Lillard expected to sign a 4 year Super-Max extension in Portland

[BoBoBREWSKI]

I wish he'd sign for less $$ so we can afford better players to surround him with. But I dont blame him for taking the super max. He's earned it.

 

[Orion Bailey]

I wish he'd sign for less $$ so we can afford better players to surround him with. But I dont blame him for taking the super max. He's earned it.

Exactly my point. Be careful though, you might be labeled a pathetic loser for this stance.....

 

[tlongII]

Shit I've been working about 50 hrs/wk for many years now.

 

[SIeepwalker]

Exactly my point. Be careful though, you might be labeled a pathetic loser for this stance.....

woe is me

 

[blue9]

Lillard would be stupid to ask for less than his max. It's not even clear any less that he takes could be reinvested in the roster... Sure, you can invent scenarios where one day that difference actually makes a difference to the roster, but there's certainly no direct and immediate benefit.

Not to be a dick, but...thanks Captain Obvious! The extension doesn't go into effect until 2021 (?), so obviously it has no immediate benefit. But it would have future benefit, because, aside from Dame's contract, there are no* other contracts on the books for the years this extension is in effect.

*I haven't looked, so maybe it's not zero, but I have to think that if there are any contracts currently on the books during the years of Dame's extension the total dollar amount is very small.

 

[handiman]

Even Pippen, he of financial woes after his playing days, says it would be a bad move to give Dame the Super-Max. He says Curry is the only player who received it deservedly and with a positive outcome.

 

[dviss1]

Exactly my point. Be careful though, you might be labeled a pathetic loser for this stance.....

Who labeled you that?

 

[Orion Bailey]

...Fuck any players who do that cheap shit, if you are truly a great player you take what you earned and still compete for a ring.

This place is full of a bunch of unmotivated cheating pathetic losers.

Who labeled you that?

 

[Minstrel]

Not to be a dick, but...thanks Captain Obvious! The extension doesn't go into effect until 2021 (?), so obviously it has no immediate benefit. But it would have future benefit, because, aside from Dame's contract, there are no* other contracts on the books for the years this extension is in effect.

Thanks for not being a dick, I guess? Anyway, the idea that the Blazers will just keep letting contracts drop off their salary structure without replacing them with other ones is silly. Unless they're looking to punt on the next two seasons (I'm sure Lillard would love that!), they're going to keep using what resources they have as those resources become available. They'll almost certainly be capped out in 2021 too. Hopefully not capped out with as many terrible contracts as today, but the idea that they could have significant cap room in 2021 if only Lillard would give them a discount is hopelessly naive.

 

[dviss1]

Well @Orion Bailey that dude is kind of a dick so... Fuck him?

 

[blue9]

Thanks for not being a dick, I guess? Anyway, the idea that the Blazers will just keep letting contracts drop off their salary structure without replacing them with other ones is silly... They'll almost certainly be capped out in 2021 too. Hopefully not capped out with as many terrible contracts as today, but the idea that they could have significant cap room in 2021 if only Lillard would give them a discount is hopelessly naive.

Okay, nobody is saying we WON'T have new contracts on the books. And the idea of cap space in '21 isn't hopelessly naive - as of this moment, it's reality.

As I understand it Dame's extension doesn't go into effect until the 21/22 season - at that point, we have a TON of cap space that summer. We're pretty hog-tied with what we can offer this summer, so whatever we do (barring trades) will not have a huge impact on our books for the summer of '21. If we are smart with whatever we do next summer (when we could potentially have a decent amount of cap space), we could potentially also have cap space in the summer of '21 - but at that point Dame's contract will take up 34% (or whatever it is) of our total cap. And then going forward, depending on the contracts that are signed in the summer of '20 and '21, that's where Dame leaving $4M on the table may - or may not - pay dividends in us being able to afford another quality player.

But as Bobo said: "I wish he'd sign for less $$ so we can afford better players to surround him with. But I dont blame him for taking the super max. He's earned it."

 

[Orion Bailey]

Well @Orion Bailey that dude is kind of a dick so... Fuck him?

Pretty much, lol.

 

[wizenheimer]

I wish he'd sign for less $$ so we can afford better players to surround him with. But I dont blame him for taking the super max. He's earned it.

Exactly my point. Be careful though, you might be labeled a pathetic loser for this stance.....

I wouldn't call you a pathetic loser...I would say that perspective is blind to reality though

consider it: Dame's super-max is a shade under 48M/year. Now, just how much less should he sign for? Say 40M a year instead of 48M. You'd be asking him to leave 32 million dollars on the table. Really, you guys would expect that for the "good of the team"? I tell ya...that just seems absurd and naive to me

but let's just assume Dame wouldn't notice 32 million dollars setting on the negotiating table. Next, does anybody not expect Olshey to extend CJ? It will definitely happen if he's still the GM; he loves him some CJ. CJ's max would be around 39M a year. Let's say he follows Dame's lead and accepts 35M a year. Nurkic at 13M (likely bonus); But he'll be getting a new deal after only 1 year of Dame's supermax...say 25M and say Zach at what, 20M?

ok then, those 4 players:

40M - Dame
35M - CJ
25M - Nurk
20M - Zach

that's 120M/year....for 4 players, when the cap will be ranging from 116M to 150M; and the tax line ranging from 139M to 170M

4 players and Portland has little to no cap-space and at most, a 50M margin under the tax line

now, redo the assumption about Lillard and assume he's not stupid enough to leave 32M on the table and CJ won't leave as much either

the bottom line is that even with loony assumptions about how much money Dame will 'sacrifice' Portland isn't going to have any cap-space. The "better players" argument fails under any detailed scrutiny

 

[oldmangrouch]

Just out of curiosity, what do folks mean when they say Dame has "earned" the super max? What's your criteria?

 

[Orion Bailey]

I wouldn't call you a pathetic loser...I would say that perspective is blind to reality though

consider it: Dame's super-max is a shade under 48M/year. Now, just how much less should he sign for? Say 40M a year instead of 48M. You'd be asking him to leave 32 million dollars on the table. Really, you guys would expect that for the "good of the team"? I tell ya...that just seems absurd and naive to me

but let's just assume Dame wouldn't notice 32 million dollars setting on the negotiating table. Next, does anybody not expect Olshey to extend CJ? It will definitely happen if he's still the GM; he loves him some CJ. CJ's max would be around 39M a year. Let's say he follows Dame's lead and accepts 35M a year. Nurkic at 13M (likely bonus); But he'll be getting a new deal after only 1 year of Dame's supermax...say 25M and say Zach at what, 20M?

ok then, those 4 players:

40M - Dame
35M - CJ
25M - Nurk
20M - Zach

that's 120M/year....for 4 players, when the cap will be ranging from 116M to 150M; and the tax line ranging from 139M to 170M

4 players and Portland has little to no cap-space and at most, a 50M margin under the tax line

now, redo the assumption about Lillard and assume he's not stupid enough to leave 32M on the table and CJ won't leave as much either

the bottom line is that even with loony assumptions about how much money Dame will 'sacrifice' Portland isn't going to have any cap-space. The "better players" argument fails under any detailed scrutiny

32mill is a TON of money to you sand me.

I dont think I would think it as much if I had 250 in the bank though. And like ive said many many times, its not just for the sake of the team. Its for him too. He wants a ring right?

And said several times, the cap space will be different a year or two from now when we have a different roster and rid of our expiring like Turner.

Cap space is a moot point. because we are hamstrung now, doesnt mean we always will be.

So really, I think some of your points there are what is blind to reality.

 

[Minstrel]

Just out of curiosity, what do folks mean when they say Dame has "earned" the super max? What's your criteria?

Projection of future production based on his existing production and age.

 

[illmatic99]

Just out of curiosity, what do folks mean when they say Dame has "earned" the super max? What's your criteria?

Huh? By nearly every metric, Dame deserves this. A top 10 player who keeps improving every year in the prime of his career, without much of an injury history (don't spite me, bball Gods), and is unarguably the best leader in sports doesn't deserve this?

I get the tough for team argument. But not this doesn't deserve stuff.

 

[blue9]

I wouldn't call you a pathetic loser...I would say that perspective is blind to reality though

consider it: Dame's super-max is a shade under 48M/year. Now, just how much less should he sign for? Say 40M a year instead of 48M. You'd be asking him to leave 32 million dollars on the table. Really, you guys would expect that for the "good of the team"? I tell ya...that just seems absurd and naive to me

but let's just assume Dame wouldn't notice 32 million dollars setting on the negotiating table. Next, does anybody not expect Olshey to extend CJ? It will definitely happen if he's still the GM; he loves him some CJ. CJ's max would be around 39M a year. Let's say he follows Dame's lead and accepts 35M a year. Nurkic at 13M (likely bonus); But he'll be getting a new deal after only 1 year of Dame's supermax...say 25M and say Zach at what, 20M?

ok then, those 4 players:

40M - Dame
35M - CJ
25M - Nurk
20M - Zach

that's 120M/year....for 4 players, when the cap will be ranging from 116M to 150M; and the tax line ranging from 139M to 170M

4 players and Portland has little to no cap-space and at most, a 50M margin under the tax line

now, redo the assumption about Lillard and assume he's not stupid enough to leave 32M on the table and CJ won't leave as much either

the bottom line is that even with loony assumptions about how much money Dame will 'sacrifice' Portland isn't going to have any cap-space. The "better players" argument fails under any detailed scrutiny

I totally get what you're saying, and agree with you to a large extent. But, Nurk is tied up on a very team-friendly deal at around $12M. And Zach has a LONG way to go before getting $20M - if he gets there it's likely we've won a championship.

Also, it's not just about being over the cap, it's about the timing of going over the cap. As you've illustrated (despite some wrong numbers) we will be over the cap. But there will be a window where we have space to sign players before extending CJ/Collins/Nurk.

I don't expect Dame to take less. It would just be nice if he did - especially considering that contract won't kick in until he's 30 (31?), which means we'll likely be paying more and getting less. I'm a Dame-For-Life guy, but I can't see that contract aging well.

 

[HailBlazers]

Shit I've been working about 50 hrs/wk for many years now.

Pathetic loser.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Pathetic loser.

Fuck that dude. Don't give away my title like that!!!!

 

[wizenheimer]

And said several times, the cap space will be different a year or two from now when we have a different roster and rid of our expiring like Turner.

a year from now is a year BEFORE Dame's super-max. That's an irrelevant argument against Dame's super-max

Cap space is a moot point. because we are hamstrung now, doesnt mean we always will be.

So really, I think some of your points there are what is blind to reality.

oh c'mon man....

ok then, this is on you now to not type generalities. Since you're pounding on the same ground over and over, explain with specific examples of salaries how Portland could have significant cap-space if Dame was getting 40M/year rather than 48M a year. You do know the difference is only 8M, right? which will be quite a bit less than the MLE. That's not very significant at all. I will not be impressed with any reply that just uses more rather evasive generalities

I actually gave you a template above listing projected salaries for 4 players. You can start from there if you want

I totally get what you're saying, and agree with you to a large extent. But, Nurk is tied up on a very team-friendly deal at around $12M. And Zach has a LONG way to go before getting $20M - if he gets there it's likely we've won a championship.

Nurk's contract ends in year 1 of Dame's super-max. 3 years of Nurk's new contract will coincide with Dame's super-max

the rookie scale contract for Zach ends at the same time as Dame and CJ's contract. They will all be on new contracts at the same damn time (and, when that off-season starts, even if Dame/CJ were free agents their cap-holds would be around 80M). It doesn't matter really whether Zach is getting 10M or 15M or 20M. What matters is that Portland could be in the 100-120M range in salaries for only 4 players...and that 1st year the cap might be in the 120-125M range. Portland simply won't have any cap-space unless they have gutted the team

the only time Portland might have any cap-space is next summer. They have 87M in guaranteed salary and the cap is projected to be 116M. But that 87M is only for 6 players. If they have Kanter and Hood on escaating contracts that space reduces in a hurry. And if they bring back Aminu and Layman...it's just about gone

I'm making an assumption with all this: if the Blazers are giving Dame a super-max, they aren't going to piss away a couple of years of that contract by having a skeleton roster one summer. They will be doing whatever they can to keep Portland competitive. Besides that, when was the last time Portland added a high level free agent using cap-space?

 

[Orion Bailey]

a year from now is a year BEFORE Dame's super-max. That's an irrelevant argument against Dame's super-max



oh c'mon man....

ok then, this is on you now to not type generalities. Since you're pounding on the same ground over and over, explain with specific examples of salaries how Portland could have significant cap-space if Dame was getting 40M/year rather than 48M a year. You do know the difference is only 8M, right? which will be quite a bit less than the MLE. That's not very significant at all. I will not be impressed with any reply that just uses more rather evasive generalities

I actually gave you a template above listing projected salaries for 4 players. You can start from there if you want



Nurk's contract ends in year 1 of Dame's super-max. 3 years of Nurk's new contract will coincide with Dame's super-max

the rookie scale contract for Zach ends at the same time as Dame and CJ's contract. They will all be on new contracts at the same damn time. It doesn't matter really whether Zach is getting 10M or 15M or 20M. What matters is that Portland could be in the 100-120M range in salaries for only 4 players...and that 1st year the cap might be in the 120-125M range. Portland simply won't have any cap-space unless they have gutted the team

the only time Portland might have any cap-space is next summer. They have 87M in guaranteed salary and the cap is projected to be 116M. But that 87M is only for 6 players. If they have Kanter and Hood on escaating contracts that space reduces in a hurry. And if they bring back Aminu and Layman...it's just about gone

I'm making an assumption with all this: if the Blazers are giving Dame a super-max, they aren't going to piss away a couple of years of that contract by having a skeleton roster one summer. They will be doing whatever they can to keep Portland competitive. Besides that, when was the last time Portland added a high level free agent using cap-space?

I said one or two years... You read one.


ON the oh come on man. Well How much is turners salary? I think he will be gone. Aminu is gone.

Come on man.. I said the roster would be different. Yes I believe we will have space down the road and 8 mill less per year if he takes that max. 8 mill gets you a solid role player or cna be used with other saleray to get a star.

Come on man... How can you say next year is the only year when we dont have any contracts goign beyond 2021?

 

[Labinot41]

I wouldn't call you a pathetic loser...I would say that perspective is blind to reality though

consider it: Dame's super-max is a shade under 48M/year. Now, just how much less should he sign for? Say 40M a year instead of 48M. You'd be asking him to leave 32 million dollars on the table. Really, you guys would expect that for the "good of the team"? I tell ya...that just seems absurd and naive to me

but let's just assume Dame wouldn't notice 32 million dollars setting on the negotiating table. Next, does anybody not expect Olshey to extend CJ? It will definitely happen if he's still the GM; he loves him some CJ. CJ's max would be around 39M a year. Let's say he follows Dame's lead and accepts 35M a year. Nurkic at 13M (likely bonus); But he'll be getting a new deal after only 1 year of Dame's supermax...say 25M and say Zach at what, 20M?

ok then, those 4 players:

40M - Dame
35M - CJ
25M - Nurk
20M - Zach

that's 120M/year....for 4 players, when the cap will be ranging from 116M to 150M; and the tax line ranging from 139M to 170M

4 players and Portland has little to no cap-space and at most, a 50M margin under the tax line

now, redo the assumption about Lillard and assume he's not stupid enough to leave 32M on the table and CJ won't leave as much either

the bottom line is that even with loony assumptions about how much money Dame will 'sacrifice' Portland isn't going to have any cap-space. The "better players" argument fails under any detailed scrutiny

How do you know that the cap will jump from 116M to 150M?

 

[wizenheimer]

Come on man... How can you say next year is the only year when we dont have any contracts goign beyond 2021?

do you really think the Blazers are going to give Dame a super-max so they can turn into a lottery team with cap-space? It's fucking ludicrous. CJ's cap-hold in 2021 will be 35M. That alone could be 1/3 of the cap. Dame/CJ on their extensions will be 80M, and that's with team discounts

but as I suspected, you seem to be evading the question. Lets give up this shit-brain notion that Dame is going to leave 32M on the table. He's not that stupid. Maybe 3-4M a year...ok? 5M tops; or none. That just won't make any difference

 

[wizenheimer]

How do you know that the cap will jump from 116M to 150M?

I don't. It's just an extrapolation. The cap from last season thru 2021 is projected to go up 15%. That for two years, and IIRC, that's about standard. If you start at 116M and multiply 1.15 twice, you end up at 153M in 2025.

but if the cap is only 135M by 2025, that supports my argument that Dame giving a discount super-max would not result in any more space than not giving the discount

the cap-space argument against Dame's super-max is bogus. There may be good arguments against it, but not that one

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

He ought to give up a few mil off of this after getting lit up and cooked by Steph.

It was like watching Shaq "battle" Todd McCullough.

 

[Orion Bailey]

do you really think the Blazers are going to give Dame a super-max so they can turn into a lottery team with cap-space? It's fucking ludicrous. CJ's cap-hold in 2021 will be 35M. That alone could be 1/3 of the cap. Dame/CJ on their extensions will be 80M, and that's with team discounts

but as I suspected, you seem to be evading the question. Lets give up this shit-brain notion that Dame is going to leave 32M on the table. He's not that stupid. Maybe 3-4M a year...ok? 5M tops; or none. That just won't make any difference

How much did we pay for Kanter this year?

I rest my case. It will make some difference...
Anyhow, just agree to disagree.

I think if he takes less, combined with the changing roster and salaries, I think it helps. you dont. Ok

 

[GDiama]

Leaving some money on the table wouldn't really make a difference since this contract starts in 2021, same as CJ's next contract. Summer of 2020 will be the most important for the franchise, a summer that Neil Olshey needs to make good decisions. After that summer we wouldn't have any cap space anyway unless it's a good idea to go into the summer of '21 without our stars (Dame and CJ) already extended and lose them for nothing.

 

[Minstrel]

He ought to give up a few mil off of this after getting lit up and cooked by Steph.

It was like watching Shaq "battle" Todd McCullough.

Nah, it was more like watching Clyde Drexler being overshadowed by Michael Jordan. It didn't mean Drexler wasn't a star or worth being paid--he just wasn't Jordan.

 

[wizenheimer]

How much did we pay for Kanter this year?

I rest my case.

your case shouldn't be rested, it should be waived

Kanter was signed with a minimum salary; same for Stauskas. Curry was signed for an exception. Hood was traded for using a pair of minimum contracts. Blazers will have those tools no matter how much Dame is paid.

approach it this way: the last time Dame was eligible for a max contract it was for 30% of the cap when the standard was 25%. He gave Portland a home-team discount and accepted 27%. So then 2.5/30 = 8.3%. Dame essentially gave the Blazers an 8% break on his annual salary

that 32M number we were 'discussing' would be a 16.8% discount. That's extreme. If Dame gave Portland a similar 8% break on his super-max it would be about 3.8M/year. By that time that will only be a little more than half of a tax-MLE. Maybe around 1/3 of a full-MLE. It's not going to make any significant difference in the roster construction

He ought to give up a few mil off of this after getting lit up and cooked by Steph.

It was like watching Shaq "battle" Todd McCullough.

kind of a false narrative IMO

Curry almost never guarded Dame. He was on CJ or Harkless or his brother. Dame probably guarded Curry less than half the time.

when Curry was on offense he mostly had single coverage. Stotts is allergic to doubles, especially on the perimeter. Even after game 1 when Portland started to jump Curry in the PnR, it was about halfway in between a passive and aggressive PnR defense. Curry faced fairly weak help defense. Meanwhile, Dame was defended by either Klay or Iggy; and the help defense was either Klay or Iggy or Green or Looney or Bell. He was constantly doubled and trapped, occasionally tripled, and the defense was always hedged to his side of the floor....always. The Warriors did the same thing that the Pelicans did. And the Blazers are 0-8 the last 2 years against that type of blanket defense. Portland has had no answers and only part of that is Dame's fault

I think his biggest sin was slow recognition and adjustment to the Warriors hedging him with a trailing defender in his passing lanes. That's where he had most of his turnovers