2024-25 NBA Thread: posters rush in to make final bad Bronny takes before thread locks (1 Viewer)

[Juxtatarot]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I think Brooklyn will still be the only team below th cap next summer

No, there might be a handful. Bulls, for instance will be $73 million under less what Giddey re-signs for. Depends on future trades, of course.

 

[identikit]

'Bad Bronny' sounds redundant

 

[Juxtatarot]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

 

[Navin Johnson]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

He just turned $45m over 2 years from GS.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

He just turned $45m over 2 years from GS.

But with a team option on the second year.

 

[Navin Johnson]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

He just turned $45m over 2 years from GS.

But with a team option on the second year.

The Warriors will match any offer sheet. WHat the Warriors will pay him isn't the point of contention.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

He just turned $45m over 2 years from GS.

But with a team option on the second year.

The Warriors will match any offer sheet. WHat the Warriors will pay him isn't the point of contention.

To Kuminga it is. He would certainly prefer to be paid more this year without locking him into a second year.

 

[thecatch]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

A 2+1 at the MLE would be worth a max of like $42 million. If he takes the Warriors current offer (2/45), he's making more than half that next year alone with the possibility to make more over 2 years under the Warriors' offer than that 3 year MLE deal. The Warriors would be thrilled to match that because that's like $8 million less for next year than they've already offered him and he's a better trade chip at that price.

If he takes the QO, he gets a no trade clause so the Warriors are screwed - the only reason they want to sign him at all is to keep a trade asset, and they'll have to roster a deeply unhappy player all year. It costs Kuminga ~$15 million in the short run but he'll be able to find a team that values him and probably will make up that difference in salary over the long term, though we've obviously seen that backfire. But Mikal Bridges is getting $38 million a year, someone will pay Kuminga. We've seen even capped teams get creative with sign and trade deals that don't require the team the FA is leaving to take on a bunch of bad salary back, so I think the Warriors would have to end up playing ball there so they get at least a minor asset back at that point.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

A 2+1 at the MLE would be worth a max of like $42 million. If he takes the Warriors current offer (2/45), he's making more than half that next year alone with the possibility to make more over 2 years under the Warriors' offer than that 3 year MLE deal. The Warriors would be thrilled to match that because that's like $8 million less for next year than they've already offered him and he's a better trade chip at that price.

If he takes the QO, he gets a no trade clause so the Warriors are screwed - the only reason they want to sign him at all is to keep a trade asset, and they'll have to roster a deeply unhappy player all year. It costs Kuminga ~$15 million in the short run but he'll be able to find a team that values him and probably will make up that difference in salary over the long term, though we've obviously seen that backfire. But Mikal Bridges is getting $38 million a year, someone will pay Kuminga. We've seen even capped teams get creative with sign and trade deals that don't require the team the FA is leaving to take on a bunch of bad salary back, so I think the Warriors would have to end up playing ball there so they get at least a minor asset back at that point.

I’m thinking of an MLE deal of two years total (second year being a player option). Not 2 guaranteed and a third year option. Apparently this would be permissible. At least, ChatGPT says so.

 

[thecatch]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

A 2+1 at the MLE would be worth a max of like $42 million. If he takes the Warriors current offer (2/45), he's making more than half that next year alone with the possibility to make more over 2 years under the Warriors' offer than that 3 year MLE deal. The Warriors would be thrilled to match that because that's like $8 million less for next year than they've already offered him and he's a better trade chip at that price.

If he takes the QO, he gets a no trade clause so the Warriors are screwed - the only reason they want to sign him at all is to keep a trade asset, and they'll have to roster a deeply unhappy player all year. It costs Kuminga ~$15 million in the short run but he'll be able to find a team that values him and probably will make up that difference in salary over the long term, though we've obviously seen that backfire. But Mikal Bridges is getting $38 million a year, someone will pay Kuminga. We've seen even capped teams get creative with sign and trade deals that don't require the team the FA is leaving to take on a bunch of bad salary back, so I think the Warriors would have to end up playing ball there so they get at least a minor asset back at that point.

I’m thinking of an MLE deal of two years total (second year being a player option). Not 2 guaranteed and a third year option. Apparently this would be permissible. At least, ChatGPT says so.

Ah I see. I could have sworn I heard someone talk about there being some minimum number of years on an MLE (beyond 1) but in the 10 minutes I (unfortunately) spent on this I couldn't find any reference to that rule, and I didn't see anything in the CBA itself on a quick skim other than a reference to the maximum being 4 years.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

A 2+1 at the MLE would be worth a max of like $42 million. If he takes the Warriors current offer (2/45), he's making more than half that next year alone with the possibility to make more over 2 years under the Warriors' offer than that 3 year MLE deal. The Warriors would be thrilled to match that because that's like $8 million less for next year than they've already offered him and he's a better trade chip at that price.

If he takes the QO, he gets a no trade clause so the Warriors are screwed - the only reason they want to sign him at all is to keep a trade asset, and they'll have to roster a deeply unhappy player all year. It costs Kuminga ~$15 million in the short run but he'll be able to find a team that values him and probably will make up that difference in salary over the long term, though we've obviously seen that backfire. But Mikal Bridges is getting $38 million a year, someone will pay Kuminga. We've seen even capped teams get creative with sign and trade deals that don't require the team the FA is leaving to take on a bunch of bad salary back, so I think the Warriors would have to end up playing ball there so they get at least a minor asset back at that point.

I’m thinking of an MLE deal of two years total (second year being a player option). Not 2 guaranteed and a third year option. Apparently this would be permissible. At least, ChatGPT says so.

Ah I see. I could have sworn I heard someone talk about there being some minimum number of years on an MLE (beyond 1) but in the 10 minutes I (unfortunately) spent on this I couldn't find any reference to that rule, and I didn't see anything in the CBA itself on a quick skim other than a reference to the maximum being 4 years.

I had time to kill....

If you look at Larry Coon's Q&A there is a chart called "Summary of Salary Tax Exemptions" that actually lists the minimum as only a single year. It used to be two but was changed in the last CBA apparently. (I originally trusted ChatGPT but it admitted being wrong to me -- shouldn't be surprising.) So, actually, I think another team could offer > $7.9 million on a one year (or, still, a 2 year with the 2nd year being a player option) and make the Warriors match.

This is all a small thing but it seems like something another team should step in and do if it were to come to this.

 

[Yo Mama]

Luke signed his extension today - 3 year $165m, with the third year a player option.

Crazy to see the numbers for the extension he’s eligible for if/when he opts out of that third year (28/29) - 5 years at $417m. Last year of that deal will be in the $90s.

 

[Frostillicus]

Luke signed his extension today - 3 year $165m, with the third year a player option.

Crazy to see the numbers for the extension he’s eligible for if/when he opts out of that third year (28/29) - 5 years at $417m. Last year of that deal will be in the $90s.

Garza?

 

[Yo Mama]

Luke signed his extension today - 3 year $165m, with the third year a player option.

Crazy to see the numbers for the extension he’s eligible for if/when he opts out of that third year (28/29) - 5 years at $417m. Last year of that deal will be in the $90s.

Garza?

I wish

 

[Capella]

Luke signed his extension today - 3 year $165m, with the third year a player option.

Crazy to see the numbers for the extension he’s eligible for if/when he opts out of that third year (28/29) - 5 years at $417m. Last year of that deal will be in the $90s.

This is like the money Booker got for 2 years lol.

 

[identikit]

So this was extra funny to me, in a relieving sort of way:

https://x.com/BricksCenter/status/1951371149461561791

 

[Juxtatarot]

Luke signed his extension today - 3 year $165m, with the third year a player option.

Crazy to see the numbers for the extension he’s eligible for if/when he opts out of that third year (28/29) - 5 years at $417m. Last year of that deal will be in the $90s.

Garza?

Ridnour.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Luke signed his extension today - 3 year $165m, with the third year a player option.

Crazy to see the numbers for the extension he’s eligible for if/when he opts out of that third year (28/29) - 5 years at $417m. Last year of that deal will be in the $90s.

Garza?

Ridnour.

Brasi

 

[Navin Johnson]

Warriors are offering Kuminga 2/45 with the second year non guaranteed. Which suggests that they agree with me that he’s not that good. On the other hand, they are apparently offended by the Kings’ sign and trade offer of Monk and a lottery protected first because they think he’s a future all star. Seems like they need to pick a lane. (IMO the Kings offer is an overpay).

Warriors think he isn’t a good fit with Curry, Butler and Green. That’s probably true. However, it’s painfully obvious no team is going to meet their asking price.

All four of the remaining RFAs are kind of screwed. It will be interesting to see if any take the QO.

The Warriors are almost equally screwed if Kuminga takes the QO so that's a real interesting situation.

I was thinking about Kuminga taking the QO more. It’s only $7.9 million. There are teams that have the MLE still. Wouldn’t it make more sense for another team to sign him with that? I believe it would have to be 2 years but could have a player option. Warriors would match but at least the other team would be forcing the Warriors to pay more.

He just turned $45m over 2 years from GS.

But with a team option on the second year.

The Warriors will match any offer sheet. WHat the Warriors will pay him isn't the point of contention.

To Kuminga it is. He would certainly prefer to be paid more this year without locking him into a second year.

they have already offered him $150m over 5. Money is obviously not his primary motivator

 

[Juxtatarot]

@Navin Johnson Was that a rumored extension offer last season? I think I read something about that. It's obviously not on the table now. I do agree that Kuminga is looking for a different role than he has with the Warriors and would like to be elsewhere. However, if a sign-and-trade doesn't happen, he's stuck. If he is going to return to the Warriors regardless, he is better off getting more money without committing to a multi-year contract than less money.

 

[Navin Johnson]

@Navin Johnson Was that a rumored extension offer last season? I think I read something about that. It's obviously not on the table now. I do agree that Kuminga is looking for a different role than he has with the Warriors and would like to be elsewhere. However, if a sign-and-trade doesn't happen, he's stuck. If he is going to return to the Warriors regardless, he is better off getting more money without committing to a multi-year contract than less money.

Yes. He turned it down and GS decided to table talks until the off season. Obviously, he would like to be somewhere where he sees the floor more, but nobody has any cap space to put on an offer sheet and GS would likely match anyway to deal him later. Either way, sign and trade isthe only way he gets moved before the season starts. Apparently SAC increased their offer to Monk and a protected first which GS turned down

 

[the moops]

Wait Kuminga turned down a 5/150 contract? If true, he should find a new agent. My god.

 

[thecatch]

Wait Kuminga turned down a 5/150 contract? If true, he should find a new agent. My god.

It was last year but your point stands.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Forget SAC-Kuminga talks.

I just want to see them sign Russ and we get Russ-Lavine-Derozan-Sabonis

Then try to offset that cluster with signing Ben Simmons



It'd be almost impossible to **** up a franchise as much as the Kings have the last year+

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Wait Kuminga turned down a 5/150 contract? If true, he should find a new agent. My god.

That would have been a brutal contract for GS.

 

[msudaisy26]

Wait Kuminga turned down a 5/150 contract? If true, he should find a new agent. My god.

I see it both ways. Kuminga hates playing for the Warriors. He is betting on himself and knows he is still going to be making good money. Would he rather make 100ish million over the next 5 years and be happy where he is playing or 150 million and hate it.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

@Navin Johnson Was that a rumored extension offer last season? I think I read something about that. It's obviously not on the table now. I do agree that Kuminga is looking for a different role than he has with the Warriors and would like to be elsewhere. However, if a sign-and-trade doesn't happen, he's stuck. If he is going to return to the Warriors regardless, he is better off getting more money without committing to a multi-year contract than less money.

Yes. He turned it down and GS decided to table talks until the off season. Obviously, he would like to be somewhere where he sees the floor more, but nobody has any cap space to put on an offer sheet and GS would likely match anyway to deal him later. Either way, sign and trade isthe only way he gets moved before the season starts. Apparently SAC increased their offer to Monk and a protected first which GS turned down

I don’t know if the 5/150 was confirmed. I believe slater said there was a contract offered around $30 mill/year, but it is unclear how close it was to 30 or for how long

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Anthony Slater: Part of the reason that the Warriors were hesitant to extend Jonathan Kuminga last summer. And while numbers were discussed and I think Jalen Johnson getting 5 years for 150 million gave a target that that you know obviously Kuminga and their their you know his representation they had ambitious thoughts about what it could be. I'm of the belief and I've been told that they would have taken five years for 150 million if it was ever on the table. It wasn't on the table.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtu.be

 

[thecatch]

At the risk of being accused of having some anti-Fox bias, that extension is going to age really poorly and probably sooner than people think.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Was just going to post early this AM it's going to be interesting with Fox-SA extension talks. Now news they've agreed to 4-229 max extension.

Don't think he's a max player. I could have seen the Kings giving it as the unquestioned face of their franchise and only thing of any value. Definitely don't think the Spurs should have with ROY, budding star Castle and landing Harper.

 

[thecatch]

Was just going to post early this AM it's going to be interesting with Fox-SA extension talks. Now news they've agreed to 4-229 max extension.

Don't think he's a max player. I could have seen the Kings giving it as the unquestioned face of their franchise and only thing of any value. Definitely don't think the Spurs should have with ROY, budding star Castle ROY and landing Harper.

The Spurs' upside is that Wemby becomes the best player in the league and the sky is the limit. The equally realistic downside is that Wemby continues to get hurt and miss a lot of time, and Fox and Castle get exposed as overrated, and who knows what they have in Harper. Fox is going to be difficult to move off of in that scenario now.

Fox was terrible playing with another ball-dominant guard in Haliburton, even though Hali is very unselfish. I think he's going to be a mess with Harper and Castle.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Was just going to post early this AM it's going to be interesting with Fox-SA extension talks. Now news they've agreed to 4-229 max extension.

Don't think he's a max player. I could have seen the Kings giving it as the unquestioned face of their franchise and only thing of any value. Definitely don't think the Spurs should have with ROY, budding star Castle and landing Harper.

Due to how the season (and lottery) played out, they should regret trading for him. Now they’ve doubled down on a mistake.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Was just going to post early this AM it's going to be interesting with Fox-SA extension talks. Now news they've agreed to 4-229 max extension.

Don't think he's a max player. I could have seen the Kings giving it as the unquestioned face of their franchise and only thing of any value. Definitely don't think the Spurs should have with ROY, budding star Castle and landing Harper.

Were the Bulls the winners of that 3-way trade?

 

[msudaisy26]

Was just going to post early this AM it's going to be interesting with Fox-SA extension talks. Now news they've agreed to 4-229 max extension.

Don't think he's a max player. I could have seen the Kings giving it as the unquestioned face of their franchise and only thing of any value. Definitely don't think the Spurs should have with ROY, budding star Castle and landing Harper.

Were the Bulls the winners of that 3-way trade?

Easy now. Last time the Bulls made a big trade everyone claimed the Bulls dominated the trade it was Jimmy Butler and since that trade they have made the playoffs once and won a game. That was 8 years ago.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Was just going to post early this AM it's going to be interesting with Fox-SA extension talks. Now news they've agreed to 4-229 max extension.

Don't think he's a max player. I could have seen the Kings giving it as the unquestioned face of their franchise and only thing of any value. Definitely don't think the Spurs should have with ROY, budding star Castle and landing Harper.

Were the Bulls the winners of that 3-way trade?

Easy now. Last time the Bulls made a big trade everyone claimed the Bulls dominated the trade it was Jimmy Butler and since that trade they have made the playoffs once and won a game. That was 8 years ago.

Ergo, you should let me have my small victories.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Was just going to post early this AM it's going to be interesting with Fox-SA extension talks. Now news they've agreed to 4-229 max extension.

Don't think he's a max player. I could have seen the Kings giving it as the unquestioned face of their franchise and only thing of any value. Definitely don't think the Spurs should have with ROY, budding star Castle and landing Harper.

Were the Bulls the winners of that 3-way trade?

No doubt after spending the better part of 2 years trying to deal Lavine and his absurd deal. And getting their own pick back in the process.

 

[Kev4029]

Was just going to post early this AM it's going to be interesting with Fox-SA extension talks. Now news they've agreed to 4-229 max extension.

Don't think he's a max player. I could have seen the Kings giving it as the unquestioned face of their franchise and only thing of any value. Definitely don't think the Spurs should have with ROY, budding star Castle and landing Harper.

Due to how the season (and lottery) played out, they should regret trading for him. Now they’ve doubled down on a mistake.

I think this might immediately might be the worst contract in the NBA, non-76ers edition. I suspect this was agreed to before he was traded though.

Some back contracts in no particular order (other than the Sixers dudes up top).

• Joel Embiid (thru age 34) - 4/243 remaining. This could become the worst contract of all time.
• Paul George (37) - 3/162 - I believe he will bounce back to AS/near-AS level but he is the 13th highest paid player in the league this year.
• Jerami Grant (33) - 3/103 - Huge contract for a sixth man type.
• Jamal Murray (31) - 4/208 - Him and Fox are basically on the same contract, Murray's is just one year less. I think I would prefer Murray and he'll age better.
• Devin Booker (33) - 5/304 - I think they could trade him for positive value at the trade deadline but maybe not in a couple seasons.
• KAT (32) - 3/171 - I still find him to be possibly the most overrated player of all time. Or at least this side of Isiah Thomas (at least Thomas was a winner).
• Brandon Ingram (30) - 3/120 - I just don't like his fit with a good NBA team.
• Immanuel Quickley (29) - 4/130 - It was an overpay before last season and he played 33 games...
• Jakob Poeltl (34) - 5/123 - One of the most non-sensical extensions I can remember.
• Dejounte Murray (31) - 3/94 - not worth this contract plus he is likely out for this season.
• Jrue Holiday (37) - 3/104 - Him and Grant at ~35m a year to be maybe starters/maybe bench guys is really a waste of financial resources.
• Gobert (35) - 3/110 - Still a great defender, if a tier down from what he was, but an increasingly worse offensive player.
• Bam Adebayo (31) - 4/198 - Efficiency, rebounding, and defense have all be on the decline for a couple seasons and really dropped last year.
• Some others to keep an eye on:
  • Whatever Anthony Davis is going to get in an extension from the Mavs.
  • Alex Caruso (4/81) as he moves into his mid 30s might not be a rotation player.
  • Patrick Williams 4/72 is probably the worst contract for a guy that doesn't deserve a rotation spot but the Bulls are irrelevant so it doesn't matter.
  • JJJ 5/240 lots of money for a player that can't play 30 mpg and is out for an undetermined mount of time.
  • Jaylen Brown 4/236 - Lots of risk for a player with an iffy jumper as he passes his peak.
  • Jayson Tatum 5/314 - biggest contract ever.... hopefully he can make a Durant-style return in 26-27 or he may shoot towards the top of the list.
  • Lauri Markkanen 4/196 - He averaged 19/6/2 last year while shooting 42% from the field and 35% from 3... not great.

 

[dutch]

• Devin Booker (33) - 5/304 - I think they could trade him for positive value at the trade deadline but maybe not in a couple seasons.

I shoulda taught my son basketball, some of these number are insane. But this one really stands out, is Booker really avg. 60 mil per year?!? Good for him but I think I'm gonna puke.

 

[dutch]

Jeehousafat! Just saw Tatum's deal. Eeesh! Can't make that pouring concrete or installing hvac.

 

[Kev4029]

Jeehousafat! Just saw Tatum's deal. Eeesh! Can't make that pouring concrete or installing hvac.

Just imagine how much money the owners are making, while often being incompetent business people. Most recently, the Lakers were sold for a $10 billion valuation - 51% of that went to the Buss family who still retain 15% ownership after the sale (20% was already owned by Mark Walter who bought the team, 14% of the team was owned by other investors). Jerry Buss bought the team in 1979 for $16m (the total sale was for $67.5m, but included the Forum, the LA Kings, and other real estate). Forbes estimates (or maybe they have this for real?) that they had an EBITA of $199M last year. So they made 15% a year on their investment PLUS made 100s of millions (billions?) along the way.

Being a pro athlete is amazing, but being a successful slum lord is way cooler.

 

[Capella]

I’m sorry but that kind of money for Fox is insane. He’s not an all-nba kind of player. Ironically that’s a move you’d think the Kings would make.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Phoenix rid of Beal only to give Booker a couple of $70m/yr seasons when he's like 48.

No controlled draft capital + middle aged Booker

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Aren't the "bad contracts" all relative though, so long as the cap continues to increase? The max contracts and how they are calculated and structured just makes things look crazy and the player are making generational money, but compared to the revenue of the NBA and the cap etc., the "bad" deals are really the ones being given to overly aged vets, but the service time and max contract concept make that a necessary evil. And with the stretch and buyout and Houston rules, can't those deals be mitigated due to injury or being 40 years old?

 

[thecatch]

Aren't the "bad contracts" all relative though, so long as the cap continues to increase? The max contracts and how they are calculated and structured just makes things look crazy and the player are making generational money, but compared to the revenue of the NBA and the cap etc., the "bad" deals are really the ones being given to overly aged vets, but the service time and max contract concept make that a necessary evil. And with the stretch and buyout and Houston rules, can't those deals be mitigated due to injury or being 40 years old?

Not sure what you are trying to say, here, exactly - the fact you can buy somebody out or stretch their contract doesn't help the situation that much, those are pretty costly ways to deal with the situation. With the cap only going up 10% recently, the contractual raises built into these deals are almost keeping up with cap inflation.

Slight tangent, but I heard on a podcast this week (Hollinger, maybe?) that players are really only taking home about 90% of their contracted for salary due to the CBA. Players are guaranteed a certain amount of basketball related income, but the value of all the player contracts in the league has actually been exceeding that. So part of every player's contract goes into escrow throughout the year, and the teams keep the escrowed amount if necessary to maintain the negotiated split in total BRI.

 

[the moops]

I think this might immediately might be the worst contract in the NBA, non-76ers edition.

No chance

 

[msudaisy26]

Phoenix rid of Beal only to give Booker a couple of $70m/yr seasons when he's like 48.

No controlled draft capital + middle aged Booker

He will be 33 when the contract ends. It shouldn't be that bad.

 

[Mister CIA]

Spurs are fine. Sure it's an overpay for Fox, but I'm sure this deal was basically agreed to back in February when the Spurs acquired Fox for pennies on the dollar. We still have two years of Wemby on a rookie deal, Castle for three, and Harper for four. I'm pretty sure any below average salary cap wonk can navigate these waters with ease. Absolutely no surprises revealed yesterday.

 

[Kev4029]

Spurs are fine. Sure it's an overpay for Fox, but I'm sure this deal was basically agreed to back in February when the Spurs acquired Fox for pennies on the dollar. We still have two years of Wemby on a rookie deal, Castle for three, and Harper for four. I'm pretty sure any below average salary cap wonk can navigate these waters with ease. Absolutely no surprises revealed yesterday.

It's not just the crazy overpay, it's also the fact that he is a poor fit with all of their young players as none of them can really shoot other than Wemby and they all should have the ball in their hands more than they will.

If he plays similarly to his 17 games with the Spurs last year, that contract is an absolute albatross. Here is the list of NBA starting quality PGs in their late 20s or older with below average jump shots: De'Aaron Fox. There aren't many small PGs that have aged gracefully into their 30s in the last couple decades and nearly all of them were perennial All-NBA types. The only two that I can really think of off the top of my head that weren't that type of player were Kyle Lowry and Mike Conley.

 

[Mister CIA]

Spurs are fine. Sure it's an overpay for Fox, but I'm sure this deal was basically agreed to back in February when the Spurs acquired Fox for pennies on the dollar. We still have two years of Wemby on a rookie deal, Castle for three, and Harper for four. I'm pretty sure any below average salary cap wonk can navigate these waters with ease. Absolutely no surprises revealed yesterday.

It's not just the crazy overpay, it's also the fact that he is a poor fit with all of their young players as none of them can really shoot other than Wemby and they all should have the ball in their hands more than they will.

If he plays similarly to his 17 games with the Spurs last year, that contract is an absolute albatross. Here is the list of NBA starting quality PGs in their late 20s or older with below average jump shots: De'Aaron Fox. There aren't many small PGs that have aged gracefully into their 30s in the last couple decades and nearly all of them were perennial All-NBA types. The only two that I can really think of off the top of my head that weren't that type of player were Kyle Lowry and Mike Conley.

There were a lot of things not going right late last season for the Spurs, chief among them Fox's broken/dislocated finger on his shooting hand, and even before the DVT diagnosis, Wemby was looking fatigued, a lot. I would not use the end of last season as a guide.

Regarding age, Fox is 27. I don't see a problem with a 4-year deal. Might want to frame this pitch a little better.

Regarding fit, it's going to take a minute to figure out some stuff, but theoretically having two of three (Fox, Castle, and Harper) on the floor at all times - and Wemby - is going to be a huge problem for opponents. Sure there will be growing pains, and I'll be here for it - all of it!

 

[Juxtatarot]

Rick Carlisle said something very interesting in a recent podcast.

“The NBA game has now become a play hard league. It's not just being top heavy with stars. Roster construction is changing. It's become more important to have more good players than be top heavy with two or three great players that get all the touches.”

If he is right, roster construction, salary cap management, player development, tanking, etc. changes from what we've seen in the past. I can't stop thinking about this.

https://x.com/KevinOConnorNBA/status/1952722819617345610