The NBA 2014 Offseason Thread

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by nol

It's always fascinating how these arguments are exclusively directed at the players. You could easily turn the tables and say something like, "Oh, the Buss family can only earn a $50 million profit each year for owning the Lakers, a task for which they have not demonstrated any clear aptitude?"

nol, I was responding to a quote directed at player pay. This is only directed at players because of that.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by korme

If you were the best person in the planet in your field, don't you think you would deserve more than 20% of what an above average guy (in this case, Heyward) is making? You cant argue that LeBron isn't worth, like 50MM a year in reality for the revenue he generates, the huge improvement of a team, interest etc etc

How would I know? Have you conducted studies on the relative worth of the best workers compared to the average peer in their fields? Maybe 20% is pretty good.

My only point is in response to the quote noting that the best players (in that poster's opinion) maybe aren't doing so well. I'm of the opinion they're doing pretty good.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by nol

It's too easy to go back and point to all the dumb Cavs moves, but if they had just made the conventional pick with Noel last year that roster would be very, very, scary for a team with 3 key players under 22 - almost title-ready without needing to make any big trades.

I doubt we end up keeping Anthony Bennett but he's going to be a serious player in this league.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Paul Pierce to the Wizards on a 2 year deal, 2nd year is player option.

As a person who will always see him as a Celtic, this news is rather depressing.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

As a person who will always see him as a Celtic, this news is rather depressing.

Yeah, going to be really strange seeing him in those terrible Washington jerseys. Not sure how good a replacement he'll be for what Ariza gave them last year, but the Wizards must be thinking that they are a decent chance in the East next season.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by stevew

I doubt we end up keeping Anthony Bennett but he's going to be a serious player in this league.

IMO they'd be nuts to move him right now with his value where it is, unless he's a throw in for a good player.

[Young Drachma]

Everybody loves the free market except when it comes to paying people what they're worth. Donald Sterling gets to flip his 2nd rate team into a multibillion dollar profit and that's okay. LeBron being underpaid where if he were a baseball player with no cap how much would he make per year? It's bullshit.

[korme]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

How would I know? Have you conducted studies on the relative worth of the best workers compared to the average peer in their fields? Maybe 20% is pretty good..

You know what, I haven't

[sterlingice]

Would it be good for the sport if there were a completely unfettered market around players? For instance, is it good for some of the European soccer leagues that you have some teams with seemingly unlimited payroll and others with much more limited budgets? Or is it better to have a system, for the sport as a whole, where there are some artificial constraints?

In short, it's the union's job to look out for every one of its members- not just the ones at the top. Do players, as a whole, do better with more balance or less balance in the league. For the US, in order of success in terms of players salaries: NFL (strictly regulated), MLB (mostly open), NBA (between NFL and MLB), and NHL (strictly regulated).

SI

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Everybody loves the free market except when it comes to paying people what they're worth. Donald Sterling gets to flip his 2nd rate team into a multibillion dollar profit and that's okay. LeBron being underpaid where if he were a baseball player with no cap how much would he make per year? It's bullshit.

You will rarely catch me saying something like "that guy doesn't deserve his money" I'll say a team or a player is overrated. I'll say they are lucky to be in the position they are in. Criticize a player for how much they make? Never.

I think the range of 50 to 55 percent of the total revenue of the league should go to the players. I don't think it needs to go much beyond that. I'm also in favor of very strict salary floors which ensure no team can have a payroll of 12 million and get away with it.

All of that said, I'm not interested in American sports being turned into European soccer. Don't have a sugar daddy owner? Aren't a part of the richest teams in your country? Good luck with your mid table finish. Maybe you'll get lucky and get relegated so you can have a chance at a league one championship someday.

Baseball can mitigate the problem to a degree because:

A) There are 25 guys on a team
B) The best player is worth maybe 15% of a teams needed wins to get to the postseason
C) The farm system allows teams to build up dominant youth programs that can keep them competitive with the super rich. (Tampa Bay as an example)

Open basketball up to no cap and allow someone to pay James 60 million a year and you'll get three or four dream teams in LA/NY/Miami/Dallas (Cuban) and maybe Chicago. Every other team would just be incubators for young stars.

I think that's garbage. Some, like jon for example, think that's terrific because he's enthralled by the super team stuff. I can't stand it. I've watched less basketball in the last few years than I ever have before with the super team. When I do watch it and comment, it seems like everyone else is seeing a different game than I am. (I'm stunned that Bill Simmons and me seem to be the only two guys who have stated Lebron intentionally didn't take over games at times in the finals he should have)

With James going back to Cleveland, I'll likely watch 10X the amount of NBA I would have. The league is interesting to me again. As for soccer, I truly love the sport. I truly love the Arsenal despite them being a "rich" club. Even so, I'd love to see a system where a Swansea could compete with Chelsea yearly. Or an EPL season where you could make a case for 7 winners of the trophy instead of 3 or 4.

To each his/her own.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Some, like jon for example, think that's terrific because he's enthralled by the super team stuff.

That's fair, albeit "enthralled" is overstated by several magnitudes.

The Lebron hate made that team interesting, more specifically watching people reach for antacids when he got rings. That was entertaining enough to give me at least some rooting interest & a reason to pay attention.

Now?

The NBA goes back to being interesting only insofar as having some vague notion about players is useful when NBA 2k15 comes out. If the Hawks happen to do something meaningful for the first time in ages, hey, I'll enjoy the watercooler buzz of that just for the sake of something to talk about I suppose.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

I think the players will be better prepared next time.

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

They won't because they still don't have anyone leading the PA but valuation of franchises has increased way too much and the TV deal expiring. It is still in the best interest of the owners to lockout but the players will get more just more even by extending the present CBA(but won't because of all this new found money). I'm afraid the 2 year lead the league has on the player association is too much but the Clippers deal was the best thing for the players in 16-17.

This. Billy Hunter was terrible and he stayed in charge for 20? years, and now it's been 2? 3? years and they still haven't found a new head. Some of the older guys get it, but I just don't see the majority of NBA players having the foresight to plan well enough for a sustained strike/lockout. It'll come down to whether the owners are satisfied with their vastly increasing profits or if they want to squeeze that extra $3-5 million per year out of the players.

Originally Posted by miami_fan

As a person who will always see him as a Celtic, this news is rather depressing.

I love him, I want him back here after his career, but I'd rather see him playing meaningful games than playing out the string on a "rebuilding" team. I am kind of shocked he didn't go to the Clippers.

You know who has to kind of hate LBJ's decision to go back to Cleveland the most? Kevin Durant. He's going to be painted as an asshole if he doesn't go home to Washington now, and if he does he won't be setting a heroic precedent, he'll just be "following LBJ's lead".

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

You know who has to kind of hate LBJ's decision to go back to Cleveland the most? Kevin Durant. He's going to be painted as an asshole if he doesn't go home to Washington now, and if he does he won't be setting a heroic precedent, he'll just be "following LBJ's lead".

Really? I don't see it. I think anyone would hold it against him if he stayed in OKC. And I don't think anyone is really going to hold it against him to not go to DC.

SI

[stevew]

Obviously the Cavs now getting all of the premium games is a benefit. I figure Heat/Cavs has to be a Christmas game.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by stevew

Obviously the LBJ now getting all of the premium games is a benefit. I figure Bosh-Wade/LBJ has to be a Christmas game.

Fixed it for you. Nobody cares what teams they are really on, right?

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Really? I don't see it. I think anyone would hold it against him if he stayed in OKC. And I don't think anyone is really going to hold it against him to not go to DC.

SI

I don't see it either. Durant is considered a good guy by most everyone in the league. If he stays in OKC, takes off for Dallas (college), heads back home to DC or goes someplace else I don't think anyone will blink an eye.

[Arles]

Luol Deng just signed with the Heat for 2 years - $20 mil.

[Arles]

A couple more items: Houston decided not to match the Parsons offer sheet and worked out a sign and trade with Washington for Ariza.

[Groundhog]

LBJ really screwed the Rockets. Not that Ariza is a bad player or anything, but he's not Parsons, either. They went into the offseason with some lofty goals, but come out of it weaker overall than last year IMO.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

LBJ really screwed the Rockets. Not that Ariza is a bad player or anything, but he's not Parsons, either. They went into the offseason with some lofty goals, but come out of it weaker overall than last year IMO.

James didn't really. It was Bosh and, to a lesser extent, Melo.

SI

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by TroyF

You will rarely catch me saying something like "that guy doesn't deserve his money" I'll say a team or a player is overrated. I'll say they are lucky to be in the position they are in. Criticize a player for how much they make? Never.

I think the range of 50 to 55 percent of the total revenue of the league should go to the players. I don't think it needs to go much beyond that. I'm also in favor of very strict salary floors which ensure no team can have a payroll of 12 million and get away with it.

All of that said, I'm not interested in American sports being turned into European soccer. Don't have a sugar daddy owner? Aren't a part of the richest teams in your country? Good luck with your mid table finish. Maybe you'll get lucky and get relegated so you can have a chance at a league one championship someday.

Baseball can mitigate the problem to a degree because:

A) There are 25 guys on a team
B) The best player is worth maybe 15% of a teams needed wins to get to the postseason
C) The farm system allows teams to build up dominant youth programs that can keep them competitive with the super rich. (Tampa Bay as an example)

Open basketball up to no cap and allow someone to pay James 60 million a year and you'll get three or four dream teams in LA/NY/Miami/Dallas (Cuban) and maybe Chicago. Every other team would just be incubators for young stars.

I think that's garbage. Some, like jon for example, think that's terrific because he's enthralled by the super team stuff. I can't stand it. I've watched less basketball in the last few years than I ever have before with the super team. When I do watch it and comment, it seems like everyone else is seeing a different game than I am. (I'm stunned that Bill Simmons and me seem to be the only two guys who have stated Lebron intentionally didn't take over games at times in the finals he should have)

With James going back to Cleveland, I'll likely watch 10X the amount of NBA I would have. The league is interesting to me again. As for soccer, I truly love the sport. I truly love the Arsenal despite them being a "rich" club. Even so, I'd love to see a system where a Swansea could compete with Chelsea yearly. Or an EPL season where you could make a case for 7 winners of the trophy instead of 3 or 4.

To each his/her own.

I wonder if there is a middle ground. Where say 50% to the players as currently constructed.

Then say 8% to a league fund that is distributed EXCUSIVELY to the starting 5 of post season teams. Where maybe Round 1 is worthX, 2 X *1.25, Conference Champ, x *1.5, Final runner up X *2, and League Champ x*3.

That way you cant just all stock pile on one team as only 5 get paid. There is a reason to spread the wealth and play for a cause they actually care about.

Combine that strategy with contracting about 5 teams and the NBA would be Must See TV, IMHO.

[CU Tiger]

-Dola....then again what do I know. My buddy brought some high gravity home brew over and we've been drinking it since around noon.

Its amazing what 20% ABV does to you in a smooth albeit thick porter

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Fixed it for you. Nobody cares what teams they are really on, right?

It's a major pain$$$$ wise to get the Fox Sports Ohio channel so prime time is always better

[stevew]

Daryl really really botched the Parsons thing.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Really? I don't see it. I think anyone would hold it against him if he stayed in OKC. And I don't think anyone is really going to hold it against him to not go to DC.

SI

I don't think anyone knows or cares where Durant is from. Maybe if he was a Terp it would be different

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

James didn't really. It was Bosh and, to a lesser extent, Melo.

SI

Well ultimately it was Morey, but if LBJ signs back with Miami and Bosh stops being a realistic target, I think Parsons is still in a Rockets jersey.

We'll see though... Ariza might end up being a better fit than Parsons if he maintains last season's form. Gives the Rockets a wing who can defend the perimeter at least.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Arles

Luol Deng just signed with the Heat for 2 years - $20 mil.

Going to be interesting watching these guys play next year IMO. I don't think Bosh will be Raptors-era Bosh, but he needs to turn into Celtics-era KG (title year), and Wade goes back to being primary ball handler which suits him better (when healthy). Deng is a good team player who should slot in effortlessly. Obviously he's not going to replace LBJ, but I think he will look more like Chicago Deng than Cleveland Deng.

James Ennis has looked better than I expected he would against Summer League competition, and at least looks like a legit rotation player. Jury is out on Napier but it's only summer league so who knows... He is basically the Heat's version of Boobie Gibson now, a player the Heat grabbed for LeBron and are now stuck with after he left. Might as well bring Oden and Beasley back.

They wouldn't reach the playoffs in the West, but might fight for the 5-8 spots in the East.

[korme]

Getting rid of the cap wouldn't be the right thing. I love the NBA salary cap. What would make it more interesting is if they limited the "max" a player can make. So, say the cap is 65 M, how much would a team willingly offer a LeBron knowing it has to put 14 more contracts around him?

[korme]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

You know who has to kind of hate LBJ's decision to go back to Cleveland the most? Kevin Durant. He's going to be painted as an asshole if he doesn't go home to Washington now, and if he does he won't be setting a heroic precedent, he'll just be "following LBJ's lead".

Nah, not at all. LeBron's situation is very unique. Yes, he was born near Cleveland, OH. But if the Milwaukee Bucks drafted him originally, we are probably never talking about Cleveland as an option. Most franchise guys adopt the cities that drafted them as their new homes. Look at Kobe (from Philly), he is a Laker for life, even if the Sixers were awesome he wouldn't be considering them at this point.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by korme

Look at Kobe (from Philly), he is a Hornet for life, oh wait, even if the Sixers were awesome he wouldn't be considering them at this point.

FIFY

[stevew]

Nobody calls Dirk a Milwaukee Buck though.

[Groundhog]

You have to keep the salary cap, but IMO it should be higher than it is. Given the importance of individual stars to team success, they definitely deserve higher max contracts, but increasing the cap just means more non-max guys getting overpaid.

I don't know what the answer is, but maybe a scaled max that takes into account performance - although that's far from perfect, and rewards a guy putting up Kevin Love numbers on bad teams.

[nol]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

I wonder if there is a middle ground. Where say 50% to the players as currently constructed.

Then say 8% to a league fund that is distributed EXCUSIVELY to the starting 5 of post season teams. Where maybe Round 1 is worthX, 2 X *1.25, Conference Champ, x *1.5, Final runner up X *2, and League Champ x*3.

That way you cant just all stock pile on one team as only 5 get paid. There is a reason to spread the wealth and play for a cause they actually care about.

Combine that strategy with contracting about 5 teams and the NBA would be Must See TV, IMHO.

My way would be to keep a salary cap, remove individual max salaries, and get rid of the draft. All rookies enter as free agents, and the last-place team gets a salary exception where they can pay $X million/year to any rookies signed (and that number would scale up each year for the duration of the first contract) before it starts to count against the cap. Then as you move up the standings, that exception gets smaller. Ideally, the exceptions would be spaced out so that one of the worst teams - but not necessarily the absolute worst team - would usually be able to land the top rookies.

That would allow teams to rebuild more quickly without providing as much of an incentive to lose. If Philadelphia wanted to use their salary exception plus their cap space to sign both Embiid and Wiggins to huge deals and have them be the cornerstones moving forward, that's fine provided they can convince both players to join them.

Additionally, the bad teams would have the flexibility to go after multiple first-round caliber players rather than kicking rocks and deciding to tank another year because they got stuck with the 3rd pick in a draft with two franchise saviors. The salary exception also helps for the teams like Milwaukee who spend and try to win, but just have all the wheels fall off.

[korme]

Originally Posted by stevew

Nobody calls Dirk a Milwaukee Buck though.

He never played for Milwaukee (I realize he was drafted by them) and CU Tiger, yep that is a good one too, you guys are missing the point, and you know what I meant. That's weak.

[lungs]

Dirk may not be a Buck but Robert 'Tractor' Traylor was a Buck until the end!

[Groundhog]

That Taylor/Traylor/Baston Wolverine trio is one of the earlier college-to-pro fail stores I remember after I started following the NBA closely thanks to the internet.

[sterlingice]

Kindof amusing:

Originally Posted by hoopsrumors

The Lakers have officially renounced the rights to Pau Gasol along with an entertaining list of long-retired players, according to Mark Deeks of ShamSports (via Twitter). Prepare for a stroll down memory lane. The Lakers renounced the rights to Horace Grant, Ron Harper, Jim Jackson, Karl Malone, Ira Newble, Theo Ratliff, Mitch Richmond, John Salley, Brian Shaw, Joe Smith, and Shammond Williams. The Lakers had to drop the rights to those players in order to help make the Jeremy Lin trade possible.

Western Notes: Gasol, Love, Mavs, Deng | Hoops Rumors

SI

[vex]

The Karl Malone comeback appears to be over

[Groundhog]

Yikes. Ira Newble. There's a player I hadn't thought about in a long, long time.

[Hammer755]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Well ultimately it was Morey, but if LBJ signs back with Miami and Bosh stops being a realistic target, I think Parsons is still in a Rockets jersey.

We'll see though... Ariza might end up being a better fit than Parsons if he maintains last season's form. Gives the Rockets a wing who can defend the perimeter at least.

As much as I love Morey, I think this is all on him. The second they declined Parsons' team option, he HAD to come up with another max guy before Chandler signed his offer sheet. When it looked like LeBron was sending Bosh this way on a silver platter, it looked like a good move. Now, not so much.

And I don't have any confidence in Ariza whatsoever. Yes, he shot almost 46% last season, but his FG% in the prior 4 seasons was 42, 42, 40 & 39.

[RainMaker]

Morey is all about value. Parsons at $15 million is not good value. It hasn't been a good offseason for the Rockets but they put themselves in a good position and it just didn't pan out.

Ariza will likely be more valuable to Houston than Parsons and for half the price.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Ariza will likely be more valuable to Houston than Parsons and for half the price.

Yeah, Parsons is a very good player, but the Rockets are invested in Dwight and Harden as their top two, so you need guys that compliment their strengths and weaknesses. Would I prefer Parsons on my roster? Absolutely. But Ariza does compliment Harden's weakness on D to an extent, and gives them good floor spacing at less salary than Parsons. It puts more pressure on Harden and Dwight, but hey, that's why they're max.

Losing Lin and Asik for nothing is a big blow to their bench though. I can see why they want their Swiss draft pick to come over because, especially if they lose Garcia, their starters are going to be playing a ton of minutes.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Morey is all about value. Parsons at $15 million is not good value. It hasn't been a good offseason for the Rockets but they put themselves in a good position and it just didn't pan out.

Ariza will likely be more valuable to Houston than Parsons and for half the price.

Declining the team option on Parsons was stupid when they did it and it's stupid now. At a minimum, he was going to make $11-12 mil. I know he wanted the right to match, but why not get one more season of him at under a mil and worst case you get a trade exception next year if he leaves (prob a S&T). He could have still signed Bosh/Melo/Ariza and had Parsons as well.

The whole move just didn't make sense. Best case, you pay $11 million more than you were scheduled to for Parsons. Where's the value in that?

Morey basically traded Asik, Lin and Parsons for Ariza and Clint Capela. Not sure how a team is better this next season after that move.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by nol

It's too easy to go back and point to all the dumb Cavs moves, but if they had just made the conventional pick with Noel last year that roster would be very, very, scary for a team with 3 key players under 22 - almost title-ready without needing to make any big trades.

If Lebron was from Indiana, the cavs owner would be correctly identified as a moron with the maturity of a 12 year old.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by korme

He never played for Milwaukee (I realize he was drafted by them) and CU Tiger, yep that is a good one too, you guys are missing the point, and you know what I meant. That's weak.

I'm on your side here.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Arles

Declining the team option on Parsons was stupid when they did it and it's stupid now. At a minimum, he was going to make $11-12 mil. I know he wanted the right to match, but why not get one more season of him at under a mil and worst case you get a trade exception next year if he leaves (prob a S&T). He could have still signed Bosh/Melo/Ariza and had Parsons as well.

The whole move just didn't make sense. Best case, you pay $11 million more than you were scheduled to for Parsons. Where's the value in that?

Morey basically traded Asik, Lin and Parsons for Ariza and Clint Capela. Not sure how a team is better this next season after that move.

Nothing worked out for him this offseason but I still think it wasn't a bad plan to swing for the fences on someone like Bosh or Carmelo. And declining the team option allowed for them to be able to not only land one of those stars, but also retain Parsons by matching him. From the sounds of it, they were really close to nabbing Bosh which would have made them one of the favorites.

They are worse this season but I still think Ariza is a better fit for the team. They need to improve defensively and he will help with that. Plus that Parsons contract is ridiculous.

[Arles]

Parsons' option was only for $964K. They could have kept that option and still went after Bosh/Melo. Moving Asik and Lin was what they needed to do to get the cap space.

[RainMaker]

But Parsons would have been unrestricted the next year. It was a risk that backfired but I understand why they did it. And I don't think anyone saw Parsons getting $15 million a year.

[stevew]

Raises hand

Parsons was an obvious lock to start out at the max. If you have the need/room it's just good game theory to screw Houston. Also now that 7 year contracts are gone, you can overpay a Parsons by the amount of less than a full MLE.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Really? I don't see it. I think anyone would hold it against him if he stayed in OKC. And I don't think anyone is really going to hold it against him to not go to DC.

Guess I run in different circles than y'all. All my DMV friends were talking about it, and I think the Wizards chose Pierce over Ariza at least partly because it preserves their flexibility and cap room in 2016.

Originally Posted by stevew

Daryl really really botched the Parsons thing.

I still don't understand why he didn't extend the deal that one more year, but I think he played his hand as well as he could this summer. Dallas called his bluff and threw a Godfather offer in, and then Bosh kind of inexplicably turned them down. If Bosh signed with them they probably match on Parsons, which costs them luxury tax money, but they'd be one of the 2-3 favorites and leading Sportscenter for 3 months. (Ok, after the first commercial break once they're done fellating LeBron.)