Batum compared to other SF's

[JfizzleBlazer]

The thing I dont like is we are making a big assumption he takes that leap into the next level of small forwards. If he doesnt improve more than he is now, id much rather have my swingman role player making sefolosha, ariza or barnes money.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

This. You can't use contracts from the old CBA to establish current contract values.

Is that why you're going to unload Noah on us?

 

[Natebishop3]

1.5 million a year, which is the difference between what he will get, and what would have been awesome for him to get, is not going to kill our cap room

But we're talking about the league as a whole. You're saying that teams are throwing around money willy nilly and I'm saying they will regret it when the luxury tax rolls in. I just don't think reality has set in for some of these teams. They had money, they wanted to spend it and they threw big deals at players that didn't necessarily deserve them. That's all fine and well, but the new CBA will be less forgiving about big contracts and it was my understanding that you really only wanted to throw big money at established stars like Durant, Deron, Aldridge, etc. Nic Batum is a far cry from an established anything.

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

I would much rather have Batum than Deng. Deng is at his ceiling and it isn't any better than Batum now. Batum is only 23 and could do much better on a team with more movement.
.

I agree!

 

[magnifier661]

Well personally I think it's a mistake. I sure hope I'm wrong, but I just don't see that "fire in his eye" like most players at that pay scale. He just doesn't look like he wants to be a #2 option.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Not surprisingly, I look at the situation in a very different way...

I look at the players in Tiers. To simply, let's momentarily categorize all rotation players in 3 Tiers:
Role Players, Stars, Big 3.

If we had Hibbert, our team will look like this:
Big 3s: Hibbert, LMA, Lillard
Stars: Batum, Leonard
Role Players: Everyone else

Under these conditions, it makes sense to pay these players as much as they want as long as you stay under the Luxury Tax.

Here's what our team actually Looks Like:
Big 3s: LMA, Lillard, X
Stars: Batum, Leonard
Role Players: Everyone else

We need one of the following to happen:
A) Batum improves and becomes a Big 3, an RP becomes a Star
B) Leonard improves and becomes a Big 3, an RP becomes a Star
C) We sign or trade for a Big 3

By paying Batum like a Big 3, we better hope for plan A).

If you listen to Olshey, he seems to think like I do. He has said several times that he needs to trade several "assets" for a top player like he did with Chris Paul.

edit: I don't think of Deng as a Big 3. Rashard Lewis was not a Big 3 and Orlando paid him like a superstar, which was one of their downfall.

 

[JfizzleBlazer]

Come on people. Even mags thinks its a mistake and he is our beloved resident homer.

 

[Natebishop3]

Come on people. Even mags thinks its a mistake and he is our beloved resident homer.

But now we have to match because we can't let Khan win!

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

But we're talking about the league as a whole. You're saying that teams are throwing around money willy nilly and I'm saying they will regret it when the luxury tax rolls in. I just don't think reality has set in for some of these teams. They had money, they wanted to spend it and they threw big deals at players that didn't necessarily deserve them. That's all fine and well, but the new CBA will be less forgiving about big contracts and it was my understanding that you really only wanted to throw big money at established stars like Durant, Deron, Aldridge, etc. Nic Batum is a far cry from an established anything.

We only run into problems if we far exceed the luxury tax or are above it three times. That should not happen.

 

[magnifier661]

Come on people. Even mags thinks its a mistake and he is our beloved resident homer.

It's just that a 12 mil per is actually more like a 14 mil per player we've been used to. With the new agreement; that average is for a legit #2 option. Batum is not even close to a legit #2. In fact, LMA is more of a Legit #2 than a #1 IMO. I am hoping management doesn't fall into this trap and find a true #1 option someway somehow. Who is it? I really don't know, but I do know Batum will never be that type of player. He is easily a role player and that's it. If we want to pay role players like they are superstars, then we will free fall.

 

[RR7]

It's just that a 12 mil per is actually more like a 14 mil per player we've been used to. With the new agreement; that average is for a legit #2 option. Batum is not even close to a legit #2. In fact, LMA is more of a Legit #2 than a #1 IMO. I am hoping management doesn't fall into this trap and find a true #1 option someway somehow. Who is it? I really don't know, but I do know Batum will never be that type of player. He is easily a role player and that's it. If we want to pay role players like they are superstars, then we will free fall.

Lillard. And we get a discount on his deal. And really, are just slightly underpaying LMA, arguably. Batum will be our #3. More of a facilitator roll coming up, IMO.

 

[JfizzleBlazer]

Since olshey has said that(needle moving players and not overspending on guys like wes or batum) if we do match batum I believe olshey moves wes for cap space next year to try and get his big third guy next yr with the ideathat you have lillard and l#onard on cheap deals the length of batums contract.

 

[magnifier661]

Lillard. And we get a discount on his deal. And really, are just slightly underpaying LMA, arguably. Batum will be our #3. More of a facilitator roll coming up, IMO.

Is he really that good? If that's the case, then I'm gonna be really excited. Last time we had a star PG was Porter. Yeah Strickland, Anderson and Damon had the skill, but didn't have the heart.

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

Come on people. Even mags thinks its a mistake and he is our beloved resident homer.

Mags is a great guy, but mathematically challenged on this one.

Think of it this way. By overpaying Nic slightly, we cannot sign a 3 million dollar each of the next four years. No problem for me.

 

[magnifier661]

Mags is a great guy, but mathematically challenged on this one.

Think of it this way. By overpaying Nic slightly, we cannot sign a 3 million dollar each of the next four years. No problem for me.

No I get what you're saying; but I am looking at it in a different light. What if Batum doesn't pan out? Then we have an Turk on our payroll that has an untradeable contract. If Batum can propell himself as a legit #2 option, then I'm all for keeping him. If he can't play at that level, then this will be a mistake.

 

[Natebishop3]

We only run into problems if we far exceed the luxury tax or are above it three times. That should not happen.

Again, I wasn't saying that we were the ones that would have luxury tax problems. We're not even over the cap currently, are we? I'm saying that MM is pointing to all these other massive deals that other wings have signed and I'm saying those teams might regret those deals when the new luxury tax kicks in. Spending freely should be a thing of the past in a few years, especially for a team like OKC who will have to extend Harden and Ibaka on top of the deals they already have with Durant and Westbrook.

We dodged a bullet in a way because we were set to pay Oden and Batum on top of what we were paying Roy and Aldridge. Now we only have Aldridge and Batum.

 

[Duckhook]

I really feel Nico will explode in the right system. A D'antoni offense will open up the floor and players like Lillard, Batum, Aldridge, and Leonard will thrive. They all are finishers at the rim (I'm confident of the rooks) and a run and gun offense will open up his game. Batum's game was slowed to a plodding style under Nate, and that's not his game. In my naive opinion, Batum can be an 18/4/4 guy in the right system. I hate that a style of play would label Batum as someone not worthy of that kind of money. He may be a 3rd option, but it could be pose difficult matchups given a capable PG. James Worthy wasn't a bad 3rd option .

 

[Natebishop3]

I think in a D'Antoni system, Nic could see a Joe Johnson type improvement. JJ exploded in Mike D's system in Phoenix, and cashed in with ATL.

 

[RR7]

What if Batum doesn't pan out? Then we have an Turk on our payroll that has an untradeable contract.

Turk has been traded twice so far on his untradeable contract.

 

[Charcoal Filtered]

No I get what you're saying; but I am looking at it in a different light. What if Batum doesn't pan out? Then we have an Turk on our payroll that has an untradeable contract. If Batum can propell himself as a legit #2 option, then I'm all for keeping him. If he can't play at that level, then this will be a mistake.

At Nic's age it is hardly likely he regresses. If he has a Hedolike collapse, we are in just as bad of position as letting him walk on terms of wins and losses.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

You look around the NBA and there not many available that would come close to Nic's potential/production/age.

We missed out on a great opportunity with San Antonio, who's been infatuated with Nic for years, before Ndiaye opened his mouth. Kawhi Leonard is one of the very few young SF's I'd deal Nic for.

 

[e_blazer]

As I see it, absolute worst case argument is that Batum is in the Gerald Wallace/Stephen Jackson category. Both of those guys have recent contracts or extensions at around $9.2M, which would put Batum at around $2M over market value...except of course that he's only 23 and has considerable upside where those guys are on the downhill slide. It would have been great to get him for around the $9M mark, and maybe Buchanan blew it last winter in not making an offer around there. In any event, I really think that with the right coach Nic can blossom to the point where we're all thinking he's well worth the money.

 

[Denny Crane]

Is that why you're going to unload Noah on us?

The bulls reportedly shopped Noah, Deng, and Boozer, looking to cut payroll.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Not surprisingly, I look at the situation in a very different way...

I look at the players in Tiers. To simply, let's momentarily categorize all rotation players in 3 Tiers:
Role Players, Stars, Big 3.

If we had Hibbert, our team will look like this:
Big 3s: Hibbert, LMA, Lillard
Stars: Batum, Leonard
Role Players: Everyone else

Under these conditions, it makes sense to pay these players as much as they want as long as you stay under the Luxury Tax.

Here's what our team actually Looks Like:
Big 3s: LMA, Lillard, X
Stars: Batum, Leonard
Role Players: Everyone else

We need one of the following to happen:
A) Batum improves and becomes a Big 3, an RP becomes a Star
B) Leonard improves and becomes a Big 3, an RP becomes a Star
C) We sign or trade for a Big 3

By paying Batum like a Big 3, we better hope for plan A).

If you listen to Olshey, he seems to think like I do. He has said several times that he needs to trade several "assets" for a top player like he did with Chris Paul.

edit: I don't think of Deng as a Big 3. Rashard Lewis was not a Big 3 and Orlando paid him like a superstar, which was one of their downfall.

I liked this post.

My first quibble with it is with the notion that we're (necessarily) paying Batum like a big 3. If we are fortunate enough to have Lillard and Leonard both develop to the point that 17-PER-Batum is our fourth-best player, then we will arguably be a contending squad, for which being over the cap--or even in the luxury tax--will be an acceptable circumstance. Batum can be paid $11M/year, be our fourth-highest-paid player, and our team still be OK.

However, on top of that, it should be noted that our lottery-drafted rookies are on rookie deals for the duration of Batum's potentially excessive contract. So, should it come about that Lillard and Leonard develop and join with Aldridge to form the big 3 we need, Batum's deal would be expiring by the time it came time to pay them accordingly. And if we need to go with "plan C", Batum will likely need to be included in that deal, and his contract will probably be necessary for us to match salaries to make that deal.

So, even based on the "tier" scanario presented above, I would conclude that Batum's deal will likely not hamstring us in any way in terms of creating a contender, and may in fact be a necessary ingredient.

 

[magnifier661]

I liked this post.

My first quibble with it is with the notion that we're (necessarily) paying Batum like a big 3. If we are fortunate enough to have Lillard and Leonard both develop to the point that 17-PER-Batum is our fourth-best player, then we will arguably be a contending squad, for which being over the cap--or even in the luxury tax--will be an acceptable circumstance. Batum can be paid $11M/year, be our fourth-highest-paid player, and our team still be OK.

However, on top of that, it should be noted that our lottery-drafted rookies are on rookie deals for the duration of Batum's potentially excessive contract. So, should it come about that Lillard and Leonard develop and join with Aldridge to form the big 3 we need, Batum's deal would be expiring by the time it came time to pay them accordingly. And if we need to go with "plan C", Batum will likely need to be included in that deal, and his contract will probably be necessary for us to match salaries to make that deal.

So, even based on the "tier" scanario presented above, I would conclude that Batum's deal will likely not hamstring us in any way in terms of creating a contender, and may in fact be a necessary ingredient.

Great point and repped. I'm going to rep wizard mentor as well. Makes me feel a little better about this.

 

[magnifier661]

It's just that a 12 mil per is actually more like a 14 mil per player we've been used to. With the new agreement; that average is for a legit #2 option. Batum is not even close to a legit #2. In fact, LMA is more of a Legit #2 than a #1 IMO. I am hoping management doesn't fall into this trap and find a true #1 option someway somehow. Who is it? I really don't know, but I do know Batum will never be that type of player. He is easily a role player and that's it. If we want to pay role players like they are superstars, then we will free fall.

Lillard. And we get a discount on his deal. And really, are just slightly underpaying LMA, arguably. Batum will be our #3. More of a facilitator roll coming up, IMO.

This is a fucking BEAST of a reply RR7! You called Lillard being the true #1 in July! Kudos friend!

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

This is a fucking BEAST of a reply RR7! You called Lillard being the true #1 in July! Kudos friend!

Dude, in dick-measuring contests, it's not cool to measure someone else's junk for them.

You're supposed to measure yours only.

Of course, you're Asian. So I'm sure you have penis envy.

 

[magnifier661]

It's just that a 12 mil per is actually more like a 14 mil per player we've been used to. With the new agreement; that average is for a legit #2 option. Batum is not even close to a legit #2. In fact, LMA is more of a Legit #2 than a #1 IMO. I am hoping management doesn't fall into this trap and find a true #1 option someway somehow. Who is it? I really don't know, but I do know Batum will never be that type of player. He is easily a role player and that's it. If we want to pay role players like they are superstars, then we will free fall.

Dude, in dick-measuring contests, it's not cool to measure someone else's junk for them.

You're supposed to measure yours only.

Of course, you're Asian. So I'm sure you have penis envy.

Well it's just that I have been so "ON POINT" with calling out the draft selections; I wanted to toss a few bones out there. I have enough glory!

 

[Mediocre Man]

No more thread bumping

 

[THE HCP]

BUMP