- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Official Free Agency Thread
Posted on 7/19/16 at 10:56 am to TigerinATL
Posted on 7/19/16 at 10:56 am to TigerinATL
quote:
I was just trying to compare rosters, because I don't think Boston has enough shooting to give him space, but OKC doesn't have much shooting either, especially if they waive Waiters. I guess the Celtics can trade Thomas for more shooting if he isn't part of the trade package to get Westbrook.
Boston has assets, space, another star, and no bad contracts while playing in the east. They have flexibility to reshape the roster around Westbrook and Horford. OKC has some space, but lacks other stars and assets plus they will need to resign Adams, Oladipo, and Westbrook.
This post was edited on 7/19/16 at 10:57 am
0
Posted on 7/19/16 at 11:00 am to NOFOX
quote:
I think you may see an increase to the max percentages in the new CBA in an attempt to prevent superteams, so it might behoove him not to be locked in too long.
Possibly. Or a franchise tag, which yuck. But the owners also might really pursue a hard cap or cutting the players' revenue split.
IMO, they should keep most things the same, try to tweak the Melo rule so it makes more sense for players to actually sign extensions, and tie rookie scale/cap exceptions to the actual cap rather than arbitrary numbers.
Posted on 7/19/16 at 11:07 am to corndeaux
quote:
Possibly. Or a franchise tag, which yuck. But the owners also might really pursue a hard cap or cutting the players' revenue split.
IMO, they should keep most things the same, try to tweak the Melo rule so it makes more sense for players to actually sign extensions, and tie rookie scale/cap exceptions to the actual cap rather than arbitrary numbers.
All of the above (sans franchise tag), please.
Posted on 7/19/16 at 11:18 am to Jester
quote:I wouldn't mind some form of the franchise tag. For teams/cities to lose their star players puts a huge financial drag on the team/city.
All of the above (sans franchise tag), please.
Posted on 7/19/16 at 11:29 am to NOSHAU
quote:
I wouldn't mind some form of the franchise tag. For teams/cities to lose their star players puts a huge financial drag on the team/city.
The franchise tag is a shitty way to do that. A better way would be to allow a separate max contract for your own free agents, like Bird Rights, but just additional money.
Posted on 7/19/16 at 11:31 am to NOSHAU
quote:
I wouldn't mind some form of the franchise tag.
The NFL version isn't very good at keeping a player long term. I think it'd have to be a tweak of extensions like corndeaux suggested, and a players union run by superstars will probably balk at anything that forces them to stay, it has to be more money and years. Maybe a 6th year instead of just 5. Then instead of leaving "only" 1 year and $35 million on the table, they'd be walking away from almost $80 million. 4/$111 vs 6/$188.
If you get a career ending injury you're screwed. If you bet on the wrong horse, you're screwed. You have to really hold this out for a star player, not just your best player at the time.
Posted on 7/19/16 at 12:16 pm to TigerinATL
I think a franchise tag would be a bad idea. But, in general, and I'm in a small minority around here, I think copying the NFL is a bad idea. In their most recent SI podcast, Andrew Sharp had a great quote about losing interest in the NFL over the years because of parity that mirrors my thoughts exactly.
Ziller had a piece on a potential NBA franchise tag today
LINK
To me, the money shot is this:
It's really fascinating. The owners have done a great deal to minimize their own risk (max contracts, shorter length, age limit, etc). Yet, they seem to also want to minimize player movement at the same time.
I do think they should maybe add an extra year or give higher raises to guys that stick around or even a higher % of the cap if you're on your 3rd contract with a team. But a lot of this seems like people just get mad when a player leaves for whatever reason. You can't legislate choice.
Ziller had a piece on a potential NBA franchise tag today
LINK
To me, the money shot is this:
quote:
This is one of the most obvious contradictions of the NBA's posturing with regards to contract length over the past 18 years of labor struggles. Teams want the ability to lock up the best players for their entire careers while dropping the maximum contract term as low as possible. Teams want control over the best players but don't want to commit to paying anyone more than five years out.
It's really fascinating. The owners have done a great deal to minimize their own risk (max contracts, shorter length, age limit, etc). Yet, they seem to also want to minimize player movement at the same time.
I do think they should maybe add an extra year or give higher raises to guys that stick around or even a higher % of the cap if you're on your 3rd contract with a team. But a lot of this seems like people just get mad when a player leaves for whatever reason. You can't legislate choice.
Posted on 7/19/16 at 12:21 pm to corndeaux
quote:
You can't legislate choice.
And a guy like Durant who can make almost $300 million from a shoe contract may still leave a bad situation for a ring. And OKC wasn't really a bad situation, they were just 2a or 2b instead of 1.
This post was edited on 7/19/16 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 7/19/16 at 1:20 pm to TigerinATL
quote:Yeah, that is why I said some form of a franchise tag. The NFL version would not work. The additional year might work or a different scale (above which does not count against the caps such as similar to the Rose rule whereas your franchise player could get 5% higher salary than normal max but that extra 5% does not count against the cap of the retaining team). Something that drastically benefits a player for staying.
The NFL version isn't very good at keeping a player long term. I think it'd have to be a tweak of extensions like corndeaux suggested, and a players union run by superstars will probably balk at anything that forces them to stay, it has to be more money and years. Maybe a 6th year instead of just 5. Then instead of leaving "only" 1 year and $35 million on the table, they'd be walking away from almost $80 million. 4/$111 vs 6/$188. If you get a career ending injury you're screwed. If you bet on the wrong horse, you're screwed. You have to really hold this out for a star player, not just your best player at the time
This post was edited on 7/19/16 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 7/19/16 at 2:17 pm to NOSHAU
quote:
Spurs have interest in trading for Bucks forward Greg Monroe. (via @AmicoHoops)
quote:
The Bucks Zone @BrewCityBucks The Spurs have contacted the Bucks about Greg Monroe and could possibly offer a trade proposal soon in the next few days
quote:
Spurs confident they can find a 3rd team to include in trade proposal to Bucks by early next week (@AmicoHoops).
Interesting. Don't see how that works. Probably just BS leak by the Bucks to try to generate interest in Monroe.
This post was edited on 7/19/16 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 7/19/16 at 2:25 pm to NOFOX
quote:Looking at the Spurs roster, would they trade Parker? If they get a 3rd team with cap room involved, I guess they could offer Danny Green.
Interesting. Don't see how that works. Probably just BS leak by the Bucks to try to generate interest in Monroe.
Posted on 7/19/16 at 2:28 pm to NOFOX
Pop zigging while everyone else is zagging?
Who are they going to give up? They need to send $13.5 million and can't trade anyone they just signed. That means either Parker is gone or Green + filler(Mills).
Monroe to Spurs
Tyreke + either Green or Mills to Bucks
Green or Mills to Pels
quote:
Spurs confident they can find a 3rd team to include in trade proposal to Bucks by early next week (@AmicoHoops).
Who are they going to give up? They need to send $13.5 million and can't trade anyone they just signed. That means either Parker is gone or Green + filler(Mills).
Monroe to Spurs
Tyreke + either Green or Mills to Bucks
Green or Mills to Pels
This post was edited on 7/19/16 at 2:31 pm
Posted on 7/19/16 at 2:38 pm to TigerinATL
This has to be BS. Monroe is a black hole on defense.
Posted on 7/19/16 at 2:42 pm to Solo
I could see them taking him for free, but considering they'd have to give up either Parker or Green + Mills, yeah it doesn't make sense.
Posted on 7/20/16 at 12:09 pm to TigerinATL
best unsigned players from bobby marks
Posted on 7/20/16 at 1:29 pm to cgrand
The Vertical just tweeted Gee is coming back on a 1 year deal. I guess that's why no one has been officially announced. I thought we were done.
This post was edited on 7/20/16 at 1:32 pm
Posted on 7/20/16 at 1:31 pm to dafif5
quote:
The Vertical just tweeted Gee is coming back on a 1 year deal. I guess that's why we still haven't announced anyone.
Uh. What. That would put us at 15 guaranteed spots, and he's another wing. That move would make no sense.
Has to be an unguaranteed deal.
Posted on 7/20/16 at 1:31 pm to dafif5
So that puts us at 15. I wouldn't mind keeping Gee around to see what another year of Fred Vinson can do for him. If he could learn to hit the open 3 he'd be a useful player.
Maybe, maybe not. I wouldn't be surprised if we had a pinky promise in place, if he helped us out by opting out and couldn't find a deal we'd bring him back on a minimum.
quote:
Has to be an unguaranteed deal.
Maybe, maybe not. I wouldn't be surprised if we had a pinky promise in place, if he helped us out by opting out and couldn't find a deal we'd bring him back on a minimum.
This post was edited on 7/20/16 at 1:33 pm
Posted on 7/20/16 at 1:32 pm to Fun Bunch
Somebody has to sit at the end of the bench...
Posted on 7/20/16 at 1:32 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:OR...
Uh. What. That would put us at 15 guaranteed spots, and he's another wing. That move would make no sense.
Has to be an unguaranteed deal.
Tyreke is gone
Page 55 of 56
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News