BizarroJerry wrote:Fair point Abe. I'm also leery of taking on a bad max contract and content to see if this team as it is can get better without much addition (I'm ok moving players when necessary but I see our Big 3 or 4 really improving the next two years and beyond)
I think we'll see the Wolves spend big. (They have to, right? Just to reach the salary cap floor?)
But it will be a 2-year deal. They won't be alone. Things are going to be so crazy... I can see guys like Jamal Crawford getting $30 - $35M on 2 year contracts. After all, teams will have PLENTY of space to roll it in. And it won't damage the financial future of the team.
The cap floor...who cares there is no penalty for not reaching that. Even the Sixers ended up reaching that level because they took on players in trades. There is zero worry about that. Sorry that just drives me bonkers when it's brought up. Abe your point was really that the Wolves are gonna spend some money whether it's on a big guy or a couple other guys they will spend some money. Maybe not BIG but they will spend some. Too many factors to absolutely predict anything obviously.
BizarroJerry wrote:Fair point Abe. I'm also leery of taking on a bad max contract and content to see if this team as it is can get better without much addition (I'm ok moving players when necessary but I see our Big 3 or 4 really improving the next two years and beyond)
I think we'll see the Wolves spend big. (They have to, right? Just to reach the salary cap floor?)
But it will be a 2-year deal. They won't be alone. Things are going to be so crazy... I can see guys like Jamal Crawford getting $30 - $35M on 2 year contracts. After all, teams will have PLENTY of space to roll it in. And it won't damage the financial future of the team.
I'm not sure how much below the cap the floor is, but obviously we have to spend some money. And I like your Crawford example. I'd rather overspend at $15M a year for 2 years than a fairer $11M a year for 3 years. Not saying it has to be Crawford, but a veteran like that might be ready to re-sign for less money in 2 years, older and settled and liking the team's direction. Leaves more money for the important signings in 3 and 4 years. And if we lose him in 2 years, not a big loss.
BizarroJerry wrote:Fair point Abe. I'm also leery of taking on a bad max contract and content to see if this team as it is can get better without much addition (I'm ok moving players when necessary but I see our Big 3 or 4 really improving the next two years and beyond)
I think we'll see the Wolves spend big. (They have to, right? Just to reach the salary cap floor?)
But it will be a 2-year deal. They won't be alone. Things are going to be so crazy... I can see guys like Jamal Crawford getting $30 - $35M on 2 year contracts. After all, teams will have PLENTY of space to roll it in. And it won't damage the financial future of the team.
I'm not sure how much below the cap the floor is, but obviously we have to spend some money. And I like your Crawford example. I'd rather overspend at $15M a year for 2 years than a fairer $11M a year for 3 years. Not saying it has to be Crawford, but a veteran like that might be ready to re-sign for less money in 2 years, older and settled and liking the team's direction. Leaves more money for the important signings in 3 and 4 years. And if we lose him in 2 years, not a big loss.
As I've been predicting, (obviously I'm not the only one) we're going to see some crazy deals. With so much cap room, teams can afford these guys. So negotiations won't be about annual salary as much as the number of years for reasons you describe.
This is the NBA. Teams do dumb things. They always have... always will. The number of years will dictate how dumb some of these teams are.
BizarroJerry wrote:Fair point Abe. I'm also leery of taking on a bad max contract and content to see if this team as it is can get better without much addition (I'm ok moving players when necessary but I see our Big 3 or 4 really improving the next two years and beyond)
I think we'll see the Wolves spend big. (They have to, right? Just to reach the salary cap floor?)
But it will be a 2-year deal. They won't be alone. Things are going to be so crazy... I can see guys like Jamal Crawford getting $30 - $35M on 2 year contracts. After all, teams will have PLENTY of space to roll it in. And it won't damage the financial future of the team.
The cap floor...who cares there is no penalty for not reaching that. Even the Sixers ended up reaching that level because they took on players in trades. There is zero worry about that. Sorry that just drives me bonkers when it's brought up. Abe your point was really that the Wolves are gonna spend some money whether it's on a big guy or a couple other guys they will spend some money. Maybe not BIG but they will spend some. Too many factors to absolutely predict anything obviously.
Actually, doesn't the team have to divvy up the money (below the cap) among the players on the team? But the more important issue is why take on deadweight contracts instead of using the money on players who could help the team win.
Maybe that's what you're saying... it's late. I'm tired and supposed to be working... but procrastinating and drinking instead.
BizarroJerry wrote:Fair point Abe. I'm also leery of taking on a bad max contract and content to see if this team as it is can get better without much addition (I'm ok moving players when necessary but I see our Big 3 or 4 really improving the next two years and beyond)
I think we'll see the Wolves spend big. (They have to, right? Just to reach the salary cap floor?)
But it will be a 2-year deal. They won't be alone. Things are going to be so crazy... I can see guys like Jamal Crawford getting $30 - $35M on 2 year contracts. After all, teams will have PLENTY of space to roll it in. And it won't damage the financial future of the team.
The cap floor...who cares there is no penalty for not reaching that. Even the Sixers ended up reaching that level because they took on players in trades. There is zero worry about that. Sorry that just drives me bonkers when it's brought up. Abe your point was really that the Wolves are gonna spend some money whether it's on a big guy or a couple other guys they will spend some money. Maybe not BIG but they will spend some. Too many factors to absolutely predict anything obviously.
Actually, doesn't the team have to divvy up the money (below the cap) among the players on the team? But the more important issue is why take on deadweight contracts instead of using the money on players who could help the team win.
Maybe that's what you're saying... it's late. I'm tired and supposed to be working... but procrastinating and drinking instead.
Yep that's how it works. Lets just agree nobody (NBA franchises) are actually concerned about reaching the cap floor and nobody should even mention that in any post ever again.
Like you said teams are going to put forth money in side the cap to improve their team's (what's the word here I am tired too..) fortunes (that's good enough) either by.
1. Signing players they think will help
2. Absorbing players in trades they think will help
3. Absorbing player/contracts from other teams and getting compensation in draft picks (maybe young players) and maybe some of the guys with big contracts could actually be useful to the team as well.
One way or another teams are gonna spend some money. Typically they do that through FA and pr sign in their own guys. The wolves don't need to add much youth to their team and draft picks are always nice but they sorta have things set up pretty good. I can see them adding a player another team doesn't want that's decent like maybe a Kyle Singler from OKC (or someone better just throwing a name out there) but they don't have to do anything crazy desperate which is pretty nifty.
