- 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: The Official NBA Free Agency/Offseason Thread Update: MITCHELL TO CLE
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:01 am to teke184
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:01 am to teke184
quote:
My proposed deal is Kira and Jax for McBuckets and some seconds.
I would be very happy with that, although i don't know if they would trade Kira right now. I think they should, but i don't see it happening. I wish Kira nothing but the best, but his potential isnt' really all that appealing to me. I've seen what he can do, and i know what he can't do. Jose is better than him, and i'd bet Dyson already is too. There aren't any minutes for him on this team.
and if we did that, i'd see no reason to move DG. I think he'll be much better playing off the ball in the backup roll where he's going to get much more open catch and shoot 3 point opportunities. The ball shouldn't be in his hands much this season, and when it is, it shouldn't be to dribble unless he's going to the goal.
I don't know what the tax line will look like next year, but if we did that trade, we'd be at $172M in salaries next year, assuming we keep everyone but GT, and that would be 14 players on the roster.
We really need to find someone to replace DG or Jax and do it making the minimum. Liddell would help with the Jax part, but we really need to find someone else to do what DG does, and do it for cheap. CJ/BI/Zion make a combined $100M. JV/Nance another $25M. We can't have two more backups in McBuckets and DG making $25M as well, and with how well our young guys play, there's no need for it.
2
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:26 am to TeddyPadillac
If we keep developing young guys like we have been and their 3pts start hitting, both Graham and McBuckets become expendable in the 23 offseason.
The idea for now is to fill a stopgap need and clear up a roster spot while our young guys come along. Because sometimes they blossom quickly like Herb and Alvarado, and sometimes they don’t, like a lot of other former picks we have had.
The idea for now is to fill a stopgap need and clear up a roster spot while our young guys come along. Because sometimes they blossom quickly like Herb and Alvarado, and sometimes they don’t, like a lot of other former picks we have had.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:28 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
i don't know if they would trade Kira right now.
You'd be selling low because of the injury, but I'm not sure if he'll develop much here. He was drafted to be a PG, he was one of the top P&R players in college. I just don't see a role that really fits his skill set here, and now Dyson will likely be jumping him in the rotation after Jose already jumped him.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:31 am to teke184
i said i'd do the trade, and keep DG as well. I think they both make us better this year while we wait for younger guys to get even better.
Just pointing out that both of them would need to be moved in the offseason in a dump if we wanted to stay under the tax. Maybe could keep one if the tax line gets near $160M
Just pointing out that both of them would need to be moved in the offseason in a dump if we wanted to stay under the tax. Maybe could keep one if the tax line gets near $160M
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:37 am to TeddyPadillac
And my counter was that both are likely expendable at that point anyway, with them potentially holding value for other teams looking to compete.
It is potentially a short term problem if we can’t dump either but it sorts itself out by the next offseason as McBuckets expires and Graham enters a partially guaranteed season.
It is potentially a short term problem if we can’t dump either but it sorts itself out by the next offseason as McBuckets expires and Graham enters a partially guaranteed season.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:43 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:Not sure what the rush is to extend CJ. He'll be 33 when an extension kicks in and BI and Zion will be making north of $75 million combined. Not sure why we would not wait to see how things go at least next season.
LINK
quote:
The New Orleans Pelicans and guard CJ McCollum have reportedly had talks regarding a new contract.
Speaking Wednesday on Brian Windhorst & The Hoop Collective, ESPN NBA insider Brian Windhorst said he had heard that the Pels and McCollum have discussed a new deal even though he may not technically be eligible to sign one yet.
ESPN's Andrew Lopez chimed in, noting that McCollum may be able to sign a new contract as soon as August.
McCollum is still under the three-year, $100 million extension he signed with the Portland Trail Blazers in 2019, and his current deal runs through the 2023-24 season.
quote:
New Orleans acquired the 30-year-old McCollum last season in a blockbuster trade with the Blazers. The Pels sent a first-round pick, two second-round picks, Josh Hart, Nickeil Alexander-Walker, Tomas Satoransky and Didi Louzada to Portland for McCollum, Larry Nance Jr. and Tony Snell.
McCollum went on to enjoy the best production of his nine-year career in 26 games with the Pelicans, averaging 24.3 points, 5.8 assists, 4.5 rebounds and 1.3 steals, all of which would have been career highs over the course of a full season.
The former Lehigh star also made 2.7 three-pointers per game with the Pelicans and shot 49.3 percent from the field and 39.4 percent from beyond the arc.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:47 am to NOSHAU
Because extending him now is likely cheaper than extending or re-signing him later.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:49 am to NOSHAU
quote:
Not sure what the rush is to extend CJ. He'll be 33 when an extension kicks in and BI and Zion will be making north of $75 million combined. Not sure why we would not wait to see how things go at least next season.
Maybe they think they can save some money by doing it now rather than after this awesome year we are about to have.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:50 am to teke184
but you do realize you'd have to dump 2 guys that each make about $13M, and you're only looking to take back 1 or 2 guys, and they can't make more than about $8-10M combined. That pretty much means you can trade one of them for a lesser contract guy that makes about $6-8M, but the other one would have to be a straight dump basically.
playoff teams don't have salary space to make uneven trades. They would need the TPE for us to dump them to a good team, and that assumes they are good enough to be wanted by a playoff team by next offseason.
I'm not saying it can't be done, but it might be a little harder than you think. Would be very important that we get some 2nd rounders with the Kira/Jax trade so that we can use those to help dump DG or McBuckets.
playoff teams don't have salary space to make uneven trades. They would need the TPE for us to dump them to a good team, and that assumes they are good enough to be wanted by a playoff team by next offseason.
I'm not saying it can't be done, but it might be a little harder than you think. Would be very important that we get some 2nd rounders with the Kira/Jax trade so that we can use those to help dump DG or McBuckets.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:50 am to Fun Bunch
quote:Not sure I buy that or that the risk is worth the potential savings.
Because extending him now is likely cheaper than extending or re-signing him later.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:54 am to Mickey Goldmill
It's still a rather big risk considering he has had recent major injuries to his back and foot and isn't getting any younger.
I'm sure in part it is a goodwill gesture and assumes relatively good health and aging gracefully, but it would be silly not to acknowledge there's some notable risk with this approach.
I'm sure in part it is a goodwill gesture and assumes relatively good health and aging gracefully, but it would be silly not to acknowledge there's some notable risk with this approach.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 10:58 am to Bronc
Of course there's a risk, but the reason they would do it now rather than waiting is to save money.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 11:09 am to Mickey Goldmill
But you are only saving money if you correctly forecast his future market value and what he signs today is below that.
I get the arguments for doing it, but forecasting two seasons out, then having to assume he plays up to his salary hit through that contract, is more risk than I would take given all the surrounding factors, but hopefully it all works out.
I get the arguments for doing it, but forecasting two seasons out, then having to assume he plays up to his salary hit through that contract, is more risk than I would take given all the surrounding factors, but hopefully it all works out.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 11:24 am to Bronc
quote:
But you are only saving money if you correctly forecast his future market value and what he signs today is below that.
Yeah why are we worried that an ancient CJ is somehow more valuable than today? Because of the new media deal/cap increase? or something else?
Years matter the most, also. Are we going to offer him a 2-year extension? By god hopefully not a 4-year.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 11:27 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Years matter the most, also. Are we going to offer him a 2-year extension? By god hopefully not a 4-year.
I think that's why you do it now vs. later. Do it now and you can probably get away with just 2 years. Wait longer and your long term commitment to him will go further out.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 11:28 am to SlowFlowPro
Pretty sure we can only offer him a 2 year extension. So, in effect we're saving ourselves by not waiting 2 years and then signing him to a 4 year deal.
I think that's the thought process, but who knows.
I think that's the thought process, but who knows.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 11:29 am to SlowFlowPro
I’d be cool with a 4 year 100 mil extension + injury protections and a team option year 4.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 11:48 am to Epic Cajun
quote:I really like CJ and if we can get him at a reasonable price for a 2 year extension, maybe it is not an issue. However, remember that before we traded for him, his contract was seen through much of the league as a negative contract. If we extend him and he declines for any reason, we would be in a major jam. Maybe it will just be a one year extension as a good will gesture.
Pretty sure we can only offer him a 2 year extension. So, in effect we're saving ourselves by not waiting 2 years and then signing him to a 4 year deal.
I think that's the thought process, but who knows.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 11:50 am to NOSHAU
I think his contract was seen as such because pairing him with Dame had a lot of issues due to size / defense.
Either making him the point or having a larger point next to him fixes a lot of that.
Either making him the point or having a larger point next to him fixes a lot of that.
Posted on 7/6/22 at 11:57 am to NOSHAU
quote:
I really like CJ and if we can get him at a reasonable price for a 2 year extension, maybe it is not an issue. However, remember that before we traded for him, his contract was seen through much of the league as a negative contract. If we extend him and he declines for any reason, we would be in a major jam. Maybe it will just be a one year extension as a good will gesture.
What also concerns me is how he looked in the playoffs. It very much looked like a continuation of the previous post season where CJ has been less effective scoring efficiently when he goes up against better wing/guard defenders. Last two post seasons he's shot 33% from three and lower 40's, high 30's from the field.
I get the sense we are going to give him Lowry like money, but I'm not sure he is going to maintain a Lowry-like impact in the post season.
Page 58 of 111
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News