- 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
0
Posted on 6/27/22 at 9:10 pm to The_Duke
At this point I think they just want to be rid of him.
No one was going to take him and they weren’t going to throw him out there given their young guys need minutes.
No one was going to take him and they weren’t going to throw him out there given their young guys need minutes.
Posted on 6/27/22 at 9:13 pm to The_Duke
quote:
How in the hell does buying out Wall at 40mil make any sense?
Because the owner is notoriously frugal and it just saved them $6.5 million for a player they weren't going to play and couldn't trade.
Posted on 6/27/22 at 9:14 pm to TigerinATL
Right, no one was going to trade for him. So essentially you just saved 6.5 mil because you weren’t going to play him anyway, and you still had to pay him.
Posted on 6/27/22 at 9:16 pm to Epic Cajun
In other related news:
ETA: could be a decent backup big who offers some stretch game and rim protection.
quote:
If the Clippers give John Wall the Tax MLE, then LA won't have it to give to Isaiah Hartenstein. Hartenstein is pretty good and that could make him gettable for a lot of teams looking for a big.
ETA: could be a decent backup big who offers some stretch game and rim protection.
This post was edited on 6/27/22 at 9:20 pm
Posted on 6/27/22 at 9:25 pm to Epic Cajun
He is a not just a decent backup big, but a good one. Some of his metrics are really strong
But we are about to extend Nance, and I’m guessing he’ll want a chance to start or at least play more minutes.
But we are about to extend Nance, and I’m guessing he’ll want a chance to start or at least play more minutes.
Posted on 6/27/22 at 9:34 pm to Epic Cajun
I get that but just from a business stand point of power and owner vs player--it makes more sense just to eat it and sit him the year.
You gave him 40 mil and all the power. Doesn't make any sense.
You gave him 40 mil and all the power. Doesn't make any sense.
Posted on 6/27/22 at 9:39 pm to The_Duke
quote:
I get that but just from a business stand point of power and owner vs player--it makes more sense just to eat it and sit him the year.
You gave him 40 mil and all the power. Doesn't make any sense.
They already did that for a full year. How does sitting John Wall for another year benefit Houston? Remember, AD wanted to play so Klutch made some noise and the league threatened the Pels with crazy fines, something like $100k per game IIRC, and losing 1st round picks if we didn't play AD. So if John Wall really wanted to play he could probably make Houston play him and derail the development of their young team.
This post was edited on 6/27/22 at 9:40 pm
Posted on 6/27/22 at 10:06 pm to TigerinATL
Is John gonna call them the Blippers?
Posted on 6/27/22 at 10:24 pm to cgrand
quote:They don't have enough assets to attach for that contract plus Kyrie though.
the lakers have a walking salary match on their team...
Posted on 6/27/22 at 10:38 pm to The_Duke
quote:They didn’t want to play him because they didn’t want him to take minutes from the young guys who need experience.
I get that but just from a business stand point of power and owner vs player--it makes more sense just to eat it and sit him the year.
You gave him 40 mil and all the power. Doesn't make any sense.
Wall made too much money and isn’t good enough to justify his contract. No team would want to trade for him for $40 million.
So a buyout makes sense for all parties. It gets him off the team, it saves the Rockets a little bit of money, and that little bit of good will to send a player like John Wall to a better situation goes a long way with players and agents to show that the Rockets are an organization that treats players fairly. Agents may steer players away from teams with hardass owners who are miserable to play for.
This post was edited on 6/27/22 at 10:39 pm
Posted on 6/27/22 at 10:47 pm to DallasTiger45
quote:Nance is not going to be a starting 5. Hartenstein would be a nice backup for JV but not sure we can shed enough salary and create a spot for him.
He is a not just a decent backup big, but a good one. Some of his metrics are really strong
But we are about to extend Nance, and I’m guessing he’ll want a chance to start or at least play more minutes.
Posted on 6/28/22 at 6:28 am to The_Duke
quote:
You gave him 40 mil and all the power. Doesn't make any sense.
When they acquired him, they only acquired a contract (to dump Westbrook). The Rockets never really intended to value Wall the player
Posted on 6/28/22 at 6:55 am to NOSHAU
Yeah, at 16 spots right now, we’d have to move two players or just one and have EJ on a two-way contract. Not likely as it stands if that’s your only move.
Posted on 6/28/22 at 7:00 am to The_Duke
I understand why they did it but it must be nice to pay a player $40M+ to go away. Gonna be interesting to see after the new TV contracts ….
I would barely want to pay a player $40M per year to play and they just have enough money to say , just go away
I would barely want to pay a player $40M per year to play and they just have enough money to say , just go away
Posted on 6/28/22 at 7:12 am to Stamps74
it’s not a matter of having enough money...
every team has enough money
every team has enough money
Posted on 6/28/22 at 7:12 am to Stamps74
quote:
Gonna be interesting to see after the new TV contracts ….
That $40M is going to be something like $55-60M after the new TV deal
Posted on 6/28/22 at 7:14 am to cgrand
quote:
it’s not a matter of having enough money...
every team has enough money
Yeah. The super max salary that Wall got is literally based on a % of revenue. That's what determines the salary cap, luxury tax, max salaries, and the cost of salaries that has to be paid to the players. The owners don't get to just not spend and save. The players MUST be paid 49% of revenues every year.
Posted on 6/28/22 at 7:15 am to SlowFlowPro
John Wall and Russell Westbrook were some of the first to get the Super Max Extensions where you get access to the 35% max a few years early. What it shows is just like regular max contracts, not everyone is worth it, but the best players on your team expect to get the best contracts you have available to give them.
This post was edited on 6/28/22 at 7:16 am
Posted on 6/28/22 at 7:20 am to TigerinATL
quote:
but the best players on your team expect to get the best contracts you have available to give them.
yep, regardless
the max contract artificially sets a number that the players immediately expect and leaves the team no negotiating position
plus it leaves the players that do deserve it underpaid
Page 13 of 111
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News