Is Jordan Clarkson a negative value contract?

[danfantastk32]

I think as long as the price is reasonable we are matching any Randle offers. Had Randle been more consistent this season I would say we are totally matching any offer. Now I wonder, if there is an increase in $$$ in the seasons to come doesn't it make the Moz and Deng deal cheaper in year 3 and 4? Thus, maybe making it easier to trade them in year 3 and 4?

You might know all this, but the CBA essentially decides what percentage of revenue the players get, and what percent the owners get. That percentage becomes the cap. The "revenue" is the TV contract. There's other revenue involved...but TV is the elephant in the room. Typically you see little jumps.

Ok...so a couple years ago, a new TV contract was negotiated...giving the NBA alot more money. That came into effect last year. Typically the Cap goes up $2-5 mil a year...depending on revenue. Last year it jumped from $70 to $94. That was the new TV contract.

Then they set a CBA that takes effect this offseason. I'm not totally sure of exact figures, but basically the players go from 48% of revenue to 50%. It's not a huge spike....but it was supped be another nice jump.

The original consensus was from $94 to around $107. The NBA didn't do very good in revenue this year. Bit of a bummer year. That's a different topic. Point is....revenue essentially lost a little. But....you get a 2% increase. So it is now going up to $102. I bit less than they had anticipated. But still.....you go from $70 to $102 in two years......that a nice healthy %50 "raise". Any other sectors of the American worker seeing 50% wage increases??? <------ So that's why the "max" is going from like $22mil to $34 or whatever it is.


Alright...so with that said, it essentially goes back to those little jumps again. The new TV deal is in effect....and after this year, the new percentages will be in effect. Moving forward, when revenue increases....the players will see an additional 2% go towards the cap...so it will raise a little faster....but not very much. Does that make all sense?

So the problem with the Deng/Moz contract is there wasn't this huge second spike. The salary cap went up $8 mil. That's about a 9% increase. So if you wanna look at it in context....Deng's $18mil contract will "feel" like around $16.3 mil moving forward. Certainly doesnt make it feel much better....does it?

And unfortunately when I did all my numbers up above....that was with next years $102 cap. The following year....the cap is supposed to jump from $102...to $103. Then $108.15. That's a projection.....not a hard number....but you can see that there won't be anymore $15mil spikes or anything to take the sting off those contracts.

[Landsberger]

I think JC, Russell, Randle, Clarkson, and Ingram fit Luke's system. I think we keep all those guys. Zubac we trade with the pick to dump Deng and gain some exceptional young all star level player if possible. Mozgov is nice to have to match a team with a big. Makes more sense to dump Deng than Mozgov.

I'm on the other side of this. Zubac has the ability to be a unicorn in the NBA. A 2 way center who can score inside and out. That potential gives us a better chance at being a better team over copying GS's offense without that completely unique set of players.

If we're ranking ones to move first to get better I'd do Randle as what he brings that is unique for his position we have in Ingram as well. That would allow us to get a true scorer at either the 4 or 3 to complement the younger players as Ingram can play either position.

Well I'm not really too sure what Luke wants. We can't keep all these young guys or there will be no balance to the roster. I think myles turner fits the team perfectly at the C spot, but no one on these boards was digging my PG/Myles turner trade for top 3 pick, zubac, randle, and deng.

That's not a horrible trade but I'd like to see more of Zubac before we decide on adding him to a trade. Of all of our youngsters he has surprised the most and he still seems to have a lot more to come.

[Pointgod]

No he doesn't have negative value but it's time to recognize Clarkson for what he is. 6th man/borderline starter. He's can contribute to a team but your team is probably better off when he's your 5th or 6th best player rather than your 3rd. It also serves as a cautionary tale not to over value young talent.

[danfantastk32]

I think we need to be weary of PG. He's going to want the Max.....or damn near it. The problem is, is that he will prob get it.

But I'm sorry....22.6 ppg is just so "average" in the NBA. Not that your average player gets that....but your average "good" player does. There's so nothing special about 22ppg. 6-rebound, 3-assists, with a 19per is not noteworthy in any way.

PG has always come with the "great defender" tag. He's been a damn good defender. I'll give him that. But he took an alarming drop this year. He's typically been a top defender....dropped to #17 last year.....and now he's hovering in the 70's this season.

I think we're going to regret tying up $30 on PG.

[RingsDontLie]

I think we need to be weary of PG. He's going to want the Max.....or damn near it. The problem is, is that he will prob get it.

But I'm sorry....22.6 ppg is just so "average" in the NBA. Not that your average player gets that....but your average "good" player does. There's so nothing special about 22ppg. 6-rebound, 3-assists, with a 19per is not noteworthy in any way.

PG has always come with the "great defender" tag. He's been a damn good defender. I'll give him that. But he took an alarming drop this year. He's typically been a top defender....dropped to #17 last year.....and now he's hovering in the 70's this season.

I think we're going to regret tying up $30 on PG.

I think you are being a bit too picky here considering how many bad seasons we have had for half a decade now. I say don't get too caught up in the stats. He'll make the team better and that's all I care about. I think he'll make a lot of these young guys better with his presence. He opens up more opportunities to get better. We'll be able to tell free agents look, we got Paul George, your buddy from the olympic team, don't you want to help him get a ring?

We'll be playoff bound with him here that's for sure. Plus we have the assets to put another great player beside him and become relevant again.

Or are we happy with just doing what the 76ers have done and sit with these young guys?

[danfantastk32]

I think you are being a bit too picky here considering how many bad seasons we have had for half a decade now. I say don't get too caught up in the stats. He'll make the team better and that's all I care about. I think he'll make a lot of these young guys better with his presence. He opens up more opportunities to get better. We'll be able to tell free agents look, we got Paul George, your buddy from the olympic team, don't you want to help him get a ring?

We'll be playoff bound with him here that's for sure. Plus we have the assets to put another great player beside him and become relevant again.

Or are we happy with just doing what the 76ers have done and sit with these young guys?

No...I hear what your saying. I'm personally kinda tired of being the league's bi***. I'm sick of "team tank"....and so I totally get where you're coming from.

I guess what I'd like to see is us (crossing my fingers SO HARD) get that lotto pick....and then give Ingram another year. I think Ingram can really become dominant. He needs some bulk-muscle though. I'd like to get that Lotto - Point Guard...Swing Russell to the 2 and see how Ingram does with that. Give him one more year to impress.

If there's no big step...I say we pull the trigger, and get PG. If Ingram starts looking like a boss....then I think we aughta look elsewhere. My thought would be PF. I like Randle....but I have my doubts. He becomes a restricted FA next summer...and if he hasn't taken a big-big step, then he'd be who I replace.

[Pointgod]

The real question is if anyone thinks that Randle, Russell, Ingram or the possible lottery pick will be better or equal to current Paul George. Theven only reason you hang onto these guys is if you belive one of them will be. George is a top 15, at worst top 20 player. For you to not trade for him you have to believe that whoever you're trading is a top 20 player. I honestly don't know if I can say that about any of our players or our potential lottery pick.

[Princeinrevolt]

I think you are being a bit too picky here considering how many bad seasons we have had for half a decade now. I say don't get too caught up in the stats. He'll make the team better and that's all I care about. I think he'll make a lot of these young guys better with his presence. He opens up more opportunities to get better. We'll be able to tell free agents look, we got Paul George, your buddy from the olympic team, don't you want to help him get a ring?

We'll be playoff bound with him here that's for sure. Plus we have the assets to put another great player beside him and become relevant again.

Or are we happy with just doing what the 76ers have done and sit with these young guys?

No...I hear what your saying. I'm personally kinda tired of being the league's bi***. I'm sick of "team tank"....and so I totally get where you're coming from.

I guess what I'd like to see is us (crossing my fingers SO HARD) get that lotto pick....and then give Ingram another year. I think Ingram can really become dominant. He needs some bulk-muscle though. I'd like to get that Lotto - Point Guard...Swing Russell to the 2 and see how Ingram does with that. Give him one more year to impress.

If there's no big step...I say we pull the trigger, and get PG. If Ingram starts looking like a boss....then I think we aughta look elsewhere. My thought would be PF. I like Randle....but I have my doubts. He becomes a restricted FA next summer...and if he hasn't taken a big-big step, then he'd be who I replace.

This offseason is going to be the most important for the development of our players, and coach. Next year is the last year we have before we need to resign a major piece in our roster (Julius Randle), so we need them to step up big time. Next offseason we need to convince Paul George to come, he is the player that will get us into the playoffs, and as long as our youth grow around him, we can be a top team.

Our first problem: We have no shooters. Therefore Magic and Pelinka need to go out there this offseason and sign at least 3 good shooters to 1 year deals (Overpay if you have to). Also everyone on our team needs to work on their shooting, and this year they have to be average-good at it.

Second problem: Coaching Problems; Especially on the defensive end, our defensive strategy has just been awful. Luke Walton needs to learn how to coach defense, or needs to bring people in that know how to because we are really that bad. Also on the offense side, he needs to teach the player the counters of the plays he's running, and off ball movement because those are nonexistent. Also I want Luke to play all the starters 34 minutes or more, thats the only way we could get some wins next year.Which means all our young guys need to increase there stamina (mostly Russell, and Randle).

Notes:
-Randle has been shooting the three pretty well this month, but i'm still not convinced.
-We really need that Lotto pick, If we get it, we pick either Jackson, or Ball, I really don't care who, we just can't start Clarkson. He is not a starting caliber Pg/Sg.
-Offseason of 2018, we need to trade Deng, or Mozgov to clear up some more cap space, maybe to sign Avery Bradley? We wouldn't need to give up as much if we trade one of them then. Maybe we can give up our 2019 first rounder top 10/15 protected? that could work. And by then we would be allowed to trade it, since we already gave up our 2018 first round pick to philly.

[dAdo dA dEvil]

I think as long as the price is reasonable we are matching any Randle offers. Had Randle been more consistent this season I would say we are totally matching any offer. Now I wonder, if there is an increase in $$$ in the seasons to come doesn't it make the Moz and Deng deal cheaper in year 3 and 4? Thus, maybe making it easier to trade them in year 3 and 4?

You might know all this, but the CBA essentially decides what percentage of revenue the players get, and what percent the owners get. That percentage becomes the cap. The "revenue" is the TV contract. There's other revenue involved...but TV is the elephant in the room. Typically you see little jumps.

Ok...so a couple years ago, a new TV contract was negotiated...giving the NBA alot more money. That came into effect last year. Typically the Cap goes up $2-5 mil a year...depending on revenue. Last year it jumped from $70 to $94. That was the new TV contract.

Then they set a CBA that takes effect this offseason. I'm not totally sure of exact figures, but basically the players go from 48% of revenue to 50%. It's not a huge spike....but it was supped be another nice jump.

The original consensus was from $94 to around $107. The NBA didn't do very good in revenue this year. Bit of a bummer year. That's a different topic. Point is....revenue essentially lost a little. But....you get a 2% increase. So it is now going up to $102. I bit less than they had anticipated. But still.....you go from $70 to $102 in two years......that a nice healthy %50 "raise". Any other sectors of the American worker seeing 50% wage increases??? <------ So that's why the "max" is going from like $22mil to $34 or whatever it is.


Alright...so with that said, it essentially goes back to those little jumps again. The new TV deal is in effect....and after this year, the new percentages will be in effect. Moving forward, when revenue increases....the players will see an additional 2% go towards the cap...so it will raise a little faster....but not very much. Does that make all sense?

So the problem with the Deng/Moz contract is there wasn't this huge second spike. The salary cap went up $8 mil. That's about a 9% increase. So if you wanna look at it in context....Deng's $18mil contract will "feel" like around $16.3 mil moving forward. Certainly doesnt make it feel much better....does it?

And unfortunately when I did all my numbers up above....that was with next years $102 cap. The following year....the cap is supposed to jump from $102...to $103. Then $108.15. That's a projection.....not a hard number....but you can see that there won't be anymore $15mil spikes or anything to take the sting off those contracts.

I think we have to end it here. I'm having a hard time comprehending right now as I have a lot of things to do. Anyway, thanks for the time.

[danfantastk32]

I think we have to end it here. I'm having a hard time comprehending right now as I have a lot of things to do. Anyway, thanks for the time.

No worries.

In a nutshell....last year was the big jump. And this year will be a little jump. After that...it's just small increments each year.

[Pythagoras]

Very interesting statistical breakdown of Clarkson's impact on Deng, among other things: 2016-2017 IN REVIEW: A TALE OF TWO TEAMS. I maintain that he needs to be on the Lakers must trade list. I think ditching him could have a positive ripple effect similar to when GS ditched Monta. Fortunately I think it's not too late to still get positive value out of him in a trade.

[Princeinrevolt]

Thanks for sharing that article Pythagoras, and here's some quotes from the article that I found interesting. Also, I agree with you about Clarkson, he needs to go.

The Lakers lost quite a few games in November because these mixed lineups were horrible, especially the Nance/ Randle small ball lineup (-11.2 net rating on the season).

The unit of D’Angelo Russell, Nick Young, Luol Deng, Julius Randle, and Timofey Mozgov posted +6.0 net rating in 406 minutes.

What’s more intriguing is the four-man unit of Russell-Young-Deng-Mozgov was quite good no matter who the fifth guy was, except when it’s Clarkson. Russell’s steady play with this group of veterans particularly merits notice: in 494 minutes, he averaged, per-36 minutes, 21.8 points (on 57% TS%), 5.3 rebounds, and 7.6 assists (to 3.7 turnovers) while solely orchestrating the offense.

[ALL HAIL]

Very interesting statistical breakdown of Clarkson's impact on Deng, among other things: 2016-2017 IN REVIEW: A TALE OF TWO TEAMS. I maintain that he needs to be on the Lakers must trade list. I think ditching him could have a positive ripple effect similar to when GS ditched Monta. Fortunately I think it's not too late to still get positive value out of him in a trade.

When will people learn that simply collecting talent does not make a team good? The pieces have to fit properly.

Clarkson was NEVER a good fit with Russell. My basketball instincts told me that, then my eyes semi-confirmed that, and, finally, the numbers you've shared affirm everything I've "felt" since Clarkson and Russell arrived.

I would've traded Clarkson immeadiately after his glorious rookie year for a real lead guard in that draft, which, in hindsight, if Clarkson helps the Lakers get George, would've been a bad move.

Strangely though, in retrospect I would still have a problem not trading him then ...

I wonder how much better Russell might be if Clarkson and Lou Williams were never in the same team with him. It was clear from the beginning that Russell needed defenders next to him and Williams and Clarkson were the polar opposite of that.