That's a damn good synopsis of it. Almost beside the point that short of a Jokic-like season, nobody is going to think about handing Poeltl a 5-year deal.
That's not the rule. The rule is you can have only one rookie-contract DPE at a time (by signing and an additional one by trading) and two vet DPE contracts. Jakob can't get a five-year deal unless it starts at the max, so no point in even discussing that. But if they give him a new five-year deal next summer, it doesn't count against their DPE total in either category.
The Celtics couldn't trade for Davis last year because of Irving also being a DPE rookie. But they were able to trade for Kawhi since Leonard's contract wasn't an extension.
That's a damn good synopsis of it. Almost beside the point that short of a Jokic-like season, nobody is going to think about handing Poeltl a 5-year deal.
Yeah, but there is such a thing as sunk costs. You can't let past mistakes trap you into making future mistakes. Once you've spent the money and made the trade, all future decisions have to stand on their own.
It happens in business all the time, where bad management will double down rather than admit that a past decision didn't pan out. The good ones bite the bullet and move on.
Huh? They got two years of DMDR and Poeltl plus four years of Johnson for one year of Kawhi. Maybe that's worth it, and maybe it's not, but you don't just get to ignore that players are only on their teams for a fixed amount of time anyway. The Spurs don't keep having to "get something" for Kawhi forever.
DPG getting his pushed in, per par, tbh
I dont think you can give him a 5 yr contract unless it is the rookie DPE. Even if it happens after his contract ends it could only be for 4 years not 5.
Nope. Anyone with Bird rights can get five years. The E is actually short for extension, or it was before this new DPE came recently.
Like Draymond and Crowder to five years.
EDIT: Here is the rule from the CBA FAQ, http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q24
So they have changed the rule since I last looked at it. They laxened the rule on DPE rookies by letting a team sign two rather than just the one they used to have, but they no longer make grant an extra spot for traded DPE contracts. The rest remains true though.
A) Players can only get a five-year extension if it starts at the max: http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q58
B) Waiting until the player is a free agent doesn't count as a DPE contract: http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q53
Yeah, there's zero point in talking about five-year extensions for Poeltl. I'm of the mind that they should offer him a $26.25M/4 extension now. That would bring his five-year total up to $30 Million. Maybe that's higher than he might make in free agency. But next summer isn't going to be the Max Fest this year was, so teams might be more inclined to spend more on role-players, especially if Jakob puts in another solid year. Plus, the cap is going to keep going up. Unless Poe becomes a much worse player than he is now, his contract should remain pretty moveable.
Last edited by Chinook; 07-26-2019 at 08:54 PM.
Sure - but this trade is still live and active in my mind. Again, you may not agree, but if SA knows they don’t want to resign DDR and/or Jakob under any cir stances then the prudent move is to trade them and ac ulate as much as they can and then that closes the loop on the Kawhi trade.
Don’t get hung up on the Kawhi part; that is just how trades are viewed and framed in terms of “measuring” the deal. Like with future picks in a deal. A trade isn’t closed until those picks are made then you look back and say “the final return yielded x”.
I know you value having them playing on the team, but that is not the best use of a valuable asset like DDR; letting him walk and saying “well we got 2 years of him so that’s plenty of value” doesn’t seem smart to me and I just can’t agree with that.
I don’t understand what people think I’m saying. You think trading DeRozan if you know you don’t want to resign him is part of the sunk cost?
I’m not advocating resigning him when you don’t want him just because you moved Kawhi for him. If I said that i would understand this type of response.
I’m literally advocating the opposite. Like do people read what I post and say “DPG doesn’t understand sunk cost and I can’t believe he wants to keep DeRozan even though he’s not a good fit”.
It’s simple; regardless of Kawhi you don’t let your best assets like DDR just walk for nothing. If you were trying to keep him and he bolts that’s one thing. But they KNOW they don’t want him and if that is the case not moving him is silly and sub optimal.
Last edited by DPG21920; 07-27-2019 at 02:36 PM.
you seem baffled that seemingly everybody interprets your post in a certain way... maybe you should look back at your posts. you keep bringing up the kawhi deal when discussing how derozan/poodle should be dealt with
that's the source of any "confusion."
when we had this discussion, you just said we'd have to agree to disagree, and thats fine. but thats different from denying that you think the kawhi deal should factor into how we handle those 2
Well reading comprehension isn’t st strong suit. I have read what I posted multiple times. Whether or not I mentioned Kawhi trade as a taking point I was very clear on explaining the logic after that comment unless you can quote something where I mentioned that BECAUSE they traded Kawhi for DDR that they must keep him.
I even said forget the Kawhi part if that bugs you and focus on the fact SA doesn’t what ddr past this year. The Kawhi trade does matter and again context matters. It matters in context that the trade is still fresh and being evaluated. That’s it.
see now you're changing your story again. when we discussed this the other day, you mentioned optics and fans as reasons why you have to factor in the kawhi trade, and now you're basically saying nah we dont need to factor the kawhi trade.
its fine if we disagree but you have to pick a lane tbh
And like 5 people have said something “literally everyone”
What? No. I really don’t understand how you’re struggling with any basic level of context. Optics, fan opinion and all of that matters with how trades are evaluated. This Kawhi trade and the return is still fluid with ddr on the team and what SA is going to do with him
Optics and fans don’t matter however when it comes to thinking you need to keep DDR just because you traded Kawhi for him. That’s where the sunk cost fallacy comes into play.
Dude, let it go, you only make it worse for you.
Damn, just trade DDR, Poe, and KJ for George Hill and call it a wash.
So 5 mio is enough?
Poeltl netrating so far: +5,8
Aldridge: -7,...
Derozan: -7,...
Dejounte: -10,7
I don’t think the Austin spurs would give poodle an extension
Spurs don‘t have to give him an extension. He‘ll get some good offers.
He sometimes blocks shots and is sometimes even lucky enough to score when he's left wide open. Not worthy of an extension when guys like this are a dime a dozen.
No they are not. Show me a Role Player who is able to lift up the defense as he does. It should be clear for everybody now, that he is the most important defender on this Team.
Also he is one of the best Screensetters, at blocking and altering shots, efficent in scoring when he gets the chance and on of the best on the offensiv glass. And he still has room to grow.
Yes he is not an Allstar, but if the Spurs dont pay him, someone else will. You need that kind of guys to win something.
Pay this man before he ends up somewhere else.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)