How Paul Allen's money can really help in free agency this summer

Just thinking about how Portland is going to be able to lure some free agents this summer and a thought came to my mind that with Paul Allen's wealth he can help out the cause a lot with teams deciding not to match on restricted free agents. Imagine the Blazers wanted to go after a guy like Roy Hibbert. Because Paul has the means they can write a contract like Wesley Matthews a couple summers ago. His was a MLE but the Blazers ended up paying him just over 9m as a signing bonus. That is a lot of money for a team to come up with in 3 days. So Blazers could offer Hibbert a descending contract starting out at the max (I think at around 14.5m) plus the 15% of the whole contract (say the total is a 4 year 44m). Which would make the total out of pocket on the day the Pacers sign the contract to be just over 21m. That is a lot of freaking money!

How many owners have that much in liquid assets that they will be able to throw at a single player. Especially a team like the Pacers that have a couple of free agents this year. Also think of NO with Gordon....you think that new owner wants to shell out another 21m right after buying the team?

As far as unrestricted free agents that is an incentive to sign with the Blazers as opposed to another team, you will get a lot more money up front. Not sure it's enough to get D. Will because I'm guessing Prokerov has the means as well. But with other free agents that could be the thing they need to pick Portland over another team.

 

Maybe you should find the articles where Paul Allen has said he isn't going to go into the luxury tax anymore. Or that spending huge amounts of money doesn't make sense.

"One thing we are not going to do is to spend money like there is no tomorrow, and calls to do so just don't make sense. I've tried that path before -- it doesn't work and is not sustainable."

-- Blazers owner Paul Allen

 

I'm not saying spend more money then they should....just do it in a manner that takes advantage of Allen's money. If you really wanted Hibbert and would offer him $11m a year for 4 years, that comes out to $44m. I'm just saying they can structure the contract at $14.5m, $10m, $10m, $9.5m and give $20 up front. Still paying the same just making it very difficult for a team to match because it's so much up front.

 

But by doing that, it will cost the team 20 million up front (which they don't have) and the re-signing Batum would put them into luxury tax

 

There was a time when every player whose deal was up automatically got the max. Nothing against Kenny Anderson, but was he really a max contract player? There was a time when the Blazers had the largest payroll in NBA history and the second largest in sports history. Got a round 1 playoff sweep. That is not sustainable. Spending big and spending smart are not always the same thing, but sometimes it is smart to spend big.

 

I like South East's idea. Use a dirty trick to get us one extra new starter per year. Use regular means to get us another.

 

I know what Allen said. I think if the team is at the brink of contending he will spend what he needs to put them over the top. With that said, he also hasn't forgotten he needs to put a competitive product on the floor to sell tickets.

 

Well, he certainly has the money. If he has a lump sum for Matthews, he has it for Hibbert. As for the LT, the signing bonus is spread evenly amongst the 4 years of the contract, so it would not be 20 million counting towards the LT calculation this year, but the first year salary and bonus. So if it was 14.5 descending, it'd be 14.5 coutning against. And then Batum, even at 10 million, that isn't us in LT territory.

That being said, I struggle to believe we will go hard after a RFA to start with, because of the need to spend our money before Batum gets an offer. Could be a wasted 3 days, and then a wasted 5 million in space.

 

Very well said

 

When was the last time the Blazers spent both big and smart? Honest question, and not trying to be a smart ass

 

a lot of people thought we overpaid on Aldridge's deal.

 

Yeah I'm not suggesting maxing out a player... Just structure the contract differently. With the Blazers under the cap this offseason it makes giving an offer like this ore feasible because they are further away from the luxury tax. And as RR7 said the bonus is spread out over the length of the contract. You can even structure it so the cap hit gets drastically less in the last year by going something like $14.5, $12, $10, $7.5. Then as Aldridge and Batums contracts get bigger that one gets smaller to help compensate. Plus trade value goes up because the amount owed goes way down.

 

yeah, an example for Hibbert, if you offered him 4 year, 49, with the 10% signing bonus, all paid up front, his salary would be 13, 12.5, 12, 11 roughyl, but the first year, if we made it payable immediately, woudl be a lump sum of about 16.6 million. Which would be tough for a smaller team like Indy to come up with in a week, I imagine.

 

I think the point is that PA may be willing to spend money (go above the cap) if he believes he is spending it smartly. But he isn't just going to throw all kinds of money out there just to spend money.

I agree I thought Aldridge was a big contract but a smart one. Blazers spent a lot to get Wallace then after a year traded him fro a draft pick, that seem like a big and smart transaction. Giving Roy a max contract was big but in the end not smart.

I'm sure if Allen had a crystal ball and could see down the road, he might not make some of those big moves. But he spent big many times while owning the Blazers, some of them were smart, others not so much.

 

Ripping off Matthews from Utah, for example. Locking up BRoy - sadly, no one knew his knees would give out but it avoided some other team grabbing him.

 

With respect, I think many people knew Brandon's knees were shot. The writing was on the wall. That's why, at the time, I was not in the group that was ranting for the Blazers to max him out, and give him whatever he wanted, 'yesterday'.

Aldridge I thought was a good and fair deal. In fact, it surprised me a little that the Blazers took a tougher stance on his salary than Blazers culture would previously have dictated -- as you've pointed out. In the past, they'd have just maxed him and been done with it. Not now.

If we can front-load contracts (i.e. using bonuses) to get a leg up on our targets, then do it. In fact, I wonder why all contracts aren't front-loaded.

 

3 days actually

 

Yes they did. KP and others said they knew the risk with Brandon's knees when they extended him, and knew all the way back when the drafted him.

 

Aldridge was less than a max deal, so not big

Wallace was acquired for two draft picks and we received one back, so I am not sure how that was smart?

 

3 days to match. In the past, for the Millsap and Matthews' offers, they wrote it into the contract that the entire first year had to be paid within 7 days, to make it extremely difficult for the Jazz to come up with all of that money up front. So a similar deal would tell Indy to match that offer, and come up with almost 17 million to pay Hibbert in one week.