Summer Free Agency 2019 Part 4

[stormi]

elton...

Holy smokes. This is indeed incomplete, but it's really illuminating and a bit alarming for anyone who's relying on the "trade filler" trope for some of these contracts. What struck me from glancing through team salary pages just now was how few guys there are, period, in the $3-6M range. Bobi is pretty much the only bench scorer I could find on those rosters there, should Dallas suck unexpectedly and/or should they get another big man. I kind of like Trier, but I don't know why NY would trade him only one year after he was drafted (since he's playing decently). Really surprised.

This isn't to say that we can't trade for or acquire someone who's not in that $3-6M range, but it sort of dents alleged rationale of having signed certain guys just to add up $6M. I think we probably signed certain guys in order to have them on this team.

I think this was just the next best thing to Elton and co. after Korver was gone. They probably didn't see any of the remaining guys being too appealing, and if they could get a Kris Dunn going forward then they'll be looking like geniuses, not only that but we'll still have roster spots open to make a splash during the buyout market.

[BullyKing]

elton...

Holy smokes. This is indeed incomplete, but it's really illuminating and a bit alarming for anyone who's relying on the "trade filler" trope for some of these contracts. What struck me from glancing through team salary pages just now was how few guys there are, period, in the $3-6M range. Bobi is pretty much the only bench scorer I could find on those rosters there, should Dallas suck unexpectedly and/or should they get another big man. I kind of like Trier, but I don't know why NY would trade him only one year after he was drafted (since he's playing decently). Really surprised.

This isn't to say that we can't trade for or acquire someone who's not in that $3-6M range, but it sort of dents alleged rationale of having signed certain guys just to add up $6M. I think we probably signed certain guys in order to have them on this team.

As one of the (self-anointed) leaders of the we need salary filler movement, I gotta disagree a little with your characterization. I don't think anyone was arguing that we should sign people to minimum contracts solely for the purpose of trading their salary. It was more in opposition to the idea that there is no need to sign anyone where they would provide that small benefit at worst.

It's also a little restrictive to look at just what Bolden and Korkmaz could bring back. The argument wasn't that you would always necessarily trade all of the minimum salary guys bundled together but more that it gives you extra trade flexibility, which is never a bad thing even if might not always end up meaning anything good either. Maybe we have the chance to trade Scott, Korkmaz, and Bolden for a player in the $10+ range that is more useful than Scott? Maybe Bolden, Korkmaz and lucky roster spot #15 go out for someone like Jae Crowder. We don't really know what will happen or whether that extra salary will be needed or not but having it there in case you do still seems like a better position than having unused roster spots for no purpose.

[phillynative]

elton...

The only guy on that makes since is Allonzo Trier. And hes not going anywhere

[Sixerscan]

elton...

Holy smokes. This is indeed incomplete, but it's really illuminating and a bit alarming for anyone who's relying on the "trade filler" trope for some of these contracts. What struck me from glancing through team salary pages just now was how few guys there are, period, in the $3-6M range. Bobi is pretty much the only bench scorer I could find on those rosters there, should Dallas suck unexpectedly and/or should they get another big man. I kind of like Trier, but I don't know why NY would trade him only one year after he was drafted (since he's playing decently). Really surprised.

This isn't to say that we can't trade for or acquire someone who's not in that $3-6M range, but it sort of dents alleged rationale of having signed certain guys just to add up $6M. I think we probably signed certain guys in order to have them on this team.

As one of the (self-anointed) leaders of the we need salary filler movement, I gotta disagree a little with your characterization. I don't think anyone was arguing that we should sign people to minimum contracts solely for the purpose of trading their salary. It was more in opposition to the idea that there is no need to sign anyone where they would provide that small benefit at worst.

It's also a little restrictive to look at just what Bolden and Korkmaz could bring back. The argument wasn't that you would always necessarily trade all of the minimum salary guys bundled together but more that it gives you extra trade flexibility, which is never a bad thing even if might not always end up meaning anything good either. Maybe we have the chance to trade Scott, Korkmaz, and Bolden for a player in the $10+ range that is more useful than Scott? Maybe Bolden, Korkmaz and lucky roster spot #15 go out for someone like Jae Crowder. We don't really know what will happen or whether that extra salary will be needed or not but having it there in case you do still seems like a better position than having unused roster spots for no purpose.

Sure but this does give context to the idea as we get further from the cap spike there are fewer and fewer contracts of decent NBA players not on rookie deals that make under $10 million anymore, and so this concept of stacking minimum salaries becomes less and less viable.

As far as that list goes, I would at least kick the tires on buying low on Monk. He’s had a rough start to his career but there’s some talent there that fits our personnel well.

Belinelli is another option not listed there.

[stormi]

elton...

The only guy on that makes since is Allonzo Trier. And hes not going anywhere

Dunn.

Can be our backup pg. Chicago just drafted White and have Arci & Lavine.

I would love to get him

[BigSleep333]

not gonna lie, i expected more than koumadje and korkmaz with the 2 open spots. but whatever

[kingofthecourt67]

Curious, what’s the most we could have offered TJ after the Horford, Richardson, Harris moves?

[BullyKing]

Holy smokes. This is indeed incomplete, but it's really illuminating and a bit alarming for anyone who's relying on the "trade filler" trope for some of these contracts. What struck me from glancing through team salary pages just now was how few guys there are, period, in the $3-6M range. Bobi is pretty much the only bench scorer I could find on those rosters there, should Dallas suck unexpectedly and/or should they get another big man. I kind of like Trier, but I don't know why NY would trade him only one year after he was drafted (since he's playing decently). Really surprised.

This isn't to say that we can't trade for or acquire someone who's not in that $3-6M range, but it sort of dents alleged rationale of having signed certain guys just to add up $6M. I think we probably signed certain guys in order to have them on this team.

As one of the (self-anointed) leaders of the we need salary filler movement, I gotta disagree a little with your characterization. I don't think anyone was arguing that we should sign people to minimum contracts solely for the purpose of trading their salary. It was more in opposition to the idea that there is no need to sign anyone where they would provide that small benefit at worst.

It's also a little restrictive to look at just what Bolden and Korkmaz could bring back. The argument wasn't that you would always necessarily trade all of the minimum salary guys bundled together but more that it gives you extra trade flexibility, which is never a bad thing even if might not always end up meaning anything good either. Maybe we have the chance to trade Scott, Korkmaz, and Bolden for a player in the $10+ range that is more useful than Scott? Maybe Bolden, Korkmaz and lucky roster spot #15 go out for someone like Jae Crowder. We don't really know what will happen or whether that extra salary will be needed or not but having it there in case you do still seems like a better position than having unused roster spots for no purpose.

Sure but this does give context to the idea as we get further from the cap spike there are fewer and fewer contracts of decent NBA players not on rookie deals that make under $10 million anymore, and so this concept of stacking minimum salaries becomes less and less viable.

As far as that list goes, I would at least kick the tires on buying low on Monk. He’s had a rough start to his career but there’s some talent there that fits our personnel well.

Belinelli is another option not listed there.

I don't think the long term plan is to depend on being able to stack minimum contracts. As the years go on and we hopefully add taxpayer MLE's every year, we will build up players that will either serve as depth or provide a more significant salary for future trade purposes. Now hopefully whoever they sign with the MLE is useful depth himself and we don't need to trade anyone. But at the very least it will start providing some salaries that bridge the gap between the max level players and the rookie/minimum guys.
So while I agree that stacking minimum salaries is not a viable long term strategy, it's the only one currently available to us.

[BullyKing]

Curious, what’s the most we could have offered TJ after the Horford, Richardson, Harris moves?

Minimum contract because we had to renounce him to sign the people we did.

[kingofthecourt67]

Curious, what’s the most we could have offered TJ after the Horford, Richardson, Harris moves?

Minimum contract because we had to renounce him to sign the people we did.

Right but what's that come out to for him? It's around 1.5, right?

[BullyKing]

Curious, what’s the most we could have offered TJ after the Horford, Richardson, Harris moves?

Minimum contract because we had to renounce him to sign the people we did.

Right but what's that come out to for him? It's around 1.5, right?

I think actually a couple hundred thousand more but around that.

[Ben]

As one of the (self-anointed) leaders of the we need salary filler movement, I gotta disagree a little with your characterization. I don't think anyone was arguing that we should sign people to minimum contracts solely for the purpose of trading their salary. It was more in opposition to the idea that there is no need to sign anyone where they would provide that small benefit at worst.

It's also a little restrictive to look at just what Bolden and Korkmaz could bring back. The argument wasn't that you would always necessarily trade all of the minimum salary guys bundled together but more that it gives you extra trade flexibility, which is never a bad thing even if might not always end up meaning anything good either. Maybe we have the chance to trade Scott, Korkmaz, and Bolden for a player in the $10+ range that is more useful than Scott? Maybe Bolden, Korkmaz and lucky roster spot #15 go out for someone like Jae Crowder. We don't really know what will happen or whether that extra salary will be needed or not but having it there in case you do still seems like a better position than having unused roster spots for no purpose.

I wasn't thinking of you or anyone in particular, but just remembered reading here-- since at least the signing of Mike Scott-- that perhaps the rationale was not so much to pay the mediocre players that much money to play here, but to use their contracts later as trade filler. It certainly came up with Scott. As I've written here before, I don't mind Scott as deep-bench guy but I do as a 6th or 7th man who's paid $4.75M when better players wound up signing for significantly less. I thought, eh, if the plan is to use them as placeholders, that's not so bad. But I'm coming to suspect that the plan is to sign them to play them, and I have a hard time understanding the player selection.

In my long NBA fantime I've seen front offices prove to know a lot more than fans like me, and I've seen front offices prove to be just as short-sighted as they seemed at first glance. Hope like heck that the Sixers' 2019 summer bench moves will prove out in the first category.

[PhilasFinest]

not gonna lie, i expected more than koumadje and korkmaz with the 2 open spots. but whatever

Koumadje is an exhibit 10 contract....so he is not likely counting towards the 15 man roster and is essentially a lock to be a camp body and then headed to Delaware.

[BullyKing]

As one of the (self-anointed) leaders of the we need salary filler movement, I gotta disagree a little with your characterization. I don't think anyone was arguing that we should sign people to minimum contracts solely for the purpose of trading their salary. It was more in opposition to the idea that there is no need to sign anyone where they would provide that small benefit at worst.

It's also a little restrictive to look at just what Bolden and Korkmaz could bring back. The argument wasn't that you would always necessarily trade all of the minimum salary guys bundled together but more that it gives you extra trade flexibility, which is never a bad thing even if might not always end up meaning anything good either. Maybe we have the chance to trade Scott, Korkmaz, and Bolden for a player in the $10+ range that is more useful than Scott? Maybe Bolden, Korkmaz and lucky roster spot #15 go out for someone like Jae Crowder. We don't really know what will happen or whether that extra salary will be needed or not but having it there in case you do still seems like a better position than having unused roster spots for no purpose.

I wasn't thinking of you or anyone in particular, but just remembered reading here-- since at least the signing of Mike Scott-- that perhaps the rationale was not so much to pay the mediocre players that much money to play here, but to use their contracts later as trade filler. It certainly came up with Scott. As I've written here before, I don't mind Scott as deep-bench guy but I do as a 6th or 7th man who's paid $4.75M when better players wound up signing for significantly less. I thought, eh, if the plan is to use them as placeholders, that's not so bad. But I'm coming to suspect that the plan is to sign them to play them, and I have a hard time understanding the player selection.

In my long NBA fantime I've seen front offices prove to know a lot more than fans like me, and I've seen front offices prove to be just as short-sighted as they seemed at first glance. Hope like heck that the Sixers' 2019 summer bench moves will prove out in the first category.

I know you weren't talking about me specifically and I definitely agree with you on everything you said about Scott. When it became clear that we'd only be able to sign one bench player for more than the minimum, I did not think Scott was the right target for that. With Horford, Harris, and Simmons, backup PF just was a big enough need to use our one bench bullet on. And I agree with that when you're talking about your exceptions (room, MLE, whatever), your goal should be to get a player you think will be a useful rotation piece and not just salary filler.

[kriss73]

Read on Twitter

So Elton read realgm threads.

[Mik317]

Burke probably sucks ass but man dude was fun as **** to watch at Minnesota.

and IIRC I was legit butthurt when we drafted MCW over him. Which made that Utah fan trolling us all year extra weird for me lol.

but more than likely he either does not make the final squad or is just in TJ's old role.

[Sixerscan]

Burke probably sucks ass but man dude was fun as **** to watch at Minnesota.

and IIRC I was legit butthurt when we drafted MCW over him. Which made that Utah fan trolling us all year extra weird for me lol.

but more than likely he either does not make the final squad or is just in TJ's old role.

He was taken 9th MCW was 11th.

Pretty sure he'll make the team barring injury. He's put together some decent scoring years on bad teams. Fine way to round off the roster.

[youngcrev]

Finally!

(The Rock HAS come back...)

[agiaco]

Burke probably sucks ass but man dude was fun as **** to watch at Minnesota.

and IIRC I was legit butthurt when we drafted MCW over him. Which made that Utah fan trolling us all year extra weird for me lol.

but more than likely he either does not make the final squad or is just in TJ's old role.

I don't think sucks ass is quite fair enough for him. I was hoping we'd sign Burke. Finally a guard off the bench that can be a spark plug and create some offense. I think playing on a contender will minimize his weaknesses more too. Pretty thrilled with the way EB and co rounded out the roster.

[youngcrev]

Our backup PG spot feels a lot like our backup C spot last year. Hopefully something sticks to the wall this time.