jbk1234 wrote:KuruptedCav wrote:jbk1234 wrote:
I'd roll the dice on Sexton first, at half the salary, and we all know how I feel about that.
I want no part of LaVine on a max deal. His defense is awful, he has no interest in improving it, and he hasn't shown he can play within an offense where he's not the focal point.
He's, at least, one tier below a true max player. This isn't a rookie max either. It's a vet max. This is Tobias Harris territory and that might be optimistic.
Maybe, but LaVine is the optimistic case for Sexton (playmaking and volume shooting); so paying a premium to lock that in with Allen, Mobley, Garland seems reasonable.
I don’t buy the Harris comparison. 0x all-star Harris on a 5 year 30% max with 8.5% raises coming off a career year is always going to be worse than 2x all-star LaVine on a 4 year 30% max with 5% raises. And that’s before the positional premium.
Honestly don’t see the luxury tax as an impediment given Gilbert’s wealth & health.
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app
The impediment would be he'd be on a really bad contract that would prove difficult to trade if issues arose with Allen, Mobley, and Garland due to his *volume shooting.*
We were a very unselfish team for the first time in three years last year. Everyone ate. People were happy. Also, no one cares about Dan Gilbert's money. It's the opportunity cost that comes with overpaying players in a league that has a salary cap and luxury tax line.
jbk1234 wrote:KuruptedCav wrote:jbk1234 wrote:
I'd roll the dice on Sexton first, at half the salary, and we all know how I feel about that.
I want no part of LaVine on a max deal. His defense is awful, he has no interest in improving it, and he hasn't shown he can play within an offense where he's not the focal point.
He's, at least, one tier below a true max player. This isn't a rookie max either. It's a vet max. This is Tobias Harris territory and that might be optimistic.
Maybe, but LaVine is the optimistic case for Sexton (playmaking and volume shooting); so paying a premium to lock that in with Allen, Mobley, Garland seems reasonable.
I don’t buy the Harris comparison. 0x all-star Harris on a 5 year 30% max with 8.5% raises coming off a career year is always going to be worse than 2x all-star LaVine on a 4 year 30% max with 5% raises. And that’s before the positional premium.
Honestly don’t see the luxury tax as an impediment given Gilbert’s wealth & health.
Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app
The impediment would be he'd be on a really bad contract that would prove difficult to trade if issues arose with Allen, Mobley, and Garland due to his *volume shooting.*
We were a very unselfish team for the first time in three years last year. Everyone ate. People were happy. Also, no one cares about Dan Gilbert's money. It's the opportunity cost that comes with overpaying players in a league that has a salary cap and luxury tax line.
Since when is a max contract for an all star in his prime a bad deal?
LaVine's volume last year was a half a shot a game more than Garland's. Less than Ingram's or Brown's. His volume isn't a problem unless you literally don't want an offensive upgrade on the wing.