turtle28 Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, MikeT14 said: It's not just Charlotte. It's similar to why the Lakers didn't care to bring him back, why the Hawks (outside of rebuilding) were quick to move on, why rumblings of Harden wanting Howard out were there, and why the Nets have no interest in keeping him. It follows him wherever he goes with reason. Meshing had nothing to do with it. He had a decent season. Yes, I know, but I still don’t understand the “why?” Like, why is it that he doesn’t get along with teammates? Why is it that he can’t seem to stick on a team more than a few years? I know it happens, but I don’t know the why? Orlando sure wanted him to stay long term and they wanted to continue to build around him a decade ago; especially after making the finals with him and shooters like Turkoglu, Rashad Lewis and Jameer Nelson. I just don’t know. My impression is he’s immature despite being talented like Arenas was and Nick Young is, etc. And players who are serious about winning can’t deal with his immaturity despite his talent. Edited July 2, 2018 by turtle28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT14 Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 Sometimes you don't need a "why", it just "is". I don't think it would end well with Howard in Washington. But, with how open the East is, who the hell knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 Just now, MikeT14 said: Sometimes you don't need a "why", it just "is". I don't think it would end well with Howard in Washington. But, with how open the East is, who the hell knows? Well I’m a “why” type of guy. Rarely do I just take things as truth because someone told me so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e16bball Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 8 hours ago, LoganF89 said: correct me if im wrong but. if we sign nerlens noel and do the mid level acception for mike scott, could we stretch mahimis contract and essentially be out of the luxery tax? i believe we are over by 7 mil If we’re using the mid-level exception on Mike Scott, how are we signing Nerlens Noel? We’re over the cap, exceptions are our only means of signing FAs. Which means the only way we could sign a FA after we’ve burnt up the MLE is to a minimum contract. Is Nerlens Noel really already at the point where he has to take a minimum deal? He might be, because of his injury history, but it just seems odd that he wouldn’t be able to find anyone willing to give him at least a portion of their MLE to take a gamble on him. Anyway, let’s say we give Scott the full taxpayer MLE ($5.33M) and Noel a minimum contract ($1.76M). That takes our cap number to $130.20M with 12 players under contract. If we were to waive and stretch Mahinmi, his remaining $32M would be paid out for cap purposes over 5 years instead of 2. In other words, that would reduce his annual cap hit to $6.40M and would save us $9.60M on the 2018-19 cap. That would drop us to $120.60M with 11 players under contract. The 12th player would be Troy Brown once his contract is made official ($2.73M first year value), which would take us to $123.33M. Which is just below the luxury tax level of $123.73M. But I believe that would still leave us in need of one additional minimum salary player to fill out a 13-man roster — and even if we signed a player with no NBA experience, that would cost at least $0.83M, putting us just a hair over that luxury tax threshold at $124.16M. So to answer your question, I believe that no, they would not be able to get below the luxury tax level by taking that precise approach. There are ways around it, obviously. They could try to get Mike Scott to take something like $4.75M instead of the full MLE. Could be a tough sell since we’re already limited to offering him 3 years (instead of the 4 years that non-taxpaying teams can offer), but 3/$15M is still a great deal for a guy who was on a minimum contract last season. They could also essentially pay someone to take Jodie Meeks’s salary, given that he’s now entirely valueless to us with the addition of Rivers. Would probably cost us a pick and some cash, but that would probably be worth it if we could avoid being repeaters next season when the Supermax kicks in. That one is probably the better plan, as it would give us another roster spot to use on a big with a pulse instead of Meeks and would give us a little flexibility as far as not being pressed directly against the luxury tax threshold. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 8 hours ago, LoganF89 said: correct me if im wrong but. if we sign nerlens noel and do the mid level acception for mike scott, could we stretch mahimis contract and essentially be out of the luxery tax? i believe we are over by 7 mil No. The Wizards are currently already over the luxury tax line, the luxury tax threshold is $123.7 mil and the Wizards currently have $126.6 mil in salaries. Using the numbers stated earlier in this thread, if the Wizards added Mike Scott at $5.3 mil MLE and Noel at $1.9 mil they'd be at $133.8 mil. I believe this would be how stretching Mahinmi would work. According to NBA rules, a stretched player's salary can be spread out over double the remaining year amount, plus one. Mahinmi's contract has 2 years remaining, so that mean's you can stretch him over a 5 year period. According to spotrac his contract is fully guaranteed. He's currently owed $31.4ish mil over the next two years, so stretching him would have him count $6.3ish mil against the Wizards cap for the next FIVE years. That gives them a cap savings of $9.7ish mil this season. Is that worth it? I'd say no. $9.7 mil savings from the $133.8 mil from above is $124.1 mil, or still over the $123.7 mil luxury threshold. And then there's the fact that the Wizards would only have 12 men on the roster after all of that, and they need 15. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 hour ago, e16bball said: If we’re using the mid-level exception on Mike Scott, how are we signing Nerlens Noel? We’re over the cap, exceptions are our only means of signing FAs. Which means the only way we could sign a FA after we’ve burnt up the MLE is to a minimum contract. Is Nerlens Noel really already at the point where he has to take a minimum deal? He might be, because of his injury history, but it just seems odd that he wouldn’t be able to find anyone willing to give him at least a portion of their MLE to take a gamble on him. Anyway, let’s say we give Scott the full taxpayer MLE ($5.33M) and Noel a minimum contract ($1.76M). That takes our cap number to $130.20M with 12 players under contract. If we were to waive and stretch Mahinmi, his remaining $32M would be paid out for cap purposes over 5 years instead of 2. In other words, that would reduce his annual cap hit to $6.40M and would save us $9.60M on the 2018-19 cap. That would drop us to $120.60M with 11 players under contract. The 12th player would be Troy Brown once his contract is made official ($2.73M first year value), which would take us to $123.33M. Which is just below the luxury tax level of $123.73M. But I believe that would still leave us in need of one additional minimum salary player to fill out a 13-man roster — and even if we signed a player with no NBA experience, that would cost at least $0.83M, putting us just a hair over that luxury tax threshold at $124.16M. So to answer your question, I believe that no, they would not be able to get below the luxury tax level by taking that precise approach. There are ways around it, obviously. They could try to get Mike Scott to take something like $4.75M instead of the full MLE. Could be a tough sell since we’re already limited to offering him 3 years (instead of the 4 years that non-taxpaying teams can offer), but 3/$15M is still a great deal for a guy who was on a minimum contract last season. They could also essentially pay someone to take Jodie Meeks’s salary, given that he’s now entirely valueless to us with the addition of Rivers. Would probably cost us a pick and some cash, but that would probably be worth it if we could avoid being repeaters next season when the Supermax kicks in. That one is probably the better plan, as it would give us another roster spot to use on a big with a pulse instead of Meeks and would give us a little flexibility as far as not being pressed directly against the luxury tax threshold. I like the answer for the last paragraph. I think we have to look for a way to move Meeks and throw in our 2nd round draft pick and some cash to make it work. I think re-signing Scott is a must. I’ve felt that way all last season when he proved himself early on when Morris was out, and especially how he played in the playoffs. Scott was our best PF/C in the playoffs. Yes, he’s undersized and not the greatest defensive player but still, he played the best out of the 4 who played. As far as Noel goes, he has been on awful teams his entire career, I would think he’d want that to change. Even though he’s young still, I wonder if he’s at the point in his career (just entering his prime) that he would be willing to take a little less $ just to be on a winner for once and get to play in the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 hour ago, turtle28 said: I like the answer for the last paragraph. I think we have to look for a way to move Meeks and throw in our 2nd round draft pick and some cash to make it work. I think re-signing Scott is a must. I’ve felt that way all last season when he proved himself early on when Morris was out, and especially how he played in the playoffs. Scott was our best PF/C in the playoffs. Yes, he’s undersized and not the greatest defensive player but still, he played the best out of the 4 who played. As far as Noel goes, he has been on awful teams his entire career, I would think he’d want that to change. Even though he’s young still, I wonder if he’s at the point in his career (just entering his prime) that he would be willing to take a little less $ just to be on a winner for once and get to play in the playoffs. Or they could trade Morris. He's a UFA after this season and would give them more cap relief than trading Meeks. You probably also don't have to pay someone to take him from you, they could maybe get a 2nd in return. Oubre could start at one of the Forward spots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: Or they could trade Morris. He's a UFA after this season and would give them more cap relief than trading Meeks. You probably also don't have to pay someone to take him from you, they could maybe get a 2nd in return. Oubre could start at one of the Forward spots. Trading another big and our best big doesn’t make much sense to me. Morris certainly has his issues but creating a huge hole by losing our starting C & PF in one offseason doesn’t make much sense unless you’re getting a starting C/PF back in return. Edited July 2, 2018 by turtle28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, turtle28 said: Trading another big and our best big doesn’t make much sense to mee. Morris certainly has his issues but creating a huge hole by losing our starting C & PF in one offseason doesn’t make much sense to me unless you’re getting a starting C/PF back in return. It doesn't matter, they can't afford to extend him next offseason, they should get what they can for him now. If you think the Wizards books are bad now just remember Wall's supermax kicks in next year. They basically have to be under the luxury tax this year because they'll be over it for the next several years guaranteed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 Just now, MKnight82 said: It doesn't matter, they can't afford to extend him next offseason, they should get what they can for him now. If you think the Wizards books are bad now just remember Wall's supermax kicks in next year. They basically have to be under the luxury tax this year because they'll be over it for the next several years guaranteed. It matters if you want to put a team that’s capable of winning 45+ games on the court. Also, a second round pick isn’t worth crap in the NBA that’s why they’re traded away for cash and back of the roster players yearly. Like I said, if you’re trading away Morris and his expiring contract you had better get a starting big back in return. That big doesn’t have to be the stretch 4/5, 15 pt and 7 reb a game guy like Morris is when he’s healthy but they at least should be a starter that can rebound and play some decent D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, turtle28 said: It matters if you want to put a team that’s capable of winning 45+ games on the court. That roster isn't finishing ahead of the Celtics, 76ers or Raptors. They're a 4 seed at best (again). Yay? 4 minutes ago, turtle28 said: Also, a second round pick isn’t worth crap in the NBA that’s why they’re traded away for cash and back of the roster players yearly. This attitude is why the Wizards have no bench. They are completely capped out and need every draft pick they can get. Satoransky was a 2nd round pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 46 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: That roster isn't finishing ahead of the Celtics, 76ers or Raptors. They're a 4 seed at best (again). Yay? This attitude is why the Wizards have no bench. They are completely capped out and need every draft pick they can get. Satoransky was a 2nd round pick. Sure, if you trade away 2 of your starters for back ups or nothing the team won’t get past those teams. It’s not likely that they get past them with Morris, but’s it’s not impossible. I’ve been an avid Wizards fan and followed the draft for over 20 years. In those 20 years there has been a handful of 2nd round picks that have even made the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 minute ago, turtle28 said: Sure, if you trade away 2 of your starters for back ups or nothing the team won’t get past those teams. It’s not likely that they get past them with Morris, but’s it’s not impossible. I’ve been an avid Wizards fan and followed the draft for over 20 years. In those 20 years there has been a handful of 2nd round picks that have even made the roster. No, a 4 seed is the highest level they will reach with their current roster. I will never understand your content to root for mediocrity. Sometimes you have to take a step back in the present to take two steps forward in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: No, a 4 seed is the highest level they will reach with their current roster. I will never understand your content to root for mediocrity. Sometimes you have to take a step back in the present to take two steps forward in the future. We’ve been over this until we’re both in the face. I will never agree with the position that you’re either elite or nothing in any sport. The Wizards have taken steps back in order to hopefully take a step forward since 1980 and it’s never worked. Talk to me when it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.