SupremeCommander wrote:crzymdups wrote:wargames wrote:I feel justified in my breakdown of his talent..... I just never thought he was going to be a Max contract......
He got a four year $75M offer from the Nets, with incentives that could take it up to $83M. I'm not sure if that's a max for his age group, but it is pretty close.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/168767...
I consider it a max deal... unbelievable a 10ppg guy gets that... I think he'll be better than that but just seems insane to me
I remember we were arguing in here if he was worth 54 Mil which we thought would be more than enough to steal him. A lot of us were agreeing 48 mil was a fair price but I never thought he would go so high. This off-season has been insane.
wargames wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:crzymdups wrote:wargames wrote:I feel justified in my breakdown of his talent..... I just never thought he was going to be a Max contract......
He got a four year $75M offer from the Nets, with incentives that could take it up to $83M. I'm not sure if that's a max for his age group, but it is pretty close.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/168767...
I consider it a max deal... unbelievable a 10ppg guy gets that... I think he'll be better than that but just seems insane to me
I remember we were arguing in here if he was worth 54 Mil which we thought would be more than enough to steal him. A lot of us were agreeing 48 mil was a fair price but I never thought he would go so high. This off-season has been insane.
exactly the kind of stupid deal I am so glad Phil avoided. Impressed with the overall group he spent on and what that yielded. What is Crabbe going to do? Score 15ppg on an 18 win team next year? Lin&Crabbe... should be quite the dynamic duo
Knickoftime wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:crzymdups wrote:wargames wrote:I feel justified in my breakdown of his talent..... I just never thought he was going to be a Max contract......
He got a four year $75M offer from the Nets, with incentives that could take it up to $83M. I'm not sure if that's a max for his age group, but it is pretty close.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/168767...
I consider it a max deal... unbelievable a 10ppg guy gets that... I think he'll be better than that but just seems insane to me
It is, but in context it makes some sense.
Nets have to spend. They can either distribute to a bunch of veterans they know are just going to be who they are. They can sign no one, stink, not get a draft pick for the next two seasons and write checks to make-up the money they have to spend anyway.
Or they can take the money they have to spend, and gamble and do what it takes to actually get a few young players with upside and a possible future.
Just a confluence of events that makes Johnson and Crabbe their least objectionable, crappy option.
Yeah, but now they're potentially committed to him for next four years. Could've just signed a vet for one year.
this is something Briggs did get right
IMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
RonRon wrote:this is something Briggs did get rightIMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
why would the team that drafted him let him go and bring in Evan Turner instead?
crzymdups wrote:fishmike wrote:wargames wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:crzymdups wrote:wargames wrote:I feel justified in my breakdown of his talent..... I just never thought he was going to be a Max contract......
He got a four year $75M offer from the Nets, with incentives that could take it up to $83M. I'm not sure if that's a max for his age group, but it is pretty close.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/168767...
I consider it a max deal... unbelievable a 10ppg guy gets that... I think he'll be better than that but just seems insane to me
I remember we were arguing in here if he was worth 54 Mil which we thought would be more than enough to steal him. A lot of us were agreeing 48 mil was a fair price but I never thought he would go so high. This off-season has been insane.
exactly the kind of stupid deal I am so glad Phil avoided. Impressed with the overall group he spent on and what that yielded. What is Crabbe going to do? Score 15ppg on an 18 win team next year? Lin&Crabbe... should be quite the dynamic duo
lol if only they could draft a dude named Goyle.
fishmike wrote:RonRon wrote:this is something Briggs did get rightIMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
why would the team that drafted him let him go and bring in Evan Turner instead?
I will go with "Did the Blazers think Crabbe would receive a ridiculous contract offer?" for $500 Alex
Welpee wrote:Knickoftime wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:crzymdups wrote:wargames wrote:I feel justified in my breakdown of his talent..... I just never thought he was going to be a Max contract......
He got a four year $75M offer from the Nets, with incentives that could take it up to $83M. I'm not sure if that's a max for his age group, but it is pretty close.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/168767...
I consider it a max deal... unbelievable a 10ppg guy gets that... I think he'll be better than that but just seems insane to me
It is, but in context it makes some sense.
Nets have to spend. They can either distribute to a bunch of veterans they know are just going to be who they are. They can sign no one, stink, not get a draft pick for the next two seasons and write checks to make-up the money they have to spend anyway.
Or they can take the money they have to spend, and gamble and do what it takes to actually get a few young players with upside and a possible future.
Just a confluence of events that makes Johnson and Crabbe their least objectionable, crappy option.
Yeah, but now they're potentially committed to him for next four years. Could've just signed a vet for one year.
What's the upside to the Nets for signing a vet for one year?
Understand the Nets wouldn't be paying Johnson and Crabbe the poison pill years. They'll be paying them the total amount divided by 4, so the cap hits in the final 2 years aren't as bad for them as they would be for Portland and Miami.
I'm not saying it's not crazy money for Crabbe, I'm just saying the Nets don't have much of a reason to say no.
Nets have NO payroll to speak after the next 2 years. They'll have $110m+ to spend and NO one to spend it on.
Even with Johns and Crabbe making $25m between then in 2018-19, Nets will still have $85m to spend and there is NO way they'll get attracting top free agents.
They're in a very weird, pretty much unprecedented place where there is little downside to this for them. Don't be surprised to see them do it again next year.
fishmike wrote:RonRon wrote:this is something Briggs did get rightIMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
why would the team that drafted him let him go and bring in Evan Turner instead?
They may value a ball dominant wing more for some reason. Why did Orlando let Tobias Harris go and then sign Jeff Green? Why did the Jazz let Millsap and Carrol leave to ATL for peanuts? Sometimes teams make bad decisions.
SupremeCommander wrote:fishmike wrote:RonRon wrote:this is something Briggs did get rightIMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
why would the team that drafted him let him go and bring in Evan Turner instead?
I will go with "Did the Blazers think Crabbe would receive a ridiculous contract offer?" for $500 Alex
If some of us here were predicting Crabbe would get a ridiculous offer, I'm sure the Portland front office was prepared for the contingency and Evan Turner was probably part of their plan for offsetting that possibility.
That said, I would not be shocked if Portland still matched on Crabbe.
Knickoftime wrote:Welpee wrote:Knickoftime wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:crzymdups wrote:wargames wrote:I feel justified in my breakdown of his talent..... I just never thought he was going to be a Max contract......
He got a four year $75M offer from the Nets, with incentives that could take it up to $83M. I'm not sure if that's a max for his age group, but it is pretty close.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/168767...
I consider it a max deal... unbelievable a 10ppg guy gets that... I think he'll be better than that but just seems insane to me
It is, but in context it makes some sense.
Nets have to spend. They can either distribute to a bunch of veterans they know are just going to be who they are. They can sign no one, stink, not get a draft pick for the next two seasons and write checks to make-up the money they have to spend anyway.
Or they can take the money they have to spend, and gamble and do what it takes to actually get a few young players with upside and a possible future.
Just a confluence of events that makes Johnson and Crabbe their least objectionable, crappy option.
Yeah, but now they're potentially committed to him for next four years. Could've just signed a vet for one year.
What's the upside to the Nets for signing a vet for one year?
Understand the Nets wouldn't be paying Johnson and Crabbe the poison pill years. They'll be paying them the total amount divided by 4, so the cap hits in the final 2 years aren't as bad for them as they would be for Portland and Miami.
I'm not saying it's not crazy money for Crabbe, I'm just saying the Nets don't have much of a reason to say no.
Nets have NO payroll to speak after the next 2 years. They'll have $110m+ to spend and NO one to spend it on.
Even with Johns and Crabbe making $25m between then in 2018-19, Nets will still have $85m to spend and there is NO way they'll get attracting top free agents.
They're in a very weird, pretty much unprecedented place where there is little downside to this for them. Don't be surprised to see them do it again next year.
Yeah, you're right. It probably makes sense for the Nets because they really have few options right now. They're not signing any big time free agents, don't control their draft picks for the next two-three years, Brook Lopez is their only asset currently. Some on this board were suggesting we should pursue Crabbe, but you're right, it may be a decent move for the Nets.
Whats more risk--signing a declining 32 yo C to a 4 yr 72mm contract or a 24 year old up and coming SG to a 4 year 75mm contact?
BRIGGS wrote:Whats more risk--signing a declining 32 yo C to a 4 yr 72mm contract or a 24 year old up and coming SG to a 4 year 75mm contact?
I see you've added a year to Noah's age.
We haven't seen yet if Portland will match the offer to Crabbe - some are predicting that they will.
So maybe your question is better phrased as - what's more risk, signing a sure thing former DPOY center who was a top 4 mvp candidate 2 years ago, who has gas in the tank and something to prove or ending up with nothing
crzymdups wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Whats more risk--signing a declining 32 yo C to a 4 yr 72mm contract or a 24 year old up and coming SG to a 4 year 75mm contact?
I see you've added a year to Noah's age.
We haven't seen yet if Portland will match the offer to Crabbe - some are predicting that they will.
So maybe your question is better phrased as - what's more risk, signing a sure thing former DPOY center who was a top 4 mvp candidate 2 years ago, who has gas in the tank and something to prove or ending up with nothing
At least years aren't being added to Phil's age this offseason.
BRIGGS wrote:Whats more risk--signing a declining 32 yo C to a 4 yr 72mm contract or a 24 year old up and coming SG to a 4 year 75mm contact?
I would much rather pay a 29 year old DPOY of the year than give a bench guy who scores 8ppg a $100mm contract.
yellowboy90 wrote:fishmike wrote:RonRon wrote:this is something Briggs did get rightIMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
why would the team that drafted him let him go and bring in Evan Turner instead?
They may value a ball dominant wing more for some reason. Why did Orlando let Tobias Harris go and then sign Jeff Green? Why did the Jazz let Millsap and Carrol leave to ATL for peanuts? Sometimes teams make bad decisions.
So your take is that Portland got it wrong?
fishmike wrote:RonRon wrote:this is something Briggs did get rightIMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
why would the team that drafted him let him go and bring in Evan Turner instead?
well they didn't let him go...yet. they can still match.
djsunyc wrote:fishmike wrote:RonRon wrote:this is something Briggs did get rightIMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
why would the team that drafted him let him go and bring in Evan Turner instead?
well they didn't let him go...yet. they can still match.
fair enough, but Liliard is a max guy, Turner is getting crazy money, McCollum will get huge money in a year so if they keep Crabbe they are paying like $70mm a year plus for 4 guards. Hard to envision that
fishmike wrote:yellowboy90 wrote:fishmike wrote:RonRon wrote:this is something Briggs did get rightIMO, he is Allan Houston with a much more complete game on both OFF and DEF/versatility on both ends as well
While he is a VERY GOOD SHOOTER that can play off the ball and also shoot off the dribble, some post up abilities, that can be ELITE
why would the team that drafted him let him go and bring in Evan Turner instead?
They may value a ball dominant wing more for some reason. Why did Orlando let Tobias Harris go and then sign Jeff Green? Why did the Jazz let Millsap and Carrol leave to ATL for peanuts? Sometimes teams make bad decisions.
So your take is that Portland got it wrong?
if they let Crabbe walk then yes. Especially sense they chose to give Turner money. Unless they play small ball with Aminu as a 4 I just don't see how they can keep Crabbe.
