NBA: Heat Might Trade Wade or Bosh

[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 ed it up by investing too much money in the wrong players, forcing him to trade Harden and perhaps concede any chance of winning a le 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 ed it up by investing too much money in the wrong players, forcing him to trade Harden and perhaps concede any chance of winning a le 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 le 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/show...=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 le 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/show...=1#post3358978

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

[TIMMYtoZO]

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

[Mel_13]

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 le 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/show...=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 ting 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 ting into plastic bags and eating onion sandwiches for dinner on his cruise ships tbh.

[Latarian Milton]

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

[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 ot 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.

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.