That take makes no sense except the Warriors are short on the wings. They are shorter in the middle too. LMA with Curry and Klay. Gee. LMA gets doubled for the Spurs due to our lack of shooters. Imagine having Curry and Klay out there with him? You would jump on that. Warriors window is open for a few more years and it's not like LMA contract hurts their flexibility over the next few years too. Wiggins has to be their 4th star by default. And at 30mil per year? But LMA would be their third star, leaping Green.
Don’t need insider info. League payrolls are available a number of places online, and I understand the luxury tax, and how to do basic math. $148M+$9M for next year, and $158M + $9.6M for the following year. Every dollar over the tax is charged a premium of $3.50.
Basic math and cap figures.
The Spurs would have options to get out of the money, but those options aren't free. That's why it's not a no-brainer for them to do this kind of deal. At the point where you're giving up or passing on value just to make the numbers work, you really have to question whether this trade at all makes sense for them.
Let's talk about LMA for Wiggins and the swap and DeRozan for Horford and 21 (that's the only thing that'd affect this year's cap). Here's a capulator link: http://www.shamsports.com/capulator?...a86d9328737660
That basically has both of those trades, plus releasing Lyles and letting everyone walk -- including Poeltl. I had them select Wiseman because you suggested it, but they could easily not even have that chance or desire and would thus be more tempted to re-up Poeltl. Regardless, as it stands, they'd be about $2 Million under the tax line with three roster spots left to fill. That's basically impossible without further trades to move Gay and Mills. Even if the Spurs can find a way to make it worth without taking back future salary, they'd be right up against the tax the next season, but this time they'd have to make a decision on keeping White. You're one of the people who believes that he should get more than Murray, and that would make them clear tax-payers, and that's with them having 10 guys on the roster, including White and the future first. It'd be pretty hard for the Spurs to dodge the tax either season, and I don't see any reason why that roster would be willing to pay it.
Want and willing to aren't different. They are just different ways of describing the same thing in a case like this. GS doesn't WANT to pay tax -- therefore saving money is an incentive that has to be worked into any deal. They might ultimately decide to not do a deal, but they'd be missing out in the same way SA would be missing out if they decide not to pay the price GS asks for to move up in the draft. SA might well be "willing to" just draft at 11 -- in fact, I'm sure they are. GS doesn't have them over a barrell. Both sides want things the other has, but both can get those things by dealing with other teams. We've heard no indication that PATFO even wants to move up that high; so assuming their lack of leverage doesn't make sense. LMA for Wiggins just seems like a straight-forward framework that gets GS something they want while SA gets something they MIGHT want. I've yet to see anything about PATFO coveting Edwards or Wiseman.Want and willing to are two difference things. Either way, they're not taking a subpar return for the 2nd pick (even in this draft) because of the tax. I didn't imply any "sweetheart deals", just a decent or intriguing young player or young veteran.
Overall, I think it's a case of a Golden State guy/homer overvaluing their assets while failing to acknowledge (like many in this thread have said) the financial ramifications on their roster moving forward.
I'm in the minority on this I'm sure, but I feel GS rise to providence is no guarantee next year. They lack play-makers, have unproven pieces on the wing and are short of depth at the 5. Not to mention questions about Klay coming back from injury and possible decline in Dray's and Steph's games.
And there's a report that the Timberwolves now are considering taking James Wiseman instead.
This is what makes me worry lately. If the deal push-thru, Spurs already set to take James Wiseman but what if Timberwolves drafted James Wiseman instead? I mean taking Anthony Edwards is not a bad idea but kinda defeats the purpose.
https://grantland.com/features/analy...erence-finals/
some reading to understand how draft deals work
Damn. They might be in the lottery next year too!
I know it sounds somewhat crazy. I don’t expect the lottery but as currently constructed, I don’t think they are better than both L.A’s, Denver and maybe Dallas. They will make moves for sure. They brought ex-spur Jonathon Simmons into their ”dubble” and he was dominant. Not sure he is even an NBA player at this point.
Sam Amico has been around forever and he has never been right with these rumors. Sam Amick is the reliable one
so Wiseman/Okongwu at worst. Hornets badly wanting Wiseman rumors makes Timberwolves taking Wiseman sound reliable. Any asset plus number 3 sound like an easy decision for Timberwolves specially with these rumors Spurs might be interested in Wiseman as well. Taking a starting big makes tons of sense for Spurs.
They interested in LMA/Gay for Wiggins. Not giving us #2.
Which we would say heck no to.
You should never play poker. Hornets want Wiseman, so Minny just wants a small asset to move back 2 spots? Minny has them over a barrel. , Minny may have floated those GS rumors just to get CHA to act, so they can up the ante.
That doesn’t even come close salarywise, and the Spurs would never take that contract without a good pick, or a couple of average ones. Don’t know why you decided to pull this out of your ass, but I’ve never seen any version of this without #2. Show your work, or gtfo.
It wouldn't be playing poker if Charlotte and Timberwolves are in active talks for the number one plus an asset which is usually how this stuff works no?
Do to, as you have, pontificate that its going to impact what they do with the #2 pick.
The Warriors aren't the Spurs financially and they're in a unique position as a franchise. I wouldn't be making assumptions on this one.
They kind of are free. Since they're not going to receive a haul as is, if one of the Spurs' pre-requisites in a DeRozan trade that they want to clear appreciable salary for this upcoming season in the deal, I don't foresee that being an issue. Gay could be a different story (maybe they could flip him for Ariza and waive him) though.
Even as something of a Wiseman skeptic and someone who shudders at the thought of Wiggins on this team, I'd still see it as a no brainer because it's the absolute apex of an asset they could acquire for Aldridge or DeRozan.
Either way, the Spurs aren't paying the tax for this team, no matter what they do.
Realistically, if they acquired #2 (Wiseman) and Wiggins, that'd make a Horford trade less likely because they'd have a lesser need for a centerish type and at that point they'd probably place more of a premium on cap relief in a DeRozan trade.
An incentive is one thing, but acting like they'd be willing to make a bad trade because of the tax is another. The Warriors have the leverage because they have the key asset and the Spurs don't have a great asset/package to offer in return.
No, they’re not the Spurs. They are in tax , and the Spurs aren’t. GS also won’t be able to monetize that new arena like they thought they would, at least not this season. They could pay $31M in tax JUST on pick #2 next season. Imagine that other 30ish million that they’ll have to pay 3.5-1 tax on.
The one time I want the Spurs to stay put and I'm sure they will end up doing something stupid like trading up in this draft.
he's just citing Zach Lowe's comment in the podcast as his source
Gay/LMA for Wiggins doesn't work without picks .... Taking on a lot of salary ... Probably why it made it to the media. Guess dead in water
I have heard another rumor the Warriors wanted LMA and the 11th pick for Wiggins straight up. Ridiculous if that's true.
Pop for Blake Griffin and a 2nd rounder?
So, after perusing the thread.....
Let's say we get 2 from GS, 4 from Chicago, and keep 11.....
Who do we take at 2, 4, and 11
How the are you getting #4 from Chicago?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
