This is why I don't care much for unions, we shouldn't be having a discussion on scale it should be strictly based on merit within the confines of the cap, or bird rights to go over the cap, bu this is what happens when an employee who isn't as good gets paid the same or thinks they should be paid the same as one who is better than that employee because precedent has been set.

Not my money, but I say no or at the very least if we offer the max only offer the four year max so we can lure a player via trade to pair with Love and Rubio and offer five years to that player to make this a more desirable destination.

yowyOw · Post #18 » by **yowyOw** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:56 pm

Krapinsky wrote:
yowyOw wrote:Yes. You can't lure superstars since they all want bigger markets, specially L.A. & NYC, or to join other superstars. And not being able to give Rubio a five year contract is not a problem. He'd be 28yo when he hits FA unrestrictedly. A lot of things can happen in 7 years. DWill will never be a max contract player.

The only 2 problems I see are 1) Getting the right pieces to fill the roster. I just hope that we will move with intelligence in the off-season because we need BADLY a C and a scoring SG. And 2)Beas future, since he becomes an unrestricted free agent next off-season and might have a great end of season this year (but nobody can guarantee he'd repeat that the following years).

.

Thought the same thing about Love when he was a rookie.

I think this will get done monday or tuesday.

I hope so. He is an explosive player and has talent. But until now, he didn't show he is potential star; so far!

Who knows. Kobe, as a rookie, wasn't the player he became later. *crossfingers*

.