2023-24 NBA Free Agency 06/30 at 6PM

[terrell]

33 minutes ago, theheroatl said:

Even the rising noise about Toronto forward Pascal Siakam has seemed to quiet. The Hawks and Raptors have discussed various concepts to send Siakam to Atlanta in recent weeks, sources said, however those conversations have not generated any forward progress of late. Elsewhere with the Hawks, there continues to be optimism among league personnel familiar with the situation that Atlanta will come to terms on a contract extension for All-Star guard Dejounte Murray.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/with-nbas-moratorium-lifting-leagues-focus-now-shifts-to-restricted-free-agents-215641767.html

My opinion: Further solidifies belief that Murray was never included in convos with Toronto. If anything I think Toronto still has the Hunter, AJ, OO offering on the table or some variation of it.

Interesting take:

 

"Have you watched alot of Raps games? I live in Canada and watch at least 1/2 of their games every season. Let me start by saying Pascal is a good player. However, the notion he is some needle moving ALL NBA player is wrong. He is inefficient for his position, doesnt shoot 3's well and is very inconsistent in general. He gets ALOT of his #'s in garbage time or in meaningless games. Nurse constantly had him in the game late when they were way up or way down playing against backups. Pascal almost never takes over a game of importance (or when guarded by one of the opposing teams better defenders). He literally was the WORST clutch time performer in the ENTIRE NBA (Look it up). He folds like a cheap lawn chair when under pressure. His defence has regressed huge in last 2 yrs too. Think of it this way...if Pascal is some stud All Nba type, FVV is a supposed All star stud 3pt shooter/defender, OG is an elite 3 and D guy (which he is), Barnes is the 2nd coming of Magic Johnson, Poertl is a top 10 C and Gary Trent JR is a "elite 3pt shooter" as Raps fans/media says. Then why are Raps sooo mid despite also playing a playoff rotation/minutes all season? Pascal is a fake star and trading a bunch of assets and giving him huge contract would be a franchise crippling mistake"

 

Somebody forward this to LF.. 

Edited July 5, 2023 by terrell

[JayBirdHawk]

1 minute ago, theheroatl said:

We are at $130 in 2024-2025

The raise he would get would begin this year.

Sabonis was scheduled to make $22 mil this year. Sac was under the cap so they gave him a $9 million dollar raise so his salary for this season is $31 million. Then he got his 140% max extension on that $31 mil.

[AHF]

22 minutes ago, Afro said:

I don't mind asking to be traded for the most part. Things can change. 

 

But you can't have it both ways. You can't say "I want the money" and also say "I don't want any of the restrictions this puts on my labor. I want stability but also total free agent freedom whenever I want."

 

Yep.  You can keep your stability and flexibility as part of your contract (keep it short, no trade clause, etc.) or you trade that flexibility and stability for a pile of guaranteed money.  Part of what the team gets for paying you is the right to get compensation for losing you by trading you for value.  You have options if you don't want to put yourself in the position where a team could force you to relocate for years on end without you consenting to the location.  (LeBron's string of 1 year contracts, Beal's no trade clause, etc.)  You might have to give up some money if you want things like a no-trade clause but that is the trade-off.  You only get that if you agree on it as part of your contract.

[AHF]

11 minutes ago, ShooterSays said:

Hawks DNA baby!

That isn't happening.  I hope to be wrong but I can't imagine that happening.

[Hawkish]

4 minutes ago, terrell said:

Interesting take:

 

"Have you watched alot of Raps games? I live in Canada and watch at least 1/2 of their games every season. Let me start by saying Pascal is a good player. However, the notion he is some needle moving ALL NBA player is wrong. He is inefficient for his position, doesnt shoot 3's well and is very inconsistent in general. He gets ALOT of his #'s in garbage time or in meaningless games. Nurse constantly had him in the game late when they were way up or way down playing against backups. Pascal almost never takes over a game of importance (or when guarded by one of the opposing teams better defenders). He literally was the WORST clutch time performer in the ENTIRE NBA (Look it up). He folds like a cheap lawn chair when under pressure. His defence has regressed huge in last 2 yrs too. Think of it this way...if Pascal is some stud All Nba type, FVV is a supposed All star stud 3pt shooter/defender, OG is an elite 3 and D guy (which he is), Barnes is the 2nd coming of Magic Johnson, Poertl is a top 10 C and Gary Trent JR is a "elite 3pt shooter" as Raps fans/media says. Then why are Raps sooo mid despite also playing a playoff rotation/minutes all season? Pascal is a fake star and trading a bunch of assets and giving him huge contract would be a franchise crippling mistake"

 

Somebody forward this to LF.. 

Yes, hope he has taken off the blinders.  I’ve been sold away from Pascal.  

[ShooterSays]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

That isn't happening.  I hope to be wrong but I can't imagine that happening.

I know. Just like throwing out that Hawks DNA slogan lol

[Packfill]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

The player doesn't have to maximize his own trade value.  The only thing he has to do is not threaten to breach his contract.  He doesn't have to do anything more or less.

Being honest is not enough if you are threatening to breach your contract.  That is a violation of your contract.

Let's use a real world example.  If Axle Co. signs a contract to be the sole supplier on the Ford F150 at Ford's Detroit plant from 2023 to 2027 for $50M per year, all they have to do is to fill the orders placed by Ford.  If the contract allows Ford to move the production to Toledo, then Axle Co. has to fill the orders in Toledo.  Either way, Ford is required to pay them the $50M per year.  If Ford wants to sell the plant, they don't have to do anything to maximize Ford's sale value.  But if Axle Co. threatens to stop shipping unless they get something to which they aren't contractually entitled, they are violating their contract and have crossed a line.  Ford can sue them and should have both contractual and ethical expectations that Axle Co. won't threaten to stop shipping to illegally stop Ford from selling the Detroit plant to someone they don't like or whatever they want.  (The same applies if they are threatening to send bad product or short Ford on the shipments, etc.)  Axle Co. has a contractual obligation to fulfill their contract with Ford until the contract is expired.

Axle Co. is Dame in this analogy.  Dame is fine to signal to a new team that he doesn't want to be there.  But communicating that he won't give a good faith effort if he is traded somewhere other than Miami crosses a line because he is now threatening to breach his contract.  That isn't about "maximizing his own trade value" it is about not using a threatened breach of contract to damage his trade value.  

(Again, I'm not saying that Lillard has definitively crossed that line.  As I said before, Miami might be spreading rumors that Lillard won't play anywhere other than Miami because they know they can't match the offers other teams would make.  Dame wouldn't be obligated to correct the record in that case, imo, but he couldn't be the one who is the source of that rumor because then he would be communicating a threat to breach his contract.)

Contractual disputes are never that simple.  Axle Co. can effectively tell Ford we cannot supply product to Toledo at the same contract price because of increased shipping costs.  While Axle Co. may not have an explicit right to request a price increase, it is also not going to do something where it is losing money.  It could, for example file for bankruptcy.  Ford needs to weight the potential impact to its business of any non-performance by Axle Co.  If Axle Co. is the exclusive supplier, then Ford has no other way to get the Ford F150 trucks to sell to consumers and so it will lose money and have reputational harm and  litigation, regardless of the outcome, is unlikely to make them whole.  So Ford may make the decision that for business reasons a price adjustment, or other change to the business terms, is preferable to the interruption in business.  

Suppliers, particularly in the auto industry, fail to meet contract terms all the time (think of the supply chain interruption resulting from Covid, or the ship getting stuck in the Suez Canal).  It sucks, but it happens and often times people make concessions because that is the less costly alternative in the long run.  

[terrell]

5 minutes ago, AHF said:

That isn't happening.  I hope to be wrong but I can't imagine that happening.

Murray would be a fool to take that.. lol

Edited July 5, 2023 by terrell

[Peoriabird]

6 minutes ago, terrell said:

Interesting take:

 

"Have you watched alot of Raps games? I live in Canada and watch at least 1/2 of their games every season. Let me start by saying Pascal is a good player. However, the notion he is some needle moving ALL NBA player is wrong. He is inefficient for his position, doesnt shoot 3's well and is very inconsistent in general. He gets ALOT of his #'s in garbage time or in meaningless games. Nurse constantly had him in the game late when they were way up or way down playing against backups. Pascal almost never takes over a game of importance (or when guarded by one of the opposing teams better defenders). He literally was the WORST clutch time performer in the ENTIRE NBA (Look it up). He folds like a cheap lawn chair when under pressure. His defence has regressed huge in last 2 yrs too. Think of it this way...if Pascal is some stud All Nba type, FVV is a supposed All star stud 3pt shooter/defender, OG is an elite 3 and D guy (which he is), Barnes is the 2nd coming of Magic Johnson, Poertl is a top 10 C and Gary Trent JR is a "elite 3pt shooter" as Raps fans/media says. Then why are Raps sooo mid despite also playing a playoff rotation/minutes all season? Pascal is a fake star and trading a bunch of assets and giving him huge contract would be a franchise crippling mistake"

 

Somebody forward this to LF.. 

Most astute basketball fans already know this about him. It's just the raw stat chasers with big imagination who don't want to know the truth. Or the desperate Trae lovers who would get on board with anything they think Trae approves of. Sad!

[GameTime]

 

Edited July 5, 2023 by GameTime

[JayBirdHawk]

9 minutes ago, theheroatl said:

We are at $130m in 2024-2025.. how are you figuring these? Seems like it's a lot simpler than you are trying to make it. His new deal is in the next salary year and we don't know what OO's salary is.. if there is salary matching on a Siakam trade, this still works. We also have a ton of team options for 2024-2025. Nonetheless a max for him still fits with no cap issues. Even an extension for Siakam fits if you take Dre + OO + AJ out (extensions looming). The odd man out is JJ.

Capela is expiring that year so I bet they trade out that contract.

Also, the cap should go up drastically after 2025.

That $130 doesn't include capholds for OO ($24 mil) or Bey ($13 mil)

[theheroatl]

11 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

The raise he would get would begin this year.

Sabonis was scheduled to make $22 mil this year. Sac was under the cap so they gave him a $9 million dollar raise so his salary for this season is $31 million. Then he got his 140% max extension on that $31 mil.

I'm referring to a Jerami Grant type situation. It's possible and that is the likely avenue.

3 minutes ago, GameTime said:

 

Damn I wanted Grant..

 

You telling me we couldn't do this: 

 

Edited July 5, 2023 by theheroatl

[Hawkish]

2 minutes ago, GameTime said:

 

Unprotected pick swap for a team like Dallas was unwise.

[Final_quest]

27 minutes ago, Afro said:

I don't mind asking to be traded for the most part. Things can change. 

 

But you can't have it both ways. You can't say "I want the money" and also say "I don't want any of the restrictions this puts on my labor. I want stability but also total free agent freedom whenever I want."

 

If you are a big enough star you CAN say that and a lot of other things.  The classic is the prima donna movie star, pop star, or other major entertainment act.  Their agent negotiates a big money contract and then the manager/director/producer has to coax them to go perform.  
Telling them they have to perform because of a contract?  Are you serious?  They loosen contract demands to get the results they want from the star.  In this case the contract limits Dame to a degree, but I’m not sure what else he has to do to demonstrate that the contract is not governing what is happening.  He’s not as free as a free agent, but he’s also not intending to play as a Blazer this year either.  

[KB21]

$54 million over 4 years for Grant Williams.  

[AHF]

1 minute ago, Packfill said:

Contractual disputes are never that simple.  Axle Co. can effectively tell Ford we cannot supply product to Toledo at the same contract price because of increased shipping costs.  While Axle Co. may not have an explicit right to request a price increase, it is also not going to do something where it is losing money.  It could, for example file for bankruptcy.  Ford needs to weight the potential impact to its business of any non-performance by Axle Co.  If Axle Co. is the exclusive supplier, then Ford has no other way to get the Ford F150 trucks to sell to consumers and so it will lose money and have reputational harm and  litigation, regardless of the outcome, is unlikely to make them whole.  So Ford may make the decision that for business reasons a price adjustment, or other change to the business terms, is preferable to the interruption in business.  

Suppliers, particularly in the auto industry, fail to meet contract terms all the time (think of the supply chain interruption resulting from Covid, or the ship getting stuck in the Suez Canal).  It sucks, but it happens and often times people make concessions because that is the less costly alternative in the long run.  

If the issue is shipping costs, that is a negligible issue and I agree that the parties will work that out.  But that is not remotely analogous to what we are talking about which is the the ability to threaten deliberate breach of contract to increase leverage for issues that go to the core of the value of the contract for Ford.  When NBA players threaten to refuse to show up, that destroys their trade value which is the only value the player has to the team.  Making threats like that is generally a way to ruin your company against the Fords of the world.  This is particularly the case because if you are going to maintain the analogy with an NBA player, the contract is hugely profitable for Axel Co. You aren't going to get Ford to cave and take away the core value for them while letting you keep your hugely profitable contract.

You did name one viable strategy against the Fords of the world in that context - bankruptcy.  But that goes hand in hand with ruining your company.  Either you go chapter 11 which means ruining things for your owners and taking on massive costs (it is very expensive and painful to go through chapter 11) or giving up all your assets and completely destroying the company via chapter 7.  The only reason to go through bankruptcy from a legit business strategy is when you aren't making money and you have huge liabilities.  You reorganize through chapter 11, wipe out much of the equity of your owners, wipe out some of your liabilities, and then you get to return to business once you've satisfied the terms of your plan.  Very, very expensive process as you pay all your creditor's legal bills as part of that reorganization.  

 

[Peoriabird]

Just now, AHF said:

If the issue is shipping costs, that is a negligible issue and I agree that the parties will work that out.  But that is not remotely analogous to what we are talking about which is the the ability to threaten deliberate breach of contract to increase leverage for issues that go to the core of the value of the contract for Ford.  When NBA players threaten to refuse to show up, that destroys their trade value which is the only value the player has to the team.  Making threats like that is generally a way to ruin your company against the Fords of the world.  This is particularly the case because if you are going to maintain the analogy with an NBA player, the contract is hugely profitable for Axel Co. You aren't going to get Ford to cave and take away the core value for them while letting you keep your hugely profitable contract.

You did name one viable strategy against the Fords of the world in that context - bankruptcy.  But that goes hand in hand with ruining your company.  Either you go chapter 11 which means ruining things for your owners and taking on massive costs (it is very expensive and painful to go through chapter 11) or giving up all your assets and completely destroying the company via chapter 7.  The only reason to go through bankruptcy from a legit business strategy is when you aren't making money and you have huge liabilities.  You reorganize through chapter 11, wipe out much of the equity of your owners, wipe out some of your liabilities, and then you get to return to business once you've satisfied the terms of your plan.  Very, very expensive process as you pay all your creditor's legal bills as part of that reorganization.  

 

Can we start another thread for this topic since some don't want to move back to the thread topic

[theheroatl]

2 minutes ago, KB21 said:

$54 million over 4 years for Grant Williams.  

That's pretty good. Losing Grant and Marcus Smart is going to take a dent into their defensive juggernaut. 

[AHF]

2 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

If you are a big enough star you CAN say that and a lot of other things.  The classic is the prima donna movie star, pop star, or other major entertainment act.  Their agent negotiates a big money contract and then the manager/director/producer has to coax them to go perform.  
Telling them they have to perform because of a contract?  Are you serious?  They loosen contract demands to get the results they want from the star.  In this case the contract limits Dame to a degree, but I’m not sure what else he has to do to demonstrate that the contract is not governing what is happening.  He’s not as free as a free agent, but he’s also not intending to play as a Blazer this year either.  

If the Blazers don't trade him they don't have to pay him either if he isn't playing.  That isn't a particularly painful scenario for them.  He sits at home.  They save $20M or so while they shop him and they deal him on their timeline.  

(And some actors can get tagged when they don't perform.  Kevin Spacey got hit with a $31M judgment from his non-performance in House of Cards, for example.  Most of the time the studio fires the actor and simply doesn't pay them if they won't perform and the type of "coaxing" that many actors need doesn't prove effective.  But that kind of coaxing goes on all the time in basketball too - it just doesn't end up being an issue if the player doesn't refuse to play.)

[Bonkers]

I have no idea what people see in Siakam