OT: Sessions worried about Telfair

[Tince]

Wait... who's saying ANYTHING about him? Isn't this whole thread based on assumptions?

I think that my assumptions make a lot more sense than yours.

I'm still waiting to hear why him remaining unsigned means anything given the inability of almost every other RFA to get a new contract.

Ed O.

Sorry, I took the article as fact, that may have been a mistake. The article stated he was concerned about the playing time issue and stated Telfair as one of the culprits. The was slightly eye-catching to me.

 

[WarriorFan]

It didn't say Sessions doesn't feel he can beat out Telfair, it says he doesn't want to share the court with him. Makes sense, IMO. Telfair will play. Sessions can play at the same time with Baron. He's really the perfect guy to pair with a scoring PG. Baron can create on offense, leaving sessions to only score, and Baron can guard the 2 on D. It doesn't work out so well with Telfair on the court with him. Telfair isn't a great playmaker and can't guard the 2. Sessions would end up getting beat up by bigger guys on D and standing around waiting for the ball on O.

 

[oldmangrouch]

To be fair, he might also be bringing up Telfair b/c it's a lot more polite than saying "are you effing kidding me? Have you seen the Clippers? Ha Ha Ha!"

I have to say, that was my first thought. A hasty attempt to be diplomatic.

 

[crowTrobot]

Shit, the Clips also have Eric Gordon who plays a little bit of combo guard, I would be worried too if I were Sessions, but not because of competition, but because I was about to sign a contract with historically the worst franchise in NBA history.

This actually reinforced for me just how smart Sessions must be.

i'm sure they are thinking of using gordon as a pure 2 at this point.

 

[TheFreshPrince]

Telfair is really improving. I was so upset when he started getting minutes for us, but he proved that he can be a legit pg in the league. His shot is becoming streaky rather than broken, and he can get into the lane at will. He still doesn't know what to do once he's there, but he's getting better and better with more confidence. If I was a gm he'd be my first choice for a veteran backup pg.

 

[RR7]

Well, there's that, and then there is also that none of the teams that could do so offered him a contract that the Bucks would not match. A Millsap-esque offer, and Sessions is a Blazer. Clearly the team felt that Sessions added little, since Portland could have had him quite easily by simply tranferring the Millsap offer to Sessions.

We couldn't make the same offer we made to Millsap, to Sessions.

 

[PapaG]

We couldn't make the same offer we made to Millsap, to Sessions.

Why not? Both were RFAs. Is there a Millsap-only clause in the CBA for "toxic" offers than I don't know about? Why couldn't Portland have offered Sessions a Millsap-like contract for Milwaukee to try and match? No way Milwaukee would match it. Perhaps some people on this board have been grossly overrating Sessions and his value?

 

[RR7]

They are different cases, because Sessions had only been in theleague 2 years, and Millsap 3 years, which changes what each could be offered in free agency, even though both are RFAs.

 

[PapaG]

They are different cases, because Sessions had only been in theleague 2 years, and Millsap 3 years, which changes what each could be offered in free agency, even though both are RFAs.

Huh? What's the max that Sessions can be offered as a 2 year vet? I can't find anything about a restriction, let alone what the restriction is in terms of money. Is it under the $7.7 million that Portland had on the cap? They could also have had more if they had renounced Freeland and/or Koponen.

 

[PapaG]

They are different cases, because Sessions had only been in theleague 2 years, and Millsap 3 years, which changes what each could be offered in free agency, even though both are RFAs.

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cach...n+sessions+max+offer&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Other teams meanwhile can offer only five years and 8% raises, or $32.4 million, for Sessions.

Put a "toxic" pill at the front end, and Milwaukee wouldn't match it. Hell, the way Jennings played in Summer League, I doubt they would even match a 4 year deal with the same "toxic" bonus up front.

 

[Draco]

We couldn't make the same offer we made to Millsap, to Sessions.

If we had renounced the Euros yes I believe we could have offered 4 years 32 million but the yearly breakdown would have been different.

 

[Minstrel]

Huh? What's the max that Sessions can be offered as a 2 year vet? I can't find anything about a restriction, let alone what the restriction is in terms of money. Is it under the $7.7 million that Portland had on the cap? They could also have had more if they had renounced Freeland and/or Koponen.

Second round picks only get two-year guaranteed contracts instead of the three-year variety that first-round picks do. That means they hit RFA earlier. However, to avoid second-round picks being able to cash in before first-round picks, they're also limited to a MLE max offer for the first two seasons of a new deal in the third year. It's referred to as the "Gilbert Arenas provision" I believe.

 

[PapaG]

Second round picks only get two-year guaranteed contracts instead of the three-year variety that first-round picks do. That means they hit RFA earlier. However, to avoid second-round picks being able to cash in before first-round picks, they're also limited to a MLE max offer for the first two seasons of a new deal in the third year. It's referred to as the "Gilbert Arenas provision" I believe.

Yeah, I just read up and posted it. Still, there is no provision against a front-end bonus, like in the Millsap case, that had to be paid in cash within one week.

If Sessions is such a great fit, Portland should have worked the contract with a bonus, and Milwaukee would not have matched it.

 

[Minstrel]

Yeah, I just read up and posted it. Still, there is no provision against a front-end bonus, like in the Millsap case, that had to be paid in cash within one week.

As long as that bonus didn't make the first year higher than the MLE. Which would make it a pretty weak "toxin."

If Sessions is such a great fit, Portland should have worked the contract with a bonus, and Milwaukee would not have matched it.

You're free to speculate. Only Senator Herb Kohl knows and he ain't saying.

 

[RR7]

Yes there is such a provision. The first year and second year can only be MLE equivalent. So we could not have front loaded a deal. The most that first year would have been was 5.8, or whatever the MLE is. Backloading a deal might have worked better against the Bucks, with Jennings in the pipe line. Paying 5 or 6 the next two years would not be that bad for them, but playing over 8 for Sessions in his 3rd year, after drrafting Jennings might have been a bigger deal.

 

[PapaG]

Yes there is such a provision. The first year and second year can only be MLE equivalent. So we could not have front loaded a deal. The most that first year would have been was 5.8, or whatever the MLE is. Backloading a deal might have worked better against the Bucks, with Jennings in the pipe line. Paying 5 or 6 the next two years would not be that bad for them, but playing over 8 for Sessions in his 3rd year, after drrafting Jennings might have been a bigger deal.

Front load the deal and make the first payment mandatory within one week of signing, or don't, and make Milwaukee come up with the MLE cash when it looks like Jennings will be starting from day one.

None of this happened.

 

[RR7]

You can't frontload the deal. First two years can only be MLE level amounts. Not more.

 

[PapaG]

You can't frontload the deal. First two years can only be MLE level amounts. Not more.

Then don't, and do what I posted afterward.

Do you think Milwaukee would match that type of contract for what looks like a back-up PG?

 

[RR7]

MLE? yes, I do think they would match a MLE deal. He would easily start there next season, and then they would have a valuable trade chip, on a good contract.

 

[PapaG]

MLE? yes, I do think they would match a MLE deal. He would easily start there next season, and then they would have a valuable trade chip, on a good contract.

A MLE deal with the first year due in cash within 10 days of signing?

 

[RR7]

I think so.

 

[PapaG]

I think so.

I guess we'll never know.

 

[RR7]

We sure won't.

 

[ehizzy3]

which teammate did bassy hate again?