W/ Iguodala trade, Russell and Klay both maxes and dump Livingston's GT, GSW 5 players. A mere $18.2m below the hard cap to fill out 9 roster slots. Even if they keep McKinnie, Graham, Napier NG, $13.1m for 6. Goodbye Looney, Cousins, Cook, possibly Bell.
Originally Posted by :
Guard Klay Thompson has agreed to sign a five-year maximum contract with the Warriors worth $190 million, league sources have confirmed with The Chronicle.
Before free agency opened Sunday, the Warriors offered Thompson the max. Thompson, not surprisingly, accepted on the spot.
Thompson has long voiced his desire to stick with Golden State long-term. Even after the shooting guard suffered an ACL injury in Game 6 of the NBA Finals that could sideline him for most — if not all — of next season, the Warriors had no hesitation about offering him a max contract.
Don't speak in generalities, actually sit down and do the math on what you can get for $28-30 million in 'good' players in this league. Like I said - Malcolm Brogdon is gonna cost at least $16 million on his own and I wouldn't be even a little surprised if that turns into $20 when all is said and done. That's a 'good' player. What you're talking about is veteran roster chaff.
The short answer is you can hope to get lucky, but most of the time you end up with overpaid role players who you're trying to dump within 24 months. The 'go sign 3 $10 million FA's approach' just doesn't work because of how the NBA works its cap.
For $30 million you can get Russell and see what shakes loose with the remainder or you can get, I dunno, Brogdon and Kelly Olynyk. I think you wildly underestimate what good but not great players cost right now, and what they're gonna cost in this market.
Get your stars. The high price of mediocrity in the NBA kills teams.
$21 million/season?!?!?!
My basic operating premise was that role players were going to be comically overpaid this off-season but even I never figured on Brogdon getting to $21 million.
Can I close the books on the 'go sign good depth players' argument now?
Get. Superstars.
The only people that are arguing otherwise are people who cover the league professionally and want to make this seem more complicated than it is. Idiots like Dennis Smith going on NBA TV and trying to say that Kawhi would make the Lakers worse than if they added {insert 3 replacement level guys here} because they don't want to concede that team building in the NBA isn't complicated at ALL.
The only time 'team trumps talent' is when the talent has bizarre circumstances. It's when the Lakers run a team out there with Malone injured, Payton dogging it and Kobe/Shaq trying to kill each other. Or when KD and Klay both go down injured.
Building an NBA team really is like playing a video game - go get as many guys with OVR scores in the 90s as can and hit X. It's a hard thing for NBA lifers to admit because they don't want to acknowledge how simple this league is to cover, but it is just undeniable. [Reply]
Pretty much. Especially with the regular season being as lax as it is now, all that matters is getting into the playoffs healthy with your stars.
Building depth has to come thru the draft or fliers on hurt guys that come back to being healthy. Otherwise, you're paying so much for middle tier guys it just can't work.
I don't know how long the league can keep going on like that to be honest. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
$21 million/season?!?!?!
My basic operating premise was that role players were going to be comically overpaid this off-season but even I never figured on Brogdon getting to $21 million.
Can I close the books on the 'go sign good depth players' argument now?
Get. Superstars.
The only people that are arguing otherwise are people who cover the league professionally and want to make this seem more complicated than it is. Idiots like Dennis Smith going on NBA TV and trying to say that Kawhi would make the Lakers worse than if they added {insert 3 replacement level guys here} because they don't want to concede that team building in the NBA isn't complicated at ALL.
The only time 'team trumps talent' is when the talent has bizarre circumstances. It's when the Lakers run a team out there with Malone injured, Payton dogging it and Kobe/Shaq trying to kill each other. Or when KD and Klay both go down injured.
Building an NBA team really is like playing a video game - go get as many guys with OVR scores in the 90s as can and hit X. It's a hard thing for NBA lifers to admit because they don't want to acknowledge how simple this league is to cover, but it is just undeniable.
In order to win in the NBA you always have to have stars, it comes down to having stars but also having some quality depth as well. Maybe this is why so far this off season you are seeing more balance, 2-stars, on teams instead 3+ because of the no depth issue. GS has and will continue to be an outlier because they drafted 3 of their stars.
Of course Kawhi could change that by going to your team but they still have to play a 82-regular game season in an extremely tough WC and hope they stay healthy going into the playoffs. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Pretty much. Especially with the regular season being as lax as it is now, all that matters is getting into the playoffs healthy with your stars.
Building depth has to come thru the draft or fliers on hurt guys that come back to being healthy. Otherwise, you're paying so much for middle tier guys it just can't work.
I don't know how long the league can keep going on like that to be honest.
But the league has ALWAYS been like this. That's the dirty little secret.
The league is at its most popular when there are 'superteams'.
The Showtime Lakers with Magic, Kareem, Worthy and even Byron Scott. The Bird Celtics with him, McHale, Parrish then Ainge and Dennis Johnson.
Jordans Bulls were ridiculous. Yet when there wasn't a leaguewide hegemonic influence and a bit of a power vacuum after Jordan retired, the league turned to ass until Kobe/Shaq created a new centerpiece. The Riley Heat era league with teams like them and the Knicks just out there gooning their way to wins nightly was unwatchable. And AI hucking up 35 shots a game while rebounders keep feeding him the ball.
Parity has always been better in theory than in practice. People say they want it, but then when they get it these teams all take to beating the brains out of each other and playing really mediocre basketball for 82 games a year. Folks stop watching.
It's just the nature of a game where there are only 10 people on the court at any given time. It's star driven and the teams fueled by stars are the ones that draw eyes.
You ask how long the league can 'survive' this way but the bottom line is that the league thrives this way.
Fans of teams like the Bucks and Wolves and Raptors who are unlikely to be those epicenters for any appreciable time don't want to hear that, but it's just that's just the way of it in the NBA. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Pretty much. Especially with the regular season being as lax as it is now, all that matters is getting into the playoffs healthy with your stars.
Building depth has to come thru the draft or fliers on hurt guys that come back to being healthy. Otherwise, you're paying so much for middle tier guys it just can't work.
I don't know how long the league can keep going on like that to be honest.
I don't think the regular season is going to be lax in the WC, it is going to be brutal and a dog fight. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
But the league has ALWAYS been like this. That's the dirty little secret.
The league is at its most popular when there are 'superteams'.
The Showtime Lakers with Magic, Kareem, Worthy and even Byron Scott. The Bird Celtics with him, McHale, Parrish then Ainge and Dennis Johnson.
Jordans Bulls were ridiculous. Yet when there wasn't a leaguewide hegemonic influence and a bit of a power vacuum after Jordan retired, the league turned to ass until Kobe/Shaq created a new centerpiece. The Riley Heat era league with teams like them and the Knicks just out there gooning their way to wins nightly was unwatchable. And AI hucking up 35 shots a game while rebounders keep feeding him the ball.
Parity has always been better in theory than in practice. People say they want it, but then when they get it these teams all take to beating the brains out of each other and playing really mediocre basketball for 82 games a year. Folks stop watching.
It's just the nature of a game where there are only 10 people on the court at any given time. It's star driven and the teams fueled by stars are the ones that draw eyes.
You ask how long the league can 'survive' this way but the bottom line is that the league thrives this way.
Fans of teams like the Bucks and Wolves and Raptors who are unlikely to be those epicenters for any appreciable time don't want to hear that, but it's just that's just the way of it in the NBA.
Didn't mean how can the league survive as a star driven league, as you say, it's always been that way.
More so, how can it survive paying this mid level guys this much money? Seems crazy. [Reply]