I don’t know if being a bad contract and a bad player are the same thing. CJ had a bad contract but was a good player (in my opinion). Paid like an All-Star and was something less than that. A bad contract on a good player can still net you negative roster building outcomes. It’s usually a fast track to the middle.
Totally. It's all about value: is a player outperforming his contract? More precisely, is his net present value (present and future production, normalized for certainty) less than his contract? It's a bad deal. Equal? It's money that could probably be better spent elsewhere. Is it under? Then it's a good deal. Of course, net present value is only as good as one's prediction of the future is. If we think Simons is going to get a LOT better, then his current contract is much better than if we think he's plateaued. Also, with the salary cap, a contract can be of different values between teams... if a guy is worth $10m a year, but you're paying him $20m, then that's a bad contract generally, right? But if a team that's over the cap/has no opportunity costs, and can choose between a dude worth $3m for a $2m contract and a guy worth $10m on a $20m contract, then the more expensive guy adds more value to the team and that team likes him more than other teams would (see: many of Paul Allen/Bob Whitsitt's teams). Related to the Blazers: I dunno. Haha. If the team were GOOD, then the contracts for Simons, Nurk, and Dame would make perfect sense, and re-signing Grant would be wise... even if those four guys would be paid based on the reasonable upper limit of their net present value. But given the team needs to get better, their contracts don't look as good IMO.
Watch out, you kind of sound like me talking about Ben Simmons a year and a half ago... and I seem to have been wrong to have disputed so many in here that were saying that his value on the court had taken irreparable damage. Not saying that you're wrong, just that you could be or John Collins will have a breakout season next season. People were writing off Julius Randle (again) this time last year but he seems to have rebounded.
That does seem ridiculous to call it a bad contract. It's basically 25 million a year. Meanwhile we have people saying we would be fortunate to have the older Grant at 30 million a year. Even though Grant is haing a year offensively way above his average and Collins a year way below his average, their efg% about the same this year. TRB% about 7 for Grant and 12 (career 15) for Collins. Assist % 1 for Grant, over 5 for Collins (career over 8) Blk % 2 for Grant 3 for Collins. ORTG about the same this year but Collins much higher for career (and Collins is only 25) DTRG Collins much lower at 115 to Grant's 120 and Collins career 113. OBPM Grant quite a bit better this year but over career Collins a lot better. DBPM about the same. What happened to Collins anyway? Did some kind of injury slow him permanently? Trade rumors get to him?
I always think about Presti and the Thunder. They acquire 'negative contract' Chris Paul AND 2 swaps with the Rockets, AND 2 first round picks for Russell Westbrook—as they were heading into a rebuild anyway. After a playoff appearance and 2nd team all-nba appearance, they double dip on the backend and send 'positive contract' Chris Paul to the Suns for a 2022 first and a couple of vets that they end up liquidating for even more picks. Time (being able to wait someone out, or wait until a player's value improves—ex: Julius Randle this year) and system (cultivating an environment where a variety of different types of players can shine) are two big components of a GM's job. The Dame situation has made that Time component tricky for Cronin to navigate.
Agreed. For equal money, I'd most likely prefer Collins. One of John's issues this year has been that he's played the entire season with essentially a broken finger.
Mario hezonja, Anthony toliver, Shabazz Mohamed, Nick Stauskus, Aminu, Harkless, Earl Watson, and a lot of other scrubs say hello.
Right now, both guys feel like they should only be situational backups. Not good enough to play every night, but against the right matchups are worthy of 12ish minutes.
I don't know about that Eubanks, because of hustle, energy, and rim protection could be an every night backup if the rest of the roster was balanced. We saw Zach and Eubanks on the same floor last night and they were at the same level, and there are several posters here who think Zach would be a great backup. Watford is only 22 and does have a lot of skills. He has decent handles, a solid perimeter shot, is a good passer for position, commendable BBIQ. I think he has a solid upside sure, we'd all like to see 'better' backups (whatever that really means) but the last few seasons have shown that adding, and keeping, those better backups is a real tall task
I liked Zach, but time ran out on his health with the Blazers. Now? Healthy? A back-up center who opts-in with the Spurs with the understanding they trade him to the Blazers into the Payton trade exception? Okay. That’s an option that could marginally improve the team … maybe, yeah. I like improving for the cost of almost nothing. I’d rather get Payton Pritchard with that spot. I have zero hesitation in getting better back-ups BUT also zero hesitation in keeping Thybulle, Eubanks, Watford, and Walker and like doing it.
Knox is another interesting "backup". Not sure what to think about him. He certainly is good enough to scare the shit out of us during this tank job.
. Its not uncommon for minimum contract guys to be valued highly around here. I like them both at their contract value. I also feel their contract is in line with their skill level. It's hard for me to see either of those guys as regular 16-20mpg players on a competitive roster unless it has 3 stars to support them.
I think Mays & Knox are keepers. They actually can contribute now and going forward. Mays is the 1st "real" backup PG the Blazers have had to spell Dame in a long time. Knox is showing he has a real nice skillset. It's all about adding talent to this team. No matter what position. I don't want to slam guys, who have been on the roster and have tried hard, but it's time to let those guys move on. But Mays and Knox are contributors now. I'm intrigued by Nate Williams Jr. as well.
Does anyone think Dorian Finney-Smith can be had for Nas + Keon + some 2nds? I like buying low on a high quality defender that is a threat that can shoot the ball to plug as a SF next to Grant. I don’t like trading 1sts. I think DFS + Grant is no worse than Grant + DFS offensively with potential to he much better defensively. Thybulle plays the role of the bench that GPII would’ve played. That would give us a chance on a swing for the BPA in the draft at both the lotto and #23 position.
For the REBUILD option: It's actually pretty hard to come up with a good team for Dame, given his massive contract and age, and given that a team that traded for him would want to be able to compete pretty much immediately. Here's one suggestion that, as usual, most people will take offense at: Obviously the main prize is NOT Ben Simmons, he's just what makes up the salaries. Maybe the Blazers can even get him off the roster the way they attempted to with Darius Miles and Brandon Roy (so that means the Timberwolves will try to fuck it up). If he DID manage a miraculous Markelle Fultz-esque recovery, that would just be gravy, because the main prize is Nic Claxton, who turned into an all-defense team member, and exactly plugs a hole in our roster. No, the Nets would not give us Mikal Bridges - pairing him with Dame would be their plan. They'd be short a center after this trade, but they could surround Dame with SEVERAL 3-and-D guys. Not sure they'd go the expensive superstar route again so soon after being burned by KD and Kyrie, though.
That's some serious trash. A haul of complete epic, putrid gahhhhbidge. And i totally disagree the Nets wouldn't trade Bridges for the #2 pick if we got it. Brooklyn fans want splashy. Bridges is a fantantic role player. But if they had a chance to get ol' Scooter, who many in here say is the "truth". The Nets woulkd be all over it.
You keep acting as if Bridges was the same player he was on the Suns. Did you not see him turn into a total star on the Nets? Were you not paying attention?
