2021 NBA Offseason Thread: Business as Usual? -- Trades/Free Agency/Retirements/Etc.

[Message Board User 12,396]

On 7/3/2021 at 12:42 PM, Llogg said:

SGA is not statistically a guy a that's going to move the needle for any of those teams. Is he even better than Colin Sexton? Why would they swap Sexton AND #3 overall for SGA? That's crazy talk.

Yeah this is dumb, even if SGA hadn't told Cleveland that he didn't want to go there in that draft (which he did).

The more I read about this draft, the more it appears there's 3 guys with the potential to develop into franchise players - Cade, Green, and Mobley.  The Cavs would be foolish to trade out of the top 3 unless it's a Godfather offer. 

In no universe is SGA worth a top 3 pick in this draft.

[ztejas 43,685]

McMillan just got paaaaaid. Good for him. I thought he sucked shit in Indy but I guess something in ATL helped him turn it around. 

[Message Board User 12,396]

James Harden in mid offseason form.  And midseason form.

 

[billfromlaketravis 11,566]

What in the hell is wrong with Sixer fan? Link: https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nba-rumors-warriors-discussed-damian-164411286.html

On what planet does Ben Simmons have trade value? And enough trade value to land a superstar like Lillard?!

They're like Yankee fan in the 2000's when they thought they could sign any player they wanted. 

[Message Board User 12,396]

Sexton likely gone this summer.  Will be interesting how much other teams value him.

A deal that might make more sense for the Cavs is bundling Love with Collin Sexton, who I’ve been told is “very available” this summer. I wrote not long ago that I thought the Cavs were going to write the check to pay Sexton a max contract this summer, but based on what I’ve been told the last few months from sources around the league, I no longer believe that’s true.

Sexton is a fine NBA player, but he isn’t a max player. The fact Team USA chose Darius Garland, and not Sexton, to compete on the Select team should be ample evidence of the different trajectories between the Cavs’ young guards.

I asked one executive from an opposing team if the Cavs could get the Sixers’ Ben Simmons for a package of Love and Sexton. While the money matches, the response was “no chance; Philly can do better” despite Simmons’ deflated value.

Teams around the league are well aware of Sexton’s contract situation, which will hurt his value in trade talks. One source believed the Cavs should’ve traded Sexton last summer, knowing this was coming and didn’t believe the Cavs will get a pick in the top half of the draft for him because of the contract. The Cavs may not find a match and still bring Sexton back for next season, but it won’t be for a lack of trying.

There was a time, not long ago, when I thought Sexton and Love would both be on the Cavs when next season began. Now, I’m not so sure.

[d2o 1,602]

12 hours ago, Message Board User said:

Sexton likely gone this summer.  Will be interesting how much other teams value him.

A deal that might make more sense for the Cavs is bundling Love with Collin Sexton, who I’ve been told is “very available” this summer. I wrote not long ago that I thought the Cavs were going to write the check to pay Sexton a max contract this summer, but based on what I’ve been told the last few months from sources around the league, I no longer believe that’s true.

Sexton is a fine NBA player, but he isn’t a max player. The fact Team USA chose Darius Garland, and not Sexton, to compete on the Select team should be ample evidence of the different trajectories between the Cavs’ young guards.

I asked one executive from an opposing team if the Cavs could get the Sixers’ Ben Simmons for a package of Love and Sexton. While the money matches, the response was “no chance; Philly can do better” despite Simmons’ deflated value.

Teams around the league are well aware of Sexton’s contract situation, which will hurt his value in trade talks. One source believed the Cavs should’ve traded Sexton last summer, knowing this was coming and didn’t believe the Cavs will get a pick in the top half of the draft for him because of the contract. The Cavs may not find a match and still bring Sexton back for next season, but it won’t be for a lack of trying.

There was a time, not long ago, when I thought Sexton and Love would both be on the Cavs when next season began. Now, I’m not so sure.

Sexton is MUCH better than Garland.   Who was chosen for that shit collection of players shouldn't factor into anything.

[Patrick Bateman 3,933]

2 hours ago, d2o said:

Sexton is MUCH better than Garland.   Who was chosen for that shit collection of players shouldn't factor into anything.

They're both so young, it's hard to say who will end up being better.  Sexton is more of a scorer while Garland has a little more play making talent.  Neither is a great player right now, but last yea, yea Sexton was the better player but we're talking about league average or below guys.  All potential right now.

[d2o 1,602]

13 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

They're both so young, it's hard to say who will end up being better.  Sexton is more of a scorer while Garland has a little more play making talent.  Neither is a great player right now, but last yea, yea Sexton was the better player but we're talking about league average or below guys.  All potential right now.

Very true.   It was a bad pairing to draft 2 tiny guards and play them together so I kind of always expected them to part with one or the other.    Maybe they think Sexton is the more valued commodity and can get more for him at this time

 

[Message Board User 12,396]

1 hour ago, d2o said:

Very true.   It was a bad pairing to draft 2 tiny guards and play them together so I kind of always expected them to part with one or the other.    Maybe they think Sexton is the more valued commodity and can get more for him at this time

 

Sexton + Garland is a bad pairing which should have never happened but here we are.

And while I like Sexton as a player and love his attitude, the main concerns revolve around - 1) Sexton is going to want 25-30 million a year in his next contract, 2) his physical limitations mean you will always need to compensate for him defensively, and 3) just like with Zach Lavine, are Sextons number a result of him being on a bad team?  Will Sexton ever be the first or second best player on a 50+ win team?

Like I said, I like Sexton and think his ultimate role on a good team would be that of 6 man who can come in and score in bunches…but is that worth crazy money?

[d2o 1,602]

3 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

Sexton + Garland is a bad pairing which should have never happened but here we are.

And while I like Sexton as a player and love his attitude, the main concerns revolve around - 1) Sexton is going to want 25-30 million a year in his next contract, 2) his physical limitations mean you will always need to compensate for him defensively, and 3) just like with Zach Lavine, are Sextons number a result of him being on a bad team?  Will Sexton ever be the first or second best player on a 50+ win team?

Like I said, I like Sexton and think his ultimate role on a good team would be that of 6 man who can come in and score in bunches…but is that worth crazy money?

Definitely can see all those concerns.

[d2o 1,602]

 

 

[Patrick Bateman 3,933]

This would be interesting..... Not sure the path, maybe packing Kuzma?  Does he fit with Ingram and Zion though?  And what if the Lakers re-sign Schroeder?  I guess he's energy and scoring off the bench.

Quote

The Lakers may consider exploring ways to re-acquire Lonzo Ball, according to NBA reporter Mark Stein. 

Stein reports that the Lakers "covet one more difference-making playmaker who would allow James and Davis to spend more time at power forward and center," and to expect to hear of L.A. "searching for potential pathways, however obstacle-strewn they would be," to add Ball. It's also worth noting that Shams Charania of The Athletic reported Tuesday that the Pelicans are unlikely to match a significant offer sheet for Lonzo in restricted free agency. 

 

 

[d2o 1,602]

2 hours ago, Patrick Bateman said:

This would be interesting..... Not sure the path, maybe packing Kuzma?  Does he fit with Ingram and Zion though?  And what if the Lakers re-sign Schroeder?  I guess he's energy and scoring off the bench.

 

Think you answered your own question.   Schoder and Kuz for Zo.   I know Schroder would have to agree to go NO which he more than likely wont but I could see the market for him being a little weak and it might the only way he could get paid...........what LA offered him last season, doh!!

 

[Patrick Bateman 3,933]

7 minutes ago, d2o said:

Think you answered your own question.   Schoder and Kuz for Zo.   I know Schroder would have to agree to go NO which he more than likely wont but I could see the market for him being a little weak and it might the only way he could get paid...........what LA offered him last season, doh!!

 

Schroder turned down 21m AAV from the Lakers already and is seeking 25m -30m.  Besides the money not matching, if the Cans won't go above 18m for Ball, hard to see them putting out 22-25m for Schroder.  Kuzma is about 26m for the next 2 years so pretty affordable.  Let's say Ball comes in at 18-20m then maybe they could add Harrell and make it work.  They could then maybe work out a S&T for Schroder or a 3 way trade somehow depending on suitors.

[Loch Ness Monster 3,533]

Kawhi undergoes surgery on a partially torn ACL.

[Michael Knight 13,043]

Odds he plays next year

[Kermit 3,159]

18 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

Odds he plays next year

Hope he plays and the Clippers lose in such a convincing and terrible fashion that this one legged asshole is forced to consider retirement due to shame. 

[Message Board User 12,396]

24 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

Odds he plays next year

PM Uncle Dennis

Edited July 14, 2021 by Message Board User

[LTtxfan 49,390]

7 hours ago, d2o said:

 

 

 

Ben Simmons needs time with Chip Engelland (The Shot Doctor)

[d2o 1,602]

12 hours ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Kawhi undergoes surgery on a partially torn ACL.

Knew that injury was more than they let on.   Not traveling and not even sitting on the bench during home games Were sure signs.

[Mitch Cumsteen 18,609]

15 minutes ago, d2o said:

 Not traveling and not even sitting on the bench during home games Were sure signs.

Yeah... it was just shocking that after he got hurt that he wasn't out there supporting his teammates. He's never done anything like that before. Although if he didn't hide from Clippers support and medical staff, it would be a sign of tremendous personal growth.

[Kermit 3,159]

I can’t wait to see how this gets blamed on Tony Parker.

[aggie08 21,576]

22 minutes ago, Kermit said:

I can’t wait to see how this gets blamed on Tony Parker.

Tony Parker - Paul George. Same number of letters in their names. Coincidence? 

[Chad 1,728]

I enjoyed watching the Clips fail to meet expectations the last two seasons. Is bitch ass gonna demand the Clips unload Paul George? Or demand a trade somewhere like the Knicks or 76ers?

[d2o 1,602]

8 minutes ago, Chad said:

I enjoyed watching the Clips fail to meet expectations the last two seasons. Is bitch ass gonna demand the Clips unload Paul George? Or demand a trade somewhere like the Knicks or 76ers?

Clips were always gonna Clip

[SilasCoade 2,622]

36 minutes ago, Chad said:

I enjoyed watching the Clips fail to meet expectations the last two seasons. Is bitch ass gonna demand the Clips unload Paul George? Or demand a trade somewhere like the Knicks or 76ers?

I actually would like to see the 76ers send Simmons + a first to Clips for Kawhi + a second. Even coming off the ACL a half-year of Kawhi might be enough to get them over the hump.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8,867]

It was an insane gamble to give up all of those picks. They probably couldn’t sign Kawhi if he doesn’t tamper with PG to demand a trade from OKC. Soo yea. I’ll play my tiny violin after this blows up and the clippers can begin rebuilding somewhere between 2027 and 2032

[Message Board User 12,396]

7 hours ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

It was an insane gamble to give up all of those picks. They probably couldn’t sign Kawhi if he doesn’t tamper with PG to demand a trade from OKC. Soo yea. I’ll play my tiny violin after this blows up and the clippers can begin rebuilding somewhere between 2027 and 2032

[Patrick Bateman 3,933]

Better become Zion's best friend....

 

[d2o 1,602]

 

 

[BigOrange1 6,476]

i know it's a player's league and all, but lillard has 3 guaranteed years, plus a $54 million 4th year option (he'll be 35), left on his contract.  in this situation, more than any that came before it, the player has about as little amount of leverage as i can ever recall.

[d2o 1,602]

20 minutes ago, BigOrange1 said:

i know it's a player's league and all, but lillard has 3 guaranteed years, plus a $54 million 4th year option (he'll be 35), left on his contract.  in this situation, more than any that came before it, the player has about as little amount of leverage as i can ever recall.

You would certainly think so.   It will be interesting to see how this one works out.     

On a somewhat related note, I've always thought that teams that give guys supermax deals should only have the reg max value count against the cap for them.    Being able to pay them more than any other team is only a benefit if that extra part doesnt count for their cap.   Otherwise it is taking up space that might be used to add additional talent and consequently a hinderance

Edited July 16, 2021 by d2o

[Mitch Cumsteen 18,609]

6 minutes ago, d2o said:

You would certainly think so.   It will be interesting to see how this one works out.     

On a somewhat related note, I've always thought that teams that give guys supermax deals should only have the reg max value count against the cap for them.    Being able to pay them more than any other team is only a benefit if that extra part doesnt count for their cap.   Otherwise it is taking up space that might be used to add additional talent and consequently a hinderance

Yes... and then the player with the super max should be forced forfeit the additional monies if they request a trade.

Lillard went from bagging on guys who jump to superteams and saying that he's loyal to Portland until the end, to taking every last dollar he could and then bailing on them. With all due respect to Damian Lillard, when he signed that deal he kneecapped that franchise. When they subsequently signed McCullom to his ridiculous deal, they for all intents killed any chance for a championship. And I don't think Portland had much choice in either case.

I'm not sure how the league can address this, but their system is broken. It's not fair to the players that they should be forced take less money than they can under the CBA to win. And it's not fair to the teams that the players can bail whenever the fuck they want. If we learned anything from James Harden, it's that it doesn't matter how much time is left on your contract because if you are willing to become a big enough malcontent then the team will have no choice but to move you.

Also... for as historically successful as Portland has been, is there any other fanbase that has been as tortured? It's one thing to suck for forever like the Clippers, but to be consistently good and simultaneously constantly shit on has got to be a brutal tease. It's like they sold their soul for that 1976 chip and have been paying for it ever since.  Walton gets hurt. They take Sam Bowie over MJ. Those rip city teams were great but never quite good enough to win a ring. They went through the whole jailblazers deal and had some good runs when Paul Allen was outspending the rest of the league. They lose Jermaine O'Neal to the Pacers before he grew up. Brandon Roy got hurt. Greg Oden over Kevin Durant. Aldridge bails and now Lillard wants out. 

[d2o 1,602]

13 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Yes... and then the player with the super max should be forced forfeit the additional monies if they request a trade.

Lillard went from bagging on guys who jump to superteams and saying that he's loyal to Portland until the end, to taking every last dollar he could and then bailing on them. With all due respect to Damian Lillard, when he signed that deal he kneecapped that franchise. When they subsequently signed McCullom to his ridiculous deal, they for all intents killed any chance for a championship. And I don't think Portland had much choice in either case.

I'm not sure how the league can address this, but their system is broken. It's not fair to the players that they should be forced take less money than they can under the CBA to win. And it's not fair to the teams that the players can bail whenever the fuck they want. If we learned anything from James Harden, it's that it doesn't matter how much time is left on your contract because if you are willing to become a big enough malcontent then the team will have no choice but to move you.

Also... for as historically successful as Portland has been, is there any other fanbase that has been as tortured? It's one thing to suck for forever like the Clippers, but to be consistently good and simultaneously constantly shit on has got to be a brutal tease. It's like they sold their soul for that 1976 chip and have been paying for it ever since.  Walton gets hurt. They take Sam Bowie over MJ. Those rip city teams were great but never quite good enough to win a ring. They went through the whole jailblazers deal and had some good runs when Paul Allen was outspending the rest of the league. They lose Jermaine O'Neal to the Pacers before he grew up. Brandon Roy got hurt. Greg Oden over Kevin Durant. Aldridge bails and now Lillard wants out. 

YES!

[aggie08 21,576]

1 hour ago, BigOrange1 said:

i know it's a player's league and all, but lillard has 3 guaranteed years, plus a $54 million 4th year option (he'll be 35), left on his contract.  in this situation, more than any that came before it, the player has about as little amount of leverage as i can ever recall.

Exactly. And what has changed in Portland since he signed that deal? They're the same mediocre team that they've been for almost a decade now, just with a new coach. Surely, he wasn't expecting dramatic roster improvements after he inked that deal? Or did he really believe the BS that they were close after Steph swept them out of the WCF in 2019?

Or did he just take the money knowing he could just ask out when their already cracked window was shut?

Edited July 16, 2021 by aggie08

[aggie08 21,576]

59 minutes ago, d2o said:

On a somewhat related note, I've always thought that teams that give guys supermax deals should only have the reg max value count against the cap for them. 

 

29 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Yes... and then the player with the super max should be forced forfeit the additional monies if they request a trade.

Both excellent ideas. Players waiting around to get their money, then forcing their way out of town because their hamstrung teams can't build an elite roster around them is probably the exact opposite of how the NBA hoped that the supermax would work.

[HtownHorn 14,814]

4 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

 

Both excellent ideas. Players waiting around to get their money, then forcing their way out of town because their hamstrung teams can't build an elite roster around them is probably the exact opposite of how the NBA hoped that the supermax would work.

I agree, both are reasonable ideas that could potentially solve this current mess.

[d2o 1,602]

11 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

 

Both excellent ideas. Players waiting around to get their money, then forcing their way out of town because their hamstrung teams can't build an elite roster around them is probably the exact opposite of how the NBA hoped that the supermax would work.

This is exactly what is going on.   I'm not mad at agents advising guys to do it either.   Get as much guaranteed money on the books as you can and then force your way where you wanna go.

Strange that no one saw that as the likely outcome of the supermax idea.

[Aqua Buddha 14,647]

Yeah, got his money and then forced a trade.  It's not like everyone didn't see this coming dating back to when he signed his current contract.

That being said, if he wants to win, GS and Philly are the two best options.  GS prolly has more in trade (Wiseman, Wiggins, draft picks, etc.)  Portland might go the Okie City route and just trade everyone away for the most draft picks and tank.  

[aggie08 21,576]

1 hour ago, d2o said:

Strange that no one saw that as the likely outcome of the supermax idea.

When the supermax was put into the CBA, the idea of star players publicly and vehemently demanding to be traded--to the point of it being untenable to keep them in your locker room--with multiple years left on their massive contracts that they eagerly signed wasn't really a thing yet.

[d2o 1,602]

4 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

When the supermax was put into the CBA, the idea of star players publicly and vehemently demanding to be traded--to the point of it being untenable to keep them in your locker room--with multiple years left on their massive contracts that they eagerly signed wasn't really a thing yet.

The flip side is guys like Blake Griffin who the Clips did all they could to convince him to re-sign a  yr max deal and then traded him less than a yr later.

[closetohumping 17,513]

19 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Yeah, got his money and then forced a trade.  It's not like everyone didn't see this coming dating back to when he signed his current contract.

That being said, if he wants to win, GS and Philly are the two best options.  GS prolly has more in trade (Wiseman, Wiggins, draft picks, etc.)  Portland might go the Okie City route and just trade everyone away for the most draft picks and tank.  

Would be an absolute nightmare for them if Dame, Steph and Klay go into their house raining 3s.

[d2o 1,602]

 

 

 

 

Edited July 16, 2021 by d2o

[Loch Ness Monster 3,533]

Must be depressing to be a mid to small time franchise.

Not only do you have to find a superstar which can take 15 years, the star will most likely ask to leave after they get their supermax.

Oh yeah, and when they force their way out they will paint management and/or the owner as incompetent.

Edited July 16, 2021 by Loch Ness Monster

[d2o 1,602]

18 minutes ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Must be depressing to be a mid to small time franchise.

Not only do you have to find a superstar which can take 15 years, the star will most likely ask to leave after they get their supermax.

Oh yeah, and when they force their way out they will paint management and/or the owner as incompetent.

Well.........the shoe kinda fits

[Patrick Bateman 3,933]

5 hours ago, d2o said:

You would certainly think so.   It will be interesting to see how this one works out.     

On a somewhat related note, I've always thought that teams that give guys supermax deals should only have the reg max value count against the cap for them.    Being able to pay them more than any other team is only a benefit if that extra part doesnt count for their cap.   Otherwise it is taking up space that might be used to add additional talent and consequently a hinderance

Agreed.  Long argued this.  It will have some impact on the big market teams too, as they would have more cap room to fill out the roster, but I think the benefit to the small market teams would more than offset.  We'd have to continue to assess.

4 hours ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Yes... and then the player with the super max should be forced forfeit the additional monies if they request a trade.

Lillard went from bagging on guys who jump to superteams and saying that he's loyal to Portland until the end, to taking every last dollar he could and then bailing on them. With all due respect to Damian Lillard, when he signed that deal he kneecapped that franchise. When they subsequently signed McCullom to his ridiculous deal, they for all intents killed any chance for a championship. And I don't think Portland had much choice in either case.

 

I'm unsure about this.  I like the idea in theory but who is benefitting?  The team acquiring the player would benefit which is usually a big market or high profit centers, is that really what we want?  I understand there needs to be something to the enforcement but it really just penalizes the player and the team trading him because now they have less matching money.  Benefits a team like the Nets in a Harden deal or Lakers in a AD deal.  Maybe a better idea is if a player signs a supermax, which is typically 4/5 years, they can't be traded until year 3 of that deal or after year 3?  But then you're also restricting teams from rebuilding as well but maybe if they're getting the benefit of the above cap accounting benefit, then maybe they should have to live with their management decisions.  It's a murky issue, but I would be up for maybe workshopping that idea.  

59 minutes ago, d2o said:

 

 

 

 

Lebron is pissed!!!!

[d2o 1,602]

1 minute ago, Patrick Bateman said:

Agreed.  Long argued this.  It will have some impact on the big market teams too, as they would have more cap room to fill out the roster, but I think the benefit to the small market teams would more than offset.  We'd have to continue to assess.

I'm unsure about this.  I like the idea in theory but who is benefitting?  The team acquiring the player would benefit which is usually a big market or high profit centers, is that really what we want?  I understand there needs to be something to the enforcement but it really just penalizes the player and the team trading him because now they have less matching money.  Benefits a team like the Nets in a Harden deal or Lakers in a AD deal.  Maybe a better idea is if a player signs a supermax, which is typically 4/5 years, they can't be traded until year 3 of that deal or after year 3?  But then you're also restricting teams from rebuilding as well but maybe if they're getting the benefit of the above cap accounting benefit, then maybe they should have to live with their management decisions.  It's a murky issue, but I would be up for maybe workshopping that idea.  

Lebron is pissed!!!!

Maybe that it doesn't count for the team that signs the player but if he forces a trade the extra money does count against the cap for that team.   Not sure it would stop teams from doing it but it might make it a little more difficult to make the money match.....maybe

[Patrick Bateman 3,933]

22 minutes ago, d2o said:

Maybe that it doesn't count for the team that signs the player but if he forces a trade the extra money does count against the cap for that team.   Not sure it would stop teams from doing it but it might make it a little more difficult to make the money match.....maybe

So, let's try to think this through and assume improvement #1 is put in.  So..... I'm just gonna estimate numbers for ease.

Lillard signed his supermax 2 years ago.  It actually doesn't kick in until next year and runs for 4 years and around 200m.  So, let's say the normal max was 4 years at about 160m for argument sake.

So, on Portland's books, he's about 40m AAV on Portland's books because of the #1 idea.  So, the accounting gets really murky.  So are we saying, if he's traded, Portland gets to trade him at 50million AAV for matching purposes to extract more value?  But Lillard's contract would then be reduced to 4/160m.  Additionally, on his new team, he would be on their books for 50million AAV for accounting purposes?  That's a lot ghost accounting and feels like it's ripe for manipulation.  Jus throwing that out there.  Under my thought (and I haven't thought it through much so just spitballing), Dame can't be traded until year 3 of his deal, so he has 2 more years with Portland no matter what.  Is that what we want?  No idea.

My concern is if we punish the player and the acquiring team, that is going to discourage small market or small ownership teams from looking at acquiring supermax players in a trade because it probably means going into the tax, which benefits rich teams (the LA teams, NY teams, etc) who can offset tax with regional revenues.  A Milwaukee or Minnesota probably would never think of going after a supermax player then???

I don't know..... just thinking aloud.

Edited July 16, 2021 by Patrick Bateman

[d2o 1,602]

10 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

So, let's try to think this through and assume improvement #1 is put in.  So..... I'm just gonna estimate numbers for ease.

Lillard signed his supermax 2 years ago.  It actually doesn't kick in until next year and runs for 4 years and around 200m.  So, let's say the normal max was 4 years at about 160m for argument sake.

So, on Portland's books, he's about 40m AAV on Portland's books because of the #1 idea.  So, the accounting gets really murky.  So are we saying, if he's traded, Portland gets to trade him at 50million AAV for matching purposes to extract more value?  But Lillard's contract would then be reduced to 4/160m.  Additionally, on his new team, he would be on their books for 50million AAV for accounting purposes?  That's a lot ghost accounting and feels like it's ripe for manipulation.  Jus throwing that out there.  Under my thought (and I haven't thought it through much so just spitballing), Dame can't be traded until year 3 of his deal, so he has 2 more years with Portland no matter what.  Is that what we want?  No idea.

My concern is if we punish the player and the acquiring team, that is going to discourage small market or small ownership teams from looking at acquiring supermax players in a trade because it probably means going into the tax, which benefits rich teams (the LA teams, NY teams, etc) who can offset tax with regional revenues.  A Milwaukee or Minnesota probably would never think of going after a supermax player then???

I don't know..... just thinking aloud.

Well, I meant scratching the part where the players money gets lowered.   I agree with your premise that it punishes the player.   So he goes to the new team and they have the full amount on their cap.   Now it would force the team losing the superstar to take on 10M more than they are giving out which might cause lux tax issues so that part would need some additional figuring. 

I don't think there is anything that will 100% stop what is going on now.   I doubt the players association would agree to forcing guys to stay 3 yrs.

 

Edited July 16, 2021 by d2o

[Patrick Bateman 3,933]

Kawhi news..... most logical scenario by Stein so nothing shocking.  Dallas will pursue him but not high probabilities of moving unless Uncle Dennis is getting paid by Cuban under the table.  

Quote

The Clippers’ Kawhi Leonard, like Paul, has to decide whether to exercise a pricey player option ($36 million) or head to free agency in August. Unlike Paul, Leonard must do so while facing long-term injury uncertainty after it was announced this week that he underwent surgery on a partially torn ACL in his right knee and is out indefinitely.

The most likely scenario, league sources say, remains Leonard opting out to re-sign with the Clippers — or, in Steve Ballmer’s worst nightmare, to shock the league by signing elsewhere. Leonard’s well-known affinity for Southern California has led various rival front offices to presume that he would have no interest in switching teams for the third time, but the notion that Leonard is unattainable seems to be waning a bit as the Aug. 2 start of free agency nears.

Dallas, just to name one expected suitor, will not be dissuaded from pursuing Leonard even if he’s forced to miss all of next season, league sources say. Leonard’s situation is frequently likened to Kevin Durant’s free agency in 2019 after Durant had sustained a torn Achilles tendon in the Finals. Brooklyn furnished Durant with a four-year, $164 million deal as part of a sign-and-trade with Golden State, with the Nets knowing they would have to play a whole season without him. Even at 30 and with a worrisome injury history, Leonard appears capable of generating similar interest.