2016-17 Around the NBA

[devilalum]

We can easily beat that offer with Bledsoe and one of Warren/Chriss/Bender. Plus Miami can't include a pick until 2023 because we own them. Also we have the ability to absorb salary, something that I don't think any other team pursuing Kyrie has.

I think my absolute max offer would be Bledsoe Warren and our 2018 top 5 protected pick that if not conveyed next year turns to the 2018 and 2021 Miami picks.

If they want us to take on salary then we start removing assets from the offer.

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

 

[overseascardfan]

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]

Curious that Popovich isn't put off by Irving's defense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JCSunsfan]

Suns Wire‏@sunssource 18m18 minutes ago
#NBA Wire: Report: MIA offers Dragic & Winslow for Kyrie - Goran Dragic | MIA http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nba/1538/goran-dragic… http://playerpress.com

That's a good offer.

 

[JCSunsfan]

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]

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.

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]

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.

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.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

That's a good offer.

Not really. Dragic is 31 now and on a max deal.

 

[elindholm]

Not really. Dragic is 30 now and on a max deal.

"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.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

"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.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Oh and Winslow is awful. Negative win shares, 8 PER. 35% shooter with a EFG of 37%.

He makes your team worse.

 

[devilalum]

Oh and Winslow is awful. Negative win shares, 8 PER. 35% shooter with a EFG of 37%.

He makes your team worse.

Sounds like even a Bled/Warren package trumps that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elindholm]

Point was that he will be on the decline and won't match his worth. Not what you want to be trading for.

But salary inflation is so extreme that it's impossible to assess the production/cost balance even two years into the future.

Fivethirtyeight has his WAR estimate almost cut in half (was 4.8) at 2.9. Then it is 2. Then it is 1.3.

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.

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.

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]

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

 

[Chris_Sanders]

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.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

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?

 

[elindholm]

Let me just say Salary Inflation isn't extreme. That statement is incorrect. Money is declining, not increasing.

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 there have been large deals handed up the but the majority of the deals are smaller.

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.

Derrick Rose signed a 2.1 million dollar deal with Cleveland

And how much would the same level contract have been last year? How much will it be next year?

So what is the motivation for Cleveland to take Dragic?

They'd have to believe in his value on the court. I don't know whether they do or not.

 

[Ronin]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Ronin]

Shams Charania @ShamsCharania

Free agent guard Ramon Sessions is finalizing a one-year deal with the New York Knicks, league sources tell The Vertical.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

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.

 

[elindholm]

Here, I will do it for you

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/...-projection-expected-to-be-set-at-99-million/

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.

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.

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.

And it is expected to have an even smaller increase next year.

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%.

2 years ago, the NBA thought that revenues would spike far more than they have so many teams overspent on free agents.

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.

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.

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?

Thus, you have limited cap space that you can't tie heavy portions into declining players.

Which has always been true.

This is simple economics Eric. Why you want to argue about it is beyond me.

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.

Dragic is a depreciating asset tied to a fixed number. The larger that depreciation, the less his value in relation to any transaction.

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?

 

[Chris_Sanders]

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.

 

[elindholm]

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Your options aren't limited though. Well reported at least 20 cars are for sale.

 

[elindholm]

Your options aren't limited though. Well reported at least 20 cars are for sale.

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.