According to Storyteller, the Most LMA can Get is $100m/5 Years from Portland

[PapaG]

I keep reading about $127m, but according to Storyteller, that contract maxes out at $100m.

Who came up with the $127m figure that has been debated here to death?

http://www.blazersedge.com/2014/5/3...contract-extension-portland-trail-blazers-cba

#3) Aldridge can re-sign as a free agent in the summer of 2015. He could sign for up to 5 years which would pay him up to $100.30 million for those 5 years.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Yeah, just like D12. He can get $80m/4 years on another team.

 

[PapaG]

Yeah, just like D12. He can get $80m/4 years on another team.

I took for granted the $127 MILLION stuff being thrown around on this board, which was my first mistake for taking those posters seriously. I should have learned by now not to do so. Apparently, that can't happen, so as usual, the pant-shitting LMA stuff wasn't at all based on reality.

 

[OneLifeToLive]

I keep reading about $127m, but according to Storyteller, that contract maxes out at $100m.

Who came up with the $127m figure that has been debated here to death?

http://www.blazersedge.com/2014/5/3...contract-extension-portland-trail-blazers-cba

Is he worth that?

 

[3RA1N1AC]

haha i was right! 5/100 it is!

no stealsies

 

[3RA1N1AC]

from coons faq though it says players with 7-9 years service time can receive up to 30% of the cap their first year, and that will be more than 17+ million next offseason...

paging brianfromwa

 

[RR7]

I believe it's based on the cap increasing more than storyteller is projecting.

He states: I'm also assuming that maximum salary amounts increase by 3% each year over the next few seasons

early projections for the 2014-15 cap show an expected jump of about 8%

I dunno if with that corrected amount, instead of the smaller increase, it gets to the 127 million, but it does give you a bigger amount than 100.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

yeah papag, i think they are going off the cap figure from this year, 30% of that is the 17+MM figure, whereas by the time he signs a deal after next season, 30% of the cap will be closer to 20MM and with 7.5% raises his last year of a 5 year deal will be pushing 27ishMM

off the top of my head it would be around 5/115 if he started at around 20 MM

 

[3RA1N1AC]

I believe it's based on the cap increasing more than storyteller is projecting.

He states: I'm also assuming that maximum salary amounts increase by 3% each year over the next few seasons

early projections for the 2014-15 cap show an expected jump of about 8%

I dunno if with that corrected amount, instead of the smaller increase, it gets to the 127 million, but it does give you a bigger amount than 100.

30% of the cap

7.5% non compounded raises based off the first year of the contract

gonna have to wait for the cap number for 2015/16 to get deeper than that though, if he even demands a max

 

[PapaG]

I believe it's based on the cap increasing more than storyteller is projecting.

He states: I'm also assuming that maximum salary amounts increase by 3% each year over the next few seasons

early projections for the 2014-15 cap show an expected jump of about 8%

I dunno if with that corrected amount, instead of the smaller increase, it gets to the 127 million, but it does give you a bigger amount than 100.

I think it's far more likely that the entire CBA is renegotiated in 2017 than any other scenario. I don't see the salary cap being lowered since the Clippers just sold for the second-highest price of any professional team in the world, behind Man United. It's going to be hard for the owners to declare poverty when a racist just cashed in on $20m for an afterthought franchise in LA.

 

[PapaG]

yeah papag, i think they are going off the cap figure from this year, 30% of that is the 17+MM figure, whereas by the time he signs a deal after next season, 30% of the cap will be closer to 20MM and with 7.5% raises his last year of a 5 year deal will be pushing 27ishMM

off the top of my head it would be around 5/115 if he started at around 20 MM

So some posters here have been freaking out over the absolute worst-case scenario, which I don't think is worst-case if it keeps LMA in Portland. I still think the upcoming lockout in 2017 will make any LMA contract a moot point 5 years from now.

 

[Denny Crane]

I read in the CBA FAQ that the cap used to determine MAX salary is a different cap calculation than for all the rest of what we consider cap (space). It's a lower % of BRI for determining MAX.

Also, his MAX salary can be no less than 105% of his previous year's salary, regardless of the 30%.

 

[PapaG]

I read in the CBA FAQ that the cap used to determine MAX salary is a different cap calculation than for all the rest of what we consider cap (space). It's a lower % of BRI for determining MAX.

Also, his MAX salary can be no less than 105% of his previous year's salary, regardless of the 30%.

Storyteller was right, then. Oh well, erase that last month of pant-shitting on this board. I don't see how 5/$100m can be considered that much of a liability for a guy who will be 33 entering the last year of that contract.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Yay, more posts about the forum. At least this one kind of has some valuable information amongst all the ha ha's and I told you so's and S2 posters are dumb.

 

[PapaG]

Yay, more posts about the forum. At least this one kind of has some valuable information amongst all the ha ha's and I told you so's and S2 posters are dumb.

 

[RR7]

Yay, more posts about the forum. At least this one kind of has some valuable information amongst all the ha ha's and I told you so's and S2 posters are dumb.

Don't forget pant shitting.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Don't forget pant shitting.

How can I forget? The pants shitting.

 

[PapaG]

Many pants have been shatted in the last month over a fictional $127m contract.

 

[Denny Crane]

Is he worth that?

$100M or $127M, you ask the right question. He'll be making a LOT, but who cares. What you should care about is that he'll be 29 in July, 30 when he signs that contract, and 35 when he's making $22.7M which is a huge chunk of the salary cap. It's really all about the cap, even if your owner isn't averse to spending money.

 

[Rhal]

Many pants have been shatted in the last month over a fictional $127m contract.

The 127m is based off of early speculation that the cap will go up by 8-9m. If it doesn't then his Max is much lower. Regardless of what the # actually is he is worth the Max.

 

[cmeese47]

I keep reading about $127m, but according to Storyteller, that contract maxes out at $100m.

Who came up with the $127m figure that has been debated here to death?

http://www.blazersedge.com/2014/5/3...contract-extension-portland-trail-blazers-cba

The number 127 million is based on an anticipated rise in the salary cap.

 

[MARIS61]

Much ado about nothing. Paul Allen is a billionaire. He could carry a 300 million salary load plus the luxury tax without blinking an eye. If he really wanted to win a title, the salary cap would not be a consideration.

 

[Strenuus]

The 127m is based off of early speculation that the cap will go up by 8-9m. If it doesn't then his Max is much lower. Regardless of what the # actually is he is worth the Max.

I love LA. But I do not think he is worth the max. Unfortunately, that's what we'll offer because that'll be the market for him. But I think by the end of that contract it puts us back a couple years, IMO.

 

[H.C.]

I love LA. But I do not think he is worth the max. Unfortunately, that's what we'll offer because that'll be the market for him. But I think by the end of that contract it puts us back a couple years, IMO.

if the Blazers trade Aldridge for Draft picks one can logically deem it sets the Blazers back a couple years also... Unless some one believes the Blazers would make the 2nd round of the playoffs with a rookie next year. Henceforth according to the trade LA logic the Blazers are damned if they do, and damned if they don't.

 

[Denny Crane]

Much ado about nothing. Paul Allen is a billionaire. He could carry a 300 million salary load plus the luxury tax without blinking an eye. If he really wanted to win a title, the salary cap would not be a consideration.

Much ado about not being able to take back players in S&T deals or losing the MLE because you're a repeat taxpayer.

 

[Rhal]

I love LA. But I do not think he is worth the max. Unfortunately, that's what we'll offer because that'll be the market for him. But I think by the end of that contract it puts us back a couple years, IMO.

Why isnt he worth the max? His game isnt like Randolphs or Shaqs where when they fall off there going to fall off HARD its not exactly but more like Dirks/Duncans. LMA game doesnt require freak athletism so I don't think he is going to be worth the last year of his deal he will certainly still be a great player.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[Draco]

If we are forced to overspend $4 million a year on Aldridge its not that big of a problem. But we will need to be careful with the rest of our roster. I'd look at extending Rolo and Wes this summer so we don't get stuck overpaying them too. Overpaying one guy won't be an issue, if we overpay three it could start to really limit roster flexibility.

 

[PapaG]

Bump.

I still haven't seen Storyteller's numbers refuted, and now Cleveland says they're going to offer Kyrie Irving 5/$90m.

Knowing this, how can anybody legitimately say that LMA isn't worth 5/$100-104m? Seems like a no-brainer to me.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Bump.

I still haven't seen Storyteller's numbers refuted, and now Cleveland says they're going to offer Kyrie Irving 5/$90m.

Knowing this, how can anybody legitimately say that LMA isn't worth 5/$100-104m? Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Probably easy for people who also don't think Kyrie Irving is worth close to that amount. Both have won the exact same number of titles as well.

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

Bump.

I still haven't seen Storyteller's numbers refuted, and now Cleveland says they're going to offer Kyrie Irving 5/$90m.

Knowing this, how can anybody legitimately say that LMA isn't worth 5/$100-104m? Seems like a no-brainer to me.

I said originally that 5 yr/100M was more than fair for LMA and still think that. Still not for sure how that 127M came into existance.

The difference though is age, upside, and accomplishment. You would be getting a player over six years younger, cheaper, and with more supposed upside with Irving. With LMA, you get a player that has two All-NBA selections. People will value those differently.

On the back end of those contracts, would you rather have 34yr old LMA or 28yr old Irving?