Heat Might Trade Wade or Bosh

[BatManu20]

According to Ric Bucher:

One of the Miami Heat's Big Three almost assuredly will be traded - unless one opts out of his existing contract
early - thanks to the repeater tax in the NBA's new CBA. In short, the already increasingly punitive luxury tax is raised an additional dollar per every taxed dollar for teams that are tax payers three of four seasons. If the Heat keep LeBron, Bosh and Dwyane for the full terms of their contracts, they are guaranteed to pay the repeater tax several times over, which, conceivably, could nearly double the cost of their player payroll. There might be ways in which they could skeletonize their roster and avoid the tax, but would that be the kind of roster with which either the three stars or the Heat would want to compete? This, of course, applies to any team with three highly-paid stars and brings home why the Thunder, seeing a chance to get relief and talent for James Harden and not completely kill their title hopes, had to jump on it. Why am I bringing this up now? Because fear of going into the luxury tax, without having a guaranteed way to get below it again, is a big reason why there was so little action at the trade deadline. And, again, why anyone who suggested the new CBA would foster player movement and trades should've qualified that by defining them as the kind of trades we saw transpire over the last few days -- ancillary trades moving around ancillary players. Seeing how much interest in the NBA is driven by blockbuster deals, or even the hint of them, I wonder if the owners were too smart for their own good in crafting a deal that, it would appear, was meant to protect themselves from themselves.

http://sulia.com/channel/basketball/f/0e7567e8-88a4-49d7-a79f-97899d1e9271/?source=twitter

I wonder if they'll find a way to retain all 3. Bosh and Wade would both likely have to take a huge pay cut in order for it to work, which I doubt they want to do, but maybe they make it happen. Obviously they wouldn't trade Lebron, so if it came down to having to trade Wade and bosh, who do you think they'd trade? I'd say Wade, just cause of age.

[TDMVPDPOY]

lebron either walks, or bosh is traded....bosh is the odd one out though

[HI-FI]

i must say, i'm a big fan of the new CBA. if we can't have a hard cap, at least tax teams like the Lakers into the fucking ground.

[TDMVPDPOY]

even if you dilute the super teams of talent players, the shitter teams still struggle to compete even if you spread the talent around the league

[baseline bum]

i must say, i'm a big fan of the new CBA. if we can't have a hard cap, at least tax teams like the Lakers into the fucking ground.

I think it's horrible for the league, and really negates having a great front office. Presti builds an awesome team with Durant, Harden, Westbrook, and Ibaka, all his own picks, and he's forced to blow it up. Under this CBA the Spurs would have had to let Parker walk in 2005 or 2006 guaranteed; so much for having a great eye for talent in the draft. It levels the playing field to the point that idiot GMs can compete with good ones (see Houston for example).

[Chinook]

I think it's horrible for the league, and really negates having a great front office. Presti builds an awesome team with Durant, Harden, Westbrook, and Ibaka, all his own picks, and he's forced to blow it up. Under this CBA the Spurs would have had to let Parker walk in 2005 or 2006 guaranteed; so much for having a great eye for talent in the draft. It levels the playing field to the point that idiots GMs can compete with good ones (see Houston for example).

The NFL has a hard cap, but teams that draft well find ways to replace their out-going stars with young players. The Spurs would have done the same (provided they let Parker go, which I don't think would have happened). More than stars, the higher tax prevents teams from keeping mid-level players. Green and Diaw wouldn't have been re-signed this season had Duncan not taken a huge pay cut.

[TDMVPDPOY]

forcing 2nd and 3rd bananas to be franchise players on teams with no real franchise player.....

thats just wrong making a very competitive team dumb down to next tier of teams...

[baseline bum]

The NFL has a hard cap, but teams that draft well find ways to replace their out-going stars with young players. The Spurs would have done the same (provided they let Parker go, which I don't think would have happened). More than stars, the higher tax prevents teams from keeping mid-level players. Green and Diaw wouldn't have been re-signed this season had Duncan not taken a huge pay cut.

If they don't let Parker go then they have to salary dump Ginobili in that case. There's no way to have 3 stars long-term under this system unless you want total crap filling out the rest of the roster, so RC's genius in picking Parker or flat-out luck with Ginobili is lost. Decent chance this system costs the Spurs Splitter this summer.

[apalisoc_9]

I don't know much about the new CBA rule, but an agreement between Wade and Bosh to lessen both their salary so that it wouldn't be that big of a change in salary is the likely scenario IMO. If they win another ring, they would do just that.

[Chinook]

If they don't let Parker go then they have to salary dump Ginobili in that case. There's no way to have 3 stars long-term under this system unless you want total crap filling out the rest of the roster, so RC's genius in picking Parker or flat-out luck with Ginobili is lost. Decent chance this system costs the Spurs Splitter this summer.

I think they would have been fine. At the time, neither Ginobili nor Parker were making that much money. The largest combined salary the Big Three had was last season, when they totaled about $46 Million. That left $24 Million or so in under the tax. They were never in Miami's situation where they face having to pay $60 Million in a couple of years if no one opts out.

[Chinook]

I don't know much about the new CBA rule, but an agreement between Wade and Bosh to lessen both their salary so that it wouldn't be that big of a change in salary is the likely scenario IMO. If they win another ring, they would do just that.

They'd have to opt out and sign that a new deal with less money. That's possible, and Lebron himself has hinted at doing that, but it leaves Miami open to the risk that another team would swoop in and offer a true max deal and take one of them away.

[apalisoc_9]

They'd have to opt out and sign that a new deal with less money. That's possible, and Lebron himself has hinted at doing that, but it leaves Miami open to the risk that another team would swoop in and offer a true max deal and take one of them away.

I guess it all depends if they win this year. If they don't, one of bosh or wade would leave...

[Chinook]

The Thunder's problem is that they have two players signed to Duncan-like deals while having two others signed to Parker and Ginobili deals. It just doesn't make sense to pay two non-stars and average of $10.5 Million each over the next two years

[cheguevara]

whatever rule breaks up the supergayteam I'm for

[irishock]

Bosh's game will age better than Wade though. But Wade is LeBron's pal.

[TDMVPDPOY]

The Thunder's problem is that they have two players signed to Duncan-like deals while having two others signed to Parker and Ginobili deals. It just doesn't make sense to pay two non-stars and average of $10.5 Million each over the next two years

they overpaid their bigs in a wingman perimeter orientated league, if those bigs were franchise type players then u overpay for them...

the problem was westbrick and harden wanted max deals and neither was not leaving any room to negotiate to keep the team roster in tact

[whitemamba]

whatever rule breaks up the supergayteam I'm for

:lol

[TDMVPDPOY]

to beat the heat these days.....allow lil wayne and the rappers into the building

[Chinook]

they overpaid their bigs in a wingman perimeter orientated league, if those bigs were franchise type players then u overpay for them...

the problem was westbrick and harden wanted max deals and neither was not leaving any room to negotiate to keep the team roster in tact

Pretty much exactly right. They overpaid their role players for sure. But they really messed up when they gave Westbrook a max contract. Then they had no leverage to get Harden to take less. What they should have done was decide how much they wanted/were going to be able to pay for all three of them and talked them into dividing it in the way that made the most sense. So if they were willing to pay something like $48 Million for all three, then they needed to do something like give Durant 18 and Westbrook and Harden 15.

Really, though, they should have given Durant 18, Harden 15 and Ibaka 9 and let Westbrook go.

[Latarian Milton]

tax ain't gonna make them hurt when they have a stack of blank cheques to spend imho

[Old Greg]

How many of these stupid articles will be posted here? Miami is not OKC and obviously OKC fucked up.

[Seventyniner]

Pretty much exactly right. They overpaid their role players for sure. But they really messed up when they gave Westbrook a max contract. Then they had no leverage to get Harden to take less. What they should have done was decide how much they wanted/were going to be able to pay for all three of them and talked them into dividing it in the way that made the most sense. So if they were willing to pay something like $48 Million for all three, then they needed to do something like give Durant 18 and Westbrook and Harden 15.

Really, though, they should have given Durant 18, Harden 15 and Ibaka 9 and let Westbrook go.

Spot on. Westbrook reminds me of someone like Rudy Gay or Josh Smith; the "wow athleticism" and "yay points" factors combine to lead to massive overpaying.

Would Harden and Ibaka have taken that much less money, though? More realistic is Harden 16 and Abaka 11.

Also, looking at OC's salaries for next year, they're within $3M of the tax without Kevin Martin. They're going to be desperate to dump Perkins and his awful contract. I just hope some dumbass team like Sacramento doesn't bail them out and absorb his salary without extracting significant other assets.

[gaKNOW!blee]

I think it's horrible for the league, and really negates having a great front office. Presti builds an awesome team with Durant, Harden, Westbrook, and Ibaka, all his own picks, and he's forced to blow it up. Under this CBA the Spurs would have had to let Parker walk in 2005 or 2006 guaranteed; so much for having a great eye for talent in the draft. It levels the playing field to the point that idiot GMs can compete with good ones (see Houston for example).

lol yeah it's easy to have a great eye for talent when you have top 5 picks year after year.

[Mark in Austin]

I have a real problem with a system that allows absentee, shit-ass owners to profit from the hard work and investment in time, resources, and creativity that involved, smart, and full time owners put in. I guarantee you that the Maloofs are trying everything possible to screw up the deal to sell the Kings until they can reap as much of the profits as they can from the new revenue sharing. The problem is for every small market screw-up there are teams like the Spurs and Jazz that manage to field competitive teams most years. And for every big market team like the Lakers there are teams like the Knicks and Sixers. So while I get why they shifted to a tougher tax and revenue sharing arrangement, I just hope the league didn't over-correct.

That being said, holding up OKC as a "victim" of this cap is a somewhat flawed argument. It's true that Prsti found their former big four, but Presti's mistake was to pay Westbrook so much money. He should be making Tony Parker money at most; and given the fact that he's never won anything, is questionable if he makes his teammates better, and has shown a repeated habit of taking his team out of games by letting his tantrums on court get the best of him, in all honesty he should be making less than Parker. The Spurs management team is disciplined enough to recognize this. OKC, for all of Presti's brilliance, blew it. Wesbrook's contract empowers him to challenge Durant on the court. As long as there are two alpha dogs in OKC, that team is hosed. And in the meantime, Westbrook's inflated contract handcuffs the team and forces them into decisions like trading Harden, the one player who could bail OKC out whenever Westbrook had a meltdown.

If I'm OKC and Westbrook flames out in the playoffs again because he can't keep his head on straight I would very quietly be exploring trade options for him this summer...

[Edward]

I think it's horrible for the league, and really negates having a great front office. Presti builds an awesome team with Durant, Harden, Westbrook, and Ibaka, all his own picks, and he's forced to blow it up. Under this CBA the Spurs would have had to let Parker walk in 2005 or 2006 guaranteed; so much for having a great eye for talent in the draft. It levels the playing field to the point that idiot GMs can compete with good ones (see Houston for example).

I don't really have too much sympathy for OKC. Presti was careless when he gave someone as limited as Perkins $8,000,000 a year and gave Westbrook an extension for more than what comparable players like Rondo and Parker got. Even with those mistakes he could have kept Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka and Harden by amnestying Perkins or by working out the small difference in what they offered Harden vs. what he wanted. OKC forced its own hand into trading Harden much more than the CBA did.

The Spurs would have found a way to keep their big 3 together under this CBA as they would have been even more frugal with the role players they signed while Manu and Parker have always taken deals below their market value. This CBA basically puts a premium on being able to find cheap role players via late 1st round picks and free agency, which is something Buford has always been extremely good at.

If Miami has to break up its big 3 that's also largely their own fault. Mike Miller, Udonis Haslem, and Joel Anthony are all getting paid way too much while Miami's method of saving money is trading away late 1st round picks.

[Clipper Nation]

lol yeah it's easy to have a great eye for talent when you have top 5 picks year after year.
Truth bombs.... Presti got extremely lucky in the draft, and then fucked it up by investing too much money in the wrong players, forcing him to trade Harden and perhaps concede any chance of winning a title with this core....

Presti is a great drafter, but apparently isn't nearly as good with the financial side of running an NBA front office, tbh...

[Edward]

Truth bombs.... Presti got extremely lucky in the draft, and then fucked it up by investing too much money in the wrong players, forcing him to trade Harden and perhaps concede any chance of winning a title with this core....

Presti is a great drafter, but apparently isn't nearly as good with the financial side of running an NBA front office, tbh...
Yup. Any 12 year old who watches ESPN could have picked Durant in 2007. Harden and Westbrook were both good picks but again they were both top 5 picks (I honestly forget what I thought about Westbrook at the time, but I remember saying Harden would be the best player in the 2009 draft not named Blake Griffin because of how much I watched him run a train on my team in college). Ibaka was the only great pick that warrants jerking Presti off especially since it was a pick he fleeced away from the Suns.

He's also had plenty of bad picks, i.e., Byron Mullens, Cole Aldrich, picking Jeff Green in the same draft as Durant expecting those two to somehow co-exist given how similar they are, etc. Presti's luck has been just as important as his skill.

[Chinook]

The Spurs would have found a way to keep their big 3 together under this CBA as they would have been even more frugal with the role players they signed while Manu and Parker have always taken deals below their market value. This CBA basically puts a premium on being able to find cheap role players via late 1st round picks and free agency, which is something Buford has always been extremely good at.

Exactly what I was saying. The difference between the Spurs and Thunder is that the Spurs extended Parker and moved Hill, while the Thunder would have done the opposite.

People always talk about building teams the "Spurs way," and each franchise that's tried to do that has broken off the path at different points. Teams like the Bobcats and Wizards fail to scout properly and put the right coaching in place. The Thunder, Grizzlies and Nuggets have fallen off now that they started handing out huge extensions to the first couple of crops of their free agents. Then they run out of flexibility to re-sign later free agents because they have a bunch of overpaid non-stars on their roster.

I will say this, though: Miami knew what it was doing when they signed those deals. They had three stars in their primes and knew that their window was open for only a couple of years. If they get a couple of more ring and then are forced to strip their talent and fall back into mediocrity, it was still worth it. The Thunder were trying to build for the future. They had no excuse to get into salary-cap trouble this quickly.

[Chinook]

Spot on. Westbrook reminds me of someone like Rudy Gay or Josh Smith; the "wow athleticism" and "yay points" factors combine to lead to massive overpaying.

Would Harden and Ibaka have taken that much less money, though? More realistic is Harden 16 and Abaka 11.

Also, looking at OC's salaries for next year, they're within $3M of the tax without Kevin Martin. They're going to be desperate to dump Perkins and his awful contract. I just hope some dumbass team like Sacramento doesn't bail them out and absorb his salary without extracting significant other assets.

Harden's max extension for this season was 80/5, so 15 is barely below that. In fact that's the deal (60/4) that I hear the Thunder offered. I imagine Harden would have been more receptive to take it (he might have anyway before OKC traded him) if Westbrook hadn't gotten and 80/5 deal the year before

[Mel_13]

OKC would have had the same problems under the old system that they have under the new system. If you treat the luxury tax line as a de facto hard cap, and have 4 players simultaneously requiring max or near max contracts, the consequences are the same in either system.

The Spurs, otoh, would have been able to keep their big three together under the current system. Their key players didn't reach peak earnings at the same time and the Spurs never had more than one max player at any given point in time. They won the title in 99 with Duncan still on a rookie contract. They won in 03 with Parker and Manu both on initial deals. Robinson retired in 2003. Manu's second contract kicked in for 04-05, but his salary that year was less than half of Duncan's salary. Parker was on the last year of his rookie contract in 04-05. With Parker's new contract about to kick in for 05-06, the Spurs salary dumped Malik in 2005 and Rasho in 2006. The Spurs were also willing to go over the tax line by small amounts in 3 separate seasons.

From 05-06 thru 08-09, the Spurs retained room of about 30M between the combined salaries of their big three and the luxury tax line to field a supporting cast. When that room started to shrink as they approached the 09-10, the Spurs busted through the tax line to make the RJ trade. That is the one transaction that the new system would likely have prevented the Spurs from executing. Too bad the new system wasn't around then.

I did some analysis related to this subject almost 4 years ago. For anyone interested, it can be found here:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125187&p=3358978&viewfull=1#post3358978

[Mel_13]

Harden's max extension for this season was 80/5, so 15 is barely below that. In fact that's the deal (60/4) that I hear the Thunder offered. I imagine Harden would have been more receptive to take it (he might have anyway before OKC traded him) if Westbrook hadn't gotten and 80/5 deal the year before

4/60 was the max that OKC was allowed to offer Harden last summer, and all reports are that he would have taken it. They lowballed him with an offer of 4/55 and gave him an ultimatum. When he wouldn't blink, they traded him. Absolutely stupid.

[Chinook]

4/60 was the max that OKC was allowed to offer Harden last summer, and all reports are that he would have taken it. They lowballed him with an offer of 4/55 and gave him an ultimatum. When he wouldn't blink, they traded him. Absolutely stupid.

Thanks for the correction.

That's even worse. Had they not capitulated to Westbrook, then they would have had a case.

[Mel_13]

Thanks for the correction.

That's even worse. Had they not capitulated to Westbrook, then they would have had a case.

Yep.

Presti is wildly overrated, especially among Spurs fans here on ST. His record is very much a mixed bag.

[Chinook]

Yep.

Presti is wildly overrated, especially among Spurs fans here on ST. His record is very much a mixed bag.

Presti and Brooks both. I really don't care for the Thunder's culture. When the thing that's supposed to put you over the top is that your star player is leading the league in technicals you have some serious issues.

Durant and Harden for at the max and Ibaka for a little bit cheaper deal than the one he has now would have been perfect.

[Edward]

Durant and Harden for at the max and Ibaka for a little bit cheaper deal than the one he has now would have been perfect.

This plus Westbrook for the money Rondo + Parker got and either no Perkins at all or Perkins for a lot less would have allowed Presti to keep their core intact with some wiggle room.

[jag]

I don't really have too much sympathy for OKC. Presti was careless when he gave someone as limited as Perkins $8,000,000 a year and gave Westbrook an extension for more than what comparable players like Rondo and Parker got. Even with those mistakes he could have kept Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka and Harden by amnestying Perkins or by working out the small difference in what they offered Harden vs. what he wanted. OKC forced its own hand into trading Harden much more than the CBA did.

The Spurs would have found a way to keep their big 3 together under this CBA as they would have been even more frugal with the role players they signed while Manu and Parker have always taken deals below their market value. This CBA basically puts a premium on being able to find cheap role players via late 1st round picks and free agency, which is something Buford has always been extremely good at.

If Miami has to break up its big 3 that's also largely their own fault. Mike Miller, Udonis Haslem, and Joel Anthony are all getting paid way too much while Miami's method of saving money is trading away late 1st round picks.




OKC would have had the same problems under the old system that they have under the new system. If you treat the luxury tax line as a de facto hard cap, and have 4 players simultaneously requiring max or near max contracts, the consequences are the same in either system.

The Spurs, otoh, would have been able to keep their big three together under the current system. Their key players didn't reach peak earnings at the same time and the Spurs never had more than one max player at any given point in time. They won the title in 99 with Duncan still on a rookie contract. They won in 03 with Parker and Manu both on initial deals. Robinson retired in 2003. Manu's second contract kicked in for 04-05, but his salary that year was less than half of Duncan's salary. Parker was on the last year of his rookie contract in 04-05. With Parker's new contract about to kick in for 05-06, the Spurs salary dumped Malik in 2005 and Rasho in 2006. The Spurs were also willing to go over the tax line by small amounts in 3 separate seasons.

From 05-06 thru 08-09, the Spurs retained room of about 30M between the combined salaries of their big three and the luxury tax line to field a supporting cast. When that room started to shrink as they approached the 09-10, the Spurs busted through the tax line to make the RJ trade. That is the one transaction that the new system would likely have prevented the Spurs from executing. Too bad the new system wasn't around then.

I did some analysis related to this subject almost 4 years ago. For anyone interested, it can be found here:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125187&p=3358978&viewfull=1#post3358978

Edward brought it. And then Mel brought it again. Mel is an aminal.

[TIMMYtoZO]

:lol Riley isn't breaking up a core that is not close to being done as a dynasty.

[Mel_13]

:lol Riley isn't breaking up a core that is not close to being done as a dynasty.

Not his money.

How much do you believe Arison will be willing to pay in luxury tax?

[baseline bum]

OKC would have had the same problems under the old system that they have under the new system. If you treat the luxury tax line as a de facto hard cap, and have 4 players simultaneously requiring max or near max contracts, the consequences are the same in either system.

The Spurs, otoh, would have been able to keep their big three together under the current system. Their key players didn't reach peak earnings at the same time and the Spurs never had more than one max player at any given point in time. They won the title in 99 with Duncan still on a rookie contract. They won in 03 with Parker and Manu both on initial deals. Robinson retired in 2003. Manu's second contract kicked in for 04-05, but his salary that year was less than half of Duncan's salary. Parker was on the last year of his rookie contract in 04-05. With Parker's new contract about to kick in for 05-06, the Spurs salary dumped Malik in 2005 and Rasho in 2006. The Spurs were also willing to go over the tax line by small amounts in 3 separate seasons.

From 05-06 thru 08-09, the Spurs retained room of about 30M between the combined salaries of their big three and the luxury tax line to field a supporting cast. When that room started to shrink as they approached the 09-10, the Spurs busted through the tax line to make the RJ trade. That is the one transaction that the new system would likely have prevented the Spurs from executing. Too bad the new system wasn't around then.

I did some analysis related to this subject almost 4 years ago. For anyone interested, it can be found here:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125187&p=3358978&viewfull=1#post3358978

Great analysis. I should have looked up the numbers first before posting. I definitely remembered them incorrectly, as the big 3 didn't make huge money combined until 09-10.

[baseline bum]

Not his money.

How much do you believe Arison will be willing to pay in luxury tax?

Depends on how much he has to keep paying out to people angry about shitting into plastic bags and eating onion sandwiches for dinner on his cruise ships tbh.

[Mel_13]

Depends on how much he has to keep paying out to people angry about shitting into plastic bags and eating onion sandwiches for dinner on his cruise ships tbh.

:lmao

[Latarian Milton]

bron is still improving but the other two are already in slump i have to admit sadly. :cry

[TDMVPDPOY]

Not his money.

How much do you believe Arison will be willing to pay in luxury tax?

dont worry he got insurance payout from last year when italian fagot run one of his cruise liners into reefs...

[Jacob1983]

Goodbye fruity dinosaur.

[Richie]

I think it's horrible for the league, and really negates having a great front office. Presti builds an awesome team with Durant, Harden, Westbrook, and Ibaka, all his own picks, and he's forced to blow it up. Under this CBA the Spurs would have had to let Parker walk in 2005 or 2006 guaranteed; so much for having a great eye for talent in the draft. It levels the playing field to the point that idiot GMs can compete with good ones (see Houston for example).

It's different IMO. OKC had 3 max players plus Ibaka and Perkins. They had to make a choice and chose wrongly IMO. They should have done everything to dump Perkins contract and keep Harden.

In a similar position, the Spurs could have dumped any number of players in 2006 to re sign Parker. The tax threshold in 05/06 was $61m and we had a payroll of $63.5m after re signing Parker. With players like Nesterovic, Barry and Nazr all making around $5m or more, there would have been flexibility to trade away these pieces for cap room to stay under the tax and keep the big guns.

I just can't understand what the Thunder was thinking, keeping Perkins and trading Harden. Granted they have a plethora of draft picks now who they can build around, but the odds of getting a player of Hardens quality is a stretch. Even if they couldn't afford to amnesty Perkins, surely somebody would have been willing to take him in a salary dump.

[Sean Cagney]

to beat the heat these days.....allow lil wayne and the rappers into the building

Lil Waynes team has not beat them very much man lol. Let him in the building it's a double loss.
Goodbye fruity dinosaur.

LMFAO.........

[BatManu20]

bron is still improving but the other two are already in slump i have to admit sadly. :cry

Dwyane Wade is averaging 25 pts, 5 rbs, and 5 asts this year, and shooting the highest FG % of his career at over 50%.. And Bosh is averaging 17 pts and 7 rbs while also shooting a career high 55% from the field... if that's slumping, then I wish everyone on the Spurs was in a slump.