HoopsMalone wrote:The biggest problem I see on this website is the way people evaluate GM decisions and contracts. I actually think everyone has done a pretty good job in this thread.
The thing you need to forget about is trying to compare contracts to establish a player's value...i.e. Miles Plumlee makes $12m/yr so Mason at $13/yr is great value! Or people who think the Tristan Thompson or Otto Porter contracts are an albatross... so what if they are ultimately overpaid by $2m/yr... they are very good players, who fill needs, that were not replaceable. Those guys had the leverage, therefore they must "overpay" them. "Overpaying" them is correct. There is an art to roster building that has to do with fit, timing, and contract sizes. It's much deeper than just looking at the face value of someone's contract dollars.
In this case the Nuggets best player probably can not reasonably share the floor with Mason Plumlee. That alone puts a MAJOR limiting constraint on Mason Plumlee's value on this roster. You absolutely must take fit into consideration. When you're trying to go win Game 5 on the road vs the Thunder and there are 5 minutes left, no one is going to care that you "overpaid" Gary Harris by a few million if he hits two clutch 3's. No one is going to care that you got "good value" on Mason Plumlee when he only plays 11 minutes that night.
On top of that, the Nuggets current roster makes this signing considerably worse. They already have Faried who can play backup center. They already have Darrell Arthur who can play backup center. There are guys like Ricaun Holmes floating around every year who can be signed cheaply and fill certain requirements. 2nd round pick flyers always exist. Or Reclamation projects like Javale McGee, I guarantee by midyear someone will emerge from the G-league that can adequately fill 8+ minutes at the backup center position. Who knows, perhaps you find the next Hassan Whiteside.
In the meantime you leave a GIANT gaping hole at SF by letting Gallinari go and not putting this $13m toward replacing him. It makes no sense. You can't tell me the Nuggets wouldn't be better off swapping Gallinari for Plumlee... Gallinari can co-exist with Jokic to form a dynamic offense. Plumlee can not. If you're concerned with Gallo's injury history fine... perhaps go with KCP, Tony Snell, Jonathan Simmons, or PJ tucker. Or take the salary dump and acquire Demarre Carroll or Kent Bazemore. Perhaps you acquire that first round pick you lost in the Plumlee trade back. Or shed a contract that enables you to still resign Plumlee anyway...
Lastly, you have ALL The leverage in this situation. Plumlee didn't appear to have an offer. And the cap space will be even MORE limited if he tries to wait until next offseason. And you had him this year anyway on the Qualifying offer... for $4.6 million!!!! So you had this season.. you essentially just gave him 2yr/$36 million for the following two...there's just absolutely no way he gets that on the open market...
These small and medium size deals always add up and teams don't seem to get it.... Plumlee, Arthur, Faried....that combo is $34 million. Or more than the price of Gordon Hayward... or Kyle Lowry...
Well, I agree with most of your post but I do see a couple of flaws.
While Faried, Arthur even Lyles can play some backup C, if Jokic is injured and out for an extended period, we'd get eaten alive during his absence. Also we run a specific type of offense with/thru Jokic's, Plumlee's skillset is very similar so we don't have to change/adjust it when Jokic takes a breather.
As for the SF, when Gallo was playing alongside of Jokic we were actually a less productive team. Chandler makes a fine replacement in my mind (even though I do like him as a super-sub better) but it also makes us play Juancho out of position. That said, perhaps it's better for Juancho to make adjustments to learn the SF position better as he's thought of as a combo forward anyway.
And the 2/$36M statement is your negative way of the old "is the glass half empty or half full ?" . You are correct that the Nuggets had all the leverage, but to say he paid him a 2/$36M contract is just a dig. Here's the truth of it! The Nuggets were looking to avoid this same circumstance next year so they addressed it this year. They "overpaid" him because they see him as a good fit in the offense, meet what they are trying to do and more than likely are trying to save a little face from the Nurkic debacle. If they signed him to just the qualifying offer, just look how disgruntled Nerlins is in DAL, a rift has definitely been created there, the Nuggets chose to avoid that situation and get a "good soldier" on board. Mason is known to be a great teammate, good locker room presence and he does his job w/o distractions. That type of chemistry is obviously important to what the Nuggets are building for the future.
And yes, these smaller deals do add up, but can be helpful in the future as well, You say that we paid $34M for Arthur, Faried and Plumlee where that money could've gone towards a Gordon Hayward or Kyle Lowry ?? POSSIBLY, but neither were available when we signed Faried and Arthur nor were we in a position as a good landing spot for FA's at the time. Add in the fact that Nelson (expiring), Arthur and Chandler (more likely just Nelson & Chandler) may opt out, we can utilize that money for Jokic's next contract with Arthur and Faried the following year if they aren't traded. It's all a matter of timing.
While not trolling, I do think you were attempting to put you own spin on things, again more of a half empty approach to your post.
Are all these my po9nts facts....probably not. Did the Nuggets plan it this way...most definitely improbable.....but the possibilities abound and it's what you make of it that matters.
