Reply With Quote
Need this L tonight, Go Raps Go!
We all know who would shoot down any trade and probably get after them too much for it even if their confidence in PATFO leaves them open to it. But that's not really where the conversation had been for a while.
Not really. It's literally only 40 percent above the MLE and like 40 percent of his max threshold. To put it into perspective, if Zach were making as much this year as he will next year, he'd be the 102nd-highest-paid player in the league. When we're talking about trade ballast, he's well within the realm of mid-sized contracts. Johnson is too. Heck, Vassell is barely above that limit.Collins' deal far exceeds mid sized.
He's playing poorly, so he doesn't seem to have value on the court right now. He could figure it out and play to the level he's already shown. But even assuming he does, with only one year left on his deal after this upcoming season, no one's looking at him as ruining their salary cap. If the Spurs wanted to turn him into cap space, that would be hard. But as an example the Hawks wouldn't care in the context of a Young trade.Given that bigs generally occupy one position and he brings precisely zero of the attributes teams usually covet out of it, it'll be difficult to move.
We're talking about a significantly worse contract being traded for a single heavily protected first just last year. Collins' two years wouldn't even be a sticking point for a team intending to tank. As I said before, some teams would care, like Washington might if they did that suggested trade. SA would be paying a premium to move Collins instead of using their cap space, which would be a bad idea because they would want Collins' contract to trade later anyway.
I think most of us wouldn't want the Spurs to extend Zach if they could reverse it. But now that it's done, they're in a new paradigm and should operate under that rather than trying to undo the signing with assets. They'll be fine with Collin's contract on the books, and they'll almost certainly plan to go into next season with Zach as their rotational center. Hopefully they have legit compe ion in mind, but with cap space, draft picks and exceptions, they have a lot of options to get that without making a panic trade that still en bers their salary space.
Need this L tonight, Go Raps Go!
Look at you, straining to avoiding agreeing. You're making a sweeping generalization about his contract that won't apply to him specifically.
This isn't some 3ish and Dish big wing like Hunter, who despite being a disappointment and injury prone, can still probably be mostly salary dumped.
You don't pay someone what they did Collins and have compe ion in mind. If he's here, he'll be handed the same role he's getting now and continue to be a drain on the team.
I don't know what is so controversial around the fact that Collins is a negative asset at this point. Luckily, absent of him turning his game around (which I doubt), in about a year time he'll become at least a neutral asset as an expiring. The best part of Collins' deal is that it's short. It reminds me a lot of Evan Fournier's contract. This time a year ago, there was a lot of discussion about absorbing him into our cap space and getting compensated to do so. This year, he was more of a neutral asset. Same about Doug... you would have paid to dump him a year ago, this year he returns slightly positive value when combined with saving another team a little bit of money (Morris-Doug delta).
Zach is a negative asset, and you should try to not have negative assets. It's that simple.
It's also not the end of the world, but it is another mistake on this FO's record when evaluating their overall performance and skill level. Zach's deal is not a fireable offense, but it is one of many deals that leads me to not have much confidence in this FO at this time.
Collins, Champagnie, and Branham all looked their best last season after the all star break during tank season when some teams stopped caring and other teams stopped caring about the Spurs and whether they won or lost as they were focused on the playoffs
Maybe those 3 scrubateers can turn things around later this season as a result and get some value back. And if any are to be moved, it would have to be in the summer because once a new season starts and teams try again they'll all reclaim their scrub crowns
scrubateers, love it
Every organization has at least one of these contracts; it’s just the business of basketball. His salary won’t impede or affect any potential move. Nothing burger.
Again, you're trying to laugh an argument off instead of actually engaging with it. You trying to talk about whether Collins is good or worth his contract demonstrates that you didn't understand my point at all. It's not "Collins is a good player, so they should keep him." It's that the Spurs need matching salary to make trades and Collins has a short-term midsized deal. He can make up to $25 Million by himself while also being acquireable by a team sending out an MLE player.. The flexibility that grants the team is more useful to a modern NBA team than $16.7 Million in cap space. The Spurs' current amount of space isn't enough to do anything major, so it doesn't behoove them to pay to free up a bit more.
This isn't some 3ish and Dish big wing like Hunter, who despite being a disappointment and injury prone, can still probably be mostly salary dumped.
You don't pay someone what they did Collins and have compe ion in mind. If he's here, he'll be handed the same role he's getting now and continue to be a drain on the team.
This isn't complicated, but it's easy to miss if you spend your time laughing st posts that try to explain it.
Yeah and they have Johnson, Jones and Graham for that.
Matching salary only applies if they player is easily movable; he won't be. You keep ignoring that with your sweeping generalization because as usual you're too busy condescending and playing smartest guy in the room.
That you constantly think I'm trying to make you look dumb says more about your insecurity than anything else.
They have Jones for that next year, but not in two years. They only have Graham for that next year if they guarantee his salary. Did you even try to think about this before you said it? They might prefer to not trade Johnson if they can use a different ballast instead. FFS man, they traded a useful player on an expiring contract for a guy they refuse to play who had two more years and $15 Million guaranteed in his contract beyond the trade year, and all they got were seconds. But you think that come next summer teamd are going to freak out about one additional year? It just shows a lack of knowledge of recent trades (or more likely a complete unwillingness to just admit you were wrong) on your part.
Far fetched, but .... What if Atlanta was willing to move Trae Young but wanted zero salary back and just a giant 43 million trade exception
Spurs couldn't do it because of Collins. They'd have to dump someone for no salary, either a player they'd want to keep or they'd have to pay to get off money
Bottom line is they should have waited to see how he played with Wemby. They had his bird rights and few rivals with space and need for a center, not like 76ers were going to pay him.
Except you do it to virtually everyone all the time.
Do you really think I don't know that? Richardson made far less and was a player with far more utility.
You can continue throwing a tantrum all you want and I'll continue to believe that the only way they don't pay to get off of Collins, is if he's added to a Young trade, for example.
Something where they also get back Capela and the Hawks reap so much long term savings (in addition to the draft capital) that they didn't care about the extra year between the C's.
The thing about the Zollins contract is that because the roster is such a smoldering dumpwad, they didn’t have anybody else to pay.
Have you looked at the roster?
He was already under contract for this year. I don't know why people keep going on and on about meeting a salary for floor with Collins when his number for this year didn't change.
They didn't have to pay him so much before seeing him out of tank season and next to Wemby.
tbh anybody who mentions "reaching the floor" as an argument in favor of a contract has no argument because its indistinguishable from paying you that money. see how great it was to pay objective 2/35? it helps us reach the floor. and gives us a salary to match in trades!
Even if they decided to pay him the same money to get to the floor next season, they should have protected themselves by doing a Bruce Brown style deal. That guy could actually play, but it's the flexibility of his contract that made him good salary fodder for Indiana
Toronto could cut him and save on year 2
They could have moved him before the deadline was a functional expiring contract
They could decide to keep him and have him as an expiring next year
What if Atlanta wanted 30 firsts too? That's not how trades work. No one has that kind of cap room, so that wouldn't be a make-or-break condition.
More importantly, no one is talking about whether the Spurs should've signed Collins to his extension. That's a completely different argument from whether the Spurs could trade him as part of a package.Bottom line is they should have waited to see how he played with Wemby. They had his bird rights and few rivals with space and need for a center, not like 76ers were going to pay him.
Considering the number of times I've seen multiple posters defend his deal by invoking the salary floor every week (like every conversation that gets recycled on a forum), I'd say people are talking about it
No one has that kind of room?
Detroit has that kind of room. If they had never signed Collins to the extension, Spurs would be close, notsure. I could look it up to make sure but considering the particulars of the conversation, it would probably be pointless
In a one year time frame, the argument has validity. In a 2 year time frame, it does not.
Of course the game we need to lose, we win
Spurs don't want that pick.
Okay, I checked and the Spurs still would not have had enough room, even without the Raptors pick and Spurs picking around 5.
Toronto ing blows even after trying to get better with the Olynyk trade. I love it, it means Masai is trying a re-tool and keeps them as around 4th-8th worst team in the league. That pick's got a strong chance of threading the needle and conveying as a really nice pick sometime in these next 3 drafts.
At least Memphis lost also
It's turning into such an underwhelming draft
At this point if they don't get the Toronto pick this year, I would not be disappointed if Spurs are picking top three.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions