Official Off-Season Thread 2017

[Upgrayedd]

Is no one in here going to be critical for Rose signing for minimum? Durant signs for 7M less and he's the worst person in the world, but Rose signs for 15M less and no one bats an eyelid.

Durant hasn't had two meniscus tears and an ACL in 4 years. Durant may not be the most durable dude on-court but he's three times the player rose is.

Also he doesn't just not turn up to games either. bit of a plus

Also who signs Rose for over 10m? Honestly? Atlanta? Brooklyn? Chicago? Indiana? are about the only teams who can afford to, and who does it? Rose comes off the bench in all those teams bar Chicago, Indiana/Brooklyn rebuilding and are going for young PG's, Dennis is better then Rose.

Still a Handy player don't get me wrong.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Also, Seeing a few Reports Anthony will be a rocket by 5.30 America time.

 

[2006_Eagles]

Does Rose make any teammate around him better?

 

[fidstar]

Durant hasn't had two meniscus tears and an ACL in 4 years. Durant may not be the most durable dude on-court but he's three times the player rose is.

Also he doesn't just not turn up to games either. bit of a plus

Also who signs Rose for over 10m? Honestly? Atlanta? Brooklyn? Chicago? Indiana? are about the only teams who can afford to, and who does it? Rose comes off the bench in all those teams bar Chicago, Indiana/Brooklyn rebuilding and are going for young PG's, Dennis is better then Rose.

Still a Handy player don't get me wrong.

I think I even wrote in my first comment that the players aren't comparable. Definitely said it since.

My point is that if the jimmies rustled was 90/100 for Durant resigning for 7M less than max so he can keep his team mates, then Rose signing to a new team for minimum when I thought he could get 15M (even if maybe it's only 10M), should be getting more than a 0/100 on the jimmies rustled scale. I was thinking it should be around the 20-30 range. I know if he had signed at the Warriors for minimum he (and the Warriors) would be getting a lot of shit for it.

 

[2006_Eagles]

I think I even wrote in my first comment that the players aren't comparable. Definitely said it since.

My point is that if the jimmies rustled was 90/100 for Durant resigning for 7M less than max so he can keep his team mates, then Rose signing to a new team for minimum when I thought he could get 15M (even if maybe it's only 10M), should be getting more than a 0/100 on the jimmies rustled scale. I was thinking it should be around the 20-30 range. I know if he had signed at the Warriors for minimum he (and the Warriors) would be getting a lot of shit for it.

The fact that not many jimmies were rustled says it all

 

[Son of Skeletor]

I think Rose could get 15M. Surely. I mean he's obviously a shadow of his former self, but he's still a 18/4/4 guy who would make a team $5M just on the marketing side of things.

Tyreke Evans - Memphis - one year, $3.3 mil

Rajon Rondo - Nawlins - one year, $3.3 mil

Derrick Rose - Cleveland - one year, $2.1 mil

That's his direct competition, players similarly flawed with injury and/or locker-room history. And they both got contracts before he did!

In short that's the market, I think you're overestimating Rose's worth at this point in time. Now if he stays healthy, on his best behavior and helps Cleveland out this season he might be in line to score a 3/45 deal from someone next season... but not now, not in 2017.

I'm just talking about the contract he signed. He came at max to the Warriors remember. Warriors had to move players to get him. Rose has come in at minimum. He didn't sign at $10M and told the Cavs that you need to move players to get me in.

Superficially Durant went from a direct competitor, Rose came from the 30-win Knicks.

But mainly, Rose is signing a one year deal - it's a one-time only discount, there's no carryover. Durant signed a max deal then opted out and signed a non-max deal, which prevented the Dubs from either a) losing more depth, or b) paying an absolute fortune in luxury tax.

If you're asking why that's such a big deal, ask yourself this - why are NBA teams not allowed to offer heavily front-loaded contracts?

I'm not saying they are the same, but "world ending reaction", vs "no reaction" doesn't seem right.

Also Rose is a 3 time all star for the record.

I said a one-time star, not a one-time All-star

Past tense.

You comparing these two situations sort of puts it into perspective of how lol the public reaction is to this. Brian Williams was a pick up at the end of a season (like Bogut this season). Rose has signed on for the full season. Rose is probably going to be the starting point guard if Kyrie leaves. Dude is still a decent player. Perfect for the Cavs who need someone who can score.

Brian Williams joined a loaded team who needed frontcourt help for a bargain basement price. He then parlayed that exposure into a big free agent deal with the Pistons.

Rose is doing exactly the same thing. Now if he kept signing one-year minimum deals with Cleveland for the next five years, and was then awarded with a $50 million cheque to become 'team ambassador' after he retired... that'd be different.

Now you are comparing the situation to David West? What? David West is 36 years old. Rose is 28 years old. You are saying that Durant signing for only a Top 10 league contract isn't comparable to Rose, but Rose is comparable to West? Come-on SOS. That's a worse comparison. Why not compare him to Parish on the 96 Bulls?

Ugh.

I thought I was making a pretty clear distinction that I have no problem with David West type deals for any contending team, and that if people are bagging the Dubs for that deal - or the Javale McGee deal, to use a non-oldie example - then they're a little misguided.

I also don't see any problem with the Rose deal because his market is horribly deflated at this point in time - perhaps he could have squeezed a couple of million more out of Milwaukee, but who cares really? From what I read Bucks fans overwhelmingly didn't want anything to do with him.

FWIW I'm not someone who has bitched incessantly about Durant or the Dubs - sure I'd have preferred he didn't make that move, but there's no point hand-wringing about it forever. At the same time though I'm not blind to the fact that there's a pretty huge freaking difference between a Rose or Rondo or McGee level signing and signing Kevin Durant in his absolute prime on a very unusual contractual basis. It's not a Dubs thing, it just is what it is.

 

[fidstar]

The fact that not many jimmies were rustled says it all

My jimmies have been rustled about jimmies not being rustled!

 

[fidstar]

Tyreke Evans - Memphis - one year, $3.3 mil

Rajon Rondo - Nawlins - one year, $3.3 mil

Derrick Rose - Cleveland - one year, $2.1 mil

That's his direct competition, players similarly flawed with injury and/or locker-room history. And they both got contracts before he did!

In short that's the market, I think you're overestimating Rose's worth at this point in time. Now if he stays healthy, on his best behavior and helps Cleveland out this season he might be in line to score a 3/45 deal from someone next season... but not now, not in 2017.

He's better than both those guys. I know Rose has his injury issues, but Evans has played 65 games in the last two years (started 12).

Superficially Durant went from a direct competitor, Rose came from the 30-win Knicks.

We are talking about Durant signing for less than max. I have no issues with people being being upset about Durant initially signing with the Warriors.

But mainly, Rose is signing a one year deal - it's a one-time only discount, there's no carryover. Durant signed a max deal then opted out and signed a non-max deal, which prevented the Dubs from either a) losing more depth, or b) paying an absolute fortune in luxury tax.

Interesting fact. Durant opted out of a contract that would have paid him $27M this season for a contract that means he will get paid 25M. Would people have had issues if he just had taken up his player option on the original deal?

If you're asking why that's such a big deal, ask yourself this - why are NBA teams not allowed to offer heavily front-loaded contracts?

So not a big deal though if he just took a player option?

I said a one-time star, not a one-time All-star

Past tense.

Okay, you win that one!

Brian Williams joined a loaded team who needed frontcourt help for a bargain basement price. He then parlayed that exposure into a big free agent deal with the Pistons.

Ask Jod. MJ didn't need help.

Ugh.

I thought I was making a pretty clear distinction that I have no problem with David West type deals for any contending team, and that if people are bagging the Dubs for that deal - or the Javale McGee deal, to use a non-oldie example - then they're a little misguided.

I also don't see any problem with the Rose deal because his market is horribly deflated at this point in time - perhaps he could have squeezed a couple of million more out of Milwaukee, but who cares really? From what I read Bucks fans overwhelmingly didn't want anything to do with him.

FWIW I'm not someone who has bitched incessantly about Durant or the Dubs - sure I'd have preferred he didn't make that move, but there's no point hand-wringing about it forever. At the same time though I'm not blind to the fact that there's a pretty huge freaking difference between a Rose or Rondo or McGee level signing and signing Kevin Durant in his absolute prime on a very unusual contractual basis. It's not a Dubs thing, it just is what it is.

Why the Ugh? That makes me believe you don't agree with my post, but then you write that you don't have a problem with the West signing, and you don't have a problem with the Rose signing. This implies you think they are comparable.

Warriors signing West. A 100 year old player is not the same as (even an old) 28 year old.

As I mentioned before, I'm not saying it's the same (Durant and Rose). Just the fact nothing has been said is surprising.

 

[fidstar]

Any news on Bogut?

 

[stewie griffen]

Tyreke Evans - Memphis - one year, $3.3 mil

Rajon Rondo - Nawlins - one year, $3.3 mil

Derrick Rose - Cleveland - one year, $2.1 mil

That's his direct competition, players similarly flawed with injury and/or locker-room history. And they both got contracts before he did!

In short that's the market, I think you're overestimating Rose's worth at this point in time. Now if he stays healthy, on his best behavior and helps Cleveland out this season he might be in line to score a 3/45 deal from someone next season... but not now, not in 2017.



Superficially Durant went from a direct competitor, Rose came from the 30-win Knicks.

But mainly, Rose is signing a one year deal - it's a one-time only discount, there's no carryover. Durant signed a max deal then opted out and signed a non-max deal, which prevented the Dubs from either a) losing more depth, or b) paying an absolute fortune in luxury tax.

If you're asking why that's such a big deal, ask yourself this - why are NBA teams not allowed to offer heavily front-loaded contracts?



I said a one-time star, not a one-time All-star [emoji14]

Past tense.



Brian Williams joined a loaded team who needed frontcourt help for a bargain basement price. He then parlayed that exposure into a big free agent deal with the Pistons.

Rose is doing exactly the same thing. Now if he kept signing one-year minimum deals with Cleveland for the next five years, and was then awarded with a $50 million cheque to become 'team ambassador' after he retired... that'd be different.



Ugh.

I thought I was making a pretty clear distinction that I have no problem with David West type deals for any contending team, and that if people are bagging the Dubs for that deal - or the Javale McGee deal, to use a non-oldie example - then they're a little misguided.

I also don't see any problem with the Rose deal because his market is horribly deflated at this point in time - perhaps he could have squeezed a couple of million more out of Milwaukee, but who cares really? From what I read Bucks fans overwhelmingly didn't want anything to do with him.

FWIW I'm not someone who has bitched incessantly about Durant or the Dubs - sure I'd have preferred he didn't make that move, but there's no point hand-wringing about it forever. At the same time though I'm not blind to the fact that there's a pretty huge freaking difference between a Rose or Rondo or McGee level signing and signing Kevin Durant in his absolute prime on a very unusual contractual basis. It's not a Dubs thing, it just is what it is.

Cameron Payne will make more than Derrick rose next season

 

[stewie griffen]

Any news on Bogut?

His jimmies are rustled

 

[stewie griffen]

 

[stewie griffen]

I love Sean marks

 

[stewie griffen]

Nicholson waived and stretched

 

[fidstar]

Crabb gets 20M per year, and Rose can't get 10M. Shesh.

 

[stewie griffen]

Brandon Knight ACL

yikes

 

[unclechopchop2]

I think Rose could get 15M. Surely. I mean he's obviously a shadow of his former self, but he's still a 18/4/4 guy who would make a team $5M just on the marketing side of things.





I'm just talking about the contract he signed. He came at max to the Warriors remember. Warriors had to move players to get him. Rose has come in at minimum. He didn't sign at $10M and told the Cavs that you need to move players to get me in.



I'm not saying they are the same, but "world ending reaction", vs "no reaction" doesn't seem right.

Also Rose is a 3 time all star for the record.



It would be a lot harsher. People would be ripping into Rose and the Warriors.



You comparing these two situations sort of puts it into perspective of how lol the public reaction is to this. Brian Williams was a pick up at the end of a season (like Bogut this season). Rose has signed on for the full season. Rose is probably going to be the starting point guard if Kyrie leaves. Dude is still a decent player. Perfect for the Cavs who need someone who can score.



Now you are comparing the situation to David West? What? David West is 36 years old. Rose is 28 years old. You are saying that Durant signing for only a Top 10 league contract isn't comparable to Rose, but Rose is comparable to West? Come-on SOS. That's a worse comparison. Why not compare him to Parish on the 96 Bulls?

Dude.... Rose is a shell of his former self. There's also plenty of risk. The situations are nothing alike.

 

[dmac_55]

People need to calm it on the D rose contract.. The dude was openly selling himself, have never seen so many meetings reported in the media to try and drum up interest for a player..

The lakers wouldn't have much more to offer him after signing KCP. The bucks probably offered the MLE or below this for him..

The market for PGs this offseason was really shitty, he will take a 1 year deal to be on a contender and hope to get 20 million total guaranteed next offseason which he likely won't..

Teams are capped out they can't just sign a player to a 15M contract like last year.. The 2016 free agent class are the luckiest SOBs, with majority of contracts an overpay.. finally the league has normalised and we won't see anymore insane contracts for role players..

Shoulda gone for cap smoothing over 2-3 years to evenly distribute the rises amongst players but the union wanted that money ASAP

 

[fidstar]

Okay, I'll stfu

Isn't it hilarious that such a huge increase in salary cap and still teams are struggling to stay under it.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Crabb gets 20M per year, and Rose can't get 10M. Shesh.

When brooklyn offer rose a max...

Im not sure what your failing to understand dude. Teams have salary cap What team has 10m for D rose? Its even come out the lakers didnt offer him a contract. Markets not there. Everyone understands.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Okay, I'll stfu

Isn't it hilarious that such a huge increase in salary cap and still teams are struggling to stay under it.

Except your laughing if your Enes Kanter. Allan Crabbe or chandler parsons

 

[peternorth]

tyler ennis 1 year min contract at LAL.

prepare to rustle your jimmies

 

[peternorth]

Brandon Knight ACL

yikes

Look2Me4Guidance

 

[dmac_55]

Except your laughing if your Enes Kanter. Allan Crabbe or chandler parsons

Timing is everything isn't it.. KCP probably gets 100 mill guaranteed last offseason. Evan turner probably gets 24 or less this offseason

 

[jdz101]

Timing is everything isn't it.. KCP probably gets 100 mill guaranteed last offseason. Evan turner probably gets 24 or less this offseason

Evan Turner got made to look a lot better than he was by his previous coach. It had very little to do with the salary cap climate.