One big advantage we can offer LaMarcus

[Draco]

A no trade clause. He is only eligible for it if he resigns here. It could be very appealing to him. He would be the 7th player in the league with such a clause joining Kobe, Duncan, Dirk, Garnett, Wade, and Melo.

You have to fit a certain criteria to be eligible for the clause. You have to be in the NBA for at least eight years and have played for the team you're signing the contract with for at least four seasons.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I'm not sure if that is that big.

 

[illmatic99]

I would NOT offer him one

 

[Draco]

I would NOT offer him one

Nice story.

But the team will let him write whatever contract he wants in order to stay.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

That'd give the Blazers no flexibility.

I cringe at the thought of LMA getting $25-30m/per when he's 33.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I cringe at the thought of LMA getting $25-30m/per when he's 33.

Why?

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

He's already an inefficient volume scorer. The older he gets the more he's going to float to the elbow IMO.

The super-max guys should be LeBron, CP3 - true superstars.

 

[Draco]

He's already an inefficient volume scorer. The older he gets the more he's going to float to the elbow IMO.

The super-max guys should be LeBron, CP3 - true superstars.

Since each NBA team can easily afford 2 max salaries and theres 30 teams the top60 players will always be getting paid the max. Deal with it.

 

[magnifier661]

That'd give the Blazers no flexibility.

I cringe at the thought of LMA getting $25-30m/per when he's 33.

If you're saying he would regress, then might as well give him a no trade clause. The contract would be toxic. No-trade gives a player the opportunity to control their destiny.

 

[julius]

If you're saying he would regress, then might as well give him a no trade clause. The contract would be toxic. No-trade gives a player the opportunity to control their destiny.

It makes no difference it the Blazers offer him a "No Trade Clause" or if it's a Toxic offer. The other teams don't have to match.

Portland could offer him a full max, and the Spurs (or Mavs, or Barcelona) could offer him 2 years at League Min and if he wants to sign there (and lose out on all that money), he could.

 

[magnifier661]

It makes no difference it the Blazers offer him a "No Trade Clause" or if it's a Toxic offer. The other teams don't have to match.

Portland could offer him a full max, and the Spurs (or Mavs, or Barcelona) could offer him 2 years at League Min and if he wants to sign there (and lose out on all that money), he could.

I'm aware of that. This is in reply to someone that said not to give Aldridge a "no trade cause".

I responded that if he's getting max and regresses, then the offer would be toxic and untradeable, therefor it really doesn't make any difference.

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

Honestly if he doesn't take the 5 year deal this summer, and if I were Olshey I'd look to trade. The goal should be to get both and Dame locked in to 5 year deals under this current cap structure, if he wants to one year and get the Super duper max... I'd pass.

 

[julius]

I'm aware of that. This is in reply to someone that said not to give Aldridge a "no trade cause".

I responded that if he's getting max and regresses, then the offer would be toxic and untradeable, therefor it really doesn't make any difference.

I see, in essence his performance would make his contract a "no trade". Gotcha.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I think it's pretty cool how some of you worry so much about how Paul Allen's spends his money. It shows you care.

 

[PDXFonz]

Nice story.

But the team will let him write whatever contract he wants in order to stay.

I wouldn't be so sure, based off how long they have been planning for this offseason, and all the "backup" plans they have. I think they have an idea of what they are willing to offer to each player, and don't plan on deviating from it much. I think that is the way Olshey does business, and a big reason why we did not keep Mo last year.

 

[magnifier661]

I think it's pretty cool how some of you worry so much about how Paul Allen's spends his money. It shows you care.

It's really weird if you think about it. A billion dollars is 1,000 million dollars. Allen has 17.5 1,000 million dollars. Even if Allen spends 100 mil per year and doesn't make a penny, he could support the team 175 years

 

[SlyPokerDog]

It's really weird if you think about it. A billion dollars is 1,000 million dollars. Allen has 17.5 1,000 million dollars. Even if Allen spends 100 mil per year and doesn't make a penny, he could support the team 175 years

I will not let Paul Allen sign LMA to a 200 year contract!

 

[BBert]

I will not let Paul Allen sign LMA to a 200 year contract!

But by 2115 that contract will be a bargain.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

But by 2115 that contract will be a bargain.

LMAEC!

LaMarcus Aldridge Expiring Contract!

I can't wait to see what Kevin Pritchard IV can get for it!

 

[julius]

I wonder if Kobe will have retired by then.

 

[GriLtCheeZ]

I will not let Paul Allen sign LMA to a 200 year contract!

No need to worry. The last 50 years are team options, so it should be fine.

 

[OneLifeToLive]

Not sure that is an advantage. Or something the org would want to tie themselves up on.

 

[Strenuus]

I wonder if Kobe will have retired by then.

He's been retired for two years.