LeVert & Prince Extensions: Now, Later or Never?

[ecuhus1981]

The 1st pick in the 2016 draft, Ben Simmons, just received a maximum extension. Jamal Murray also got his max payday.

Now is the time that many teams secure their budding stars with extensions, before they hit restricted free agency and increase their earning potential. We have two of the most successful (to date) '16 draftees on our roster now, with Taurean Prince and Caris LeVert. The question is, what should we do with them?

Obviously, Caris was Marks' first draft target as a new GM. He has developed as a great fit for Kenny's system, and had tons of AS buzz early last season, before the injury sidelined him. His postseason numbers of 21/5/3 hint at his potential, and if we don't offer an extension before the start of this season, he'll probably garner a max offer sheet from someone else.
ECUHUS1981's OFFER: 5yrs, $120mil

Taurean has not played a game for the Brooklyn Nets, but his reputation as a 3&d (lowercase) hustle guy precedes him. He's the more prolific and efficient scorer of the two, and arguably fits better next to superstars since his game is not reliant on ball dominance. It would be less likely to see us offer an extension before suiting up, but similar to CLV, we could save ourselves money by locking him up now.
ECUHUS1981's OFFER: 5yrs, $80mil

One caveat in my mind is that, in KD's absence, these two guys are likely to put up numbers that vault their free market value. Extending them now avoids the doomsday scenario, that one or both of them receive crazy RFA offers that make keeping them cost-prohibitive. If the cap jumps as much next summer as it did this summer, and these guys ball out, they could draw offers for double the money I'm quoting. We can of course match RFA deals, but we'd likely shell out more for the same years by matching next summer, than if we agreed this summer. OTOH, maybe the fact that we own RFA rights will discourage teams from offering, thus suppressing their value. Alternately, our front office has proven with D'Angelo, that they can extract assets from teams via S&T.

Finally, if we play hardball and these players decide to take the QO to become unrestricted free agents in 2021, do you feel that an extra year of low salary is worth losing them for nothing??? It would keep us out of luxury tax, and perhaps the hope would be that we can keep drafting and developing wing players on the cheap to surround their stars.

What would you suggest? Please vote 2 choices (one for each player), and reply with your reasoning.THANKS!

[TheNetsFan]

I’d target a mutually beneficial extension for Caris. Try to convince him to take the guaranteed money given his injury history.

I’d have Prince play it out to restricted FA. I doubt he gets a contract close to your proposal. He hasn’t proven much yet, and we haven’t seen him in our system.

[vincecarter4pres]

Extend Caris, for 5/100 if possible. Don't know enough about Prince to have an opinion on a decision of that magnitude.

[3pt_chucker]

If Caris didn't have injury history, I'd extend him now.

I think it's better to wait to see how this season goes for him before doing anything. Plus it makes him a better asset if he doesn't have a huge contract already. (For example if we want Bradley Beal at the deadline)

For Prince, I'm also wait and see on him. I don't think he going to be offered anything close to the max in RFA tbh.

[Papi_swav]

I would extend Levert now before he has an all star type season and we have to max him. I'll do a 5/80 now but I understand Nets do business the right way and want to give guys a chance to make their money so that won't happen. I'll wait on Prince because he hasn't played with us yet but he won't be as expensive as Levert will be.

[MrDollarBills]

I think we should see if LeVert can be extended for a lesser cost. We are already in cap hell now so there's no point in worrying about it.

Let Prince earn his keep first.

Either way, not an issue atm. Marks will make the right choice.

[drchaos]

I have seen enough out of LeVert to extend him now.

Prince needs to prove it before I extend him.

[NyCeEvO]

I’d target a mutually beneficial extension for Caris. Try to convince him to take the guaranteed money given his injury history.

I’d have Prince play it out to restricted FA. I doubt he gets a contract close to your proposal. He hasn’t proven much yet, and we haven’t seen him in our system.

Agree with your approach 100%.

[NyCeEvO]

If Caris didn't have injury history, I'd extend him now.

I think it's better to wait to see how this season goes for him before doing anything. Plus it makes him a better asset if he doesn't have a huge contract already. (For example if we want Bradley Beal at the deadline)

For Prince, I'm also wait and see on him. I don't think he going to be offered anything close to the max in RFA tbh.

I think you have to extend Caris now or at least before the season starts. If seems as if it wasn’t for the freak injury, Caris would’ve had a strong full campaign.

Right now, you can still use the excuse that he’s injury prone. If you let Caris improve yet again but he doesn’t suffer another big injury this season, another team will inevitably max him. We need to take advantage of the time and sign him before the season starts, unless the Nets have bigger plans to use him as the centerpiece of a trade for another star.

[Prokorov]

Extending Levert now to a big contract is ABSURD. Unless its on a team friendly 15-17M annual salary you simply cant give him that kindd of contract. With Leverts injury history, its a risk but beyond that you would also be paying him based on a dozen games pre-injury plus the playoffs.

you are basically saying you are going to give 86-90% of a max deal to a guy who posted:

13/4/4 on 50.9 TS%

people want to give levert 5/120? by comparison.... julius randle, in a market where everyone had cap, had just posted a 21/9/3 season on 60TS% and didnt get 5 years or that AAV that is being proposed for levert. Randle is the same age without the injury history. I understand Simmons just got a huge extension but he is already a top 20 player and former #1 overall pick, younger then levert, more productive and healthier.

You dont max out a 13 point 51 TS% player whose RFA rights you will own this early, and pay him like an iron man all-star.

The risk that you drastically overpay a guy who doesnt become a star or who cant stay healthy is SIGNIFICANTLY greater then waiting it out to RFA and having to match a max/near max offer because he proved he WAS a healthy star.

an Prince.... you want to extend prince on 5/80? you want to give 16 million per over 5 years to a guy who hasnt played a game here and will be coming off the bench for most of his tenure here in all likelyhood,... who again... we will have RFA rights to?

if another team handed those extensions to those players we would be laughing at them

[MrDollarBills]

Extending Levert now to a big contract is ABSURD. Unless its on a team friendly 15-17M annual salary you simply cant give him that kindd of contract. With Leverts injury history, its a risk but beyond that you would also be paying him based on a dozen games pre-injury plus the playoffs.

you are basically saying you are going to give 86-90% of a max deal to a guy who posted:

13/4/4 on 50.9 TS%

people want to give levert 5/120? by comparison.... julius randle, in a market where everyone had cap, had just posted a 21/9/3 season on 60TS% and didnt get 5 years or that AAV that is being proposed for levert. Randle is the same age without the injury history. I understand Simmons just got a huge extension but he is already a top 20 player and former #1 overall pick, younger then levert, more productive and healthier.

You dont max out a 13 point 51 TS% player whose RFA rights you will own this early, and pay him like an iron man all-star.

The risk that you drastically overpay a guy who doesnt become a star or who cant stay healthy is SIGNIFICANTLY greater then waiting it out to RFA and having to match a max/near max offer because he proved he WAS a healthy star.

an Prince.... you want to extend prince on 5/80? you want to give 16 million per over 5 years to a guy who hasnt played a game here and will be coming off the bench for most of his tenure here in all likelyhood,... who again... we will have RFA rights to?

if another team handed those extensions to those players we would be laughing at them

I would extend LeVert at a cheaper rate and see if he opts for security over getting the market rate in the event that he picks up where he left off in the playoffs. Other than that, I agree.

[ecuhus1981]

Extending Levert now to a big contract is ABSURD. Unless its on a team friendly 15-17M annual salary you simply cant give him that kindd of contract. With Leverts injury history, its a risk but beyond that you would also be paying him based on a dozen games pre-injury plus the playoffs.

you are basically saying you are going to give 86-90% of a max deal to a guy who posted:

13/4/4 on 50.9 TS%

people want to give levert 5/120? by comparison.... julius randle, in a market where everyone had cap, had just posted a 21/9/3 season on 60TS% and didnt get 5 years or that AAV that is being proposed for levert. Randle is the same age without the injury history. I understand Simmons just got a huge extension but he is already a top 20 player and former #1 overall pick, younger then levert, more productive and healthier.

You dont max out a 13 point 51 TS% player whose RFA rights you will own this early, and pay him like an iron man all-star.

The risk that you drastically overpay a guy who doesnt become a star or who cant stay healthy is SIGNIFICANTLY greater then waiting it out to RFA and having to match a max/near max offer because he proved he WAS a healthy star.

an Prince.... you want to extend prince on 5/80? you want to give 16 million per over 5 years to a guy who hasnt played a game here and will be coming off the bench for most of his tenure here in all likelyhood,... who again... we will have RFA rights to?

if another team handed those extensions to those players we would be laughing at them

You make some strong points. Let me clarify a couple of them:

Caris making $24mil/yr would not be outlandish, nor would it quite be 90% of the max. It would be this year, but the salary cap for '20-'21 is projected at $116mil, $7mil higher than this year. Max salaries for less than 7-year vets like Caris and Taurean would be $29mil.

Washington thought they could get away without extending Otto, and seeing what RFA offers came his way. We pushed them, they matched, and that decision triggered a financial detonation of the team. Julius Randle is not a good comp; positional difference and playing style aside, he doesn't play D as well as LeVert, and isn't as well rounded in terms of skill set.

I think that Caris could be next year's Otto. We've made a number of enemies around the league, by making poison-pill, player-friendly aggressive offer sheets. Aside form just wanting an elite young player, what team wouldn't want to stick it to us, see how we like some of our own FA medicine?

We don't need to operate out of fear, merely an abundance of caution and forethought.

[vincecarter4pres]

Extending Levert now to a big contract is ABSURD. Unless its on a team friendly 15-17M annual salary you simply cant give him that kindd of contract. With Leverts injury history, its a risk but beyond that you would also be paying him based on a dozen games pre-injury plus the playoffs.

you are basically saying you are going to give 86-90% of a max deal to a guy who posted:

13/4/4 on 50.9 TS%

people want to give levert 5/120? by comparison.... julius randle, in a market where everyone had cap, had just posted a 21/9/3 season on 60TS% and didnt get 5 years or that AAV that is being proposed for levert. Randle is the same age without the injury history. I understand Simmons just got a huge extension but he is already a top 20 player and former #1 overall pick, younger then levert, more productive and healthier.

You dont max out a 13 point 51 TS% player whose RFA rights you will own this early, and pay him like an iron man all-star.

The risk that you drastically overpay a guy who doesnt become a star or who cant stay healthy is SIGNIFICANTLY greater then waiting it out to RFA and having to match a max/near max offer because he proved he WAS a healthy star.

an Prince.... you want to extend prince on 5/80? you want to give 16 million per over 5 years to a guy who hasnt played a game here and will be coming off the bench for most of his tenure here in all likelyhood,... who again... we will have RFA rights to?

if another team handed those extensions to those players we would be laughing at them

Although I understand your sentiment, Julius Randle is a bad example to point to to validate your side of the debate imho.

He's a 4/5 man who plays mediocre to poor defense and is something of a blackhole on offense. One of the least valuable positions teams chase. And he still got over 20 a season for 3.

[Rockice_24]

I think both stay here long term but we wait until later to extend them.

[Prokorov]

You make some strong points. Let me clarify a couple of them:

Caris making $24mil/yr would not be outlandish, nor would it quite be 90% of the max. It would be this year, but the salary cap for '20-'21 is projected at $116mil, $7mil higher than this year. Max salaries for less than 7-year vets like Caris and Taurean would be $29mil.

The cap scale is a good point, but 24 million is still outlandish for Caris and would represent over 20% of the cap even if the 20-21 projection holds true. I think that there is just too much hometown bias surrounding Caris. I love levert, I was one of the few who had his back early on when he was getting crushed 2 years ago for a horrid shooting start... but it has swung way too far the other way on too small of a body of work.

people saw him score like 18 ppg over 10 games were we went like .500 and crowned him a future all-star. but at the end of the day we are talking about a 24 year old player who has missed 1/3 of the games in his career to various injuries, and is coming off a "breakout" season where he posted:

13.5/4/4 on 42/31/69 with a 50.9 TS%

I'm sorry, but no one is paying a 24 year old, who has had multiple injuries in college and pros, who hasnt posted great volume stats and who has posted poor shooting/efficiency stats 24 million per year/20% of the future cap. it is kind of absurd to suggest that we do as well. what team has even given 18-20 million a year for someone of similar age who posted similar stats?

Washington thought they could get away without extending Otto, and seeing what RFA offers came his way. We pushed them, they matched, and that decision triggered a financial detonation of the team. Julius Randle is not a good comp; positional difference and playing style aside, he doesn't play D as well as LeVert, and isn't as well rounded in terms of skill set.

Otto porter was younger, healthier, more productive, and infinitely more efficient then caris levert. it is an awful comparison. additionlly, Otto porter is one of the worst contracts in the league, and the wiz basically dumped him 1 year later, similar to portland with crabbe.

I think that Caris could be next year's Otto. We've made a number of enemies around the league, by making poison-pill, player-friendly aggressive offer sheets. Aside form just wanting an elite young player, what team wouldn't want to stick it to us, see how we like some of our own FA medicine?

We don't need to operate out of fear, merely an abundance of caution and forethought.

Explain to me how caris is anywhere near an "elite young player"

13 ppg?

50.9 TS%

42/31/69 shooting line?

Caris isnt ben simmons. he is donovan mitchell. he isnt jason tatum.

[Prokorov]

Extending Levert now to a big contract is ABSURD. Unless its on a team friendly 15-17M annual salary you simply cant give him that kindd of contract. With Leverts injury history, its a risk but beyond that you would also be paying him based on a dozen games pre-injury plus the playoffs.

you are basically saying you are going to give 86-90% of a max deal to a guy who posted:

13/4/4 on 50.9 TS%

people want to give levert 5/120? by comparison.... julius randle, in a market where everyone had cap, had just posted a 21/9/3 season on 60TS% and didnt get 5 years or that AAV that is being proposed for levert. Randle is the same age without the injury history. I understand Simmons just got a huge extension but he is already a top 20 player and former #1 overall pick, younger then levert, more productive and healthier.

You dont max out a 13 point 51 TS% player whose RFA rights you will own this early, and pay him like an iron man all-star.

The risk that you drastically overpay a guy who doesnt become a star or who cant stay healthy is SIGNIFICANTLY greater then waiting it out to RFA and having to match a max/near max offer because he proved he WAS a healthy star.

an Prince.... you want to extend prince on 5/80? you want to give 16 million per over 5 years to a guy who hasnt played a game here and will be coming off the bench for most of his tenure here in all likelyhood,... who again... we will have RFA rights to?

if another team handed those extensions to those players we would be laughing at them

Although I understand your sentiment, Julius Randle is a bad example to point to to validate your side of the debate imho.

He's a 4/5 man who plays mediocre to poor defense and is something of a blackhole on offense. One of the least valuable positions teams chase. And he still got over 20 a season for 3.

Fair enough... who is your comp of a 23-25 year old player with moderate injury history and poor efficiency who got over 20 million per?

[MrDollarBills]

You make some strong points. Let me clarify a couple of them:

Caris making $24mil/yr would not be outlandish, nor would it quite be 90% of the max. It would be this year, but the salary cap for '20-'21 is projected at $116mil, $7mil higher than this year. Max salaries for less than 7-year vets like Caris and Taurean would be $29mil.

The cap scale is a good point, but 24 million is still outlandish for Caris and would represent over 20% of the cap even if the 20-21 projection holds true. I think that there is just too much hometown bias surrounding Caris. I love levert, I was one of the few who had his back early on when he was getting crushed 2 years ago for a horrid shooting start... but it has swung way too far the other way on too small of a body of work.

people saw him score like 18 ppg over 10 games were we went like .500 and crowned him a future all-star. but at the end of the day we are talking about a 24 year old player who has missed 1/3 of the games in his career to various injuries, and is coming off a "breakout" season where he posted:

13.5/4/4 on 42/31/69 with a 50.9 TS%

I'm sorry, but no one is paying a 24 year old, who has had multiple injuries in college and pros, who hasnt posted great volume stats and who has posted poor shooting/efficiency stats 24 million per year/20% of the future cap. it is kind of absurd to suggest that we do as well. what team has even given 18-20 million a year for someone of similar age who posted similar stats?

Washington thought they could get away without extending Otto, and seeing what RFA offers came his way. We pushed them, they matched, and that decision triggered a financial detonation of the team. Julius Randle is not a good comp; positional difference and playing style aside, he doesn't play D as well as LeVert, and isn't as well rounded in terms of skill set.

Otto porter was younger, healthier, more productive, and infinitely more efficient then caris levert. it is an awful comparison. additionlly, Otto porter is one of the worst contracts in the league, and the wiz basically dumped him 1 year later, similar to portland with crabbe.

I think that Caris could be next year's Otto. We've made a number of enemies around the league, by making poison-pill, player-friendly aggressive offer sheets. Aside form just wanting an elite young player, what team wouldn't want to stick it to us, see how we like some of our own FA medicine?

We don't need to operate out of fear, merely an abundance of caution and forethought.

Explain to me how caris is anywhere near an "elite young player"

13 ppg?

50.9 TS%

42/31/69 shooting line?

Caris isnt ben simmons. he is donovan mitchell. he isnt jason tatum.

would you float him an extension offer for a lesser amount early on to try and get him locked in? surely the temptation of long term security at a lesser rate is feasible considering his injury history.

Kind of like how we did with Spencer, get him at a cheaper price and have him locked in at a rate where he most likely outplays his contract.

[Prokorov]

You make some strong points. Let me clarify a couple of them:

Caris making $24mil/yr would not be outlandish, nor would it quite be 90% of the max. It would be this year, but the salary cap for '20-'21 is projected at $116mil, $7mil higher than this year. Max salaries for less than 7-year vets like Caris and Taurean would be $29mil.

The cap scale is a good point, but 24 million is still outlandish for Caris and would represent over 20% of the cap even if the 20-21 projection holds true. I think that there is just too much hometown bias surrounding Caris. I love levert, I was one of the few who had his back early on when he was getting crushed 2 years ago for a horrid shooting start... but it has swung way too far the other way on too small of a body of work.

people saw him score like 18 ppg over 10 games were we went like .500 and crowned him a future all-star. but at the end of the day we are talking about a 24 year old player who has missed 1/3 of the games in his career to various injuries, and is coming off a "breakout" season where he posted:

13.5/4/4 on 42/31/69 with a 50.9 TS%

I'm sorry, but no one is paying a 24 year old, who has had multiple injuries in college and pros, who hasnt posted great volume stats and who has posted poor shooting/efficiency stats 24 million per year/20% of the future cap. it is kind of absurd to suggest that we do as well. what team has even given 18-20 million a year for someone of similar age who posted similar stats?

Washington thought they could get away without extending Otto, and seeing what RFA offers came his way. We pushed them, they matched, and that decision triggered a financial detonation of the team. Julius Randle is not a good comp; positional difference and playing style aside, he doesn't play D as well as LeVert, and isn't as well rounded in terms of skill set.

Otto porter was younger, healthier, more productive, and infinitely more efficient then caris levert. it is an awful comparison. additionlly, Otto porter is one of the worst contracts in the league, and the wiz basically dumped him 1 year later, similar to portland with crabbe.

I think that Caris could be next year's Otto. We've made a number of enemies around the league, by making poison-pill, player-friendly aggressive offer sheets. Aside form just wanting an elite young player, what team wouldn't want to stick it to us, see how we like some of our own FA medicine?

We don't need to operate out of fear, merely an abundance of caution and forethought.

Explain to me how caris is anywhere near an "elite young player"

13 ppg?

50.9 TS%

42/31/69 shooting line?

Caris isnt ben simmons. he is donovan mitchell. he isnt jason tatum.

would you float him an extension offer for a lesser amount early on to try and get him locked in? surely the temptation of long term security at a lesser rate is feasible considering his injury history.

Kind of like how we did with Spencer, get him at a cheaper price and have him locked in at a rate where he most likely outplays his contract.

if he approached us with mutual interest and was willing to take like... 4/70 then yes. otherwsie id wait, extend the QO and go from there. if im in a DLO situation where i need to max him because he became an all-star then i do that. but i wouldnt pay him like that yet. too much risk. it would look bad giving 20-25 million to a guy with a 51 TS and injury history when you already have kyrie and KD on max deals

[ecuhus1981]

The two closest comp's I can give you for Caris are Jimmy Butler, and Kelly Oubre. Both averaged about 13ppg on similar efficiency as LeVert, in their 3rd year in the league. Both carried moderate, non-degenerative injury concerns, and both were touted by their organizations as a core piece and future cornerstone.

CHI knew they had a burgeoning star, and attempted to lock him up with a lowball, 4-year, $44mil extension. Remember, this is back when the cap was $63mil, so $11mil/yr comes out to 17% of the cap (in today's cap, that would be 4 years, $74mil or 5 years, $92.5mil). Unfortunately, they were too bullish (pardon the pun) in their pursuit of the best bargain contract, and Butler decided to wait and play out his 4th year, establishing himself as an elite 2-way wing in the process.

If Jimmy strengthens my argument, Kelly Oubre seems to be disproving it. WAS raved about Kelly when they drafted him, and he really turned on the offense in his 3rd year, averaging 13ppg. However, since the Wizards were cap-strapped and in need of a locker-room facelift, they traded him for Trevor Ariza, who promptly injured his groin and missed the remainder of the season. Anyway, rumors that Oubre would be fielding offers north of 4yrs, $80mil spread in the weeks before this offseason. However, the teams with the capspace to hand out big contracts are almost all gone, and he hasn't signed an offer sheet. Perhaps whomever loses out on Kawhi will put in a bid for KO. If not, Oubre will probably need to take a QO, or just agree to whatever extension PHX will provide.

[TheNetsFan]

Just like I said with DLo before this past season, the monetary equivalent of an escalating deal starting at 18% of the cap tends to be pretty standard for guys who have flashed potential but have had some injury concerns or flaws in their game.