We're all en-fascinated by the draft, and no wonder why. Soon we have the true offseason to contend with -- which means a lot of teams will need to figure out their cap situations. The new CBA is particularly onerous to very expensive rosters and the Spurs stand to benefit... somehow.
The whole thing is pretty confusing. Basically, if a team goes over a second tax apron, they get thwacked with various punishments. If they go over twice in a four year period, they get smacked around with a shovel.
The Spurs, of course, have a ton of cap room, no bad salaries, and might be overjoyed to take on contracts for gifts of draft capital.
This is from HoopsHype via ESPN:
For 2023-24, the salary cap is projected to be $134 million, and the luxury tax line is set to be $162 million. The first apron is set at $7 million above the luxury tax level in each season of the CBA (so $169 million for 2023-24) and the second apron is set at $17.5 million above the tax threshold (or $179.5 million). In future seasons, all of those numbers will rise at the same rate. There are at least six teams, including the Celtics, Denver Nuggets and Phoenix Suns, that are projected to be above the first apron but below the second apron in 2023-24. The Philadelphia 76ers could join the group if James Harden signs a $47 million max contract in the offseason. We currently project the Warriors, Clippers and Miami Heat to be over the second apron in 2023-24.
A team like the Warriors, who are paying ridiculous salaries to Wiggins, Poole, very big salaries to Klay and Curry, and might have to pay Draymond Green next year. Their situation: https://hoopshype.com/salaries/golden_state_warriors/
The big problems with the situation are these:
- The salaries these teams want to dump are freaking enormous. Some might be a single season, but most, like Poole's, are just god-awful
- None of these teams really have assets to sweeten the deals... Like, at all.
I have no idea how anyone is going to make this work for them. A good run-down of each team's future draft picks: https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/dr...rafts/detailed
We may see players like KAT have to get moved. I certainly don't want him, and the market might just be for other overpaid semi-stars. Looking at GSW, they owe a 2024 FRP to Memphis (1-4 protected). Poole is an alright player - no defense, though - but his contract goes on for years. I can see a team like Houston or maybe Indiana or Charlotte absorb him mostly outright, but how much is Golden State willing to ay?
Anyway, some of these teams are capital f ED. I just don't know how the Spurs can take advantage.
I think these are the teams under the cap right now, pulled from ta Internets:
Cap space teams (8): Rockets ($61 million), Spurs ($40-48 million), Jazz ($31-45 million), Magic ($22-58 million), Hornets ($27-37 million), Thunder ($31 million), Pistons ($30 million), Pacers ($28 million)
The preference would probably be to take a one or two year hideous contract with some draft gravy, like Tobias Harris or Klay Thompson, who are one year at about $40 million each (Jesus Christ). GSW does have draft picks to offer. Philadelphia does not - they owe in 2025 and 2027; the next they can drop is 2029.
I think the play is on the margins.
Like say the Nets: If they get in trouble because of that dumb Simmons contract (which no one will take), a Joe Harris & Patty Mills for Graham and a pick deal might appeal in this new environment.
I agree. I can see some other under-cap teams ing around with the monster contracts and getting in trouble there. Brooklyn's an odd situation. They don't control many of their own picks but then get some really sweet unprotected ones from Phoenix and one late in the decade from Dallas, when those teams may be terrible, and then one fairly lightly protected Philadelphia. They honestly don't need to jettison salary -- unless they want to make a huge move for a star (and I don't think they will). Marks managed to escape the Durant-Kyrie horrors like Indiana Jones slipping under the stone slab.
As a note, I see Nicolas Batum has only one year left at $11mil. If we have to just take on salary, I wouldn't mind bringing him in and getting Patty back for next year.
The Heat could be interesting. They are on the books for $170 million next year when Herro's extension kicks in. Lowry will come off their books in 2025, but they are still going to be in trouble. Duncan Robinson makes $18 million and $19 million over the next two years, and I'm pretty sure the third year is a $10 million partial guarantee / he won't hit the performance metrics for it to kick in. Strus and Vincent are free agents this summer, both playing for the minimum, and both playing balls out in this playoffs. They are going to have to find a way to keep them. And the Spurs could actually use Duncan Robinson's shooting, not to mention the obvious - that his name is Duncan Robinson.
Atlanta is another one. They are also right around $170 million next season and they will need to extend Dejounte next Summer, which is going to put them deep in cap . The Spurs have already fleeced them enough, but Bogdonovich and Deandre Hunter both carry pretty big numbers. Both would be useful players.
I want no part of Duncan Robinson. Like Buddy Hield, he was valuable when his shot was hot. Like Hield, he'll probably wind up being salary ballast in a trade down the line. Shoot only players are dangerous to your cap, because all of their value lies in if their shot is falling or not. They can't be league average. They have to be like 40-42%, because they bring nothing else to the table.
Those really long bad contracts will probably have to be traded for shorter bad contracts or chunked into smaller ones somehow. I doubt they can be absorbed completely into cap rooms.
Miami would obviously have to throw in some assets as well. The Spurs aren't taking on that albatross of a contract for nothing. But if the Spurs really like someone at 18? Jovic? Future firsts? I dunno. I'm spitballing here.
I don't think anyone is saying take the contracts as they are. You'd need some draft compensation or good young players -- and no one seems to give those up anymore. The problem with a contract like Duncan Robinson's is that it's extremely long. A single draft pick, esp one at 18, isn't going to cut it. I'm not even sure three future draft picks would cut it.
Serious question: is Duncan Robinson's contract really any worse than Doug's (with the exception that Doug's ends sooner)?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
