David Lee Trade For EVERY Team

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32

User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Tue Aug 19, 2014 12:51 pm
Since our starting PF appears to be on the trade block, I thought it might help if we got a clearer view of exactly what Lee means, in terms of assets on other teams. While SOME teams have multiple methods for trading for Lee, most have salary restrictions that limit them to only one possible deal. All of the following trades assume that Lee is being dealt ALONE - as there are infinitely more possibilities when Golden State adds another player. The problem with adding players is this, though: the Warriors DON'T WANT to trade most of their players that have value on the trade market (Curry, Thompson, Iguodala, and Bogut all appear off-limits, with management wanting an arm-and-a-leg for Harrison Barnes, Draymond Green, and Festus Ezeli).

Since the Warriors are content with EVERY aspect of their roster except for Lee, I thought it would be most worth-while to explore trades that only involve Lee - as the team is looking to upgrade their bench by downgrading Lee's payroll.

The following are trades that green-light on the ESPN Trade Machine:

EASTERN CONFERENCE TEAMS

ATL - Kyle Korver ($6.2 mil) & Jeff Teague ($8 mil)
BOS - Marcus Thornton ($8.5 mil) & Brandon Bass ($6.9 mil)
BKL - Kevin Garnett ($12 mil) & Andre Kirilenko ($3.2 mil)
CHA - Michael Kidd-Gilchrist ($5 mil), Cody Zeller ($4 mil), & Gerald Henderson ($6 mil)
CHI - Taj Gibson ($8 mil), Mike Dunleavy Jr ($3.3 mil), Kirk Hinrich ($2.7 mil), & Tony Snell ($1.4 mil)
CLE - Andreson Varejao ($9.7 mil), Dion Waiters ($4 mil), & John Lucas III ($1.6 mil)
DET - Josh Smith ($13.5 mil) & Kyle Singer ($1.2 mil)
IND - Luis Scola ($4 mil), George Hill ($8 mil), & Chris Copeland ($3 mil)
MIA - Luol Deng ($9.7 mil), Josh McRoberts/Chris Anderson (both $5 mil), & Greg Oden ($1 mil)
MIL - Ersan Illyasova ($7.9 mil) & OJ Mayo ($8 mil)
NYK - JR Smith ($5.9 mil), Samuel Dalembert ($4 mil), Travis Outlaw ($3 mil), & Iman Shumpert ($2.6 mil)
ORL - Aaron Gordon ($4 mil), Tobias Harris ($2.3 mil), Anthony Randolph ($1.8 mil), & $7 mil trade exception
PHI - Thaddeus Young ($9 mil) & Jason Richardson ($6 mil)
TOR - Amir Johnson ($7 mil), Landry Fields ($6.2 mil), Terence Ross ($2 mil)
WAS - Nene Hillario ($13 mil) & Melvin Ely ($2 mil)

WESTERN CONFERENCE TEAMS

DAL - Tyson Chandler ($14.8 mil) OR Monta Ellis ($8.3 mil), Brandan Wright ($5 mil), & Greg Smith ($1 mil)
DEN - Danillo Gallinari ($10.8 mil) & Timothy Mozgov ($4.6 mil)
HOU - Not possible (there's no combination NOT involving Howard or Harden, whom they won't trade for Lee)
LAC - JJ Reddick ($6.7 mil), Jamal Crawford ($5.4 mil), & Jared Dudley ($4.2 mil)
LAL - Steve Nash ($9 mil), John Randle ($2 mil), & Carlos Boozer ($3 mil, can't be traded til DEC)
MEM - Marc Gasol ($15 mil) OR Mike Conley ($8.6 mil) & Tayshaun Prince ($7 mil)
MIN - Kevin Martin ($6.7 mil), Corey Brewer ($4.7 mil), & Luc Rashard Mbah a Moute ($4.3 mil)
NOP - Eric Gordon ($14.9 mil) OR Ryan Anderson ($8.5 mil), Austin Rivers ($2 mil) & Anthony Davis ($5 mil)
OKC - Kendrick Perkins ($9 mil), Jeremy Lamb ($2 mil), Reggie Jackson ($2 mil), & Nick Collison ($2 mil)
PHO - Goran Dragic ($7.5 mil), Alex Len ($3.6 mil), Gerald Green ($3.5 mil)
POR - Robin Lopez ($6.1 mil), Thomas Robinson ($3.6 mil), Dorell Wright ($3 mil), CJ McCollum ($2 mil)
SAC - Carl Landry ($6.5 mil), Derrick Williams ($6.3 mil), Reggie Evans ($1.8 mil)
SAS - Tiago Splitter ($9.2 mil), Danny Green ($4 mil), & Jeff Ayres ($1.8 mil)
UTA - Derrick Favors ($12.9 mil) & Jeremy Evans ($1.8 mil)

******************************************************************************************

Okay, now that we've established a baseline, let's get the obvious out of the way: no team in our division is going to help us out by taking on David Lee's contract, so the Clippers, the Kings, the Lakers, and the Suns are all out.

- Los Angeles Lakers (won't trade John Randle or help a rival)
- Los Angeles Clippers (won't help a rival)
- Sacramento Kings (won't help a rival)
- Phoenix Suns (won't trade Goran Dragic or help a rival)

We can also follow that up by trimming out the teams that would have to deal a top-notch prospect for Lee and that abysmal contract. Round 2 of cuts takes away the teams that would have to deal a supreme asset for Lee:

- Charlotte (won't trade Michael Kidd-Gilchrist for Lee)
- Chicago (won't trade Taj Gibson for Lee)
- Orlando (won't trade Aaron Gordon for Lee)
- Houston (won't trade Dwight Howard or James Harden for Lee)
- Memphis (won't trade Marc Gasol or Mike Conley for Lee)
- New Orleans (won't trade Anthony Davis or Eric Gordon for Lee)

Next, we can remove the teams that tend to overvalue the guys on their own roster. Trading with these guys is usually more trouble than it's worth; the Warriors are trying to come out on top in a Lee trade and these guys are hysterically delusional in terms of who they think is going to be a star in this league:

- San Antonio (likes Splitter too much)
- Utah (has an inflated idea of what Favors is worth)

Lastly, we take away the teams that don't have any use for a player like Lee; either because their system doesn't cater to him or because they've already got a guy to play his position:

- Atlanta (already has Horford & Milsapp, won't wanna pay big money for a bench big)
- Dallas (already has Dirk at PF, won't wanna play Dirk or Lee at center)
- Indiana (already has David West at PF, won't acquire Lee to play him off the bench)
- New York (already has Amar'e at PF, won't wanna play STAT or Lee at center)
- Portland (already has LaMarcus at PF, won't wanna play LA or Lee at center)

******************************************************************************************

Now that the cutting process is over, we're left with 13 potential destinations for David Lee. So the next step is the opposite of cutting; we bring the teams MOST INTERESTED in acquiring Lee's services to the forefront. In my opinion, the following teams would be most interested and surrender the best overall package for a chance to swing DLee on their squad:

(1) The Miami Heat - Luol Deng (SF), Josh McRoberts (PF/C), Greg Oden (C)

Any trade with the Heat would have to wait until December, as Deng signed on as a free agent and won't be available in trades until December 15th. But Miami is retooling themselves in the wake of losing LeBron and David Lee is precisely the kind of player they'd love to pair in the front court with Chris Bosh to form a modern NBA big-man tandem with no real center. Offensively, Bosh is more perimeter-oriented, but has a supreme back-to-the-basket game... whereas Lee is more paint-oriented, but excels in a face-up position where he can put the ball on the floor; not to mention, he's learned to live on scraps and can find 6 points a night on offensive rebounds, giving Bosh the main spotlight in terms of possessions, but ultimately ending up with similar point totals. It would be awfully tough to game plan for both guys. Defensively, Lee is a wide-body who prefers defensive rebounding after pushing ogres off the low-block. Bosh is a shot-blocker, but he lacks width and has trouble putting weight on bigger players. His disinterest in rebounding would only fuel Lee, whose a top-notch rebound hound on the glass. I'd estimate Miami's new front court would finish the year with stat-lines resembling this: Bosh (24 points, 8 boards, 1.5 blocks), Lee (18 points, 11 boards, 3.3 assists). In the imploded Leastern Conference, this team would cruise to a top 4 seed with Lee playing his typical 80 games, plus playoff showings.

Golden State, meanwhile, acquires the services of Deng to become their stretch-4; at 6'9", he's long enough to run-and-gun with Golden State's high-octane offense and he's a good enough defender to disrupt most 4's. McRoberts is the athletic bench big that Golden State has missed; providing the same rebounding as Lee at a shred of the cost, while never expecting a starting spot. He'd likely split time between backup center and backup 4, with Ezeli and Green providing more bench minutes at both respective spots. Oden is likely never to suit up for Golden State; his place in the trade is a mere salary filler. The Heat like this trade because it gives them a productive player who will expire in 2 years, when LeBron goes back on the open market. Golden State likes it because they turn Lee's big contract into a smaller one (Deng), while reloading their bench with proven gritty veterans who would come in handy around playoff time.

(2) Cleveland Cavaliers - Anderson Varejao, Dion Waiters, John Lucas III

It's LeBron time and LeBron time means stuffing as much talent onto Cleveland's starting 5 as is humanly possible. Enter David Lee; a perfect front court compliment to LeBron James and Kevin Love; someone who doesn't demand touches, but finds points. Someone who can take over the offensive rebounding duties while Love & James play pick-and-roll 20 feet from the basket. Someone who can step in and provide a hard screen when Love goes down with another injury - or simply takes a breather. Lee at center, Love at PF, and James at the 3, with Kyrie Irving running the show, is simply too big, too athletic, and features too many hustle players to fail. Lee's infectious energy is a welcomed addition to Cleveland, whose trying to put a ring on it after 7 previous years of failure in LeBron V.1. The loss of Varejao's defense hurts, but Cleveland isn't planning on locking teams down next year; they plan on averaging 140 points per game. Lee adds to that game plan in a way Varejao could never dream of doing.

Meanwhile, Golden State acquires Varejao to start next to Bogut, creating the most intimidating front court in the Western Conference. Teams would refuse to go inside on the Warriors' twin-towers, not to mention the opposition's offensive rebounding becomes imaginary on a nightly basis. Dion Waiters refused to accept a bench role in Cleveland because he viewed himself as superior to Andrew Wiggins and Kyrie Irving; he won't have any such delusions in Golden State with All-NBA point guard, Stephen Curry, and budding superstar, Klay Thompson, not to mention, Team USA veteran, Andre Iguodala, holding down the back court. Waiters forms a shock troop corp with Shaun Livingston off the bench, responsible for the B-squad's scoring, and chips in 14 points off the bench in 20+ minus per. John Lucas is an injury reserve who only sees time if Livingston goes down. With Waiters cranking up the bench, Golden State's current roster - including Draymond Green, Brandon Rush, & Mo Speights - become even more offensive imposing, as they'll have the luxury of playing off double-teams in a way that nobody on Golden State's bench last year would inspire. If Kerr sells Waiters on 6th Man of the Year and Ginobli-style glory, the Warriors could reach as high as a #2 seed.

(3) Milwaukee Bucks - Ersan Illyasova & OJ Mayo

The Bucks struck gold in the 2014 draft by tapping local Midwestern talent, Jabari Parker, to rebuild their team around. When Golden State struck gold, themselves, with Stephen Curry in the 2009 draft, one of the first moves they made was going after a team-first, hardened, ra-ra guy by the name of David Lee. And in the years since, nearly ALL of Golden State's rookies have panned out, the Warriors feature a high-intensity, hustle attitude that mirrors' Lee's, and the Warriors went from being door mats to relevant once again. The Bucks have a young core that desperately needs an ideal to cling to; Brandon Knight is a decent PG that may one day grow into a top 10 guy in the league. Larry Sanders is already a monster down low and Jabari Parker figures to be another stud who might be Milwaukee's first home grown scoring all-star since Glenn Robinson. Sticking Lee on that team makes them better. A LOT better. But the intrigue comes when you add another prospect to the deal in Harrison Barnes.

The Bucks are rebuilding. No doubt, they'll tank another year in hopes of finding more young talent to surround Parker with. Adding Barnes shortens the time frame and gives them more certainty in terms of finding somebody to compliment Parker with. Both guys are athletic, both shoot the lights out, both are prototypical wing size. Barnes flashed defensive stopper capabilities as a rookie (not so much last year) that the Bucks might like to explore to save Parker's legs. And if Barnes gets involved in the deal, so does John Henson for Golden State.

The Warriors, potentially, could end up Henson as a young bench big, Illyasova as their long-covetted stretch 4 off the bench, and OJ Mayo as instant-offense amongst the backup brigade. Turning Lee & Barnes into 3 studly bench pieces would be the best deal the Warriors could hope for... and seeing as it gifts Milwaukee with another prospect (Barnes) and a veteran with a clean nose and a reputation for developing talent and turning them into good character guys (Lee), it's a trade that I can easily see becoming a reality. The addition of Henson makes a Bogut injury far less scary and, as we saw in 2013, when you add more shooters to this Golden State team, they become far more dangerous.

(4) Minnesota Timberwolves - Kevin Martin, Luc Rashard Mbah a Moute, & Corey Brewer

We said it the whole time Kevin Love was on the market; Minnesota simply can't attract marquee talent to sign with them via free agency. Their roster improvements must come through the draft or via trade. David Lee would step onto the wrecked TWolves franchise in the wake of losing Love as their immediate best player. He'd provide the veteran leadership (detailed above in the Bucks' trade) to Minny's new young pieces (Wiggins, Bennett). And he'd pair famously with Nikolai Pekovic, whose everything Lee is not. Minnesota, like Milwaukee, isn't done playing the tank game. They want another star prospect to pair with Wiggins and give Rubio some targets to find on the run. The fire sale is coming... and there's no sense in waiting until it becomes public knowledge.

Martin has 4 years left on a laughable contract (but the saving grace is that it's still a smaller deal than Lee's). Brewer and Mbah a Moute would be dowry for taking on such a horrendous salary for such a long period of time. All 3 men would slide into an immediate role on the Warriors' bench: Martin would be the floor-stretcher and main gun on the B-Squad, Brewer is there to lock down any player the Warriors need him to on the wing, and Mbah a Moute is a 2-way player who enjoys the up-and-down tempo that the Warriors play and would find a plethora of minutes off the pine at 2 different positions. The Warriors become 2 deep at literally EVERY spot (3 deep at 3 spots, in fact). If you can get Minny to sign off on this deal, there's literally no reason Golden State would ever say no. Even Martin's contract isn't THAT unappealing.

(5) Toronto Raptors - Amir Johnson, Landry Fields, & Terence Ross

The wild card in this deal is how much the Raptors value Ross, who seemed to come into his own last year. No doubt, they'd be acquiring a huge upgrade for their starting lineup who, along with DeRozen, Lowry, and Valenciunas, would have a pretty clean cake-walk to the playoffs in the Leastern Conference. Lee is this team's immediate star on the glass, 2nd best scorer (probably their best overall, but they'd give DeRozen more looks), and vocal, veteran leader who would be appreciated in Canada far more than he's currently valued in the Bay.

The Warriors hit the jackpot here: Johnson can spell both the center and PF position behind Bogut & Green, Fields is a versatile player who can fill in at either wing spot alongside the Warriors' shooters, and Ross is a prospect with immediate pay-off potential who could end the year in 6MotY discussions out West.

******************************************************************************************

Which trade do you like best?

Do you have a deal that isn't listed here?

Or is all this Lee trade talk fruitless because we'll end up keeping him anyway?

Discuss.
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 644
» Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:27 pm
Nice work 32. You've been busy. I love speculating on possible trades. I'm on my lunch break at the moment so I'll get back to you later on with my suggestions. So far, I like your Bucks trade. That option ticks all the boxes.
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 644
» Wed Aug 20, 2014 7:30 am
I still like the idea of trading with Utah.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=pg7rt4u

The above mentioned trade gives Utah a better team with Lee and Barnes while we get a big, young PF/C who can defend plus some junk on expiring contracts that we can dump so that we have money for Thompson and Green who are both in line for a big pay rise next season.

Rookie
Posts: 58
» Wed Aug 20, 2014 9:41 am
Clearly the Bucks-trade (Both Mayo-Ilyasava straight up for Lee or Mayo-Ilyasova-Henson). Henson is freakishly athletic and may have the higher ceiling that Sanders while Mayo and Ilyasova are proven scorers. But I believe this trade to be too good to be true tbh. As you said, had it been the summer 2013-Barnes, this would be a different story, but teams around the league know almost for a fact that he wont be that next franchise-guy.

The other one of your proposed trade options would be the Miami-one: I feel like with Thompson, Iggy and Deng, its straight down perimeter lockdown and all can spot up from 3. Problem is if Deng can hold his own against the best 4 down low, but the league is changing to be more perimeter orientated. But I dont know. That would make us a LEGITIMATE thread in the West as I value Deng higher than Lee at this point.

The Utah-trade that Ringo, maybe! I like Favors and he will undoubtedly be a allstar if he doesnt **** it up for himself, but we would trade quite a bit assets for this season and if 1 or 2 goes down, our bench is very slim
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 5907
» Fri Aug 22, 2014 2:01 am
I thin the Miami Heat trade would be content with the pieces they have.

Allthough David Lee playing alongside Bosh would be a pretty good spacing combo with Dwayne Wade, Dlee42 would do the stuff Bosh refuses to do and that is hit the glass.

So why wouldn't Detroit do that trade again? Less years on David Lee contract.
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 708
» Fri Aug 22, 2014 7:11 am
trade an 18 pt & 10 reb 52% fg locker room leader who has great chemistry with superstar Curry for scrubs? don't see the point if we're trying to win now.
Lee's got more on-court value to the Warriors than trade value... until he becomes an expiring.
Is Lee a superstar? no. Is he a bit overpaid? sure. Is he trash? hell no. He is what he is, a solid and skilled allstar/borderline allstar PF.
but everyone that list save Al Horford-type talent is a downgrade.
Didn't we learn from Cohan? the philosophy of trading for cap space while downgrading talent (espec. while in "win-now") = fast track to the lottery.
User avatar

Rookie
Posts: 130
» Sun Aug 24, 2014 1:23 am
I agree with Rocky. We got used to the idea of trading Lee to get Kevin Love. In that scenario the Warriors are getting another power forward to replace him. Now that they know the Love deal is not going to happen, why would they want to trade Lee? They need him. This is not a team that can afford to lose any of its inside assets. Unless there's a deal that returns another player at his position who will give them what he gives. And I just don't see that happening now.
User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Sun Aug 31, 2014 3:10 pm
Here's the thing with trading David Lee:

The team doesn't want to ship him out because they think they can replace his talent. An 18-and-10 big with terrific passing skills and handles probably won't be starting at the 4 in the wake of us getting rid of Lee; but the problem is his contract. Lee is set to make over $17 million next year... and he's got another year after that at the same amount.

Why are the Warriors suddenly concerned with Lee's contract?

1, because of their budding star at SG. Klay Thompson's extension is coming and, if the FIBA Basketball tourney is any indication, he's gonna get max dollars. With Andrew Bogut making a baseline of about $13 million (with the potential to go all the way up to $15), Steph Curry making $12 mill, Andre Iguodala making $13 mill, and Lee making $17 million next year, that's roughly $55 million of a salary cap that won't quite make it to $70 million spread between 4 players. If Thompson gets his full extension (about $14 million per year), the Warriors will be perennial luxury tax payers with nothing to speak of left for a bench.

If you deal Lee and give the majority of his money to Thompson, you maintain a small amount of flexibility to field the rest of the team and stay competitive. Isaiah Thomas in the mid-2000's showed how crippling it is to drag a team into the luxury tax and have zero maneuverability to improve the rest of the roster. Nowadays, the luxury tax is even more suffocating and the penalty for stuffing the salary cap is more severe.

So, long story short... the team doesn't really want to trade David Lee. They kinda have to.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 22190
» Mon Sep 01, 2014 7:04 am
With salary cap set to go up to near 80 million in a year it should be no issue. Klay and DGreen will get there's within a year but the team should be alright. It is in two years, if Lee is still here, that will be interesting to see how much Lee resigns for because he'll be about 33 years old and so shouldn't get what he is making now but could do with the increase salary cap.
User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:42 am
I was referring to the soft cap, which is going to be just under $64 million this year.

The Warriors have demonstrated that they won't be a team habitually being penalized by pushing the boundaries of the hard cap every year - their moves to drop Jenkins and Tyler two years ago for virtually nothing attests to that.

Retaining Lee while resigning Thompson, Green, and Ezeli, would push the Warriors past the soft cap and into luxury tax territory... And they won't pay the absurd rolling taxes annually, so a shuffle of resources is gonna need to happen sooner than later. And between Curry, Iguodala, Bogut, Lee, and Thompson, David Lee has unfortunately been deemed the expendable one.
User avatar

Rookie
Posts: 130
» Thu Sep 04, 2014 1:59 pm
I hear what you're saying as far as juggling salaries 32. But if Lee is gone, that is leaving a pretty big hole. It's going to have to be filled somehow. If not, I would not expect the team to perform as well as it has. If it comes down to it, another possibility is letting Iguadala go instead. Some may argue that Iguadala gives the team a lot more defensively and is therefore more valuable, but a wing player is easier to replace than a power forward.
User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Sun Sep 14, 2014 10:37 am
Lemmie just say: I'm not a fan of trading Lee. I think he's a tremendous catalyst to this offense that makes ours as pretty as any on the scoring end. He's a natural passer, a smart player, he can take over when needed, and he's taylor made for put backs and close lay-ins.

But due to salary reasons, management is looking to trade him.

And the reason they'll deal him instead of Iggy is because Iggy's still 4 years out from being an expirer. Lee's only 1 year away. It's a matter of trade value. Our core's value stacks up like this:

1) Steph Curry - A+... really, any team would be happy to trade for him
2) Klay Thompson - A-... not many better prospects in the league; rapidly becoming a star
3) David Lee - B... An automatic 19 and 10, plus only 1 year away from clearing major space on the payroll
4) Andre Iguodala - C... Undeniably, a good player to have, but that contract is grotesque and nobody will give you equal value for him
5) Andrew Bogut - D... Such a terrible injury-risk, nobody will trade you anything of value for him.

The team thinks it can replace more of Lee's value via trade than it could with Bogut or Iguodala... and they won't surrender Thompson or Curry for any reason. Therefore, Lee's the odd man out.
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 708
» Sun Sep 14, 2014 10:30 pm
I need a refesher course on the salary cap for ssho. But as for me and this year, I like our squad. Anyone pushing the advocation (that a word?) for a trade of Lee needs to be asked of the inevitable "AND DEN??" question that Lee's void would cause. I can't speak about the salary cap, 'cause I have no effin clue, but 'far as I know we got a complete squad under contract this year and I like our team. I have confidence in Bob Meyers and Co. to get creative in ensuring we keep the core together. Maybe Klay Thompson takes a couple mil under his value, etc. Warriors gotta show up this year and really establish themselves as real contenders. I just think the team as-is -- with Lee -- is of more WINNING value than what any trade would bring. I don't want the Warriors to get ahead of themselves in FUTURE talk and $$$ reasons, because their window is NOW and we should embrace that at least for what it is.

disclaimer: I fully understand if that made no sense at all lol
User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Fri Sep 26, 2014 4:53 pm
rockyBeli wrote:I need a refesher course on the salary cap for ssho. But as for me and this year, I like our squad. Anyone pushing the advocation (that a word?) for a trade of Lee needs to be asked of the inevitable "AND DEN??" question that Lee's void would cause. I can't speak about the salary cap, 'cause I have no effin clue, but 'far as I know we got a complete squad under contract this year and I like our team. I have confidence in Bob Meyers and Co. to get creative in ensuring we keep the core together. Maybe Klay Thompson takes a couple mil under his value, etc. Warriors gotta show up this year and really establish themselves as real contenders. I just think the team as-is -- with Lee -- is of more WINNING value than what any trade would bring. I don't want the Warriors to get ahead of themselves in FUTURE talk and $$$ reasons, because their window is NOW and we should embrace that at least for what it is.

disclaimer: I fully understand if that made no sense at all lol

Here's the basics of the current (2014-'15) salary cap:

1) There are actually 3 caps, in terms of salary: a minimum, a soft cap and a hard cap. They break down like this:

(a) The minimum amount an NBA franchise can pay out to it's players is approximately $56.8 million. This means that no team in the NBA is allowed to field a squad for less than nearly $57 million. They do this to ensure proper league competition: if one team has the cap maxed out and it's playing against a team that's only signing D-Leaguers and minimum wage talent, the numbers heavily slide towards the team that's maxed out. This is why teams usually tank by acquiring bad contracts or expirers before signing nothing but D-Leaguers; because you're technically not allowed to just forfeit games by employing submissively bad players. A team riding at the league-standard minimum payroll is shelling out roughly $4.7 million per player, on average. To use a real-life example, right now the Utah Jazz payroll is about $57 million (the minimum).

(b) The soft cap is what 99% of people are referring to when they say "the salary cap." The soft cap is the threshold before which you start paying luxury tax for your players. Anything between the minimum and the soft cap (which will sit at $63.065 million next year) costs the team nothing in league penalties. Two seasons back, you'll recall the Warriors traded Charles Jenkins and Jeremy Tyler for, virtually, nothing. That was to avoid going over the soft cap and paying luxury taxes. In years past, overtaking the soft cap simply meant that you paid $1 to the league for every $1 you spent on players (i.e., if the cap was at $60 million and you spent $65 million, it would cost you $10 million - not $5 - to buy that extra talent; as $5 million went to the players you were paying and $5 million went to the league's competition committee for exceeding the cap). Over time, it became obvious that exceeding the salary cap was basically an automatic ticket to the playoffs, so big market teams making a lotta money on merchandise (like the Lakers, the Knicks, the Bulls, the Heat, etc) would spend over the cap annually to ensure their team always stayed relevant and enjoyed commercial brand success, as well as victory on the court. During the last CBA negotiations, the small market teams insisted that David Stern do something to dissuade big market teams from continually out-spending them in the free agency market place (you'll recall, teams like Orlando, Milwaukee, Utah, Minnesota, etc, have typically been farm systems for players to get their rookie kinks worked out before signing huge contracts with big brand teams after their rookie rights expired - think of Shaq leaving Orlando for LA. The solution that emerged was what's being called "rolling luxury tax penalties"... Now, instead of paying $1 for every $1 you spend on players, you'll pay $1 the first year... and then, if you exceed the cap next year, it'll cost you $1.5... and the year after, if you exceed the cap, it'll cost you $3... etc, etc. Now, these are not exact numbers: the real luxury tax is calculated based on the BRI and what your team paid the previous year. For exact numbers, consult this page:

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q21

But, yeah. The point is, if you exceed the cap multiple years in a row NOWADAYS, you'll be paying a repeater tax and a higher luxury than previous years based on incremental salary increases.

The short version is this: exceeding the cap for one year costs a HELLUVA lot less than doing it for multiple years - so, in terms of the Golden State Warriors, since Steph Curry, David Lee, Andrew Bogut, and Andre Iguodala will comprise about $51 million a year until 2017, adding Thompson for an estimated $12 million per year will put the Warriors AT the soft cap for the next 2 years... and we haven't even filled out the remaining 7 roster spots yet. Perhaps the Warriors COULD field that lineup, if they thought their starting 5 could all log 45 minutes a game and never encounter an injury... but since that's extremely unlikely, they're also concerned with their depth. Right now, they're on the hook for the next 3 years with Shaun Livingston for over $5 mill a pop... Barnes & Ezeli will cost between $4 mill and $8 mill, combined, during that time... Mo Speights makes $3 mill per in 2 of those years... and, oh by the way, if the Warriors wanna stall negotiations with Thompson and simply extend him a qualifying offer after this season, they can - but they have no such power over Draymond Green (who expires after THIS YEAR and will get a HUGE pay upgrade from his current $900K salary), so unless you wanna let your glue guy who can guard 4 positions go, you're gonna need to find another $6 million a year to pay him, too.

Basically, the reason the Warriors wanna shed Lee's salary is because he makes it IMPOSSIBLE to retain Thompson, long-term, and still be able to field a team that has playoff-worthy depth. Splitting Lee into 2 or 3 bench players allows you to address your depth issue, it lets you resign Thompson, and it lets you resign Draymond Green (while, at the same time, upgrading him to the starting 5, solving a potential hole left by Lee).

I agree with you; Lee is a hugely talented piece of the puzzle. I think he makes this team TREMENDOUSLY GOOD. But, unfortunately, I believe his window on this roster only has one more year to it (at most). He's one of my favorite personal players; but I believe the bean-counters in management will tell you that he creates more problems (monetary-wise) than he solves. That's the reason the Warriors are shopping Lee.

(c) The max is going to be $77 million this year. That means NO TEAM under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES can spend over $77 million this upcoming season.

As of RIGHT NOW, the Warriors are at $71 million - source: http://hoopshype.com/salaries/golden_state.htm

Next year, Draymond Green comes off the books, Brandon Rush has a player option, Speights, Barnes, and Ezeli all have team options, and Klay Thompson (as well as Nemanja Nedovic) will both be due qualifying offers. Meanwhile, David Lee will be making $15.5 million (which could go up to $17, with incentives). That much money could buy you both Thompson and Green. Personally, I'm more in favor of keeping THOSE TWO than JUST Lee.

Alright, that's about the extent of my salary cap knowledge for today.

All Star
Posts: 2885
» Mon Nov 03, 2014 10:20 pm
While the beginning of the season has been exciting to watch, it is more than ironic that the team is on a 3-game win streak while David Lee is out with an injury. I cannot help but think about the playoffs of two seasons ago and how the team had actually improved and played better when Lee was out. With both Barnes and Green, the team can better stretch the floor on offense as well as play better defense.

Let's face it, Coach Jackson did nobody any favors with the way that he had coddled Lee last season. It is time for David Lee to man up, put on his big boy pants and learn how to play defense as well as pass the ball!

32 wrote:
rockyBeli wrote:I need a refesher course on the salary cap for ssho. But as for me and this year, I like our squad. Anyone pushing the advocation (that a word?) for a trade of Lee needs to be asked of the inevitable "AND DEN??" question that Lee's void would cause. I can't speak about the salary cap, 'cause I have no effin clue, but 'far as I know we got a complete squad under contract this year and I like our team. I have confidence in Bob Meyers and Co. to get creative in ensuring we keep the core together. Maybe Klay Thompson takes a couple mil under his value, etc. Warriors gotta show up this year and really establish themselves as real contenders. I just think the team as-is -- with Lee -- is of more WINNING value than what any trade would bring. I don't want the Warriors to get ahead of themselves in FUTURE talk and $$$ reasons, because their window is NOW and we should embrace that at least for what it is.

disclaimer: I fully understand if that made no sense at all lol

Here's the basics of the current (2014-'15) salary cap:

1) There are actually 3 caps, in terms of salary: a minimum, a soft cap and a hard cap. They break down like this:

(a) The minimum amount an NBA franchise can pay out to it's players is approximately $56.8 million. This means that no team in the NBA is allowed to field a squad for less than nearly $57 million. They do this to ensure proper league competition: if one team has the cap maxed out and it's playing against a team that's only signing D-Leaguers and minimum wage talent, the numbers heavily slide towards the team that's maxed out. This is why teams usually tank by acquiring bad contracts or expirers before signing nothing but D-Leaguers; because you're technically not allowed to just forfeit games by employing submissively bad players. A team riding at the league-standard minimum payroll is shelling out roughly $4.7 million per player, on average. To use a real-life example, right now the Utah Jazz payroll is about $57 million (the minimum).

(b) The soft cap is what 99% of people are referring to when they say "the salary cap." The soft cap is the threshold before which you start paying luxury tax for your players. Anything between the minimum and the soft cap (which will sit at $63.065 million next year) costs the team nothing in league penalties. Two seasons back, you'll recall the Warriors traded Charles Jenkins and Jeremy Tyler for, virtually, nothing. That was to avoid going over the soft cap and paying luxury taxes. In years past, overtaking the soft cap simply meant that you paid $1 to the league for every $1 you spent on players (i.e., if the cap was at $60 million and you spent $65 million, it would cost you $10 million - not $5 - to buy that extra talent; as $5 million went to the players you were paying and $5 million went to the league's competition committee for exceeding the cap). Over time, it became obvious that exceeding the salary cap was basically an automatic ticket to the playoffs, so big market teams making a lotta money on merchandise (like the Lakers, the Knicks, the Bulls, the Heat, etc) would spend over the cap annually to ensure their team always stayed relevant and enjoyed commercial brand success, as well as victory on the court. During the last CBA negotiations, the small market teams insisted that David Stern do something to dissuade big market teams from continually out-spending them in the free agency market place (you'll recall, teams like Orlando, Milwaukee, Utah, Minnesota, etc, have typically been farm systems for players to get their rookie kinks worked out before signing huge contracts with big brand teams after their rookie rights expired - think of Shaq leaving Orlando for LA. The solution that emerged was what's being called "rolling luxury tax penalties"... Now, instead of paying $1 for every $1 you spend on players, you'll pay $1 the first year... and then, if you exceed the cap next year, it'll cost you $1.5... and the year after, if you exceed the cap, it'll cost you $3... etc, etc. Now, these are not exact numbers: the real luxury tax is calculated based on the BRI and what your team paid the previous year. For exact numbers, consult this page:

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q21

But, yeah. The point is, if you exceed the cap multiple years in a row NOWADAYS, you'll be paying a repeater tax and a higher luxury than previous years based on incremental salary increases.

The short version is this: exceeding the cap for one year costs a HELLUVA lot less than doing it for multiple years - so, in terms of the Golden State Warriors, since Steph Curry, David Lee, Andrew Bogut, and Andre Iguodala will comprise about $51 million a year until 2017, adding Thompson for an estimated $12 million per year will put the Warriors AT the soft cap for the next 2 years... and we haven't even filled out the remaining 7 roster spots yet. Perhaps the Warriors COULD field that lineup, if they thought their starting 5 could all log 45 minutes a game and never encounter an injury... but since that's extremely unlikely, they're also concerned with their depth. Right now, they're on the hook for the next 3 years with Shaun Livingston for over $5 mill a pop... Barnes & Ezeli will cost between $4 mill and $8 mill, combined, during that time... Mo Speights makes $3 mill per in 2 of those years... and, oh by the way, if the Warriors wanna stall negotiations with Thompson and simply extend him a qualifying offer after this season, they can - but they have no such power over Draymond Green (who expires after THIS YEAR and will get a HUGE pay upgrade from his current $900K salary), so unless you wanna let your glue guy who can guard 4 positions go, you're gonna need to find another $6 million a year to pay him, too.

Basically, the reason the Warriors wanna shed Lee's salary is because he makes it IMPOSSIBLE to retain Thompson, long-term, and still be able to field a team that has playoff-worthy depth. Splitting Lee into 2 or 3 bench players allows you to address your depth issue, it lets you resign Thompson, and it lets you resign Draymond Green (while, at the same time, upgrading him to the starting 5, solving a potential hole left by Lee).

I agree with you; Lee is a hugely talented piece of the puzzle. I think he makes this team TREMENDOUSLY GOOD. But, unfortunately, I believe his window on this roster only has one more year to it (at most). He's one of my favorite personal players; but I believe the bean-counters in management will tell you that he creates more problems (monetary-wise) than he solves. That's the reason the Warriors are shopping Lee.

(c) The max is going to be $77 million this year. That means NO TEAM under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES can spend over $77 million this upcoming season.

As of RIGHT NOW, the Warriors are at $71 million - source: http://hoopshype.com/salaries/golden_state.htm

Next year, Draymond Green comes off the books, Brandon Rush has a player option, Speights, Barnes, and Ezeli all have team options, and Klay Thompson (as well as Nemanja Nedovic) will both be due qualifying offers. Meanwhile, David Lee will be making $15.5 million (which could go up to $17, with incentives). That much money could buy you both Thompson and Green. Personally, I'm more in favor of keeping THOSE TWO than JUST Lee.

Alright, that's about the extent of my salary cap knowledge for today.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests