Reply With Quote
wow he's just worth around $27-30 million over 3 years
Not debating that. In cases of players who are maxed out the team trading him still has to pay it not the team receiving him. Trade kicker clause does not exist simply to give bonus, it's also there to make trading players difficult.
Example, Deron Williams has a 15% trade kicker, and like Parsons, he also was maxed out. but the likelihood of Williams ever getting that is less than 1% considering that a team can't exceed the maximum salary by adding his trade kicker on top of his salary but still, other than the fact he's unde rperforming, he's also harder to move with that kicker in place.
Parsons is a good player that was on a bad team. He could really shine on a decent team.
Not true. He's worth what the market will bear.
The kicker is only for the player. If he's making the max, no one has to pay it. It discourages trades because it makes it harder to match salaries, not just because it costs more. For Parsons and Williams, the kickers mean nothing.
Who got lit up by Nic Batum. Right.
Way too much. Cuban is desperate I guess.
Your boy Lance. I guess it's not Bird low-balling him. The league doesn't agree with you. Hopefully someone like the Lakers get desperate with money to burn and wastes it on Lance.
, I hope not.
Well, knowing what Dirk took (huge paycut) and what Parson's is getting, Mavs likely only have about 2-3M in cap space left. They still have room exception and minimum contracts, so might be enough for Vince and Harris. Doubtful on Marion.
Lots of players get destroyed in bad systems, Lebron, for example.
I swear to you... if we sign that loser Lance, I'm done!!! I'll never post here again.
12 was the max he should have gotten but he is a damn good player. The Mavs just got a lot better, regardless of whether they overpaid by 3-4 mil/yr .
you guys are already elite! Parsons is under rated
good move
It means something, otherwise the clause wouldn't be part of the deal. Do you understand the leverage a player who has the option and a trade kicker to boot? This means, he gets paid even if he couldnt live up to his salary and the team simply cannot get rid of him because of the kicker.
I'm simply saying its not meaningless, you're arguing the strict financial interpretation of the clause.
He cannot create for himself. He is more of a catch and shoot player. He is a good passer though.
He was a slasher that thrived in an offense with Dwight Howard and James Harden already in it. His drop in defense since being a rookie is the only disappointing thing tbh.
There is also a small % chance we end up worse than last year if we sign someone like Deng and let Parsons walk (given no big name name signings)
I like that Cuban is ing with Morey but the Mavs are already top if the food chain offensively, a 2-way player like Stephenson would be a much better fit...
Well I mean that's all Mavs can get no one wants to play there, so good move
Well, there is still Melo/Bron (which Bron seems incredibly unlikely / Melo seems to have a shot). But after those two, unless you trade for Love (you have no assets) the other guys are flying off the market. Hayward, Parsons. You have guys like Deng/Ariza/Lance left. Not a lot to pick from.
For people saying sign Deng, you are assuming Bosh no Bosh or Melo correct?
He thrived in that offense because defenses were paying so much attention to Harden and Howard.
It is meaningless unless the cap outpaces his salary increases. Normally, a trade kicker deters teams, but in this case, it doesn't.
If Parsons didn't have the kicker, he would be no easier to move. That's not quite the case with Hayward, as he will be eligible for part of his kicker after his second year.
I have no idea tbh. Letting Parsons become a RFA backfired, so they will probably offer Bosh w.e he wants . The Melo thing has passed over btw, I'm pretty sure he's signing in NY.
He's worth at the most 12 million.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions