Blazers Should Come Out Cap Winners

[e_blazer]

With the big increase in money coming into the NBA under the new TV deal, the cap is expected to rise to $90 million in 2016. Silver wanted to "smooth" the transition by averaging the cap increase, but it was voted down by the players yesterday. That means the Blazers can, if they choose, afford to keep the roster core intact this summer, knowing they're only going to have to pay luxury tax for one year.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/i...ers_will_have_more_options_to_keep_roste.html

 

[GriLtCheeZ]

Makes me think other teams will be throwing max offers to Rolo and Wes.

 

[BlazerWookee]

A

Makes me think other teams will be throwing max offers to Rolo and Wes.

And that PA won't even blink when we match.

 

[ehizzy3]

Max offers for Wes and rolo? Yikes

 

[magnifier661]

A

And that PA won't even blink when we match.

I think the core will take some cuts to make room. At least I hope.

 

[rasheedfan2005]

Its simple really
lillard/blake
matthews/cj
lebron/batum
aldridge/leonard
rolo/freeland

 

[barfo]

Its simple really
lillard/blake
matthews/cj
lebron/batum
aldridge/leonard
rolo/freeland

That's not right. I don't see Claver anywhere.

barfo

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I love all our starters but if we don't make the WCF I'm not sure you want 4 max and 1 near max players on the roster.

 

[magnifier661]

I love all our starters but if we don't make the WCF I'm not sure you want 4 max and 1 near max players on the roster.

Aldridge, Dame and Lopez are top priority. I wouldn't want to lose Matthews, but I think those 3 are the most important of our core to stay successful.

Hopefully the players take cuts to stay competitive. We could have a dynasty team if we stay together

 

[OneLifeToLive]

Aldridge, Dame and Lopez are top priority. I wouldn't want to lose Matthews, but I think those 3 are the most important of our core to stay successful.

Hopefully the players take cuts to stay competitive. We could have a dynasty team if we stay together

Honestly, I don't think they will have to with this owner. But I agree with Sly above. I think two are max players and the others maybe 75-80% of that. If that.

 

[magnifier661]

Honestly, I don't think they will have to with this owner. But I agree with Sly above. I think two are max players and the others maybe 75-80% of that. If that.

I would love Matthews to accept around 12-13 mil. Lopez around 11-12. Aldridge obviously max

 

[OneLifeToLive]

I would love Matthews to accept around 12-13 mil. Lopez around 11-12. Aldridge obviously max

That's about right...

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Lopez could get more.

There is a premium for centers and he's clearly above average. Gortat landed $12m/per fwiw.

Priority:

1: LMA
2: Lopez
3: Matthews

 

[magnifier661]

Lopez could get more.

There is a premium for centers and he's clearly above average. Gortat landed $12m/per fwiw.

Priority:

1: LMA
2: Lopez
3: Matthews

I agree. I'm just hoping Lopez and Matthews would take less

 

[stampedehero]

LMA Lopez and Matthews Lopez puts energy into other players. We saw that when he came back from the hand injury. He is vital to our team now and in the playoffs

 

[GriLtCheeZ]

I agree. I'm just hoping Lopez and Matthews would take less

Max'em out now, and it will be a bargain in two years. It would be a shame to lose Rolo or Wes because another team offered them a measly 2-3 million more, when the salary cap will be increased by 30 million in 2 years anyway. Sure LA and Dame's extensions will eat into that, but not so much that you can't keep our starters together.

 

[riverman]

I'm no expert in cap situations but it seems to me that if you offered high or max contracts on 3-4 year deals you could back load them and pay bigger salaries in year 2-4 saving luxury tax next season.

 

[magnifier661]

I'm no expert in cap situations but it seems to me that if you offered high or max contracts on 3-4 year deals you could back load them and pay bigger salaries in year 2-4 saving luxury tax next season.

I believe the cap hit is the average of the contract. So if the contract was 40 mil for 4 years, even being like a 12 and 13 mil back load, the cap hit is still $10 mil per

 

[Denny Crane]

If I'm a player, I sign no contract that doesn't have a player option in a year. Max or not.

 

[OneLifeToLive]

Max'em out now, and it will be a bargain in two years. It would be a shame to lose Rolo or Wes because another team offered them a measly 2-3 million more, when the salary cap will be increased by 30 million in 2 years anyway. Sure LA and Dame's extensions will eat into that, but not so much that you can't keep our starters together.

I think if LA stays everyone will stay. If LA leaves, I think the both sides the organization and the player could look into other options.

 

[HomerLovesKoolAid]

Why does Paul give a shit about being over the cap? Even if he is in luxury tax hell, why would he even care? It's like us getting a $6 parking ticket. Sign em all and let Stotts sort em out.

 

[Denny Crane]

It's no longer like getting a $6 parking ticket.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/i...ers_owner_paul_allen_praises_teams_stabi.html

(interview with Paul Allen)

 

[magnifier661]

It's no longer like getting a $6 parking ticket.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/i...ers_owner_paul_allen_praises_teams_stabi.html

(interview with Paul Allen)

View attachment 4723

I definitely agree that Allen shouldn't Max every player to keep the core in tact. But I don't think signing Aldridge to max, Matthews to like 13 mil and Lopez to 12 mil will do that. And when Dame's rookie scale expires, we should have that new cap.

The only time I think we would be in luxury tax hell is when we have 3 max or near max players.

 

[e_blazer]

It's no longer like getting a $6 parking ticket.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/i...ers_owner_paul_allen_praises_teams_stabi.html

(interview with Paul Allen)

View attachment 4723

The date of that interview was Sept. 30th, or about a week before the new TV deal was announced. I suspect that if he'd been asked a slightly different question a week later, the response may have been somewhat different: "If the current team roster is successful this year and builds on what it achieved last year, would you consider going into luxury tax territory for one season to re-sign the core, knowing that the team won't be anywhere near the threshold starting in 2016?" I don't see PA blinking at paying a one year penalty if he thinks that he's got a winning roster and won't be hurting financially in the near future.

 

[Denny Crane]

The date of that interview was Sept. 30th, or about a week before the new TV deal was announced. I suspect that if he'd been asked a slightly different question a week later, the response may have been somewhat different: "If the current team roster is successful this year and builds on what it achieved last year, would you consider going into luxury tax territory for one season to re-sign the core, knowing that the team won't be anywhere near the threshold starting in 2016?" I don't see PA blinking at paying a one year penalty if he thinks that he's got a winning roster and won't be hurting financially in the near future.

I suspect he was asked about paying the luxury tax. He and most teams will be willing to pay up to the tax threshold, of course.

It's not like a $6 parking ticket or whatever.. It's so massively expensive the $billionaire owner of the Nets bailed on paying a big tax after just one season.

 

[e_blazer]

I suspect he was asked about paying the luxury tax. He and most teams will be willing to pay up to the tax threshold, of course.

It's not like a $6 parking ticket or whatever.. It's so massively expensive the $billionaire owner of the Nets bailed on paying a big tax after just one season.

I think you're missing my point, Denny. There's no doubt that the luxury tax isn't just a slap on the wrist to billionaires anymore, especially for repeaters. The cost for a first time offender up to $5 M over the threshold is $1.50 in tax for every dollar over the threshold. It goes up to $1.75 for $5-10M and escalates from there. Repeaters add another $1 in tax for every dollar over. On top of that, there are penalties that hamstring a team by eliminating trade and signing exceptions. No team can afford to be in luxury tax hell for long.

That said, the question here is whether the Blazers should make use of an unusual circumstance relating to the new TV deal to re-sign their players knowing that it could put them into luxury tax territory for one season, but would have that problem eliminated starting in 2016. The current tax threshold is around $77 M and will probably rise to $80 M next season. Without any changes, the Blazers are presently on the hook for Batum, Kaman, Lillard, McCollum, Leonard, and possibly Blake and Crabbe next season, at a total cost of around $30 M. Let's say they max Aldridge ($17M) and re-sign Matthews and Lopez for a combined $25 M. That would bring the total up to $72 M. Add in a rookie first round pick, re-sign Freeland ($5 M?) and fill in the rest of the roster spots with guys averaging $1 M apiece, and the Blazers could nudge a few million into luxury tax territory next season. There's still room the following year to give Dame his max extension and be well under the 2016 tax threshold. I don't think that Allen worries about paying an extra $5 or 7 M in tax for one season to secure his roster under those circumstances.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think it depends on how the team fares.

Also, if I am a player, I sign no contract without a pkayer option after year one. This strategy gives the player a guarantee and the flexibility to negotiate a bigger MAX deal under the higher CAP coming up.

If I were a GM trying to lure a player, I'd offer the PO, forcing the player's team to match that, too. It matters not RFA or UFA.

So even if PA pays the LT for a season, you face opt out and bigger MAX to retain in a year, plus ongoing (repeater) tax. As well, you're committing current MAX as a gamble the players won't opt out and leave.

 

[Denny Crane]

Just so the $6 ticket analogy thing is clear, non repeater tax is $1.50 for every dollar over. To use bird rights to go $15M over means you're paying $42.5M for the one player. You get reduced MLE, too. And if you repeat, the penalties are even harsher. If you're $4M+ over the LT, you cannot receive players in a S&T - this is probably far worse a penalty than the cash tax.

 

[magnifier661]

I think it depends on how the team fares.

Also, if I am a player, I sign no contract without a pkayer option after year one. This strategy gives the player a guarantee and the flexibility to negotiate a bigger MAX deal under the higher CAP coming up.

If I were a GM trying to lure a player, I'd offer the PO, forcing the player's team to match that, too. It matters not RFA or UFA.

So even if PA pays the LT for a season, you face opt out and bigger MAX to retain in a year, plus ongoing (repeater) tax. As well, you're committing current MAX as a gamble the players won't opt out and leave.

Not all players are life sucking cap vampires like the ones you mentioned. I would be surprised if any player does that in Portland

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't blame the players. If they played like all stars or near all stars for rookie wage, they make it up with bigger contracts when eligible.

I think the owners are greedy, but so are the players.