What's new
By:
Filters

Jazz and Knicks discussing Donovan Mitchell trade per Shams Charania and Tony Jones

hgb said:
I think that's how it works. I don't know about waivers, but I think the other team would be stuck with a bunch there, so most likely he clears waivers, we're stuck with all of it unless someone picks him up for vet min (which they do), so we pay $47M - 2-4M or whatever his minimum is.

Or we just hang onto him, of course.
Click to expand...

Another team doesn’t even have to pick him up for the difference in the buyout. We can negotiate down to 40M or something and he can sign for the minimum somewhere else.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
47M is so much to pay a guy that doesn’t play for your team…. Yeesh!!!

It’s the right move… just such a huge buyout. If you work in a Conley or JC or newly acquired Fournier into the deal it saves some dough next year and opens up more space… it’s just a staggering one year amount. I can see why some owners would just choke a little at it. Can’t believe the Lakers gave up good players and a pick to get him.
Click to expand...

The NBA is the craziest league transaction wise and I an outsider would think it's insane, because it is. It's part of the reason why viewership is down. You have to be a cult like member to understand and enjoy the league these days.
 
Elizah Huge said:
We can actually buy him out for less than the 47.1M total. We could theoretically negotiate down to like 40M or something and save extra money.
Click to expand...
Show me all the times that has happened.

Usually players agree to a buyout that equals (Total Owed - New Contract). I doubt anyone is giving Russ much more over the vet minimum. You arent buying him out for 40 million most likely.
 
KqWIN said:
The NBA is the craziest league transaction wise and I an outsider would think it's insane, because it is. It's part of the reason why viewership is down. You have to be a cult like member to understand and enjoy the league these days.
Click to expand...
Uhh, didnt the league come off a great NBA Finals rating? TV ratings are just a single metric to judge popularity as well. If the NBA wasnt a highly successful league you wouldnt see franchise valuations skyrocketing like they are.

The transaction part of the NBA is part of the reason why they are so popular. People love the drama.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Show me all the times that has happened.

Usually players agree to a buyout that equals (Total Owed - New Contract). I doubt anyone is giving Russ much more over the vet minimum. You arent buying him out for 40 million most likely.
Click to expand...

Blake Griffin gave back 13.3M of his 75M he was owed and signed with the Nets for 1.3M.
 
KqWIN said:
The NBA is the craziest league transaction wise and I an outsider would think it's insane, because it is. It's part of the reason why viewership is down. You have to be a cult like member to understand and enjoy the league these days.
Click to expand...
There are levels to it obvi. Most fans that pay for seats couldn't tell you any trade rules etc. Hell when I sit next to a bunch of folks in the lower bowls I am constantly annoyed when people are screaming things that show how little they understand the rules of the game.
 
Elizah Huge said:
Blake Griffin gave back 13.3M of his 75M he was owed and signed with the Nets for 1.3M.
Click to expand...
I think Russ will likely not give back a lot or any. Blake had a wide market. Russ has little to no market unless he chills the hell out and shows he can be a bench guy. He may be able to repair his value but it will require eating so much pride... to date he has shown zero ability to do that. He may have to sit out for a year to get his head in the right space for the next phase of his career like Melo did.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I think Russ will likely not give back a lot or any. Blake had a wide market. Russ has little to no market unless he chills the hell out and shows he can be a bench guy. He may be able to repair his value but it will require eating so much pride... to date he has shown zero ability to do that. He may have to sit out for a year to get his head in the right space for the next phase of his career like Melo did.
Click to expand...

That is why I said theoretically he could give up salary. Not saying he will but I wouldn’t be surprised if he did give up some.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I think Russ will likely not give back a lot or any. Blake had a wide market. Russ has little to no market unless he chills the hell out and shows he can be a bench guy. He may be able to repair his value but it will require eating so much pride... to date he has shown zero ability to do that. He may have to sit out for a year to get his head in the right space for the next phase of his career like Melo did.
Click to expand...
Blake had also been languishing in Detroit for a couple/few years and was very likely eager just to find a contender to play for. I don't think Russ will be there in his thought process (at least for several months).
 
idiot said:
Blake had also been languishing in Detroit for a couple/few years and was very likely eager just to find a contender to play for. I don't think Russ will be there in his thought process (at least for several months).
Click to expand...

We could say fine then you’re sitting on the bench if he plays hardball.
 
idiot said:
Blake had also been languishing in Detroit for a couple/few years and was very likely eager just to find a contender to play for. I don't think Russ will be there in his thought process (at least for several months).
Click to expand...
The way his long time agent threw him under the bus is telling. He isn't ready for what is coming next and it may end up being the end of his career.
 
Couldn't we just play Westbrook for 1/2 the year and then trade his expiring deal at the trade deadline for even more picks and some decent young players that aren't stars? At least we would get something else for him rather than throw away $40+ million for nothing and I doubt he prevents the tank anyway. We know how much he loves our fans, so that could be entertaining too.
 
default said:
Couldn't we just play Westbrook for 1/2 the year and then trade his expiring deal at the trade deadline for even more picks and some decent young players that aren't stars? At least we would get something else for him rather than throw away $40+ million for nothing and I doubt he prevents the tank anyway. We know how much he loves our fans, so that could be entertaining too.
Click to expand...
Nobody's trading anything of value for Westbrook.
 
Elizah Huge said:
We could say fine then you’re sitting on the bench if he plays hardball.
Click to expand...
We could... I think the sooner you deal with something like that the better. Tell his agent all you want is like a taxpayer MLE type giveback... then they tell you vet min (which would actually be like 3M+ for Russ I think)... you tell him he doesn't need to show up but you might use his expiring contract in a trade so you will wait if he doesn't give a little more back. If he has an offer somewhere I can see us shaving around 5M... dude still gets sponsor money so having him not on the court would be rough for that part of the biz. Somewhere in the 3-6M is where I'd bet we land and it would depend on what offers he had at the time.
 
default said:
Not for him, but maybe for 2-3 months of his expiring contract to make room for someone else.
Click to expand...
Its such a huge deal I doubt we find a trade partner... but that is the rationale you use if you want him to take less in a buyout to get his freedom earlier.
 
default said:
Not for him, but maybe for 2-3 months of his expiring contract to make room for someone else.
Click to expand...
You mean you want to take on Julius Randle's 4- year contract?

Actually that wouldn't even do it, since Randle only earns about half of what Westbrook does. But the basic idea is the same. We'd only get assets back for Westbrook at the deadline if we took on an/a set of egregiously large and long contracts. I don't think we have that in mind. Could be wrong, however. As they say, you have to spend the money somewhere.
 
Jingled said:
It's a staggering amount to pay a guy to not play for you. I also really hate the thought of helping make the Lakers better. I agree it's the right move, but it's still going to be a little tough to swallow.
Click to expand...
It’s a staggering amount to pay a guy to make you incredibly worse.

Which makes me think…
 
idiot said:
You mean you want to take on Julius Randle's 4- year contract?

Actually that wouldn't even do it, since Randle only earns about half of what Westbrook does. But the basic idea is the same. We'd only get assets back for Westbrook at the deadline if we took on an/a set of egregiously large and long contracts. I don't think we have that in mind. Could be wrong, however. As they say, you have to spend the money somewhere.
Click to expand...
About the only guys I could see us needing a deal that big would be like Tobias Harris, Zinger, or Hayward... and all would need like one more mid sized deal to matchup. Expiring contracts in the teens are much more useful for taking on bad salary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top