| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JUST-MING
Retired Number
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 41379
|
 Posted: Tue May 24, 2022 1:05 pm Post subject: SUPERMAX CONTRACTS |
|
|
LIST OF SUPERMAX CONTRACTS
- Giannis Antetokounmpo
5 year / $228 million
Signed by Milwaukee Bucks
- Damian Lillard
4 year / $197 million
Signed by Portland Trailblazers
- Rudy Gobert
5 year / $207 million
Signed by Utah Jazz
- Luka Doncic
5 year / $207 million
Signed by Dallas Mavericks
- Stephen Curry
5 year / $201 million
Signed by Golden State Warriors
- Joel Embiid
4 year / $196 million
Signed by Philadelphia 76ers
- Russell Westbrook
5 year / $205 million
Signed by Oklahoma City Thunder
- James Harden
6 year / $227 million
Signed by Houston Rockets
- John Wall
4 year / $171 million
Signed by Washington Wizards
Bradley Beal will join this list
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/05/23/bradely-beal-free-agency-dc-basketball-court/
_________________
“God knew they couldn’t be on this Earth without each other. He had to bring them home to heaven together.”
— Vanessa Bryant
https://youtu.be/SX3IZULkWx8 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lamar's Bud
Star Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2022 3:23 pm Post subject: Re: SUPERMAX CONTRACTS |
|
|
I get the keeping your "stars" (or maybe just "really good" all-stars) so that the team doesn't completely bottom-out, but at the same time it's clear that half of these haven't aged well. Though it's probably not much better to have a declining star (or an overpaid "really good" player) with a crippling contract in a league that has a salary cap. I'm looking at you, Gobert.
I can't (and won't) fault a player for taking a supermax contract because that's just ridiculous, life-changing money. But doing so really handcuffs a team in their ability to put together a championship contending team where one guy alone is taking up 1/3 of the salary cap. The NBA built an "advantage" for teams to offer a super max, but it's really a massive double-edged sword since these deals tend to take the player beyond their prime years.
On a side note, isn't it ironic that 3 of these players were at one time or another a member of the Rockets while under these supermax contracts? Of course Wall and Westbrook were traded for each other, but still kind of funny. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CandyCanes
Retired Number
Joined: 24 Dec 2007
Posts: 33793
Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
george w kush
Star Player
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 1033
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2022 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What a shame that a guy like Beal is going to get a max contract. Definition of a chucker with 0 defense that doesn't move the needle one bit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 141368
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Tue May 24, 2022 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| george w kush wrote: | | What a shame that a guy like Beal is going to get a max contract. Definition of a chucker with 0 defense that doesn't move the needle one bit. |
I doubt that the Beals think it’s a shame. And the Wizards don’t have to offer it to him.
_________________
Between the things known, and the things unknown, are the Doors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lamar's Bud
Star Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Wed May 25, 2022 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | george w kush wrote: | | What a shame that a guy like Beal is going to get a max contract. Definition of a chucker with 0 defense that doesn't move the needle one bit. |
I doubt that the Beals think it’s a shame. And the Wizards don’t have to offer it to him. |
Right, they don't have to offer it to him, but what alternative do they have? Let him leave and get nothing in return? He at least makes them decent.
Perhaps they're more concerned with riding the treadmill of mediocrity rather than just do a complete reset. Which is a problem several bad teams have when re-signing their stars. You need some player(s) to build your team around, but if the best player is taking up 1/3 of the cap space and the rest of the roster is not good, then how can the roster reasonably be turned over to make the team a playoff team, or even a contender? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 34395
|
| Posted: Wed May 25, 2022 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lamar's Bud wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | george w kush wrote: | | What a shame that a guy like Beal is going to get a max contract. Definition of a chucker with 0 defense that doesn't move the needle one bit. |
I doubt that the Beals think it’s a shame. And the Wizards don’t have to offer it to him. |
Right, they don't have to offer it to him, but what alternative do they have? Let him leave and get nothing in return? He at least makes them decent.
Perhaps they're more concerned with riding the treadmill of mediocrity rather than just do a complete reset. Which is a problem several bad teams have when re-signing their stars. You need some player(s) to build your team around, but if the best player is taking up 1/3 of the cap space and the rest of the roster is not good, then how can the roster reasonably be turned over to make the team a playoff team, or even a contender? |
If your best player is Bradley Beal, you're not going to be a contending team. But if you let Beal walk, you're not going to be able to sign someone who's better. So you might as well sign Beal.
That's just the reality of a 30-team league. Everyone would love their best player to be Giannis, Jokic or Curry. But most teams will have a best player on the level of Gobert, Lillard, DeRozan, or Siakam. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 27880
|
| Posted: Sun May 29, 2022 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | If your best player is Bradley Beal, you're not going to be a contending team. But if you let Beal walk, you're not going to be able to sign someone who's better. So you might as well sign Beal.
That's just the reality of a 30-team league. Everyone would love their best player to be Giannis, Jokic or Curry. But most teams will have a best player on the level of Gobert, Lillard, DeRozan, or Siakam. |
That's the logic, for sure. It hasn't worked out so well for some teams, though. If the Wizards' front office is competent, they'll need to weigh the pluses and minuses. They have the option of trading Beal for assets. I have no idea what they could get for him, and it's unlikely that they would get a single player as good as Beal. But if they give him the super max, their ceiling is limited to whatever Beal can accomplish as their franchise player. That may not even be a playoff spot.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 34395
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2022 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | If your best player is Bradley Beal, you're not going to be a contending team. But if you let Beal walk, you're not going to be able to sign someone who's better. So you might as well sign Beal.
That's just the reality of a 30-team league. Everyone would love their best player to be Giannis, Jokic or Curry. But most teams will have a best player on the level of Gobert, Lillard, DeRozan, or Siakam. |
That's the logic, for sure. It hasn't worked out so well for some teams, though. If the Wizards' front office is competent, they'll need to weigh the pluses and minuses. They have the option of trading Beal for assets. I have no idea what they could get for him, and it's unlikely that they would get a single player as good as Beal. But if they give him the super max, their ceiling is limited to whatever Beal can accomplish as their franchise player. That may not even be a playoff spot. |
I could definitely see it being a tough call for a GM. The average GM only lasts with a team for 5 years. So you have to weight whether letting a star go might be better for the long term of the bad but bad for you, if the owner and fans get frustrated by the lack of value you get in a trade for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
