Zombie Fire Olshey (1 Viewer)

[blue9]

I find all the squabbling over whether Harkless would have received more if the Blazer had more to offer boring. But some of the comments made me think about the way it went down, and I do wonder if Harkless' contract was suppressed by the fact we matched Crabbe's offer. Basically, Neil proved to the other GMs that he was going to match offers on his FAs, so other GMs didn't waste time in tying up money in an offer to Harkless that would be matched. If Crabbe didn't receive an offer from BKLYN, or if it had come later, or if we hadn't matched, then perhaps Harkless gets a $14M offer from some other team...which we would have matched.

 

[Denny Crane]

I find all the squabbling over whether Harkless would have received more if the Blazer had more to offer boring. But some of the comments made me think about the way it went down, and I do wonder if Harkless' contract was suppressed by the fact we matched Crabbe's offer. Basically, Neil proved to the other GMs that he was going to match offers on his FAs, so other GMs didn't waste time in tying up money in an offer to Harkless that would be matched. If Crabbe didn't receive an offer from BKLYN, or if it had come later, or if we hadn't matched, then perhaps Harkless gets a $14M offer from some other team...which we would have matched.

Actually, if another team offered Mo $11M, say, it would force Neil to choose between paying the LT if he matched, or getting rid of players he seems to have wanted to keep. We've seen that teams love to make toxic offers to us, and that NO has done the same to others.

 

[oldfisherman]

I also want to qualify my figuring as not necessarily 100% accurate. For example, there's the spread provision used on Verajao's that reduces that $21M figure by ~$2M. There may be more.

I like to use this site for team salaries, but not sure it is 100% accurate.
http://www.basketballinsiders.com/portland-trail-blazers-team-salary/

It has the Blazers @ $129.5 million in guaranteed salaries, and $141.6 million if we bring everyone back, including Plumlee for $3.4 million, which is too low. And that is with Verajao @ $2 million.

 

[Denny Crane]

I like to use this site for team salaries, but not sure it is 100% accurate.
http://www.basketballinsiders.com/portland-trail-blazers-team-salary/

It has the Blazers @ $129.5 million in guaranteed salaries, and $141.6 million if we bring everyone back, including Plumlee for $3.4 million, which is too low. And that is with Verajao @ $2 million.

Feel free to do the math.

 

[Denny Crane]

I like to use this site for team salaries, but not sure it is 100% accurate.
http://www.basketballinsiders.com/portland-trail-blazers-team-salary/

It has the Blazers @ $129.5 million in guaranteed salaries, and $141.6 million if we bring everyone back, including Plumlee for $3.4 million, which is too low. And that is with Verajao @ $2 million.

I used this one:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/POR.html

 

[blue9]

Actually, if another team offered Mo $11M, say, it would force Neil to choose between paying the LT if he matched, or getting rid of players he seems to have wanted to keep. We've seen that teams love to make toxic offers to us, and that NO has done the same to others.

In the scenario(s) I laid out it would actually force Neil to choose what to do with Crabbe/Meyers. My theory was that it was Crabbe's early offer, and our match, that may have suppressed Harkless' contract. And maybe if Harkless had received an early offer, then it might be that Harkless/Crabbe swap contracts, with our match on Harkless scaring off BKLYN from signing Crabbe. I think there'd be a lot fewer complaints if Harkless was making $18M and Crabbe making $10M.

 

[Sarni]

We will have nearly $90M commited to Lillard, McCollum, Turner and Crabbe next season, won't we? That's a bit dreadful. The way our salaries should be balanced, not a single bench player should be making more than $10M - $11M (since $50M is commited to backcourt it does not leave much room for other big money players). We have to be shopping Crabbe soon I imagine and preferably for someone who won't make anywhere near that for 2 years. Nurkic fits the bill but Denver will want nothing to do with Crabbe. Okafor it has to be (Noel will get $15M+ in 4 months).

 

[Denny Crane]

In the scenario(s) I laid out it would actually force Neil to choose what to do with Crabbe/Meyers. My theory was that it was Crabbe's early offer, and our match, that may have suppressed Harkless' contract. And maybe if Harkless had received an early offer, then it might be that Harkless/Crabbe swap contracts, with our match on Harkless scaring off BKLYN from signing Crabbe. I think there'd be a lot fewer complaints if Harkless was making $18M and Crabbe making $10M.

It looks like Mo was holding out for an outside offer. He could have cut a deal before Leonard signed.

All things considered, Leonard should have been the lowest priority of the re-signings.

 

[Sarni]

Leonard at $10M a year will be very hard to get rid of.

 

[e_blazer]

Huh? My statement was mathematical in nature. Which is nothing like yours, which was speculation based upon an illogical foundation. But it's ok, believe what you want, it doesn't matter. =)

Your math occurs after your bullshit and math built upon a foundation of bullshit is still bullshit. I'm using the term bullshit in the same vein as you accused me of doing: stating something as fact when we have no way of knowing for certain what the fact would have been.

You assume that, absent the signings of Turner, Crabbe and Leonard, Harkless would sign the same deal that he ended up taking. There's absolutely no way of knowing that or even of assuming it's a reasonable supposition. Your opinion seems to based on the fact that he had no other offers so he had to take whatever the Blazers were willing to pay him. But that's not the way it works in reality. Agents and GMs track what other free agent players in similar circumstances are signing for and use those signings as a basis for the money that is offered. Last summer there were the following signings of guys who are at a similar point in their careers as Harkless was:

Bradley Beal: 5 years, $128M
Harrison Barnes: 4 years, $94M
Kent Bazemore: 4 years, $70M
Miles Plumlee: 4 years, $52M
Jordan Clarkson: 4 years, $50M
Solomon Hill: 4 years, $48M
Jon Leuer: 4 years, $42M
Dwight Powell: 4 years, $37M
E'Twan Moore: 4 years, $34M

So you immediately cross off Beal, Barnes and probably Bazemore as more accomplished/prized players. The $40M that Harkless signed for puts him just above Powell and Moore, but below Leur, Hill, Clarkson & Plumlee. You can argue that Plumlee gets more as a big man, but I don't see any way that you justify Clarkson or Solomon freaking Hill getting more than Harkless. Absent the luxury tax constraint, I would expect that the offer would have been more in the $12-13M range than the $10M he signed for.

You can still insist that Olshey could have tried to stiff Harkless because there were no other suitors, but the Blazers have never been known as a stingy team. Frankly, they can't be. The only thing that they have going for them in trying to get free agents to sign here is a rich owner with a reputation of being generous with the paychecks. Further, without Leonard, Turner, and Crabbe, the Blazers would have had a really lousy roster and there would have been more of an incentive for Harkless to take the QO, play out that one year, and look for a better deal in the next summer.

Sure, my statement that Harkless would have demanded more money is bullshit in that it's not backed by a link to some statement that he or his agent made. But my statement is backed by a pretty good understanding of how things work in the NBA from years of observation.

 

[illmatic99]

I used this one:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/POR.html

View attachment 11669

This really isn't that bad. Just wait til 2017. So many teams will have payrolls that look worse.

Meyers has a contract that is slightly above mid level. It's not an albatross.

 

[e_blazer]

This really isn't that bad. Just wait til 2017. So many teams will have payrolls that look worse.

Meyers has a contract that is slightly above mid level. It's not an albatross.

Seriously. If Meyers' contract is an albatross, what the heck is Miles Plumlee's?

 

[oldfisherman]

I used this one:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/POR.html

View attachment 11669

If your site adds in Plumlee’s salary, the total comes to $141.6 million, the same as my site. Both sites match each other and have the same salaries for each player. So they both must be close to accurate.

I understand now that your $82 million cap idea was a hypothetical if we could go back and change last off-seasons moves. Not sure why everyone is spending so much time on the past. It is done and over, time to move on, not dream about what could have been.

We need to find realistic ways to improve this team. Given the huge cap mess we have to work with, how do we do it? How does NO get this team under the cap so he can sign FAs?? Please note I said realistic.

 

[e_blazer]

If your site adds in Plumlee’s salary, the total comes to $141.6 million, the same as my site. Both sites match each other and have the same salaries for each player. So they both must be close to accurate.

I understand now that your $82 million cap idea was a hypothetical if we could go back and change last off-seasons moves. Not sure why everyone is spending so much time on the past. It is done and over, time to move on, not dream about what could have been.

We need to find realistic ways to improve this team. Given the huge cap mess we have to work with, how do we do it? How does NO get this team under the cap so he can sign FAs?? Please note I said realistic.

I think the answer to your question as to why people have been kicking around past moves is given in the title to the thread. Some folks feel that Olshey's recent record of player moves demonstrate that he's not fit for the job. I'm not one of those folks.

 

[Denny Crane]

This really isn't that bad. Just wait til 2017. So many teams will have payrolls that look worse.

Meyers has a contract that is slightly above mid level. It's not an albatross.

Exactly.

 

[selloutking]

If your site adds in Plumlee’s salary, the total comes to $141.6 million, the same as my site. Both sites match each other and have the same salaries for each player. So they both must be close to accurate.

I understand now that your $82 million cap idea was a hypothetical if we could go back and change last off-seasons moves. Not sure why everyone is spending so much time on the past. It is done and over, time to move on, not dream about what could have been.

We need to find realistic ways to improve this team. Given the huge cap mess we have to work with, how do we do it? How does NO get this team under the cap so he can sign FAs?? Please note I said realistic.

trade players with large contracts for draft picks?

 

[Denny Crane]

If your site adds in Plumlee’s salary, the total comes to $141.6 million, the same as my site. Both sites match each other and have the same salaries for each player. So they both must be close to accurate.

I understand now that your $82 million cap idea was a hypothetical if we could go back and change last off-seasons moves. Not sure why everyone is spending so much time on the past. It is done and over, time to move on, not dream about what could have been.

We need to find realistic ways to improve this team. Given the huge cap mess we have to work with, how do we do it? How does NO get this team under the cap so he can sign FAs?? Please note I said realistic.

The plan isn't to sign FAs, other than our own and using the MLE and BAE.

But we don't really get to sign the most awesome of FAs out there. It's a much better strategy to trade for one, and we have lots of guys and contracts that can facilitate that.

A more interesting question is how we re-sign Plums and stay under the LT. Someone has to be moved in exchange for a lot less salary back. And that is easily possible, it's just a matter of who that someone is.

I'm quite sure that Leonard and/or Davis could easily be moved for a TPE (cap space).

 

[e_blazer]

The plan isn't to sign FAs, other than our own and using the MLE and BAE.

But we don't really get to sign the most awesome of FAs out there. It's a much better strategy to trade for one, and we have lots of guys and contracts that can facilitate that.

A more interesting question is how we re-sign Plums and stay under the LT. Someone has to be moved in exchange for a lot less salary back. And that is easily possible, it's just a matter of who that someone is.

I'm quite sure that Leonard and/or Davis could easily be moved for a TPE (cap space).

Exactly right. And the salary dump doesn't even have to come before being able to re-sign Plumlee. As long as the dump occurs before the last regular season game of next season, the Blazers wouldn't get hit with LT.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I find all the squabbling over whether Harkless would have received more if the Blazer had more to offer boring. But some of the comments made me think about the way it went down, and I do wonder if Harkless' contract was suppressed by the fact we matched Crabbe's offer. Basically, Neil proved to the other GMs that he was going to match offers on his FAs, so other GMs didn't waste time in tying up money in an offer to Harkless that would be matched. If Crabbe didn't receive an offer from BKLYN, or if it had come later, or if we hadn't matched, then perhaps Harkless gets a $14M offer from some other team...which we would have matched.

Actually, I think you're (we're all) overvaluing Harkless. To the rest of the league he was a guy who only started 14 games, averaged 6.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg and was one year removed from being given away for a top 55 protected future 2nd round pick. Doesn't exactly sound like a $14 million dollar a year man to me.

I think we all are a bit in love for Mo for those same reasons. We got him for nothing. Which made it easy for him to exceed expectations, and he was one of our few summer signings that has actually been worth what we gave him (I say C.J. is the other).

I seriously doubt he would have gotten a $14 million a year offer regardless of the Crabbe situation. If anything, I think the willingness to match a toxic offer went down after we'd already overpaid for Turner and Crabbe. A GM offering Harkless a four year deal starting at $14 million would have really been holding Neil's feet to the fire. Matching would have put us into LT territory this year and repeater tax territory in future years.

Either way, that severely ties our hands. Either we face severe penalties. Not just financial, repeater status reduces your MLE, takes away your bi-annual exception and also puts additional restrictions on trades. Or we jettison some of those "assets" we overpaid dearly to retain.

No one else thought Harkless was worth $14 million a year, or he would have gotten an offer.

BNM

 

[PtldPlatypus]

repeater status reduces your MLE, takes away your bi-annual exception and also puts additional restrictions on trades.

This is not accurate. Repeater status only impacts your tax rate. Those other restrictions are based on being over the "apron".

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q23

And it should be noted that while the luxury tax payment isn't calculated until the end of the season (as has been stated many times), the restrictions you listed would go into effect as of 7/1/17, once CJ's extension kicks in and puts us over the apron.

 

[Minstrel]

Actually, I think you're (we're all) overvaluing Harkless. To the rest of the league he was a guy who only started 14 games, averaged 6.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg and was one year removed from being given away for a top 55 protected future 2nd round pick. Doesn't exactly sound like a $14 million dollar a year man to me.

Part of the reason for the overvaluing is because we're looking at the Harkless of this season. But the Harkless of this season is a different animal largely because he's hitting three-pointers at a solid clip. He wasn't in past seasons. If you take Harkless and remove the ability to shoot threes, it's very apparent why no one else had interest.

If Olshey predicted that Harkless would start nailing threes at a decent rate (and this actually continues and isn't a half-season fluke), then it's a smart buy by Olshey that other GMs missed. If Olshey didn't see this coming and just got lucky, then he probably paid Harkless about what he was worth and Harkless' current bargain appearance is good fortune. Either way, there wasn't much reason for Olshey to pay Harkless more, even if Olshey had more money to spend--pre-2016 Harkless wasn't worth more and no one else was building in a revamped three-point shot.

 

[Boob-No-More]

This is not accurate. Repeater status only impacts your tax rate. Those other restrictions are based on being over the "apron".

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q23

And it should be noted that while the luxury tax payment isn't calculated until the end of the season (as has been stated many times), the restrictions you listed would go into effect as of 7/1/17, once CJ's extension kicks in and puts us over the apron.

OK (literally), that's what I get for using a source from OK. From the site newsOK.com, the official web site of the Oklahoma City Oklahoman:

NBA: Clarifying the Luxury Tax System

• Teams over the luxury tax line are limited to a “Taxpayer Mid-Level Exception” (MLE) for signing free agents. Players can be signed for up to three seasons under this form of the exception. For 2014-15, the starting salary of this exception is worth $3.278 million. The starting salary increases each year. The “Non-Taxpayer” flavor of this exception can sign players for up to four seasons starting at $5.305 million.
• Tax paying teams cannot use a smaller, though valuable, exception known as the “Bi-Annual Exception”. Teams can’t use this two years in a row, hence the name. It can be used to sign players for up to two seasons and has a starting salary of $2.077 million. It also increases in value each year.
• Taxpayers face restrictions when making trades. They cannot acquire a player via sign-and-trade. They can take back only up to 125 percent, plus $100,000 of outgoing salaries in other trades. Teams below the tax line have more flexibility.

So, even with this misunderstanding, seeing that we're currently only $26K under the tax threshold, matching an offer to Harkless starting at $14 million (istead of the $8.988 million he got from us) would have pushed us over the apron this year and next. So, the penalties would still apply.

So, as I said if another GM would have offered Mo and contract starting at $14 million a year, he would have really been holding Neil's feet to the fire. Thankfully, no other GM thought Mo was worth that much. Well, at least no other GM that had that kind of money to offer.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

Part of the reason for the overvaluing is because we're looking at the Harkless of this season. But the Harkless of this season is a different animal largely because he's hitting three-pointers at a solid clip. He wasn't in past seasons. If you take Harkless and remove the ability to shoot threes, it's very apparent why no one else had interest.

Exactly. No one else was going to offer Harklesss a deal starting at $14 million a year based on his performance to date.

He was a starter his rookie year, saw his production and role diminish over the next two seasons in ORL to the point where he fell out the the rotation and was given away for nothing. While we were thrilled to get him for nothing, his production last year, in his fourth season in the league, was basically back to where it was as a rookie. Four years in the league, given multiple opportunities to start, and no significant improvement isn't exactly the resume' of someone commanding $14 million a year, even in today's climate.

BNM

 

[Denny Crane]

Exactly right. And the salary dump doesn't even have to come before being able to re-sign Plumlee. As long as the dump occurs before the last regular season game of next season, the Blazers wouldn't get hit with LT.

I think the last chance to get under the LT is trade deadline, in 2018.

 

[blue9]

Well, to anyone with eyeballs not named Terry Stotts, it was fairly obvious he was our best option at SF since early last season. Unfortunately for him it took the better part of a season before his coach realized this.

 

[Denny Crane]

Mo was a major factor in our overachieving, record-wise, and advancing to the 2nd round.

Guys like that have historically received good offers. Crabbe is one example, and Eddie Robinson is another (going back a ways for an obvious other example).

Mo averaged 11PPG/5 RPG, and shot .341 from 3pt in the playoffs. He's only 22, so he has room to grow.

I could see another team making a toxic offer just to screw NO over. We're lucky it didn't happen.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

OK (literally), that's what I get for using a source from OK. From the site newsOK.com, the official web site of the Oklahoma City Oklahoman:

NBA: Clarifying the Luxury Tax System

• Teams over the luxury tax line are limited to a “Taxpayer Mid-Level Exception” (MLE) for signing free agents. Players can be signed for up to three seasons under this form of the exception. For 2014-15, the starting salary of this exception is worth $3.278 million. The starting salary increases each year. The “Non-Taxpayer” flavor of this exception can sign players for up to four seasons starting at $5.305 million.
• Tax paying teams cannot use a smaller, though valuable, exception known as the “Bi-Annual Exception”. Teams can’t use this two years in a row, hence the name. It can be used to sign players for up to two seasons and has a starting salary of $2.077 million. It also increases in value each year.
• Taxpayers face restrictions when making trades. They cannot acquire a player via sign-and-trade. They can take back only up to 125 percent, plus $100,000 of outgoing salaries in other trades. Teams below the tax line have more flexibility.

So, even with this misunderstanding, seeing that we're currently only $26K under the tax threshold, matching an offer to Harkless starting at $14 million (istead of the $8.988 million he got from us) would have pushed us over the apron this year and next. So, the penalties would still apply.

So, as I said if another GM would have offered Mo and contract starting at $14 million a year, he would have really been holding Neil's feet to the fire. Thankfully, no other GM thought Mo was worth that much. Well, at least no other GM that had that kind of money to offer.

BNM

Yeah, I wasn't disputing anything else that you had posted. Just wanted to clarify the repeater vs apron bit.

 

[e_blazer]

I think the last chance to get under the LT is trade deadline, in 2018.

As a practical matter, that's the last date to make a trade to dump a significant amount of salary, but according to the CBA FAQ page:

"The amount of tax a team pays depends on the season, the team salary as of the team's last regular season game, and whether the team is a "repeat offender"."

 

[Boob-No-More]

Yeah, I wasn't disputing anything else that you had posted. Just wanted to clarify the repeater vs apron bit.

Sure, no problem. I appreciate it. I should have gone to a more official source rather than trust a writer from cow town. So, that's on me. Live and learn.

BNM

 

[e_blazer]

Exactly. No one else was going to offer Harklesss a deal starting at $14 million a year based on his performance to date.

He was a starter his rookie year, saw his production and role diminish over the next two seasons in ORL to the point where he fell out the the rotation and was given away for nothing. While we were thrilled to get him for nothing, his production last year, in his fourth season in the league, was basically back to where it was as a rookie. Four years in the league, given multiple opportunities to start, and no significant improvement isn't exactly the resume' of someone commanding $14 million a year, even in today's climate.

BNM

I'll buy that teams were reluctant to offer Harkless a big contract because he hadn't demonstrated what he currently brings to the table, at least not on a consistent basis for a long enough time. That was proven by the fact that he didn't get other offers. Given that Olshey has a much bigger inventory of information on which draw in forming an opinion about his long term value to the team (practice games, coaching staff evaluations, etc.) than other GMs, I think his decision to give him a big contract was valid...as is now being demonstrated. As far as values, last summer's deals for players were crazy. Jordan Clarkson and Solomon Hill getting $12M a year? C'mon. How is Harkless not worth as much as those guys, not to mention Jon Leuer?