All depends on bow much less he took but math says if he took an extension of 40 mill per instead of 60 mill per, that would be more money to use elsewhere. But I know the impending counter is if he took 40 mill we would not have twenty mill to spend. But that is as it sits now and no one knows how we will be sitting a year from now. So to me, like i said, its simple math.
No one knows because no one knows who will be available in a year and no one knows what our cap situation will be in a year. The point is keeping the option and flexibility to do so if/when the opportunity arises. Dam maxing out minimizes that potential over the next few years. Kind of undeniable. Its math.
I don't think so. We'll have salary we could trade. There are nearly always exceptions or underperforming players to package. We were never going to sign a big time free agent anyway. We'll have to trade for any stars that we want to add unless they just want to come here... And if that's the case we'll make it work.
its not about big time free agents. Its about having to e flexibility to get the guys we want next to him when e opportunity arises. Whover that may be. The salary we could trade would be more if 2o mill was spread out to other players. Unless you are referring to trading dames salary, would we not have more in salary trade options if the money went elsewhere?
We can only have so many players... I think as long as we aren't hard capped we could make a trade for another star.
but if Dame took less and that money was spread out to other players then we would have more money leverage for another star or two.
But we've already signed those players... And we can pay them more starting next season. And we can go over the cap to retain them.
But if we use those players in trade in a year we dont have that extra salary to manipulate/play with. not shifting the gps but this also almost guaranteed we wont ge able to trade him if the next two years dont work and we want to flip the switch to full rebuild. There are too many variables to say there is no way the 20 mill a year couldn't have come into play in another way. But now we will never know, which to me, is limiting our future flexibility.
First $60 million man! This is his last big contract. Give him his money. Blazers will get 4-5 more great solid years from him. After that he will still be a great piece to have as a part of this franchise. As revenues go up this will be a non issue. Now go set things up and win this man a Championship.
the only possible difference is the one between the full-MLE and tax-MLE. That's it. And that probably wouldn't even be a factor either Blazers just busted thru the tax-MLE to sign Payton and he sure isn't a trajectory-altering player. you guys are arguing that having Dame on a super-max prevents Portland from adding players they could add if Dame took less. It seems to be an article of faith but it doesn't make sense, especially considering that free agency has never been an effective avenue for Portland adding talent In Dame's first season of the extension, after subtracting his salary, they will have around 110M in room before hitting the salary cap; and around 145M before they hit the tax line; and well over 150M before they hit the apron. If the Blazers can't work with those margins they are massively incompetent.
I'd like to explore that. Feel free to correct any bad assumption I make first of all..."took less money"? Dame is turning 32. No other superstar took less money when they were still 32, but I guess Dame should set another precedent...? and if he did, how much less money? From 60M to 40M is a ridiculous ask. He wouldn't do that and nobody else would either. So let's say he took 50M/year instead of 60M now then, where is this flexibility you see? it's a projected 167M salary cap in 2025-26. That's about a 35% increase from the current cap. Kind of a coincidence that Dame's max is 35% of the cap. Anyway, right now, the balance of salaries on the roster OTHER than Dame is around 107M. That include Simons and Sharpe, and if things go well for Portland, they will be getting contracts increasing over 35%. So, just for an example, let's say Portland's non-Dame payroll jumps a shade over 35% and those non-Dame salaries total in the 145-150M range so then, a 167M salary cap ---> 200M luxury tax threshold ---> 207M apron Dame ---> 60M + roster = 205-210M payroll Dame ---> 50M + roster = 195-200M payroll I'm not seeing the flexibility you are imagining, especially in terms of adding another star...who is damn well guaranteed to be expensive
Dame's earned it and I keep saying...he invests a lot of it in Oregon..he's the biggest draw we've ever had for a player who's been here 10 years...(Walton was a big draw but not for long) When you get a guy who looks ready to contribute at 57 in the draft and is on a two way contract and sign last years two way guy.....you're compensating for the bigger salaries. Payton is a steal at 8 mil a year...that's what Chief and Ed Davis got paid when we signed them. Ant's money and Nurk's money will look like good contracts when the tv money kicks in. Hart and Winslow are not breaking the bank...I think we're quickly going back to the playoffs after the tank. Dame is worth it. Compared to relief closers pitching in baseball....for the time they spend in the game..it's not an unreasonable contract and Dame is not Russel Westbrook ....giving Westbrook that money has been a big mistake for the Lakers but Dame is a true winner
Once again Jody for the win.. I have said it a million times but it completely baffles me why this lady is hated on would I love Phil knight as the new owner, absolutely but Jody is a great caring owner as well
