Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 317

Thread: Ujiri is trying to get in the draft, who you want?

  1. #261
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    This is the type of year that 2nd round picks may have more value than late first picks. The value of non-guarantee contracts vs guaranteed contracts is important. Wouldn't be surprised if teams move late first round picks for 2nd round picks, or just sell selections.

  2. #262
    Raptors Republic Superstar Chr1s1anL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario
    Posts
    3,885
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    In addition to the Pacers' Jimmer discussions, sources say Indiana has made the No. 23 pick available in hopes that an interested party would be willing to take on the contract of Gerald Green for the right to acquire Indy's pick.

  3. #263
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    744
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
    In addition to the Pacers' Jimmer discussions, sources say Indiana has made the No. 23 pick available in hopes that an interested party would be willing to take on the contract of Gerald Green for the right to acquire Indy's pick.
    We've gotta send Kleiza their way for that pick and Green.

    Wouldn't even mind Green's athleticism off the bench at the 3 behind Gay.

  4. #264
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    If they're trying to get rid of Green they wouldn't want Kleiza back. Sounds like a financial/personnel move. Probably want cash and player rights.

  5. #265
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,110
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Okay, having read this, I will get openly sentimental and say I want Ujiri to get his hands on a second-rounder for Dwayne Davis. You can't buy character, and this guy has it:

    When the Chicago Bulls offered to send a limo to the airport to drive Davis to the team facility for his workout earlier this month, he told them such a lavish expense was unnecessary and he'd just take a cab. He also ordered the cheapest item on the menu -- a personal cheese pizza -- when Bulls executives took him to dinner that night.

    "He said he knows eating out is expensive and he wanted to help save the Bulls some money," said Sam Cipriano, player relations coordinator for Edge Sports International. "Not too many kids like him out there."

  6. #266
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    338
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote blackjitsu wrote: View Post
    This is the type of year that 2nd round picks may have more value than late first picks. The value of non-guarantee contracts vs guaranteed contracts is important. Wouldn't be surprised if teams move late first round picks for 2nd round picks, or just sell selections.
    I disagree with this reasoning. Here are the NBA minimum salaries, which depend on how many years of experience they have:

    R $490,180
    1 $788,872
    2 $884,293
    3 $916,099
    4 $947,907

    And here's the rookie scale for the #30 pick this year:

    R $880,600
    1 $920,200
    2 $959,800 (team option)
    3 $1,732,439 (team option)
    4 $2,598,658 (qualifying offer)

    (For cap boffins: the amounts listed here are actually 120% of the rookie scale, because that's what almost all rookies sign for. It could theoretically be as little as 80% of scale, or two thirds of what I've listed in the table, though I believe it'd still have to be at least the minimum.)

    So a late first round draft pick costs almost exactly the same amount as a second round pick on a minimum deal, only has two years guaranteed, AND is stuck with the rookie scale. To top it off, if you like the guy you can keep him for four years! Second round picks virtually never sign deals longer than 3 years, with 2 years being the most common, and they get to negotiate their own contracts (c.f. Nikola Pekovic, who managed to get 3 years, $13.5 million--that's more than the 3rd overall pick gets!). And generally, you want to take a look at your draft pick for at least a season before deciding he's not even worth minimum wage, so the advantage from not guaranteeing the contract is that you get to dump one year of minimum salary contract. Big effin' deal.

    So, if you draft a guy at #31 instead of #30, you're getting him locked up for 2 fewer years, you have much less flexibility in retaining the player, and you're only saving, at best, one year of minimum salary. Worst case, i.e. with a euro player or someone who's got offers from euro clubs (hint: this includes most top 60 NBA prospects if they want it), they've got leverage to demand a higher salary and guaranteed years anyway, and you actually end up paying them more, with more guaranteed years, than you would have paid the first round guy.

    edited to add: The exception to this rule is if you're drafting a Euro guy who's already making 2 or 3 times what the late-1st rookie scale pays, and more so if he's got a buyout. Then you might want the flexibility to negotiate a bigger contract. (If Ricky Rubio slipped to #30 in some bizarro universe, he would have never come over, because his $8.2 million buyout would cost him twice as much as he'd make in his first 4 years--he'd be going into debt $1 million per year instead of getting paid!) But that has nothing to do with saving money, or guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed.
    Last edited by tkfu; Tue Jun 25th, 2013 at 02:49 PM.

  7. #267
    Raptors Republic Veteran ceez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,736
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote magoon wrote: View Post
    Okay, having read this, I will get openly sentimental and say I want Ujiri to get his hands on a second-rounder for Dwayne Davis. You can't buy character, and this guy has it:
    Jesus Christ. His story nearly brought a tear to my eye. Kind of reminds me of Jimmy Butler who i begged BC (in my head and on this board) to draft.
    @jerboat

  8. #268
    Raptors Republic Veteran ceez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,736
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    question, have the raptors worked out anyone?
    @jerboat

  9. #269
    Raptors Republic Superstar isaacthompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Oakville
    Posts
    3,555
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote ceez wrote: View Post
    question, have the raptors worked out anyone?
    my guess is no
    Twitter - @thekid_it

  10. #270
    Raptors Republic Veteran ceez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,736
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Brandon Paul, the next Danny Green?

    Nice breakdown at draft express

    http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Brandon-Paul-5792/

    peep this though

    Standing 6'4 with long arms and a strong frame, Paul's combination of speed and explosiveness remain a big part of his NBA potential, just as they did early in his career. He may be slightly undersized for a shooting guard, but he certainly has all the other physical tools common amongst two guards at the NBA level.

    With Meyers Leonard entering the 2012 NBA Draft, the Illini had to rely heavily on their guards this season, and that led to a significant change in what Paul was asked to do on the offensive end. He remained the focal point of the team's offensive attack, but was relied upon heavily to showcase his athleticism and create his own shot compared to his junior season, when spot-ups and off-screen opportunities accounted for a much more significant portion of his possessions.

    The key to Paul's productivity over the past two seasons, and one of his more intriguing qualities as an NBA prospect, is his ability to create his own shot. Possessing a quick first step, an explosive burst when attacking off the dribble, and a strong frame to exploit smaller guards, Paul can shake defenders one-on-one and turn the corner operating off ball screens. He's a capable ball-handler, even running the point for stretches this season, but has room to improve on not over-dribbling and become more adept at playing at different speeds to help prepare for the quickness of NBA defenders.

    Once Paul finds open space, he's explosive enough to play above the rim and possesses sound shooting mechanics. When he was playing with patience and his shot was falling, he was a handful for opposing defenses to contain at the college level, posting a memorable 43-point outing against Ohio State in 2012 and a 35-point performance against Gonzaga this year. The issue for the talented guard has always been his decision-making and the consistency with which he is able to make plays because of it.

    For someone who shoots as many 3-pointers as he does (nearly seven per game, representing over half of his overall field goal attempts), NBA scouts surely would have liked to see Paul hit more than 32% from beyond the arc. Ranking in the bottom 20 of our top-100 in true shooting percentage, Paul's shot selection is his biggest weakness and the main culprit of his mediocre scoring efficiency. Nearly 70% of his shots are jumpers, with more than half of those attempts coming off the dribble. Knocking down right around 34% of both jumpers off the dribble and off the catch, Paul limits his shooting percentages by forcing looks from beyond the arc, attempting a large proportion of his spot-up shots with a hand in his face and sometimes passing up a good shot for a more difficult one off the dribble. Part of this has to do with the large amount of offensive responsibility he was forced to shoulder on a team without great individual talent, but this has been a concern with him throughout his career.

    When Paul attacks the rim, he similarly settles for difficult shots just outside the paint on occasion, sometimes looking out of control or unable able to get all the way to the rim when he puts the ball on the floor. Converting just 47% of his finishing attempts and 39% of his runners according to Synergy Sports Technology, Paul's inconsistency in the paint was a major factor in his relatively mediocre 48% 2-point percentage, which nevertheless represented the highest mark of his career.

    Despite his shot selection, Paul still managed to rank among the most efficient volume isolation scorers in the NCAA this season, scoring 46% of his one-on-one attempts and finishing quite effectively when he was able to make one move and go. He got to the line at a very strong rate, and also excelled in transition, consistently doing his best work when he was able to use his speed to beat the defense to the spot on the offensive end and wasn't putting himself in a position where he'd need to make a decision as to how to score over or maneuver through help.


    From DraftExpress.com http://www.draftexpress.com#ixzz2XG0tjWOb
    http://www.draftexpress.com
    @jerboat

  11. #271
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote tkfu wrote: View Post
    I disagree with this reasoning. Here are the NBA minimum salaries, which depend on how many years of experience they have:

    R $490,180
    1 $788,872
    2 $884,293
    3 $916,099
    4 $947,907

    And here's the rookie scale for the #30 pick this year:

    R $880,600
    1 $920,200
    2 $959,800 (team option)
    3 $1,732,439 (team option)
    4 $2,598,658 (qualifying offer)

    (For cap boffins: the amounts listed here are actually 120% of the rookie scale, because that's what almost all rookies sign for. It could theoretically be as little as 80% of scale, or two thirds of what I've listed in the table, though I believe it'd still have to be at least the minimum.)

    So a late first round draft pick costs almost exactly the same amount as a second round pick on a minimum deal, only has two years guaranteed, AND is stuck with the rookie scale. To top it off, if you like the guy you can keep him for four years! Second round picks virtually never sign deals longer than 3 years, with 2 years being the most common, and they get to negotiate their own contracts (c.f. Nikola Pekovic, who managed to get 3 years, $13.5 million--that's more than the 3rd overall pick gets!). And generally, you want to take a look at your draft pick for at least a season before deciding he's not even worth minimum wage, so the advantage from not guaranteeing the contract is that you get to dump one year of minimum salary contract. Big effin' deal.

    So, if you draft a guy at #31 instead of #30, you're getting him locked up for 2 fewer years, you have much less flexibility in retaining the player, and you're only saving, at best, one year of minimum salary. Worst case, i.e. with a euro player or someone who's got offers from euro clubs (hint: this includes most top 60 NBA prospects if they want it), they've got leverage to demand a higher salary and guaranteed years anyway, and you actually end up paying them more, with more guaranteed years, than you would have paid the first round guy.

    edited to add: The exception to this rule is if you're drafting a Euro guy who's already making 2 or 3 times what the late-1st rookie scale pays, and more so if he's got a buyout. Then you might want the flexibility to negotiate a bigger contract. (If Ricky Rubio slipped to #30 in some bizarro universe, he would have never come over, because his $8.2 million buyout would cost him twice as much as he'd make in his first 4 years--he'd be going into debt $1 million per year instead of getting paid!) But that has nothing to do with saving money, or guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed.
    You're missing the forest through the trees. Most likely because the way the Raps have used the 2nd round poorly. It's real simple. Teams don't have to sign a second round signee. They can simply hold on to the player's rights and tell them to go abroad to get better. That's where you save money, by waiting for them to develop before you see that rookie level contract. Raptors have ties to at least 2 high level teams in Europe (JVs team and Geradini's) yet they've never taken advantage of these relationships...

    At the back of this draft's first round, playoff teams want assets but don't have the time to develop players. That's why there is value moving to the 2nd round, hold a players rights and gently recommend that they go somewhere to develop their game. That's the benefit. Sort of how Bonner was told to polish his game in Europe for a year back when the Raptors drafted him in the 2nd round. Basically, if it's used properly the 2nd round becomes a potential "Euro-stash" for all players. Obviously a big fat $0 is a powerful cap tool.

  12. #272
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    338
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote blackjitsu wrote: View Post
    It's real simple. Teams don't have to sign a second round signee. They can simply hold on to the player's rights and tell them to go abroad to get better. That's where you save money, by waiting for them to develop before you see that rookie level contract.
    You can do the exact same thing with a first round pick, and all it takes to get the player's cap number off your books is a letter to the league office declaring that they don't intend to play in the NBA this season. There is no requirement under the CBA to offer a contract to a player you have drafted.

    The risk, of course, is that the player takes it as a slap in the face, and never signs with you, instead staying in Europe. But where the player is drafted has no bearing on that risk.

  13. #273
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote tkfu wrote: View Post
    You can do the exact same thing with a first round pick, and all it takes to get the player's cap number off your books is a letter to the league office declaring that they don't intend to play in the NBA this season. There is no requirement under the CBA to offer a contract to a player you have drafted.

    The risk, of course, is that the player takes it as a slap in the face, and never signs with you, instead staying in Europe. But where the player is drafted has no bearing on that risk.
    No you can't. I disagree with your interpretation of the CBA. It's called a guaranteed contract for a reason. The exception is for players under contract in other leagues who have buyout clauses, otherwise, you cannot refuse to sign a first round draft pick.

    If a kid who opted out of NCAA eligibility was drafted in the first round the team that signed him would be obligated to offer him a contract. The player, and the players union would have grounds for a massive lawsuit if they were refused. However, if the same kid was drafted in the second round the team that selected him simply holds the rights to negotiate with the player if said player wishes to join the NBA. As that stands, if used properly, the second round can be used to gather asset rights.

    The last point is why I hated BC. He would sign players years away from developing in the second round for no reason, forcing the Raptors to spend time on players when it would have been better to spend that time and money on their first round picks. It's poor asset management.

  14. #274
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,195
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote blackjitsu wrote: View Post
    No you can't. I disagree with your interpretation of the CBA. It's called a guaranteed contract for a reason. The exception is for players under contract in other leagues who have buyout clauses, otherwise, you cannot refuse to sign a first round draft pick.

    If a kid who opted out of NCAA eligibility was drafted in the first round the team that signed him would be obligated to offer him a contract. The player, and the players union would have grounds for a massive lawsuit if they were refused. However, if the same kid was drafted in the second round the team that selected him simply holds the rights to negotiate with the player if said player wishes to join the NBA. As that stands, if used properly, the second round can be used to gather asset rights.

    The last point is why I hated BC. He would sign players years away from developing in the second round for no reason, forcing the Raptors to spend time on players when it would have been better to spend that time and money on their first round picks. It's poor asset management.
    No lawsuit. Team would lose rights.

    A first round pick has the option to play or stay away. Team cannot say you can't come play with us. Usually first round picks who don't come over right away have contract issues or it is mutually agreed they season in Europe.

    If after 3 years they still have not signed rookie deal then the team has to sign using cap space, exception, or minimum contract. .... I think.
    "Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them."
    Tim Leiweke

    Basketball has clear winners every night --
    except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.

  15. #275
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    No lawsuit. Team would lose rights.

    A first round pick has the option to play or stay away. Team cannot say you can't come play with us. Usually first round picks who don't come over right away have contract issues or it is mutually agreed they season in Europe.

    If after 3 years they still have not signed rookie deal then the team has to sign using cap space, exception, or minimum contract. .... I think.
    What I highlighted is what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about Euro players. Collegiate kids who give up there rights to play in the NCAA who are drafted in the second round are not required to be signed. That's why those contracts are considered non-guaranteed. Am I wrong in saying that?

  16. #276
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,195
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote blackjitsu wrote: View Post
    What I highlighted is what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about Euro players. Collegiate kids who give up there rights to play in the NCAA who are drafted in the second round are not required to be signed. That's why those contracts are considered non-guaranteed. Am I wrong in saying that?
    Nope.
    "Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them."
    Tim Leiweke

    Basketball has clear winners every night --
    except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.

  17. #277
    Raptors Republic Superstar TRex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Jurassic Park
    Posts
    2,959
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote ceez wrote: View Post
    question, have the raptors worked out anyone?
    Why would any prospects work out for the Raptors? they don't have a pick!!
    Follow me on Twitter - @11_RRyan

  18. #278
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    338
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    No lawsuit. Team would lose rights.

    A first round pick has the option to play or stay away. Team cannot say you can't come play with us. Usually first round picks who don't come over right away have contract issues or it is mutually agreed they season in Europe.

    If after 3 years they still have not signed rookie deal then the team has to sign using cap space, exception, or minimum contract. .... I think.
    This is wrong. If a team and a drafted player can't agree to a contract, the player enters the next year's draft. However, this only applies if the player does not play any professional or collegiate basketball at any time during that year. If they do, the team that drafted them retains their rights. This continues indefinitely. To the best of my knowledge, the one year provision has never been used.

    Both first and second round draft picks have a required tender; they must be offered contracts. The difference is that the required tender for first round picks must be for at least 80% of the rookie scale, and must have at least 80% of the rookie scale guaranteed against lack of skill. Second round picks must be offered a contract as well, however they don't have to be guaranteed against lack of skill. That means that a team can theoretically offer as little as 1 year, nothing guaranteed--but they have to make that offer. If the player wants to, they can accept it, forcing the team to either put them on the roster. Of course, the team then has the option to waive the player, which would make him a Rookie Free Agent.

    Naturally, this never happens. No respectable front office would have such acrimonious negotiations with a player; it would be bad for reputation and for future negotiations. If they can't agree on a contract, the team usually just renounces their draft rights, which also makes the player a Rookie Free Agent.

    (The three-year provision you're thinking of is that after three years, if a team still hasn't signed a first round pick they retain the rights to, the team has the option to use cap space instead of the rookie scale to sign the player, as long as the contract is for at least 3 years and is more than 120% of the rookie scale. This is to prevent situations where a player stays their whole career in Europe because they can make more money there than the NBA rookie scale.)

  19. #279
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Okay. That clears things up for me. Still don't understand why they would offer Solomon Alabi more than a one year mininum contract.

  20. #280
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    338
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote blackjitsu wrote: View Post
    Okay. That clears things up for me. Still don't understand why they would offer Solomon Alabi more than a one year mininum contract.
    Same as ever--potential. Obviously in this case it was a bad call, but nobody wants to be the guy who has to give up Paul Millsap or Carlos Boozer or Gilbert Arenas after one year, just because they wanted to save $800,000. Alabi was on a 3 year minimum deal, with a team option for the 3rd year (still at the minimum). If he had turned into something, it would have been an incredible value. When he didn't, all it cost was one year of minimum salary (after the first, evaluation/development year).

Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •