Blazers Offer Roy Hibbert Max Contract

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
KingSpeed said:
He's hurt and unavailable. He also doesn't want to play here. He also only averaged 9/7/1.5 when he played. Who cares? Moot point. What AVAILABLE guy would you prefer play center? You said to sign a solid big man. I asked who and you mentioned a guy who is retired. What AVAILABLE center do you want?
Click to expand...

Yao Ming
 
Don't even go there.

Magloire should be arrested for stealing money from the NBA.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Not just the RFA, but also that he's young, he's an All-Star, and he's a legit center in a league where legit centers are rare. Add all that up and you have a guy who requires a bigger contract than he may have earned.

Batum on the other hand..... plays an easier position to fill, hasn't shown any consistency, and is a bigger injury risk because of his international commitments.
Click to expand...

I'm beginning to think that the Blazers may not match Nic in order to keep a bit of flexibility.

I'd much rather have Hibbert on a "max" deal than Nic at $12m/year, and having both of those contracts doesn't make much sense to me.

How quickly would LMA break down if it's Freeland, Leonard, and LMA as the front-line rotation next year? The Blazers HAVE to get somebody to play alongside LMA, and Hibbert seems ideal to me.
 
PapaG said:
I'm beginning to think that the Blazers may not match Nic in order to keep a bit of flexibility.

I'd much rather have Hibbert on a "max" deal than Nic at $12m/year, and having both of those contracts doesn't make much sense to me.

How quickly would LMA break down if it's Freeland, Leonard, and LMA as the front-line rotation next year? The Blazers HAVE to get somebody to play alongside LMA, and Hibbert seems ideal to me.
Click to expand...

If they can get Hibbert and then extend Batum, I think they might do it. But if Batum gets in the way of them signing Hibbert, they might let him walk or sign and trade. I never in a million years thought Nic would be getting 12 million a year. Just fucking ludicrous for a guy who averages 13.9 ppg.
 
handiman said:
I disagree. You're playing with the words as much as any... Hibbert's "max" deal is no different from the max deals for anyone coming off their rookie contract, which is all he can be compared to. Most franchise players are established as such by the end of their rookie deal, so it's a perfectly fair comparison. Hibbert is not in that category.
Click to expand...

Disagree. Rose and Durant, for instance, are multiple-time all-stars and entitled to a "Higher-than-normal-rookie-max" (TM) contract. Hibbert is not. So no, he's not in the Rose/Durant category coming off rookie contracts, but the tier below...which seems about right to me. He'd make less-than-LMA money. As a 1-time-All-Star big man about to enter his prime, it doesn't seem like a massive overpay.

And if you're worrying about signing an All-Star caliber legit C for 14+M a year, how big a brick are you shitting about Nic being offered 11-12M?
 
PapaG said:
I'd much rather have Hibbert on a "max" deal than Nic at $12m/year, and having both of those contracts doesn't make much sense to me.
Click to expand...

Why does having both contracts not make much sense to you? I think it's unlikely that the Blazers can acquire a significantly better player for that $12 million/year and it's probably not productive to attempt to remain under the cap for too long in any case. Unused cap space is potential not being directed toward winning games. I think Lillard, Batum, Aldridge and Hibbert can form the nucleus of a pretty good young team, with Freeland and Leonard as interesting reserves.
 
RoyToy said:
You're missing my point in that the Blazers don't need to have a long-term answer in place next year
Click to expand...

So you think the Blazers should pickup some smart amnesty waivers, take on other teams salary to get future draft picks, and only sign one year deals? Then we can try for a better free agent in future off-season. I think that could be a good strategy as well. I still think Hibbert would be a good signing, but if the Pacers match Neil needs to be very careful with how he ties up our cap long-term.
 
Do you think we could have had Lopez with a contract < than a max deal?
 
If not, it would've been close, and I think Roy brings MUCH more to the table than Lopez
 
Brooke Lopez is a foot injury waiting to happen. I think his career will be cut short in much the same way that Yao Ming was.
 
Minstrel said:
Why does having both contracts not make much sense to you? I think it's unlikely that the Blazers can acquire a significantly better player for that $12 million/year and it's probably not productive to attempt to remain under the cap for too long in any case. Unused cap space is potential not being directed toward winning games. I think Lillard, Batum, Aldridge and Hibbert can form the nucleus of a pretty good young team, with Freeland and Leonard as interesting reserves.
Click to expand...

I totally disagree regarding Batum's contract. I think having him on the books for $12million could most definitely prevent the team from adding a stud player in the future. I don't think Paul Allen will pay the new higher luxury tax. Batum's value to the team would not be close to the cost of his contract on the salary cap and luxury tax. Batum would be similar to a players such as Joe Johnson or Hedo Turkoglu, he would have value on the basketball court and should be in a rotation, but that large of a contract would make him a negative asset to the roster.

The team should aim to sign players that become positive assets, where their worth exceeds the cost of their contracts. If you believe Batum will be an all-star then fine the Blazers should match. But I don't believe he will improve terribly much more from the player he is today, and that level of player on that large of a contract is a hinderance toward building a contender. This isn't the 1999 Blazers where we can aim to collect as much talent regardless of contracts. The new NBA is a moneyball league that will be driven by players outperforming their salary cost.
 
Draco said:
I totally disagree regarding Batum's contract. I think having him on the books for $12million could most definitely prevent the team from adding a stud player in the future. I don't think Paul Allen will pay the new higher luxury tax. Batum's value to the team would not be close to the cost of his contract on the salary cap and luxury tax. Batum would be similar to a players such as Joe Johnson or Hedo Turkoglu, he would have value on the basketball court and should be in a rotation, but that large of a contract would make him a negative asset to the roster.

The team should aim to sign players that become positive assets, where their worth exceeds the cost of their contracts. If you believe Batum will be an all-star then fine the Blazers should match. But I don't believe he will improve terribly much more from the player he is today, and that level of player on that large of a contract is a hinderance toward building a contender. This isn't the 1999 Blazers where we can aim to collect as much talent regardless of contracts. The new NBA is a moneyball league that will be driven by players outperforming their salary cost.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. His contract will be much worse than what's on the paper because of the luxury tax.
 
Fez Hammersticks said:
Do you think we could have had Lopez with a contract < than a max deal?
Click to expand...

Most definitely, but do we want Brook Lopez?

He is as terrible of a rebounder as Bargnani. I don't think him along with a below average rebounding LaMarcus could ever make noise in the playoffs.
 
Lopez is also a poor defender. He basically contributes to the team like a Zach Randolph except he can't rebound.
 
Fez Hammersticks said:
Do you think we could have had Lopez with a contract < than a max deal?
Click to expand...

All bigs have a higher risk of injury, but Lopez is just coming off a major injury and feet problems are tricky.

In addition, Lopez is too similar to Aldridge to make a good pair. Aldridge and Hibbert are synergistic.

Also, Hibbert is "worth" more on the open market the Lopez, thus he would probably be easier to move if needed in the future.

Also, Indiana is a very income constrained team that is on a strict budget, and thus is much much much more likely to decide to let an overpaid player walk than the Nets who have no such constraints - at all.

The only reason the Nets would let Lopez walk would be if they knew he was damaged goods, or maybe they needed the cap space to sign someone better - and after their own Deron Williams the only better free agents than Lopez is Eric Gordon and......Hibbert.

To answer your question - no. If we offer less than max, NJ will match, unless they know Lopez is damaged, in which case we don't want him.
 
Draco said:
I totally disagree regarding Batum's contract. I think having him on the books for $12million could most definitely prevent the team from adding a stud player in the future. I don't think Paul Allen will pay the new higher luxury tax. Batum's value to the team would not be close to the cost of his contract on the salary cap and luxury tax. Batum would be similar to a players such as Joe Johnson or Hedo Turkoglu, he would have value on the basketball court and should be in a rotation, but that large of a contract would make him a negative asset to the roster.
Click to expand...

I disagree that Batum would be a negative asset at $12 million. I think he's fairly close to worth that as it is and he still has upside left. I don't think $12 million is the cost of a young legitimate All Star...if Batum became an All Star caliber player, he'd be worth much more than $12 million. I don't think that's the standard for it being a worthwhile match.

The team should aim to sign players that become positive assets, where their worth exceeds the cost of their contracts.
Click to expand...

That's sort of an obvious desire, but it's like saying "the team should aim for being championship-caliber"...it doesn't provide much in the way of analytic use. The two places where a team can expect to find players worth more than their contracts are players on rookie contracts and stars paid the max, because those are the two classes of contracts where the player's value is being artificially surpressed (i.e. not free market value). I wholeheartedly endorse acquiring studs on rookie contracts or stars on max deals, but that's pretty obviously easier said than done.

I don't think $12 million is out of step with Batum's value. It wouldn't make him a "positive asset," but not a negative one either. However, while it takes the team out of contention for signing a star on a max deal (Hibbert doesn't qualify, as I think his max deal would be around fair value; he's not a clear star who's clearly worth more than the max), I don't think signing a star to a max deal (like Deron Williams) is at all a likely outcome for the Blazers no matter how much cap space they have. Signing Batum doesn't take the team out of the ability to get studs on rookie contracts...that requires being great drafters, but can be done even over the salary cap. I think that signing Batum and going over the salary cap is preferable to letting the cap space languish and eventually acquiring another role-player or two. Batum is currently a very good role-player with, in my view, the potential to be more than that.
 
Chris Haynes ‏@ChrisBHaynes
I'm assuming Spencer Hawes if he's still on the board RT @JSantangel11510 chris what's portlands back up plan if hibbert signs back w/ indy?
 
Mediocre Man said:
How about this thinking? Hibbert played for Shaw. Shaw is from Oakland like Lillard.


Also, Aldridge isn't an elite rebounder, and neither is Lopez. Hibbert would be a better fit with LA
Click to expand...

This is a really interesting take. I hadn't thought about how well each player would compliment Aldridge nor did I know there was a Hibbert/Shaw connection. I had been quitely hoping Shaw might get the nod as the head coach anyway. It will be fun to watch this develop. Summers (as far as basketball is concerned), are usually so boring. Not this year.

I do think Lopez is a bit underrated. I would have to be pretty confident that he doesn't have a chronic foot problem though. That might be effecting his rebounding. When I see a center as talented as Lopez not rebounding it makes me wonder about coaching/how they are using him too. Having said that I can see where Hibbert would be considered the safer choice. To have either of them would be an incredible upgrade.
 
Last edited:
David Aldridge‏@daldridgetnt

Sources: Roy Hibbert indeed leaning toward Blazers after max offer commitment Sat. Pacers mulling. Story up soon on http://nba.com.
 
Boise Blazer said:
David Aldridge‏@daldridgetnt

Sources: Roy Hibbert indeed leaning toward Blazers after max offer commitment Sat. Pacers mulling. Story up soon on http://nba.com.
Click to expand...

I thought that Hibbert and the Blazers had already verbally agreed?

I'm guessing Hibbert likes the idea of playing alongside another All-Star front-court player who can post up. David West is a nice PF, but he's not a true PF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top