devilalum
Heavily Redacted
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2002
- Posts
- 16,776
- Reaction score
- 3,187
If the Suns are going to "Absorb" salary they should also give up less talent. But I don't think that's what GM Lebron has in mind.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
2016-17 Around the NBA
- Thread starter Ronin
- Start date
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
overseascardfan
ASFN Addict
Boy, it would be a disgrace if LeBron brokers a trade that fleeces PHX. IMO, PHX should offer Bledsoe only in a take it or leave it offer. CLE has no leverage, they get what they can for Irving or they go into the season with all this drama. That's even if PHX feels Irving is worth all the trouble.
devilalum
Heavily Redacted
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2002
- Posts
- 16,776
- Reaction score
- 3,187
Curious that Popovich isn't put off by Irving's defense.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JCSunsfan
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2002
- Posts
- 22,019
- Reaction score
- 6,442
That's a good offer.
JCSunsfan
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2002
- Posts
- 22,019
- Reaction score
- 6,442
The fact that Kyrie wants to play for Popovich is a good sign for him. It says he wants real coaching and a real system (or it could mean that he wants Kahwi to play D for him).
pokerface
ASFN Addict
- Joined
- May 20, 2004
- Posts
- 5,369
- Reaction score
- 807
If I were the Cavs I'd say screw it and make Irving stay just to get back in the finals again...Unless they think they can make something happen with Bledsoe and Chandler (which is possible). I don't mention Warren because part of me thinks giving up TJ is too much considering Irving is a two year rental. But TJ is expendable... Jackson and Bender could fill that slot.
JCSunsfan
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2002
- Posts
- 22,019
- Reaction score
- 6,442
Seems to me that McD knows exactly what Kyrie is worth to him, and is unwilling to go above that value in a trade offer. Good for him.
Not really. Dragic is 31 now and on a max deal.
Last edited:
elindholm
edited for content
"Max" doesn't really mean anything anymore. Dragic might have signed for the maximum allowable about at the time that he signed it, but the $17 million he'll make next season is small potatoes, relatively speaking.
Point was that he will be on the decline and won't match his worth. Not what you want to be trading for.
Fivethirtyeight has his WAR estimate almost cut in half (was 4.8) at 2.9. Then it is 2. Then it is 1.3.
This is just based on how players who play his position and style decline. In that same time frame his contract value falls to 11 million and then to 7.7 million. In two years you are talking replacement level player.
So offering a declining player who's contract will be literally double of what he is worth isn't a good trade. If Cleveland takes it, they need to fire their analytics team.
Oh and Winslow is awful. Negative win shares, 8 PER. 35% shooter with a EFG of 37%.
He makes your team worse.
He makes your team worse.
devilalum
Heavily Redacted
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2002
- Posts
- 16,776
- Reaction score
- 3,187
Sounds like even a Bled/Warren package trumps that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
elindholm
edited for content
But salary inflation is so extreme that it's impossible to assess the production/cost balance even two years into the future.
I like Nate Silver and his team, but they have not established a track record for accurately predicting what an NBA player will do three seasons down the road.
The Cavaliers have one year before James leaves. The value they'd get out of Dragic in 2019-20 is utterly irrelevant.
Dragic is one of the most controversial players on this board, but one thing I think we can agree on is that his value fluctuates a lot and seems unusually dependent on his overall team circumstances. Whether he'd be a good fit with James is unknown, but leaving the call up to a renegade band of stat geeks wouldn't make a whole lot of basketball sense.
Besides, you have to consider the alternative. It doesn't look like they can go forward with Irving, so they have to do something.
devilalum
Heavily Redacted
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2002
- Posts
- 16,776
- Reaction score
- 3,187
One huge advantage Kyrie has over Bled is his ability to finish at the rim. I get so frustrated with guards that get to the rim but can't finish when they get there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Eric - Saying you have to get "Something" for Kyrie is correct. 26 teams have reached out about Kyrie Irving. Miami's offer is going to be one of the worst. They can't even add draft picks because we have them.
Devilalum, here is Kyrie versus Bledsoe
Big thing is that Kyrie is 2 years from his peak time. Bledsoe is entering it now. So Kyrie will continue to grow while Bledsoe levels off for the next 3 years.
PER
Kyrie 23.09
Bledsoe 20.56
TS %
Kyrie .580
Bledsoe .563
Assist Ratio
Kyrie 19.3
Bledsoe 22.3
Turnover Ratio
Kyrie 8.3
Bledsoe 11.9
Rebound Rate
Kyrie 5.0
Bledsoe 8.0
Value Added
Kyrie 455.6
Bledsoe 310.5
Wins Added
Kyrie 15
Bledsoe 10
Kyrie is so dominant over Bledsoe that you can literally add Warren's Value Add and Wins Add of 157 and 5.2 and now you get the impact that Kyrie has on the court.
And he is going to get better.
Devilalum, here is Kyrie versus Bledsoe
Big thing is that Kyrie is 2 years from his peak time. Bledsoe is entering it now. So Kyrie will continue to grow while Bledsoe levels off for the next 3 years.
PER
Kyrie 23.09
Bledsoe 20.56
TS %
Kyrie .580
Bledsoe .563
Assist Ratio
Kyrie 19.3
Bledsoe 22.3
Turnover Ratio
Kyrie 8.3
Bledsoe 11.9
Rebound Rate
Kyrie 5.0
Bledsoe 8.0
Value Added
Kyrie 455.6
Bledsoe 310.5
Wins Added
Kyrie 15
Bledsoe 10
Kyrie is so dominant over Bledsoe that you can literally add Warren's Value Add and Wins Add of 157 and 5.2 and now you get the impact that Kyrie has on the court.
And he is going to get better.
Let me just say Salary Inflation isn't extreme. That statement is incorrect. Money is declining, not increasing.
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/20143724/nba-nuclear-winter-forecasted-free-agents-summer-2018
Yes there have been large deals handed up the but the majority of the deals are smaller.
Derrick Rose signed a 2.1 million dollar deal with Cleveland and his PER last year was 2 lower than Dragic. Dragic is going to decline though in the next two years while Rose likely stays the same.
So what is the motivation for Cleveland to take Dragic?
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/20143724/nba-nuclear-winter-forecasted-free-agents-summer-2018
Yes there have been large deals handed up the but the majority of the deals are smaller.
Derrick Rose signed a 2.1 million dollar deal with Cleveland and his PER last year was 2 lower than Dragic. Dragic is going to decline though in the next two years while Rose likely stays the same.
So what is the motivation for Cleveland to take Dragic?
elindholm
edited for content
You should work for the White House.
The article you linked is about anticipated free-agent dollars, not overall salaries. (And it's speculation anyway.) The salary cap goes up every year. Team payrolls go up every year. The minimum salary goes up every year. The salary-cap exemptions go up every year. Almost every player on a multi-year contract has a salary that increases every year.
Two projections I could find for the 2017-18 average salary were $7.8 million (http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q31) and $8.5 million (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ary-grows-to-8-5-million-under-new-labor-deal), either of which would be a record high.
Yes, that has always been the case. The trend is that the larger deals are getting larger and that the smaller deals are also getting larger.
And how much would the same level contract have been last year? How much will it be next year?
They'd have to believe in his value on the court. I don't know whether they do or not.
OP
OP
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
OP
OP
Shams Charania @ShamsCharania
Free agent guard Ramon Sessions is finalizing a one-year deal with the New York Knicks, league sources tell The Vertical.
Free agent guard Ramon Sessions is finalizing a one-year deal with the New York Knicks, league sources tell The Vertical.
Here, I will do it for you
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/...-projection-expected-to-be-set-at-99-million/
The NBA projects it's cap based on revenue. This last year it went 3 million shorter than expected. So yes the cap went up but it went up 33% less than anticipated.
And it is expected to have an even smaller increase next year.
2 years ago, the NBA thought that revenues would spike far more than they have so many teams overspent on free agents.
The idea being that everyone would be making over 10 million a year so signing someone to a big deal would look like a value in 3 years. That simply isn't the reality now.
Thus, you have limited cap space that you can't tie heavy portions into declining players.
This is simple economics Eric. Why you want to argue about it is beyond me.
Dragic is a depreciating asset tied to a fixed number. The larger that depreciation, the less his value in relation to any transaction.
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/...-projection-expected-to-be-set-at-99-million/
The NBA projects it's cap based on revenue. This last year it went 3 million shorter than expected. So yes the cap went up but it went up 33% less than anticipated.
And it is expected to have an even smaller increase next year.
2 years ago, the NBA thought that revenues would spike far more than they have so many teams overspent on free agents.
The idea being that everyone would be making over 10 million a year so signing someone to a big deal would look like a value in 3 years. That simply isn't the reality now.
Thus, you have limited cap space that you can't tie heavy portions into declining players.
This is simple economics Eric. Why you want to argue about it is beyond me.
Dragic is a depreciating asset tied to a fixed number. The larger that depreciation, the less his value in relation to any transaction.
elindholm
edited for content
Come on, man. This is some guy making up a story in order to have something to say. Yes, the salary cap went down. That means two things: maximum deals will be a little smaller, and teams who are under the cap and pursuing free-agents have a little less money to work with. The rest of the "article's" rhetoric about teams wanting to shed dead weight has always been true, and has nothing to do with the revised cap number.
Yes, it went up less than some early projection. So what? It still went up 5% over the 2016-17 figure of $94 million. That's very likely to outpace inflation, which was 1.6% (annualized) in June and has not been as high as 3.0% in any month since 2011.
The first projection for the 2018-19 increase was $108 million from $102 million, which is 6%. Even if it now goes up from $99 mlllion to "only" something like $104 million -- which would be $4 million short of the projection -- that would be 5%.
The cap rose from $70 million in 2015-16 to $99 million now. That's 41%. The projection had instead been a 46% increase over two years. That's "far more"?
If someone told you that you'd be making 46% more money two years from now, and so you started spending more freely, and then it turned out you were making only 41% more instead, would this be a big problem?
And by the way, the first projection for last year (2016-17) was $89 million, but the actual number came in at $92 million. https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...-salary-cap-higher-than-projections/83095482/ So an error of a few million one way or the other isn't big news.
If we approximate that salaries are scaled to the cap, then a 3% difference in the cap would mean that a salary of $10 million in the "high cap" scenario becomes instead $9.7 million in the "low cap" scenario. Does that look like a big difference to you?
Which has always been true.
It's even simpler than simple economics. It's simple arithmetic. You're getting conned by people trying to make a story out of nothing.
Yes, but as I've said before, his value to the Cavaliers in 2019-20 is irrelevant.
Cleveland is going to be paying something like $70 million in luxury tax this year. Talk about a depreciating asset! Do you really think they care whether Dragic's true value in 2019-20 is only $12 million instead of the $19 million he'll be paid?
A companies budget is based on projected revenue and growth. If you are off projecting your budget by 3%, it is a big deal. It doesn't matter you made more money because you spent beyond your projections.
And to make it worse, you have increases built in next year as well based on your incorrect budget so that budget deficit will only grow.
This lack of understanding budget versus spend is amazing to me. You also have stubbornly backed yourself into this idea that Cleveland is going to trade a 24 year old all star for a player on the decline with the goal of one year and then not care about their return after that (and 37 million dollars said declining player is still owed)
I guess they could be a stupid as you are suggesting but that goes against everything reported so far.
Do you buy cars like this?
Yeah give me that car with 150,000 miles out of it. I know I will owe on it for 2 more years but as long as I get one good drive across country out of it I am good.
And to make it worse, you have increases built in next year as well based on your incorrect budget so that budget deficit will only grow.
This lack of understanding budget versus spend is amazing to me. You also have stubbornly backed yourself into this idea that Cleveland is going to trade a 24 year old all star for a player on the decline with the goal of one year and then not care about their return after that (and 37 million dollars said declining player is still owed)
I guess they could be a stupid as you are suggesting but that goes against everything reported so far.
Do you buy cars like this?
Yeah give me that car with 150,000 miles out of it. I know I will owe on it for 2 more years but as long as I get one good drive across country out of it I am good.
elindholm
edited for content
Well, if the success of your company depends on your ability to project to an accuracy of 3% two years down the road, you're in trouble. There are way too many variables.
How much is Cleveland going to spend on coaching? Front-office personnel? What will they get from local TV rights, or sponsorships, or concessions sales?
Or, ah, here's a good one: What will they earn from a deep playoff run, and the possible increased value of a championship? Does the right Irving trade make a deep playoff run more likely?
This is an organization that is prepared to spend $70+ million next season on nothing! A difference of $3 million in the cap is trivial.
I haven't done any such thing. I've said that it would depend on whether they believe in his on-court value for this season. I also said -- maybe you missed it -- that I don't know whether they do or not.
Dragic doesn't have 150,000 miles on him. But let's refine your scenario:
My car isn't working. I really want to get across the country and my options are limited. There's an opportunity on the other side of the country that may never be there again, and it's important to me. I can buy a car that I know is overpriced, but I can take a loan with a favorable interest rate, and this is the car that gives me the best chance to get across the country, right now, to pursue this priceless opportunity.
You're damn right I buy that car.
Your options aren't limited though. Well reported at least 20 cars are for sale.
elindholm
edited for content
I read somewhere -- but now I can't find it -- that six teams, including Phoenix, have gotten to the point of making offers. So, yes, it's highly likely that a Dragic package won't be the high bid, unless Cleveland values Dragic more than most of this board does. But Dragic's future salary will be a minor consideration.
Similar threads
