EPTNBA Offseason 2012 - Page 55
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Tiegrr
United States607 Posts
| ||
|
MassHysteria
United States3678 Posts
On July 20 2012 00:34 Jerubaal wrote: I am not a fan of the all-out tank being a guarantee so no disagreement here.At this moment, I'd like to register my opinion that draft picks are garbage, especially when considering players like Howard and Bynum. Maybe they were forced to, but the Magic basically traded their dollar for 4 dimes. | ||
|
TwoToneTerran
United States8841 Posts
You're never going to get equivalent value for a star who wants to leave no matter what. | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On July 20 2012 00:46 Tiegrr wrote: Why do Lakers get all the good big men? you can do a lot with a virtually unlimited cash flow | ||
|
Kazeyonoma
United States2912 Posts
There are basically 2 dollars in the league. Bynum and D12. You have 1, you had a chance to take the other early on in a 1 for 1 trade, but that fell through and you'd rather take your chances on youth/draft/trades than bank it all on 1 guy, who might put you in this SAME situation again 3-5 years down the line. So what do you do? You get the best you can get, sure you're only getting 4-5 players who's value is maybe 20 cents at best. But that's better than having your dollar get shipped out tomorrow whether you like it or not, something you ALREADY DID ONCE (shaq!). @Tiegrr the lakers get good bigs because they prioritize bigs as essential pieces to championships. They slowly over time accumulate assets that are valuable to teams that are in ORL's situation. They're also willing to pay luxury taxes on players if they see the value in keeping a star (cough Dolan, cough). And sometimes, it's just dumb luck, like trading kwame brown for Pau. That, is why to this day, I'm pretty sure, Kupchak is a fucking magician or a hypnotist or something.... draft picks aren't garbage if you do your research, and the draft pool isn't terrible. Kyrie will be an amazing pg when he matures, it just takes time, he's already balling it up, and he's smart, so I can't say that he was a terrible draft pick, and this years draft class is supposed to be amazing compared to last years. Regarding Varejao, he may not be pretty, but he's a true big (rare), can defend well (lots of teams HATE going up against him cuz he's apparently 'dirty'), is a 10/15/2 kinda player. Not someone you build your team around, but shit, he sure shores up a lot of wholes in tons of teams. Can you imagine if MIA got an actual center? Namely one like Varejao? He'd be amazing. Sometimes it's just about making the pieces you have work. ORL won't be a center based team this year after the trade, but if they do things right, they can be set up pretty nicely for the future. Also why are we even talking about Scola? he got his ass amnestied, or will soon, so trade talks about him are kaputz no? he's basically going to be on the waiver so if a team wants him, they just have to be able to afford him no? (still hazy on some of the new CBA rules). Kupchak, and the Buss family, once again, helping the Lakeshow be in the best position possible to win a championship. lets not forget, for those who want to doubt, the lakers while losing 4-1 to OKC, 2 of those losses, came down to <3 point differences, with Nash, AND Dwight, AND jamison, AND J.O. now? How can you even think they aren't strong contenders to at least take the west. | ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
Though I'm not a particularly well-learned bball fan, just my tiny little 2 cents (to continue the dollar and dimes ;P). Interesting to see the discussion, can't believe I didn't find this thread earlier  | ||
|
AntiGrav1ty
Germany2310 Posts
On July 20 2012 00:58 a176 wrote: you can do a lot with a virtually unlimited cash flow Like the Knicks did. | ||
|
MegaFonzie
Australia1084 Posts
Oh yeah, and Dwight's ok I guess | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
I made the dollars to dimes metaphor because, on the face of it, the only equivalency that you could possibly stretch is that Bynum is worth Varejao and picks (probably not true). Howard > Bynum. Howard >>>>> Varejao and picks. Yet the Magic have rationalized a travesty by laundering Howard through Cleveland. | ||
|
MassHysteria
United States3678 Posts
I just hope some good writers come out defending the Knicks decision today or in coming days. All the bad press they got yesterday was so overblown imo, same as the writers who said stuff about Lin. I didn't even know about it until after I posted on here yesterday as I hadn't read any sports news yet. Media trying to exagerrate about owner's feelings and people being butthurt is just funny tho. I would think these people understand that business is business and people dealing at that high of a level understand it better than anyone, and they know it wouldn't be wise to do that. People could argue it either way, but the truth is Lin is just a mid-tier player who doesn't justify that amount of money. He isn't the difference between the Knicks being 1st or 2nd rounders to championship contenders. Around 30 to 45 million for the third year of Lin is not smart, and in 2 years people would be saying how stupid the Knicks were to match that "ridiculous" contract. It's not about his bird or non-bird rights or being under the cap, it is about the luxury tax looming in the future. I know losing "lightning in a bottle" hurts, but it was actually a smart move. Too bad the Knicks chose a bad time and such a hyped, beloved player to finally be smart with their money. As for the "stretch provision", it is not a good sign for the Knicks if they are debating this and they are just about to sign the player. It should be a fallback option, as like a plan C or D in case of injuries and then you have to suddenly rebuild, etc. Not as an out you are seriously considering 2 years early, before even signing the player. Besides, the provision won't exactly help them out with how much they have to spend on him in total for just that year, it just helps spread it out into 3 years and helps out their cap. I am going to guess and say the "stretch provision" prob also has a limit on how often it can be used, so if they end up using it on Lin, they would lose it for a while. So being able to use it on a player who got injured and/or has a longer contract than 1 year left (a smarter move) is out the window. edit: clarification | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
shawster
Canada2485 Posts
there's been like 30 dunks in the last 6 minutes | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
| ||
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
On July 20 2012 04:34 MassHysteria wrote: Sorry to go back to Lin and Knicks but had something similar to this to post yesterday and deleted it by accident (again -_-) and started this way earlier today, got distracted, and finally got to finish it; so feel free to skip post if you are over the subject but.. I just hope some good writers come out defending the Knicks decision today or in coming days. All the bad press they got yesterday was so overblown imo, same as the writers who said stuff about Lin. I didn't even know about it until after I posted on here yesterday as I hadn't read any sports news yet. Media trying to exagerrate about owner's feelings and people being butthurt is just funny tho. I would think these people understand that business is business and people dealing at that high of a level understand it better than anyone, and they know it wouldn't be wise to do that. Agree that the amount of backlash the Knicks and Dolan got may have been excessive, but it didn't come from nowhere. This is an organization and owner who have well-established reputations and histories for poor-to-terrible decisions in one of the largest media outlets in the world who were letting a valuable player that virtually everyone considers to be a hugely valuable asset slip away for nothing. Even if they didn't feel he fit their team going forward, they should have planned things out better and gotten something back for him. I also don't know that it's outrageous to suggest that part of the decision may have been based on Dolan's feelings or him letting things get personal. He's known for letting his own feelings or opinions get the better of him in business decisions. This article by Simmons discusses some of it: http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/32425/sports-guy-vault-the-james-dolan-theory Plus, there were too many reports from different sources about how the Knicks and/or Dolan were upset or felt insulted by how things happened for it to have been completely untrue. People could argue it either way, but the truth is Lin is just a mid-tier player who doesn't justify that amount of money. He isn't the difference between the Knicks being 1st or 2nd rounders to championship contenders. Around 30 to 45 million for the third year of Lin is not smart, and in 2 years people would be saying how stupid the Knicks were to match that "ridiculous" contract. It's not about his bird or non-bird rights or being under the cap, it is about the luxury tax looming in the future. I know losing "lightning in a bottle" hurts, but it was actually a smart move. Too bad the Knicks chose a bad time and such a hyped, beloved player to finally be smart with their money. The key for me is that the first two years of Lin's deal were very reasonable and maybe even a bit of a steal for what he brought to the team both on and off the court. You can't really measure the feelings and excitement that he brought to the franchise, the testimonials and comments from Knicks fans really made him out to be a giant breath of fresh air and something to root for. Plus, there's the value of the positive impact he brought to the team by being such a perfect PR figure, which helped to balance out the poor PR the rest of the team had. For $5M/yr, that was great value IMO. That's not even factoring in the fact that he has demonstrated an incredible ceiling of play during Linsanity, and at least had the potential to be more than just an average PG. Felton and Kidd are topped out at what they are, and it's not impressive. Why not go with the option that at least gives you the chance at a player who could play a significant role in contending? When you get to the third year, I agree that it becomes ridiculous and much harder to accept. But that was something that the Knicks wouldn't have had to deal with for two whole years, during which they could see what they had and plan around. As has been mentioned by many sources, the Knicks had a lot of ways to lessen the blow of a worst case scenario. And let's be clear, anything less than a worst case scenario would still have been a positive for the Knicks in their situation. They had and have no other good means to add appreciable assets to their roster, Lin was unique due to that lucky Bird rights ruling that allowed them to resign him without giving anything else up. This is not even addressing the abundance of money the Knicks/Dolan have at their disposal which they clearly had no problem overspending on other just as questionable expenditures. As for the "stretch provision", it is not a good sign for the Knicks if they are debating this and they are just about to sign the player. It should be a fallback option, as like a plan C or D in case of injuries and then you have to suddenly rebuild, etc. Not as an out you are seriously considering 2 years early, before even signing the player. Besides, the provision won't exactly help them out with how much they have to spend on him in total for just that year, it just helps spread it out into 3 years and helps out their cap. I am going to guess and say the "stretch provision" prob also has a limit on how often it can be used, so if they end up using it on Lin, they would lose it for a while. So being able to use it on a player who got injured and/or has a longer contract than 1 year left (a smarter move) is out the window. edit: clarification The "stretch provision" was only ever supposed to be a way to lessen the blow of a worst case scenario in which Lin bottomed out completely and lost all value. Linsanity has made Lin into a desirable asset to other teams beyond what he brings to the court, so he'd have to regress pretty dramatically for him to suddenly become untradeable, particularly as a large expiring contract (which he would've been in that third year due to the fourth year being a team option). Think about that. Worst case scenarion, the Knicks are left with a huge expiring contract (always very desirable to teams) on a player with a built-in billion-large audience that no other teams have access to. The only reason the "stretch provision" came into the picture was because the Knicks were indicating that they were considering not matching the Rockets' offer due to financial reasons. It wasn't discussed initially as a way of justifying such a move. I haven't read anything about possible limitations on the amount of times a team can use a "stretch provision", so I assume there is none. The only limitation I've read is that it can only apply to "new contracts", which I assume is any that is signed since the signed the most recent CBA. | ||
|
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
On July 20 2012 05:49 Holcan wrote: boston got lee??? yes !! if we get pietrus too, omg. Lee should be a great asset to the Celtics. Wonder what kind of contact he got. | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
a question about his contract, when it is finished and he gets offered a new contract, will 'the max' it be based off the 8m/year, or his final year of 15m? | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
I know right lol. | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
just because the knicks have a shitty front office, doesn't mean your market status hasn't helped produce multiple contending teams. if lebron demanded to go to nyk, we would all be singing a different tune, just sayin. | ||
|
slyboogie
United States3423 Posts
On July 20 2012 04:26 Jerubaal wrote: Draft picks aren't good. It's just the nature of the game when you can only have 5 men on the floor and 11 on the roster. Most of your draft picks aren't just not going to give you value, but they're probably going to be next to worthless. Look at the list of NBA champs and see which ones drafted their stars to a championship. It's pretty much the Spurs and that's it (The Mavs and Heat are kind of iffy, but they only had one true star.). Look at the list of #1 picks, who you'd think would be locks. Lot of busts there. It's easy to say 'do your research', but only because somebody drafts every likely good player. I don't see any evidence that any of the championships from the last 20 years are the result of a team 'doing their research', except for the Spurs again, and they had a lot of help from surefire stars. Trading for established stars carries much less risk and much more reward because teams are willing to put faith in future picks that will likely be worthless. I made the dollars to dimes metaphor because, on the face of it, the only equivalency that you could possibly stretch is that Bynum is worth Varejao and picks (probably not true). Howard > Bynum. Howard >>>>> Varejao and picks. Yet the Magic have rationalized a travesty by laundering Howard through Cleveland. Your sentiment is correct but overstated. Draft picks, especially any pick outside the high lottery is truly a nickel (to use your analogy.) But this is ignoring the fact that the risk factor is outrageously small - rookie deals, non-guaranteed contracts, a roster spot. It's like a free reach into a grab bag - sometimes, it's Donte Greene and Sean May and you're sad. Other times, it's Aaron Afflalo (pick 27!) or Carl Landry, and you're satisfied. Then, it's Serge Ibaka, Nic Batum then George Hill - in a row in the mid 20's. Still others, it's Rajon Rondo at 21 or Tayshaun Prince at 23 and you're like, "In Basketball Jesus's name we pray." The best part of draft picks? Wouldn't you rather pay Anthony Davis $4, $4, $4.5, $5.5 instead of Dwight Howard 17, 19, 20? Yeah you would. Also, the reality is that using the NBA title as a measuring stick is bad methodology. In the last 25 years, 8 teams have won the NBA championship. | ||
| ||
