What should we do if Dray declines the 4/100 extension

[likashing]

At the same time, it is believed that free agency will be rather sparse at the top next offseason, so what would Draymond actually get from a team going nowhere with a ton of cap space?

Hard to believe Draymond would sign the 4/100 extension.

I don't think he will sign either for $100/4.

[clyde21]

At the same time, it is believed that free agency will be rather sparse at the top next offseason, so what would Draymond actually get from a team going nowhere with a ton of cap space?

Hard to believe Draymond would sign the 4/100 extension.

I don't think he will sign either for $100/4.

then we should start conjuring up trades.

[wco81]

Well if you look at the kind of contracts teams are giving out, like $180 million for Tobias Harris and today, Simmons gets $170 million, it's going to be tough for the Warriors to tell him to take $100/4.

Some team will beat that offer easily.

And why should those teams willing to pay him say $140/4 bother to trade for him when they can sign him outright?

[OptionZero]

Neither of them is remotely comparable. Harris is 27 and scored roughly 20 ppg. Dray is 29 now; he'll be 30 when he hits UFA.

Simmons was a former #1 pick

While we all see Draymond's value, it's hard to use those contracts as benchmarkers. Now, HE may see them as benchmarks . . .but i am not sure there is a team out there that would agree

Who's maxing him in 2020?

[wco81]

He's been a key part of more wins and rings than those younger players have been.

Harris hasn't been an all-star. Don't know about Simmons.

The main advantage in their favor is that this was a huge seller's market we just went through.

If the Warriors said "go and get an offer and we'll consider beating it" I think he'd say "FU" and just leave.

Then they lose him for nothing, though I guess they could dangle sign and trade for his fifth year or higher starting/avg. number.

[BW32]

He's been a key part of more wins and rings than those younger players have been.

Harris hasn't been an all-star. Don't know about Simmons.

The main advantage in their favor is that this was a huge seller's market we just went through.

If the Warriors said "go and get an offer and we'll consider beating it" I think he'd say "FU" and just leave.

Then they lose him for nothing, though I guess they could dangle sign and trade for his fifth year or higher starting/avg. number.

You don't get the 5th year on a S&T anymore, that's old CBA.

[statsman]

Then they lose him for nothing, though I guess they could dangle sign and trade for his fifth year or higher starting/avg. number.

Sign and trades are limited to the same four year maximum plus 5% raises as a free agent can get signing directly with a new team.

[likashing]

Rich Paul had Morris turn down $41m/3 (Clippers), then went to $20m/2 from the Spurs, and ended up to $15m/1 from the Knicks.

Sounds similar to Noel and KCP's story.

I hope Draymond is smarter than that. I mean, I don't even care if he declines $100m/4 and hope to get the supermax, or ~$200m full 30%/5 etc. It is pretty obvious Rich Paul's priority is LeBron and he doesn't have his best interest.

[wco81]

Try to think of teams who'd want a small-ball 4 or 5 who can defend but can't shoot.

I don't know if there are that many potential trade partners.

Lots of teams want to find the next Draymond but they don't want to pay for the original.

[bballguy50]

No way he takes this offer, but he really should. Gobert is at $25M a year right now. Add some on top of that for his DPOY, but at least Gobert has more size and paint/lob game.

We should really explore trades, I think Draymond is the type to sign elsewhere outright from spite/pride.

[Scoots1994]

I think fans **** on him for all this stuff is likely to make him want more money and be less likely to stay.

To me he seems like the kind of guy to accept less to stay, but it has nothing to do with us, and everything to do with the team.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

A 5-year extension next year that would seriously hinder our finances until he is 35 years old would be an unwise move. If he won't take the 4/100, I think we need to look at moving him for assets.

Who cares about anything past the next 3 years. Once Steph is 34 we are basically done. The only question is do Steph, Klay and Draymond retire with the Warriors or do we ship them out so we could get better lottery picks sooner.

im not ok with 'just being another PO team'...if we pay Dray the max we effectively shut down our window

im okay with the 4/100 I think that's a good deal, anything more and it's not a good investment. his game is not gonna age well at all.

Draymond is worth more to the Warriors than to other teams. Getting a player of equal talent to Draymond back for Draymond knocks the Warriors out of championship contention until after Steph and Klay's' salaries are gone. We are over the salary cap so star free agents can't sign with the Warriors.

The Warriors championship window should be closed in 3 or 4 years unless the Warriors can find their Tony Parker, Manu and Kawhi. Finding our Tony Parker, Manu and Kawhi is improbable.

So, as a fan, I don't care about overpaying Draymond and hurting a future Warrior team that will be out of the championship Window anyway. If all markets were equal and half of the champions won 2 championships then gap between a team's championship eras should be about 45 years. Luckily for Warriors fans the Warriors are a big market team but still even in a smaller league the Warriors fans had to wait 40 years between championships. If championships are what matters you don't worry about overpaying people while you are in your championship window.

Overpayed Draymond and filler plus 4 1st round draft picks might get us Giannis 2 years from now. But I actually feel loyalty towards Draymond and am confused by the fans that seem to want him gone. I get it that he is imatature and out of control in some ways but I think the Warriors would lack part of their team chemistry if he were gone. Will Klay and Steph put pressure on Burks to play defense?

Draymond and Steph and Klay are worth more together than they are separately. Steph will be doubled unless his teammates must be guarded. Steph needs to dump the ball to a good passer. Klay is best coming off screens. A non-shooting center is best setting screens and rolling to the hoop. Draymond's offensive value is maximized when his passing ability is needed.

On defense Steph help and gambles and is succeptable to being beat off the dribble. Having Draymond mitigates StephS defensive weakness and allows Steph to maximize his defensive strengths. Steph, Klay and Draymond know how to play together to a degree that other teams can only dream about.

Tell Draymond that we will match any offer other teams make in free agency. Offer him a long generous contract with a player option to opt out if he wants to extend early.

We will not be likely to get equal value for Draymond if we trade him.

You trade Draymond and the championship window slams shut.

Pay
Da
Man

he needs to retire with this org. Anything less is unacceptable

[GQ Hot Dog]

Offer Dray the max that any other team can offer because I guarantee some team will offer it with next year's crop of FAs. Let him negotiate it up a million a year or so to make him feel better and call it a victory. How many teams full of young and inexperienced scorers would happily pay Draymond a max deal to hand out assists and teach them how to play championship defense?

Edit: And I wonder why so many Warriors fans are so determined to pay him less when they have no trouble paying our other stars the max. Is it just because of his marginal scoring? I suspect people don't like his personality and want to put him in his place so to speak, teach him a lesson. That's just immature and I'm confident that the FO won't operate on the basis of that kind of pettiness. Objectively, he's a top-3 defender in the game and there's no reason to believe he won't continue to be that throughout the length of his next deal.

[Scoots1994]

Offer Dray the max that any other team can offer because I guarantee some team will offer it with next year's crop of FAs. Let him negotiate it up a million a year or so to make him feel better and call it a victory. How many teams full of young and inexperienced scorers would happily pay Draymond a max deal to hand out assists and teach them how to play championship defense?

Edit: And I wonder why so many Warriors fans are so determined to pay him less when they have no trouble paying our other stars the max. Is it just because of his marginal scoring? I suspect people don't like his personality and want to put him in his place so to speak, teach him a lesson. That's just immature and I'm confident that the FO won't operate on the basis of that kind of pettiness. Objectively, he's a top-3 defender in the game and there's no reason to believe he won't continue to be that throughout the length of his next deal.

People wildly under-rate defense and team play. Anybody who isn't scoring is "easy to replace".

[azwfan]

Offer Dray the max that any other team can offer because I guarantee some team will offer it with next year's crop of FAs. Let him negotiate it up a million a year or so to make him feel better and call it a victory. How many teams full of young and inexperienced scorers would happily pay Draymond a max deal to hand out assists and teach them how to play championship defense?

Edit: And I wonder why so many Warriors fans are so determined to pay him less when they have no trouble paying our other stars the max. Is it just because of his marginal scoring? I suspect people don't like his personality and want to put him in his place so to speak, teach him a lesson. That's just immature and I'm confident that the FO won't operate on the basis of that kind of pettiness. Objectively, he's a top-3 defender in the game and there's no reason to believe he won't continue to be that throughout the length of his next deal.

Curry will be 33 going into the final year of his contract.
Klay will be 34 going into the final year of his contract
Draymond will be 35 going into the final year of his contract (if he gets a 5 year max next off season).

Of the 3, Draymond is seen as the most likely to have his play steeply decline. Curry and Klay should still be able to shoot at the later stages of their careers. If Draymond's mobility slips, his defense will be much less impactful.

I'm sure the technicals don't help, but i doubt its a "putting him in his place" thing. Its more of a - "Draymond at age 33/34/35 won't be worth 40m+" (or whatever his cap number will be in those seasons).

For me... I offer him the extension and when he declines, how much we offer will depend a lot on how we look this year. If we have reason to believe we can legit compete for titles the next year or 2... max the man. If we look like we're gonna need a lot more help, we may need to be a little more cost conscious.

[Samurai]

A 5-year extension next year that would seriously hinder our finances until he is 35 years old would be an unwise move. If he won't take the 4/100, I think we need to look at moving him for assets.

Who cares about anything past the next 3 years. Once Steph is 34 we are basically done. The only question is do Steph, Klay and Draymond retire with the Warriors or do we ship them out so we could get better lottery picks sooner.

[/quote]
Speaking for myself as someone who has cared about the Warriors since before they moved to Oakland, I will still care about the team in 3 years (God willing of course). And I assume that Myers and Lacob will still care about the team then if they are still affilated with the Dubs. If so, I would think that they will want as much financial flexibility to shape the team in Curry's twilight. Assuming that Curry in the last years of his contract will provide less value for the dollars expended than he is now, it is very unclear to me how having so much cap space taken up by two players (Curry and Green) that are no longer performing at a high level gives the team that degree of financial flexibility to shape the team for the post-Curry era.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

A 5-year extension next year that would seriously hinder our finances until he is 35 years old would be an unwise move. If he won't take the 4/100, I think we need to look at moving him for assets.

Who cares about anything past the next 3 years. Once Steph is 34 we are basically done. The only question is do Steph, Klay and Draymond retire with the Warriors or do we ship them out so we could get better lottery picks sooner.

Speaking for myself as someone who has cared about the Warriors since before they moved to Oakland, I will still care about the team in 3 years (God willing of course). And I assume that Myers and Lacob will still care about the team then if they are still affilated with the Dubs. If so, I would think that they will want as much financial flexibility to shape the team in Curry's twilight. Assuming that Curry in the last years of his contract will provide less value for the dollars expended than he is now, it is very unclear to me how having so much cap space taken up by two players (Curry and Green) that are no longer performing at a high level gives the team that degree of financial flexibility to shape the team for the post-Curry era.

If everything was equal I would keep Draymond, Klay and Steph until they retire.

I figure paying Draymond and keeping him improves the Warriors chance of winning a championship in the next 4 years. After 3 or 4 years the Warriors are just another team. Because the Warriors are a big market team you might expect them to win a championship every 17 years. For the small market teams, now that there are so many teams they might be expected to win a championship every 55 years if they don't move to a bigger market like Shanghai before that.

I would rather have the short term improved odds at a championship than help the post Curry Warriors get back to 50 wins sooner.

[Samurai]

Who cares about anything past the next 3 years. Once Steph is 34 we are basically done. The only question is do Steph, Klay and Draymond retire with the Warriors or do we ship them out so we could get better lottery picks sooner.

Speaking for myself as someone who has cared about the Warriors since before they moved to Oakland, I will still care about the team in 3 years (God willing of course). And I assume that Myers and Lacob will still care about the team then if they are still affilated with the Dubs. If so, I would think that they will want as much financial flexibility to shape the team in Curry's twilight. Assuming that Curry in the last years of his contract will provide less value for the dollars expended than he is now, it is very unclear to me how having so much cap space taken up by two players (Curry and Green) that are no longer performing at a high level gives the team that degree of financial flexibility to shape the team for the post-Curry era.

If everything was equal I would keep Draymond, Klay and Steph until they retire.

I figure paying Draymond and keeping him improves the Warriors chance of winning a championship in the next 4 years. After 3 or 4 years the Warriors are just another team. Because the Warriors are a big market team you might expect them to win a championship every 17 years. For the small market teams, now that there are so many teams they might be expected to win a championship every 55 years if they don't move to a bigger market like Shanghai before that.

I would rather have the short term improved odds at a championship than help the post Curry Warriors get back to 50 wins sooner.[/quote]
That's fine and I have no quarrel with your approach. But just because someone also prefers to look at the bigger picture should not imply that person does not care about the team or would not/should not care about them in 3 years; that logic doesn't follow.

[Bayside]

So nice that we aren't in the cohen era. I think most of us trust this office a lot more to try to keep Draymond happy and a warrior and will take measured approaches. If Draymond's change at end of year around health and attitude are still carrying over this summer I think we will see great play out of him. And hopefully he will want to work with management to and not Klutch us over a barrel. After all the drama around KD, think its left me a smaller threshold of tolerance to the dramatic. Wish there would be an outcome before the season for my own anxiety lol. But think other posters are correct that this will be a contract year and probably will not see anything until next summer. Hope they keep them together.

[CS707]

I am a huge Draymond guy but I also think you have to be pragmatic about it. He's not going to take the extension and his contractual timeline doesn't really line up with the realistic lifecycle of this window. The front office would be remiss in not at least exploring the options. Technically we could lose him for nothing in FA.