What exactly does a max contract mean?

[RedBulls23]

Where is this number coming from?

117 mil over 4 years is an average of 29.25 mil

Bulls don’t have that cap space though.

Well the premise of this thread is about the max for Brogdon, and the Bulls can easily create that max now that Asik's deal has been taken off the books.

[panthermark]

Yep, this is where I stand.

It's not only about the max dollars and Brogdon is worth that (which I believe most people would agree he isn't), it's where him and his contract would put as a a team.

We were a lottery team, adding him, and forgetting the dollar value, he isn't even going to make us a playoff team, more likely, so what would we be doing? Making him the highest paid player on our roster to continue to be a lottery team? How does that help the team exactly?

Say this was one year later, and LaVine and Lauri made another step, with LaVine become a first time All-Star and Lauri being on the cusp, and the Bulls also barely missing out on the playoffs making us a late lottery pick, perhaps then, I'd be more open to adding Brogdon even at max dollars, because you'd imagine that with a first time all-star and an improved and primed Lauri in the mix, adding someone of Brogdon's talent could actually make a significant difference, but we are far from that stage. Besides Zach, we have no one even resembling an All-Star player (on his best days), so to add a fantastic role player just doesn't seem like it's worth the time.

This is actually exactly what I'm predicting. With the All-Star game in Chicago, and after the season he had last year, I bet LaVine makes it, and I bet (ok, hope) Lauri makes a 3rd year jump.

Ride or die, I'm pushing all chips in on this core.

If this core turns out to be a bust (just good players), I hope that is the end of GarPax.

[dice]

People said the same about LaVine. There are probably 5-6 players in the entire NBA worthy of a max contract and able to live up to it.
It's about filling a need, improving the team and making a run.

Well, LaVine is younger, more talented, and would be getting $10M less on average. So, it's not that comparable. We all ate crow on that contract, but Brogdon on a 25% max is a different beast.

no crow has been eaten on the lavine contract. average players do not warrant $20 mil a year

and how is lavine more talented when brogdon is the better shooter, passer and defender? i mean, i guess it's possible that adam silver implements an in-game dunk contest that adds points to the scoreboard for the winning team...

[Threekola]

So what moves can we make if we sign him for 4/100 that we can’t make if we sign him for 4/117? It’s not my money so beyond the question of how it influences other moves, I could care less. The question is, is signing Brogdon worth giving up possible cap room in 2021? And if you think the answer is yes the exact dollar figure is not so relevant.

[sh0ck]

I've also heard arguments like "the cap is going up so a max now is not going to be the same as a max contract in a couple of years. This would only be true if Brogdon were to sign a flat contract at 27.25M per year (similar to the 19.5M that Zach LaVine got last year). If a team were to give Brogdon a true max with the standard 5% increases per year (similar to the deal Otto Porter Jr got), the distribution would look like below.

Year - Brogdon's max - Projected Cap - % of cap
2019-2020 - $27.25M - $109M - 25%
2020-2021 - $28.6125M - $116M - 24.66%
2021-2022 - $29.975M - $121.8M - 24.61%
2022-2023 - $31.3375M - $127.890M - 24.5%

As you can see, the 5% increases will basically be in lock step with the projected cap increases. Dispelling any theory that a max contract right now, would be a bargain deal in the future.

[MrFortune3]

Brogdon plays off ball because he's not a high volume ball handler, playmaker, or shot creator. His offensive skill set is that much different from Coby White. Though, White comes with more natural talent with his speed, first step, etc.

Even if you think that's an incorrect assessment of Brogdon's abilities, paying $29.25M AAV to experiment is one hell of a risk to find out.

Where is this number coming from?

117 mil over 4 years is an average of 29.25 mil

I think most feel that Brogdon will only get 80 mil over 4 since that is the number most bandied about the board lately.

[Jimako10]

When discussing whether the Bulls should or should not sign Malcolm Brogdon to a max contract, I think people sometimes throw around the term max contract as if it is this scary thing and that Brogdon, whom is an uber-role player, couldn't possibly be worth the max.

I'd like to add a few data points into this discussion to show why this is kind of a shifty view that isn't so accurate.

First, let's take Kevin Durant. Teams are lining up to pay him 165 million to play 3 years of basketball while he will come off an injury and hopefully, maybe, possibly be a top 5 player still. He's probably a guy whom has a very good shot of not being a top 10 player for those 3 years he will play, but let's ignore the obvious massive risk that could happen. Teams are willing to pay what amounts to 55m per playing year for Kevin Durant.

The Warriors are willing to sign up to likely pay 100s of millions in luxury tax if they can keep Durant. It could literally be something in the neighborhood of 250million per playing year he gives them for KD for the Warriors, and in reality will probably be at least 100 million per year they actually have to shell out to keep him. Now maybe the Warriors are overly exuberant because of winning three titles and having no other viable options outside of giving up, but it shows at least one franchise in real money would pay 100 million per playing year for this guy and possibly upwards of 150-250m per playing year.

Given other teams are capped at the still high price of 55m per playing year and would spend more if legally allowed, we know the value of an actual max FA is considerably above the maximum salary Durant can command.

Why is this important? Because people look at Brogdon's value based on the idea that you can get a superstar for "the max" and only a superstar should get "the max", but Brogdon's max is already much lower than the other max. His max starts around 27m vs Durant's 38m or Klay's 32m and people would pay more for those guys (and possibly more for Brogdon too).

So yes, Brogdon is an uber role player, probably a sub all-star caliber guard though close enough that if he played this well for a few seasons might Luol Deng his way into an appearance. Yes, in the sense of would you pay this guy teh most you could pay anyone, probably not, but his 25% max is far below that number and far below the value of the really really top guys in the league as fairly easily demonstratable in terms of what they would make.

You're comparing a player that's been in the league 6 years of less to guys that have been in the league for more than 10 years. Obviously their max are going to be different.

Point is, do you think Malcolm is worth adding to a 22 win team at 4 years $117 million, which will have him making more than guys like Emiid and Giannis for example or about as much as what's remaining on Lillards contract on an average?

And if you're someone that's worried that this team doesn't have enough talent to be more than a 2nd round exit (something you've expressed), adding an uber role player to the max 4 year deal very likely gets you stuck to that much quicker.

Being that he's 27, and the current state of the team I'd easily pass.

Edit: typed 6 years earlier by accident but meant 4 years.

Yep, this is where I stand.

It's not only about the max dollars and Brogdon is worth that (which I believe most people would agree he isn't), it's where him and his contract would put as a a team.

We were a lottery team, adding him, and forgetting the dollar value, he isn't even going to make us a playoff team, more likely, so what would we be doing? Making him the highest paid player on our roster to continue to be a lottery team? How does that help the team exactly?

Say this was one year later, and LaVine and Lauri made another step, with LaVine become a first time All-Star and Lauri being on the cusp, and the Bulls also barely missing out on the playoffs making us a late lottery pick, perhaps then, I'd be more open to adding Brogdon even at max dollars, because you'd imagine that with a first time all-star and an improved and primed Lauri in the mix, adding someone of Brogdon's talent could actually make a significant difference, but we are far from that stage. Besides Zach, we have no one even resembling an All-Star player (on his best days), so to add a fantastic role player just doesn't seem like it's worth the time.

I think adding Brogdon would only help Zach and Laurie take that next step. Shots won't be taken away, and now they have an actual NBA offense that can be described as pace and space.

I don't think it's farfetched at all to think adding Brogdon to next year's team makes the playoffs. I would actually bet on it. The reason I'm confident in it is because the trio of Otto/Lavine/Lauri showed some serious chemistry after the trade last year. I would only think that adding Brogdon would enhance that team chemistry.

7 of those 22 wins came in the 15 games that Otto Porter played. In 325 minutes played, the trio of Otto/Lavine/Lauri actually had a net positive on the floor (+2.0/100 possessions). Think about that. This was even with Kris Dunn playing like dog crap and the bench being filled with G-leaguers. You add another high impact player like Brogdon, a healthy year of WCJ, Zach and Laurie possibly taking another step forward, and grabbing 1 or 2 more actual NBA players for the bench, I see a team that can easily be a bottom 4 playoff team.

[cjbulls]

Where is this number coming from?

117 mil over 4 years is an average of 29.25 mil

I think most feel that Brogdon will only get 80 mil over 4 since that is the number most bandied about the board lately.

That number hasn’t been bandied about in a week. Brogdon has like 6 teams targeting him not including the Bucks. I don’t think he’ll hit max but the consensus is somewhere between 4/90 and 4/100.

Most believe the Bucks match 4/80 so you need to go past that. Plus if the bulls have 23 million in cap space, what’s the point in offering 20 million? Do you have big plans for the other 3-5? You might as well go 4/92 (or the 4/100 with full raises) and then use your room MLE on a wing or big.

[dougthonus]

One, I have no idea why we are debating Brogdon's value at the max considering the Bulls don't have the cap space to offer that contract anyway.

We can trivially obtain max space now that we got the Asik medical exception. Not to say they will do that (or should do that, though if it were the difference between getting Brogdon and not, I would do that).

[DanTown8587]

One, I have no idea why we are debating Brogdon's value at the max considering the Bulls don't have the cap space to offer that contract anyway.

We can trivially obtain max space now that we got the Asik medical exception. Not to say they will do that (or should do that, though if it were the difference between getting Brogdon and not, I would do that).

No, we cannot.

shamsports.com/capulator is really good at this stuff and even if you renounce every FA, you're at about 22.3 million in space after committed salary + Coby White cap hold + Archi QO. The Bulls would have do either a large move or several more moves to get to anywhere close to 29 million.

[DanTown8587]

117 mil over 4 years is an average of 29.25 mil

Bulls don’t have that cap space though.

Well the premise of this thread is about the max for Brogdon, and the Bulls can easily create that max now that Asik's deal has been taken off the books.

No, they cannot "easily" do it.

[dougthonus]

It's not an indictment against them if they don't want to give Brogdon huge money; they're logical to believe that. We can put all the speculation about 2021 and landing a superstar to the side. Brogdon is a high-end role-player who raises the floor of a team with better players ahead of him, including the recently-named MVP. Paying him huge money to duplicate that value without that luxury is not wise.

The greater question is "what is wise" then? What is the outcome that is better than Brogdon. Say you have a choice of having someone cut off your finger or shoot you in the face, and if you don't choose in the next 30 seconds then they'll slowly torture you and everyone you care about.

It feels like a lot of people would deliberate and say "well it's not wise to let someone cut off your finger". Yes, in a vacuum that isn't wise, but when we are measuring up against the actual alternatives what is the better plan? Maybe there is an option better than getting shot in the face in this scenario, but so far I see the general possibilities as:

1: Max Brogdon/D-Lo

Brogdon is likely going to be an above average starting caliber player for four years but a sub-all-star caliber player over that stretch. D'Angelo Russell is a guy with good potential but some flaws which are scary. Both guys have potential to be very strong additions to the roster and increase in value over time and both have the potential to end up as poor contracts. I think Brogdon is more likely of the two to be good but overpaid while Russell I think is more likely to earn his contract or fall flat on his face.

2: Split up the money into the best role players you can (probably also requires 4 year commitments)

This scenario to me is likely the worst outcome as you'll probably end up with two guys that don't help you as much as one better guy but you still have the same cap hit.

3: Split up the money into the best role players you can that will only go two years to save max cap room for 2021

2021 looks presently like a poor FA year IMO with only one great target in it (Giannis), whom, may sign an extension prior to that year anyway. It will also feature other targets that will be on the downside of their careers (Lillard / McCullum / Gobert) but will still likely command the 30% max.

I can see the appeal of this plan because you just wait and see and figure maybe something good pans out later that you can't see now. It maintains the most flexibility while giving you the minimum amount of upside this season. The question really comes down to whether that future flexibility is worth more than something you can do today.

Looking at it, I don't see how the future flexibility is likely to be more useful than Brogdon today. It could be. I mean you could be heavily positioned to sign Giannis through some strange confluence of events that I can't foresee, but I don't see how we utilize that cap room later meaningfully.

[dougthonus]

One, I have no idea why we are debating Brogdon's value at the max considering the Bulls don't have the cap space to offer that contract anyway.

We can trivially obtain max space now that we got the Asik medical exception. Not to say they will do that (or should do that, though if it were the difference between getting Brogdon and not, I would do that).

No, we cannot.

shamsports.com/capulator is really good at this stuff and even if you renounce every FA, you're at about 22.3 million in space after committed salary + Coby White cap hold + Archi QO. The Bulls would have do either a large move or several more moves to get to anywhere close to 29 million.

You need 27.25m for a max slot for Brogdon roughly. Stretch Felicio and make no other moves and you are at 27.28. If the number is slightly higher, you can move Valentine/Dunn into someone else's cap room or stretch them and you are done.

You can revoke the QO on Arci immediately if necessary for the offer to go through and obviously the Bulls are renouncing everyone else anyway.

[PrimzyBulls81]

My max offer for Brogdon would be 4years - 90M

[RedBulls23]

Bulls don’t have that cap space though.

Well the premise of this thread is about the max for Brogdon, and the Bulls can easily create that max now that Asik's deal has been taken off the books.

No, they cannot "easily" do it.

Need to get to 27.25 or something to offer Brodgon the max. So they can stretch waive Felicio and that gets them there. If they need to do more, they can just waive Arci, and move Val.

[DJhitek]

Need to get to 27.25 or something to offer Brodgon the max. So they can stretch waive Felicio and that gets them to there. If they need to do more, they can just waive Arci, and move Val.

Stretching Felicio should be an option regardless of our cap situation IMO but as I posted earlier, I would offer Brogdon the max but only in a vacuum. I would have prepped the offer and traded out of the draft completely. Since the Bulls drafted White, I just don't see the Bulls offering him anything significant.

[RedBulls23]

Need to get to 27.25 or something to offer Brodgon the max. So they can stretch waive Felicio and that gets them to there. If they need to do more, they can just waive Arci, and move Val.

Stretching Felicio should be an option regardless of our cap situation IMO but as I posted earlier, I would offer Brogdon the max but only in a vacuum. I would have prepped the offer and traded out of the draft completely. Since the Bulls drafted White, I just don't see the Bulls offering him anything significant.

Possibly. Windhorst certainly made it sound like even after they drafted White that they wanted to get him.

I'd imagine the Bulls FO would like a Lavine/Brogdon/White 3 guard rotation.

[cjbulls]

By the way, the idea of stretching felicio to max brogdon is where it gets really crazy. Because then you are basically adding another 3.2 million to Brogdon’s salary each year after the first two (instead of letting felicio run it’s course naturally). His cap hit essentially becomes 33 million in their max free agent year of 2021.

$33 million! For Malcolm Brogdon!

[dougthonus]

By the way, the idea of stretching felicio to max brogdon is where it gets really crazy. Because then you are basically adding another 3.2 million to Brogdon salary each year after the first two instead of letting felicio run it’s course naturally). His cap hit essentially becomes 33 million in their max free agent year of 2021.

$33 million! For Malcolm Brogdon!

True, though it's worth noting the cap hit in total is the same as is the money. You're just moving the timing of the capt hit to a different point in time.

[cjbulls]

By the way, the idea of stretching felicio to max brogdon is where it gets really crazy. Because then you are basically adding another 3.2 million to Brogdon salary each year after the first two instead of letting felicio run it’s course naturally). His cap hit essentially becomes 33 million in their max free agent year of 2021.

$33 million! For Malcolm Brogdon!

True, though it's worth noting the cap hit in total is the same as is the money. You're just moving the timing of the capt hit to a different point in time.

Yes, but everyone should want the cap down the line and prefer to just pay off felicio ASAP. Bulls don’t really need that cap space this year or next. At that point, I prefer they just move Dunn even if it means including a 2nd over stretching felicio.