Discussing Other Teams' Moves Part 3

[FAH1223]

Paul George is getting the same contract Wall got. Assumig he makes it to the All Star Game again, then his deal will move up towards $90 million.

[Nivek]

Wait, Paul George deserves a maximum salary?

I mean, I guess -- in the same sense that Wall "deserves" a maximum contract. "Deserves" in this case meaning: He's been a pretty good player so far and he's REALLY young so he might one day actually be worth a maximum salary.

I like his potential, but I wouldn't want my team paying him a maximum salary.

[payitforward]

Wait, Paul George deserves a maximum salary?

I mean, I guess -- in the same sense that Wall "deserves" a maximum contract. "Deserves" in this case meaning: He's been a pretty good player so far and he's REALLY young so he might one day actually be worth a maximum salary.

I like his potential, but I wouldn't want my team paying him a maximum salary.

I agree entirely. Compare him to Trevor Ariza:

http://www.draftexpress.com/stats.php?y ... 27%5D=1527

They are incredibly similar. PG gets more defensive rebounds but gives that edge back by turning the ball over more. The only other meaningful difference is that PG takes more shots. Their TS% is identical. As a player I'd give PG an edge, I think he's a little better than Ariza, and then too he's much younger. But look at what Ariza has ever earned -- nowhere near a max deal, even coming off his two years w/ the Lakers.

At the same time, you could argue that PG is more deserving than Wall of a max deal!

NBA owners must be making big $$$ to give such unproven, or non super-star, players this kind of money -- and guaranteed over many years too!

[rockymac52]

Wait, Paul George deserves a maximum salary?

I mean, I guess -- in the same sense that Wall "deserves" a maximum contract. "Deserves" in this case meaning: He's been a pretty good player so far and he's REALLY young so he might one day actually be worth a maximum salary.

I like his potential, but I wouldn't want my team paying him a maximum salary.

I pretty much agree with this sentiment. There's two basic types of max contract players: ones that are worth close to what they are getting paid, and ones that are worth way more than what they're getting paid. Obviously the latter is the ideal situation. When you're paying LeBron James or Kevin Durant the same amount as another team is paying David Lee or Emeka Okafor, you gain an incredibly significant advantage - in addition to the already stellar play of those elite players.

I still haven't decided if I think paying the lower-end players max contracts is a good idea or not. Often times it's very difficult for teams to let such a player go, since they typically get nothing in return. The line of thinking is something like, "well, he may not be worth the full max contract, but he's at least relatively close to it, and he's young(ish) so he could conceivably continue to improve and be worth it, and more importantly, if we don't offer him the max, somebody else will and we're going to lose him for nothing, so we might as well bite the bullet and hope for the best." It's never completely cut and dry, but that's essentially what happened with us and Gilbert Arenas, or perhaps with the Hornets and Eric Gordon. Sometimes it can all work out just fine, but other times, it ends in disaster, and you're stuck with one of the worst contracts in the league very quickly.

The Pacers clearly like George's game, and they wanted to keep him on their team since they're one of the best teams in the East, and probably are in the conversation for title contenders. More importantly, it's Indiana - it's not exactly a place where free agents are lining up to play in. Also their core players' contracts are pretty much locked in for the next few years, so it's not like they're losing out on the opportunity to have cap space to sign a different star free agent if they let George walk. They also knew George was going to get a max contract from someone, probably the Lakers (his hometown team who he clearly would be interested in signing with), and so they'd have to match that offer sheet if that happened, which is always an awkward situation publicly with the fans and possibly within the locker room, since that players basically said he didn't want to be there any longer.

The real news of the extension was that it was a 5 year deal, with attainable incentives to become even bigger than Wall's. Just like with Wall, the team didn't really have much incentive to offer the 5 year deal, other than to "look better" publicly and keep their young star player happy. Or they're scared he's going to walk after 4 years as an unrestricted free agent, so they'd rather lock him up for that extra year. Either way, it's not exactly big news.

[rockymac52]

Also, worth adding that I don't think George really improved this past season as much as everyone thinks he did. He just got a lot more minutes, and thanks to Granger's injury, was able to take even more shots and have the ball in his hands more often. Nevermind the fact that his FG%, TS%, and eFG% all declined significantly with the increased usage.

I'd say George is currently only a slightly above average offensive player, but the key is that he appears to be an elite defensive player. That might be enough for this deal to be worth it.

[daSwami]

Wait, Paul George deserves a maximum salary?

I mean, I guess -- in the same sense that Wall "deserves" a maximum contract. "Deserves" in this case meaning: He's been a pretty good player so far and he's REALLY young so he might one day actually be worth a maximum salary.

I like his potential, but I wouldn't want my team paying him a maximum salary.

I was thinking the same thing. George has had one very good year, preceded by 2 mediocre ones. The max salary has everything to do with his upside. (ditto Wall)

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I think Paul George deserved a max contract at least as much as John Wall did. I think he's likely worth it.

http://www.82games.com/1213/12IND8.HTM
Indiana was +8.8 points per 100 possessions better with George on the court.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... -off/2013/
His defensive impact in the playoff run last season was phenomenal.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 01/on-off/
Over his career Paul George has made the Pacers leaps and bounds better with him on the court than with him off the court, especially in the playoffs.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... gpa01.html
George finished first in Defensive Rating and Defensive Win Shares in the entire NBA. Here's where I believe he has arrived already. He is not potentially a great defender. George already is a great defender.

Ariza isn't quite as good a shooter, passer, or IMO defender as George. George is a higher usage player, who's even better at hitting threes. He's an emerging offensive star.

I think Paul George deserves the max and he's going to become a perennial all star.

[Nivek]

I think Paul George deserved a max contract at least as much as John Wall did. I think he's likely worth it.

Well, there you go. Wall didn't deserve a max contract either.

[DCZards]

I still haven't decided if I think paying the lower-end players max contracts is a good idea or not. Often times it's very difficult for teams to let such a player go, since they typically get nothing in return. The line of thinking is something like, "well, he may not be worth the full max contract, but he's at least relatively close to it, and he's young(ish) so he could conceivably continue to improve and be worth it, and more importantly, if we don't offer him the max, somebody else will and we're going to lose him for nothing, so we might as well bite the bullet and hope for the best." It's never completely cut and dry, but that's essentially what happened with us and Gilbert Arenas, or perhaps with the Hornets and Eric Gordon. Sometimes it can all work out just fine, but other times, it ends in disaster, and you're stuck with one of the worst contracts in the league very quickly.

Agree with this. As much as we all cringe when we see somewhat unproven players getting "max" deals, teams are often stuck between a rock and a hard place, especially when it comes to outstanding young players who might not be worth the max today but have the potential to someday be max players. Don't pay the guy and he's terribly unhappy, maybe gets a max offer from another team and then makes it clear that he wants to play for that other team. Yeah, you can match the max offer but you've already burnt bridges with that player and now have a real attitude/motivation problem on your hands that will probably impact overall team chemistry.

I don't consider Paul George a max player--at least not yet--and I feel the same way about Wall. But when you're trying to build a contender and you have an outstanding young player with enormous talent and potential to build around, biting the bullet, as Rocky says, might turn out to be the smart thing to do. I guess time will tell.

[payitforward]

... There's two basic types of max contract players: ones that are worth close to what they are getting paid, and ones that are worth way more than what they're getting paid.

Well said. And the problem w/ maxing the "close to" guys is how do you ever get the "way more" player(s) that make you a title contender?

OKC locked up Westbrook and Ibaka on (close to) max contracts, and it led inevitably to losing Harden. Look at their roster and their salary structure going forward, and it's hard to see how they would ever get past the small but real gap separating them from ever winning a championship.

[Ruzious]

You gotta keep in mind that there are 3 levels of max. You can call them Lil Max for former 1s rounders coming off their rookie contract (25% of the cap), Maxamillion for players with 7(?) years experience (30% of the cap), and MX3 for players with 10(?) years experience (35% of the cap). Indy pretty much had to pay George the Lil Max. He became the face of their franchise - a franchise that came close to beating Miami for the Eastern Conf Champeenship. They could wait a year, but what's going to change - other than they risk p'ing off George and their fan base?

[DCZards]

... There's two basic types of max contract players: ones that are worth close to what they are getting paid, and ones that are worth way more than what they're getting paid.

Well said. And the problem w/ maxing the "close to" guys is how do you ever get the "way more" player(s) that make you a title contender?

OKC locked up Westbrook and Ibaka on (close to) max contracts, and it led inevitably to losing Harden. Look at their roster and their salary structure going forward, and it's hard to see how they would ever get past the small but real gap separating them from ever winning a championship.

There are only a handful of players in the NBA (probably 5-6 at most) who fall into the category of a max contract player who is worth "way more" than what they're being paid. And I don't think that teams can (or should) hold on to their max dollars waiting for an elite player like Durant, Lebron, Kobe or CP3 to become available. They'll be waiting forever. Sometimes, as the the song goes, you have to "love the one you're with."

[montestewart]

... There's two basic types of max contract players: ones that are worth close to what they are getting paid, and ones that are worth way more than what they're getting paid.

Well said. And the problem w/ maxing the "close to" guys is how do you ever get the "way more" player(s) that make you a title contender?

OKC locked up Westbrook and Ibaka on (close to) max contracts, and it led inevitably to losing Harden. Look at their roster and their salary structure going forward, and it's hard to see how they would ever get past the small but real gap separating them from ever winning a championship.

I sure hope the Wizards don't end up in the same situation as the Thunder. That would really suck.

[Dat2U]

I get tired of reading OKC lost Harden because of the contracts of Durant, Westbrook & Ibaka because it's not true. OKC lost Harden because they decided to trade him. And they decided to trade him because he took too long to sign the extension they offered him & he initially balked at taking a very slight discount as a sign of "being all in" like Westbrook & Ibaka did. Harden said he simply needed more time before signing but Presti felt that his delays were a sign that he didn't share the same commitment to the organization that the other core pieces did.

[dckingsfan]

ESPN is reporting that the New York Knicks are trading a package of Glen Grunwald and Mike Woodson for Ernie Grunfeld and Randy Wittman plus a 2020 second round pick.

[Ruzious]

ESPN is reporting that the New York Knicks are trading a package of Glen Grunwald and Mike Woodson for Ernie Grunfeld and Randy Wittman plus a 2020 second round pick.

That just shows their lack of vision.

[payitforward]

... There's two basic types of max contract players: ones that are worth close to what they are getting paid, and ones that are worth way more than what they're getting paid.

Well said. And the problem w/ maxing the "close to" guys is how do you ever get the "way more" player(s) that make you a title contender?

OKC locked up Westbrook and Ibaka on (close to) max contracts, and it led inevitably to losing Harden. Look at their roster and their salary structure going forward, and it's hard to see how they would ever get past the small but real gap separating them from ever winning a championship.

I sure hope the Wizards don't end up in the same situation as the Thunder. That would really suck.

Please read again. The Thunder *does* have one of those "way more" guys. We don't.

[payitforward]

I get tired of reading OKC lost Harden because of the contracts of Durant, Westbrook & Ibaka because it's not true. OKC lost Harden because they decided to trade him. And they decided to trade him because he took too long to sign the extension they offered him & he initially balked at taking a very slight discount as a sign of "being all in" like Westbrook & Ibaka did. Harden said he simply needed more time before signing but Presti felt that his delays were a sign that he didn't share the same commitment to the organization that the other core pieces did.

No. Take a look at the Thunder's salary structure please. This year they're paying out over $71m, including $4m to guys they got via the trade. Had they signed Harden -- at their discount offer level -- their payroll would be over $81m this year. Plus luxury tax. Two years hence, they'd be paying something over $65m for 4 players.

Not affordable -- especially not in their market -- and you can add the penalties they'd pay out for being over the luxury tax level for some years in a row.

They couldn't max, and therefore couldn't retain, Harden because of bad decisions about Westbrook and Ibaka -- good players both of them but not worth what they're earning. You could add Perkins to the list.

IOW, after many years of success Sam Presti showed feet of clay.

[payitforward]

ESPN is reporting that the New York Knicks are trading a package of Glen Grunwald and Mike Woodson for Ernie Grunfeld and Randy Wittman plus a 2020 second round pick.

That just shows their lack of vision.

You're looking too closely at the deal. Keep in mind that Grunfeld was known to avoid contact(s).

[Ruzious]

ESPN is reporting that the New York Knicks are trading a package of Glen Grunwald and Mike Woodson for Ernie Grunfeld and Randy Wittman plus a 2020 second round pick.

That just shows their lack of vision.

You're looking too closely at the deal. Keep in mind that Grunfeld was known to avoid contact(s).

Well, you're looking at it with the glasses half full.

<most folks wondering what the heck are they talking about? Even moreso than usual.>