JR Smith needs to be guaranteed or waived today...

[SmartWentCrazy]

I mean assets have a market. Gilbert just spent $5M for the 30th pick. But we're talking about the repeater tax here, and the ability to turn it off by staying under the tax line for two consecutive years. Is a lotto protected 1st really worth $30M or resetting the clock to year zero?

I think that's bad management.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

You will reset the tax before your competitive again. I’d personally prefer my team to have an extra first that for the owner of a rebuilding team to have an extra 30M, but maybe thats just me.

Seems like the Cavs didn't get an offer of a 1st. If they had, they probably would've taken it.

Would you want your team to pay an extra ~$46m (salary plus luxury tax) for a 2nd or two? Or to take on a multi year deal for 2 2nds?

I would almost always prefer my team to have an extra 1st. But I'm not going to demand my team also pay $100m to do so. There's limits to smart business. I'd love my team to win a championship, but if they're not doing that, I don't think anyone does well to waste $46m.

Seems like youre offering a lot of conjecture thats unsourced. If you have proof they wanted a 1 and couldn't get it, I’d love to see it.

And if they truly couldnt get a 1, thats a poor reflection of the skill of Altman.

[jbk1234]

You will reset the tax before your competitive again. I’d personally prefer my team to have an extra first that for the owner of a rebuilding team to have an extra 30M, but maybe thats just me.

Seems like the Cavs didn't get an offer of a 1st. If they had, they probably would've taken it.

Would you want your team to pay an extra ~$46m (salary plus luxury tax) for a 2nd or two? Or to take on a multi year deal for 2 2nds?

I would almost always prefer my team to have an extra 1st. But I'm not going to demand my team also pay $100m to do so. There's limits to smart business. I'd love my team to win a championship, but if they're not doing that, I don't think anyone does well to waste $46m.

Seems like youre offering a lot of conjecture thats unsourced. If you have proof they wanted a 1 and couldn't get it, I’d love to see it.

And if they truly couldnt get a 1, thats a poor reflection of the skill of Altman.

Reportedly, there were non-lotto firsts offered on draft day. The Cavs already had the Rockets pick and bought another one for $5M and second round picks.

When you see what the Crabbe and Iggy dumps cost, you get a sense of what they were looking for.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

[SmartWentCrazy]

Seems like the Cavs didn't get an offer of a 1st. If they had, they probably would've taken it.

Would you want your team to pay an extra ~$46m (salary plus luxury tax) for a 2nd or two? Or to take on a multi year deal for 2 2nds?

I would almost always prefer my team to have an extra 1st. But I'm not going to demand my team also pay $100m to do so. There's limits to smart business. I'd love my team to win a championship, but if they're not doing that, I don't think anyone does well to waste $46m.

Seems like youre offering a lot of conjecture thats unsourced. If you have proof they wanted a 1 and couldn't get it, I’d love to see it.

And if they truly couldnt get a 1, thats a poor reflection of the skill of Altman.

Reportedly, there were non-lotto firsts offered on draft day. The Cavs already had the Rockets pick and bought another one for $5M and second round picks.

When you see what the Crabbe and Iggy dumps cost, you get a sense of what they were looking for.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

A trade for Harkless wouldve left them with about 26.5M worse off including tax and salary.

Personally, I’d prefer the pick. Others disagree. Oh well.

[jbk1234]

Seems like youre offering a lot of conjecture thats unsourced. If you have proof they wanted a 1 and couldn't get it, I’d love to see it.

And if they truly couldnt get a 1, thats a poor reflection of the skill of Altman.

Reportedly, there were non-lotto firsts offered on draft day. The Cavs already had the Rockets pick and bought another one for $5M and second round picks.

When you see what the Crabbe and Iggy dumps cost, you get a sense of what they were looking for.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

A trade for Harkless wouldve left them with about 26.5M worse off including tax and salary.

Personally, I’d prefer the pick. Others disagree. Oh well.

Part of the problem is that the Heat wanted to use JR's contract in a subsequent trade and then they spent about a week arguing with the Thunder over who was going to pay for it. JR getting cut probably means that CP3 plays out the season with the Thunder.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

[Scoot McGroot]

You will reset the tax before your competitive again. I’d personally prefer my team to have an extra first that for the owner of a rebuilding team to have an extra 30M, but maybe thats just me.

Seems like the Cavs didn't get an offer of a 1st. If they had, they probably would've taken it.

Would you want your team to pay an extra ~$46m (salary plus luxury tax) for a 2nd or two? Or to take on a multi year deal for 2 2nds?

I would almost always prefer my team to have an extra 1st. But I'm not going to demand my team also pay $100m to do so. There's limits to smart business. I'd love my team to win a championship, but if they're not doing that, I don't think anyone does well to waste $46m.

Seems like youre offering a lot of conjecture thats unsourced. If you have proof they wanted a 1 and couldn't get it, I’d love to see it.

And if they truly couldnt get a 1, thats a poor reflection of the skill of Altman.

It is conjecture. I assume they were looking for more than just a 2nd or two or cash payments? A 1st or young talent would be the natural progression from there in terms of "more value" that makes sense.

[Scoot McGroot]

Seems like youre offering a lot of conjecture thats unsourced. If you have proof they wanted a 1 and couldn't get it, I’d love to see it.

And if they truly couldnt get a 1, thats a poor reflection of the skill of Altman.

Reportedly, there were non-lotto firsts offered on draft day. The Cavs already had the Rockets pick and bought another one for $5M and second round picks.

When you see what the Crabbe and Iggy dumps cost, you get a sense of what they were looking for.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

A trade for Harkless wouldve left them with about 26.5M worse off including tax and salary.

Personally, I’d prefer the pick. Others disagree. Oh well.

Cleveland didn't fit into that trade for Harkless as Harkless went for pure cap space and a 1st. Not a $5m guarantee. They're materially different concepts.

The problem was that there were so many teams that HAD cap space, or even TPE's that they could use to absorb salary fully, rather than just giving teams discounts on a partial guarantee contract like JR. When it came down to it, there were several situations where teams were willing to buy, and in some cases like Memphis, a team that was willing to buy over and over again. That devalued JR's value across the market in all likelihood.

[jbk1234]

It's done.

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

[tidho]

I don't get why they thought they needed to stretch that. Why not be done with it? They'll still be under the luxury tax this year.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Bet the Rockets sign him.

[SO_MONEY]

Bet the Rockets sign him.

The Rumor was LAL (early anyways), I am going with that and the hope for some more situational awareness comedy with LBJ.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Bet the Rockets sign him.

The Rumor was LAL (early anyways), I am going with that and the hope for some more situational awareness comedy with LBJ.

Woj said no to this I think

[SO_MONEY]

Bet the Rockets sign him.

The Rumor was LAL (early anyways), I am going with that and the hope for some more situational awareness comedy with LBJ.

Woj said no to this I think

Then China is my guess, lol.

[Scoot McGroot]

I don't get why they thought they needed to stretch that. Why not be done with it? They'll still be under the luxury tax this year.

They would’ve been over the luxury tax if they didn’t stretch him.

[HartfordWhalers]

Cavs are not my favorite offseason.

[Prospect Dong]

I mean assets have a market. Gilbert just spent $5M for the 30th pick. But we're talking about the repeater tax here, and the ability to turn it off by staying under the tax line for two consecutive years. Is a lotto protected 1st really worth $30M or resetting the clock to year zero?

I think that's bad management.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

You will reset the tax before your competitive again. I’d personally prefer my team to have an extra first that for the owner of a rebuilding team to have an extra 30M, but maybe thats just me.

I don't think that's a reasonable expectation to have of owners. A lotto protected 1st just isn't worth $30M.

Also, cap flexibility is really important in terms of being able to take advantage of potential future opportunities. You see treadmill teams, even lotto teams, get stuck because of poor cap management all the time.

Finally, there's something to be said for not lowering the price that makes sense for your organization because the market won't pay it at specific time. If the Cavs traded that contract for a poor return, teams would expect them to fold down the line as well.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

Yeah, I think this nails it. We'd all rather our owners were completely uninterested in how much their roster costs, but asking them to pony up tens of millions of dollars for a minor asset is pretty unreasonable. Hopefully, this means that both owner and repeater status will be ready for when the team is good enough to deserve to be expensive again.

And I do think there's something to establishing a reputation for not folding, particularly in a low-stakes situation like this. It's hard to win a negotiation if the other guys knows you're not willing to walk away with nothing. Sometime you have to take a hit, just to show the league that you're not a pushover.

[Prospect Dong]

My money's on JR to the Lakers. They've got enough question marks among their new players that one more proven-to-be-mediocre shooter would be handy, as long as they can ditch him if it goes sour. Just remind him to keep an eye on the scoreboard...

I am pretty underwhelmed by Cleveland's offseason overall. I guess they're committed to waiting out some more of their now-useless vets before making big moves, but unless Garland and Sexton emerge as a decent pairing this feels like a wasted offseason.

[jbk1234]

My money's on JR to the Lakers. They've got enough question marks among their new players that one more proven-to-be-mediocre shooter would be handy, as long as they can ditch him if it goes sour. Just remind him to keep an eye on the scoreboard...

I am pretty underwhelmed by Cleveland's offseason overall. I guess they're committed to waiting out some more of their now-useless vets before making big moves, but unless Garland and Sexton emerge as a decent pairing this feels like a wasted offseason.

The Cavs are sitting on $58M in expiring contracts. They can trade them during the season or sell the cap space outright next summer. They had three first round picks this last draft due to the in-season moves they made last year.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

[Stillwater]

My money's on JR to the Lakers. They've got enough question marks among their new players that one more proven-to-be-mediocre shooter would be handy, as long as they can ditch him if it goes sour. Just remind him to keep an eye on the scoreboard...

I am pretty underwhelmed by Cleveland's offseason overall. I guess they're committed to waiting out some more of their now-useless vets before making big moves, but unless Garland and Sexton emerge as a decent pairing this feels like a wasted offseason.

Being able to get KPJ at 30 was incentive enough to see staying under the tax as the main motivation regarding Smith going into FA but decided to extend the date of expiration barring a ridiculously substantial offer for him( which obviously never came) .
I think the Cavs added 3 very high ceiling offensive prospects and are early enough in a rebuild that staying under the tax and making deadline trades with some of the expiring's for more draft assets will continue the process next summer and point to appropriate kudos handed out to the Cavs brass.

[KuruptedCav]

I'm glad the Cavs didn't sell low on JR's contract or feel like they had to trade him because of sunk costs.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

Is it really better to hold onto an asset and watch it expire than to “sell low”?

The luxury tax operates as a liability (in trades, the size of a MLE available, etc.); resetting it has value. $23 million and flexibility... You’d need to offer a top-25 pick to beat that. That wasn’t forthcoming.

Stretching Smith is better than taking on bad money for a pair of late seconds.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[giberish]

Not a big fan of the way Cleveland handled the Smith contract. It was never as valuable as cap space - teams looking to clear money for a FA move want cap space, not a partially guaranteed contract. That greatly limits any value Cleveland could possibly get. Then they'd be in the luxury tax for taking back a contract for Smith - and teams never go into the luxury tax to take back a salary dump for late 1st sort of deal.

So why extend the date and guarantee Smith extra money - which then needed to be stretched to get under the tax line? Were they really expecting a top-15 pick or something like that for something less then a full salary dump??