enchilada_style
Well-Known Member
I can't wait to see Favors guard Sap.
Bye Sap It Was Nice Knowing You
- Thread starter homeytennis
- Start date
blackham9258
Member
Under the new CBA the guys that are going to get squeezed the most are the guys above mid level but not $10M level guys. Under the new CBA where you can really only have 2 guys making 8 figures a year you really have to choose wisely. The problem is Millsap passed up the extension that would have maximized his value (3years and $25M this off-season). He will really regret that because I think he will have a hard time getting anything over $6M per year. My best cast scenario for Sap is 3/$21M. I think it could be the Jazz if they somehow resign both Hayward and Favors for reasonable contracts. My hope is we can sign Hayward for 4/$30M ($7.5 seems about right at this point in his career) and 4/$36-$40M for Favors. Thats my hope at least.
As far as the argument about Laundry vs Sap go back and look at what Laundry put up the year he was a starter for Houston. Both he and Sap are suited to be top tier back up bigs. Sap is better but under the new CBA it is all about the value proposition... Sap is $1M per year better than Laundry but as soon as he starts to get more per year than that the value disappears and you are better off spending the money elsewhere and signing Laundry.
For example if Sap is wanting or getting $9M per... wouldn't you rather have Laundry at $5M, and Kyle Korver at $4M for the same $9M a year! That is the reallity of the new CBA. Smart teams do the latter and smart agents sit Millsap down last off season and say hey buddy... its not going to get any better than this... take $8.33M per year and run with it!
As far as the argument about Laundry vs Sap go back and look at what Laundry put up the year he was a starter for Houston. Both he and Sap are suited to be top tier back up bigs. Sap is better but under the new CBA it is all about the value proposition... Sap is $1M per year better than Laundry but as soon as he starts to get more per year than that the value disappears and you are better off spending the money elsewhere and signing Laundry.
For example if Sap is wanting or getting $9M per... wouldn't you rather have Laundry at $5M, and Kyle Korver at $4M for the same $9M a year! That is the reallity of the new CBA. Smart teams do the latter and smart agents sit Millsap down last off season and say hey buddy... its not going to get any better than this... take $8.33M per year and run with it!
b_line
Well-Known Member
Wow. Yeah every team was clamoring for mar will and millsap... Probably no one would listen to the trade because the jazz insisted on sending Marvin back. You are a joke of a poster, and should not be attacking anyone, think about how crappy Marvin and his contract are. If you had a team, would you want him on it?
//r00t 4 Jazz
Well-Known Member
I agree with Blackham more so than the people saying Sap is a 10mil per year player. Of course some teams will still give out bad contracts and some teams will need to get used to the new CBA and contract sizes. Toronto is not exactly a good example for giving out smart contracts, however I could see them saying DeRozen will grow/improve into his contract.
If you look at last year some of the bigger contracts (taking super stars/AS level players out of it) were usually short 1-2yr deals and most of the big contracts and most of those were teams keeping their own players. I believe the biggest contract to move teams was NOH got Ryan Anderson I think for about 4yr about 8mil per.
So I think that is the best Sap can hope for is 8mil 4yr type of contract IMO, but with the other big men out on the market this year if he is not one of the first couple guys to sign he may not get that. Again IMO.
If you look at last year some of the bigger contracts (taking super stars/AS level players out of it) were usually short 1-2yr deals and most of the big contracts and most of those were teams keeping their own players. I believe the biggest contract to move teams was NOH got Ryan Anderson I think for about 4yr about 8mil per.
So I think that is the best Sap can hope for is 8mil 4yr type of contract IMO, but with the other big men out on the market this year if he is not one of the first couple guys to sign he may not get that. Again IMO.
GVC
Well-Known Member
Jeff Green, Gerald Wallace, Kris Humphries, JaVale McGee, Omer Asik, Jeremy Lin, Roy Hibbert, George Hill, Ersan Ilyasova, Andrei Kirilenko, Eric Gordon, Nic Batum...
That's a lot of money handed out in 2012 for players roughly equal to or worse than Millsap, all in a year where fewer teams had money to spend (players who signed extensions are excluded from the list, as are KG, Steve Nash, Deron Williams and possibly others).
The biggest question mark heading into 2013 free agency is where the cap will be set. The new CBA guaranteed the cap to be no lower in 11/12 and 12/13 than it was in 10/11. In both years (11/12 and 12/13), the cap ended up being set at that lower bound, $58.044mm. I don't care to take the 5 minutes to do the calculations again, but IIRC if BRI increased by 4.5% per year over the last 3 years, the cap would again sit around $58mm. If the cap goes up this year, I'd expect teams to be more liberal spending their money, as they receive a bigger chunk of revenue relative to the players (that is, given an equal cap, they get more) AND receive a more substantial revenue sharing check. With new TV deals, renewed interest, and an economic uptick, I'd be surprised if the cap goes down substantially.
Again, we'll have to wait and see. Teams spent as recklessly as ever last summer.
That's a lot of money handed out in 2012 for players roughly equal to or worse than Millsap, all in a year where fewer teams had money to spend (players who signed extensions are excluded from the list, as are KG, Steve Nash, Deron Williams and possibly others).
The biggest question mark heading into 2013 free agency is where the cap will be set. The new CBA guaranteed the cap to be no lower in 11/12 and 12/13 than it was in 10/11. In both years (11/12 and 12/13), the cap ended up being set at that lower bound, $58.044mm. I don't care to take the 5 minutes to do the calculations again, but IIRC if BRI increased by 4.5% per year over the last 3 years, the cap would again sit around $58mm. If the cap goes up this year, I'd expect teams to be more liberal spending their money, as they receive a bigger chunk of revenue relative to the players (that is, given an equal cap, they get more) AND receive a more substantial revenue sharing check. With new TV deals, renewed interest, and an economic uptick, I'd be surprised if the cap goes down substantially.
Again, we'll have to wait and see. Teams spent as recklessly as ever last summer.
GVC
Well-Known Member
A quick follow up:
The cap is now set based on 44.74% of BRI (basketball related income), as opposed to 51% of BRI under the 2005 CBA. The cap in the 3 most recent seasons (10/11 - 12/13) was set at $58.044mm. If we let r = the rate of growth of basketball related income per year over the 3 years, we can estimate the 13/14 cap:
13/14 cap = 58.044mm x (44.74/51) x (1 + r)^3
The figures given different annual BRI growth rates:
0.0%: $50.919mm
0.5%: $51.687mm
1.0%: $52.462mm
1.5%: $53.245mm
2.0%: $54.036mm
2.5%: $54.835mm
3.0%: $55.641mm
3.5%: $56.455mm
4.0%: $57.277mm
4.5%: $58.107mm (the break even point is 4.462%)
5.0%: $58.946mm
5.5%: $59.792mm
6.0%: $60.646mm
Also worth noting: Max raises (year over year) and contract length are shortened under the new CBA, so it's likely we see an increase in starting salary (relative to the cap) under the new CBA.
The cap is now set based on 44.74% of BRI (basketball related income), as opposed to 51% of BRI under the 2005 CBA. The cap in the 3 most recent seasons (10/11 - 12/13) was set at $58.044mm. If we let r = the rate of growth of basketball related income per year over the 3 years, we can estimate the 13/14 cap:
13/14 cap = 58.044mm x (44.74/51) x (1 + r)^3
The figures given different annual BRI growth rates:
0.0%: $50.919mm
0.5%: $51.687mm
1.0%: $52.462mm
1.5%: $53.245mm
2.0%: $54.036mm
2.5%: $54.835mm
3.0%: $55.641mm
3.5%: $56.455mm
4.0%: $57.277mm
4.5%: $58.107mm (the break even point is 4.462%)
5.0%: $58.946mm
5.5%: $59.792mm
6.0%: $60.646mm
Also worth noting: Max raises (year over year) and contract length are shortened under the new CBA, so it's likely we see an increase in starting salary (relative to the cap) under the new CBA.
//r00t 4 Jazz
Well-Known Member
Yeah I didn't feel like looking up everybody and even you I think just highlighted some and not all of the players that got big contracts (like DWill) Humphries and AK signed high dollar but for only 2yr (and for Hump one of those may be a team/player option not sure) so those mid level guys can either sign a bigger short deal or a longer small deal was what I was trying to say.
Yes Sap is above that but I don't think that much above that so he may be one of the players that gets pinched so to speak. Because out of those players you listed I think Lin was the only one to move teams and his contract is all kinds of weirdly back loaded or front loaded but it is very unique to say the least. So teams may be willing to spend to keep players they feel are worth it but we'll have to keep an eye out this year to get a larger sample size, but they may be less willing to bring in other teams FA's.
*edit: again excluded All Star/Super Star/Max money guys they will always be in demand period*
Yes Sap is above that but I don't think that much above that so he may be one of the players that gets pinched so to speak. Because out of those players you listed I think Lin was the only one to move teams and his contract is all kinds of weirdly back loaded or front loaded but it is very unique to say the least. So teams may be willing to spend to keep players they feel are worth it but we'll have to keep an eye out this year to get a larger sample size, but they may be less willing to bring in other teams FA's.
*edit: again excluded All Star/Super Star/Max money guys they will always be in demand period*
GVC
Well-Known Member
Omer Asik and AK switched teams, and Nic Batum and Eric Gordon signed offer sheets with other teams (that were matched). There's more money out there this offseason (again, contingent on the cap), and owners haven't shown any restraint in the past.
Jeff ****ing Green got $36mm over 4 years, Omer Asik got $25mm over 3; both players are only 1 year younger than Millsap, and played far worse last year than Millsap has this year. Blackham's "best case" of $21mm over 3 years for Millsap is borderline retarded. The Jazz pay that without blinking.
Sandy Braille
Banned
Jeff Green's contract was ridiculous. In this Jazz team, that is about what I would want to offer Millsap at most.
Especially seeing as we have yet to see Millsap score both as a first option AND efficiently without a decent point guard helping him out. I understand that he would be a good third big for this team moving forward, but I think we might have different predictions in terms of what he would be able to do with this team.
For example, I don't think Millsap would be able to maintain his efficiency if he was our main offensive weapon on this squad.
I'd be much more keen on addressing our PG problem this offseason-- Millsap and Carroll are both tied for priority #2 IMO. And Millsap should only be re-signed @ the right price, and if he can co-exist mentally with perhaps taking a reduced role once Kanter and Favors emerge.
GVC
Well-Known Member
You don't have to be a first option to get more than $7mm per year, obviously. I, too, like Millsap at $9mm per over 4 years. More than that is tough.
I really think Millsap and Hayward can work well together in the halfcourt, with Millsap initiating the offense from the high post (which he's done really well when Jefferson's not on the court) with Hayward coming off screens, and Millsap working the baseline off Hayward pick and rolls with Kanter/Favors. Yes, the Jazz need a primary ball handler still, but they have some players who do a good job of competing defensively, running the floor and executing precisely in the halfcourt. Indiana's been pretty good using that formula this season.
I don't think it's a coincidence that Millsap consistently ranks very high in adjusted +/-. He a very effective player in a variety of situations/schemes. Not a star, but a very good player who's even better when surrounded by good players.
Sandy Braille
Banned
Mhm.
Two things:
1) I think it is worth a shot,-- but I do not think that Millsap is as good as David West. Let us also not forget the fact that Indiana has one of the worst offenses for a playoff team in the NBA-- despite them having better guard play off the 1 (DJ + Hill >> whatever we dish out) and Stephenson, with Paul George have been formidable.
2) Going off of the second point: have we seen Millsap work off the high post like that in late game situations OR against team's starters? I ask this because I am genuinely curious.
GVC
Well-Known Member
1. While lacking elite individual offensive players would likely render the offense much less efficient on a points per possession basis (at least in the halfcourt), actually making defenses work, running around trying to defend player and ball movement, should hurt opposing offenses. That, plus smart transition play and tougher, smarter team defense, could make this team better as early as next season. Indiana's a 50 win team, the Jazz won't be there next season, but they can be a more entertaining team that grows together toward becoming a contender in the future (we also disagree on David West v. Millsap).
2. Hard to say. Jefferson has closed every close game in which he's been available to play. Running stuff through the high post with Jefferson on the court is virtually impossible.
//r00t 4 Jazz
Well-Known Member
See so we aren't that different at least when it comes to Millsap I said 4yr 32mil (4x by 8) and you said 4yr 36mil, hard to really argue over 1mil so not saying I wouldn't do it but I would rather the 8mil be the ceiling the Jazz offer more so because the priority IMO needs to be spending more money on the guard line and resigning the young guys to extensions.
To be clear IMO that is the Jazz's worth of him, maybe other teams may value him more. Jazz have two bigs they may value more along with needing to spend money to improve other areas of the team more. Plus if they do get Millsap then they may want to invest money in another bench big that can play the 5, unless they decide to just have Favors and Kanter be the only ones able to man the 5 position and think Evans can step up for 10-15min a night every night.
To be clear IMO that is the Jazz's worth of him, maybe other teams may value him more. Jazz have two bigs they may value more along with needing to spend money to improve other areas of the team more. Plus if they do get Millsap then they may want to invest money in another bench big that can play the 5, unless they decide to just have Favors and Kanter be the only ones able to man the 5 position and think Evans can step up for 10-15min a night every night.
homeytennis
Well-Known Member
Deseret News has Sap goooooooone!!!!!
b_line
Well-Known Member
link or quote?
homeytennis
Well-Known Member
It was in today's edition about the Memphis game and the genuinely sucky play be virtually everyone except Al.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Sign and trade...Millsap to Brooklyn for Humphries, CJ Watson and their first-rounder next season. Deron probably pushes for this trade because he and Millsap were pretty tight. Nets have limited ability to upgrade in free agency due to their salary situation.
.
Jazz get another pick in a loaded draft and a quality third big to support Favors and Kanter as they continue to develop. He's overpaid, but it's an expiring contract that can be dealt at the deadline along with Marvin's, or simply be allowed to expire to free up cap room. Nets likely do NOT want to give up Brooks, but Watson is a nice back-up with good range (40% on his 3's).
.
Jazz get another pick in a loaded draft and a quality third big to support Favors and Kanter as they continue to develop. He's overpaid, but it's an expiring contract that can be dealt at the deadline along with Marvin's, or simply be allowed to expire to free up cap room. Nets likely do NOT want to give up Brooks, but Watson is a nice back-up with good range (40% on his 3's).
b_line
Well-Known Member
I would be ok with this. Then the Jazz would have another Watson to blame for playing crappy.