Using The MLE To Sign A Player For The 3

[Apollo]

I agree. They need to start spending more if anything. All the best teams spend a lot of money. Most of the teams who make the playoffs are paying luxury tax. The Raptors management needs to put up or shut up with this "we are about winning" crap. They better spend the full MLE or else, simply put, they're full of it.

[Tim W.]

I agree. They need to start spending more if anything. All the best teams spend a lot of money. Most of the teams who make the playoffs are paying luxury tax. The Raptors management needs to put up or shut up with this "we are about winning" crap. They better spend the full MLE or else, simply put, they're full of it.

I don't completely agree. I don't think the Raptors should spend money for spending sake. If the right player isn't there, or they can't get him, then throwing money at a player that isn't what the Raptors need isn't going to help anyone. We've already been down that road.

[Dave]

Nobody. Do not waste the team's cap flexibility on one of those options.

WHat cap flexibility do the Raptors have? It's doubtful they'll be under the cap anytime soon. If the team can add a talented player without giving up anyone, why not do it?

The Raptors have about $39.25 million tied up in five players (Hedo, Bargs, Jack, Jose, DeRozan) and their #13 pick heading into the summer of 2011. A couple of cap charges and another high lottery pick (2011 Draft) would add around another $5.5 million onto the total. That is $44.75 million ... meaning they could have somewhere around $10 million with cap room.

The Raptors could easily trade Jack and/or Bargnani for further cap flexibility creating $25 million worth of cap room in 2011.

The point here is options ... the Raptors are close to the cap figure but with a move or two they can create a lot of cap space. If they start tying up more of their cap with highly paid role players, then that will become more difficult and limit their options.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The Raptors first priority is to address the core of their roster. It is a disaster area ... and signing expensive role players only makes that more difficult because it takes away cap flexibility and it increases your win total and lowers your draft position.

If the Raptors addressed the core of their roster this summer and a good core to build around going forward ... I would be very happy to spend the MLE this summer.

But, for now at least, an most likely, the Raptors do not and will not have a strong enough core.

[Apollo]

I don't completely agree. I don't think the Raptors should spend money for spending sake. If the right player isn't there, or they can't get him, then throwing money at a player that isn't what the Raptors need isn't going to help anyone. We've already been down that road.

Tim, there are "right players" to be had in each and every free agency. I'm not saying spend for the sake of spending. I'm saying they better not let the tax stop them because if it does then they're full of shit and what's the point of it all? The numbers say it all. Team who are willing to commit financially win a lot more games than teams who don't want to go there.

[Tim W.]

The Raptors have about $39.25 million tied up in five players (Hedo, Bargs, Jack, Jose, DeRozan) and their #13 pick heading into the summer of 2011. A couple of cap charges and another high lottery pick (2011 Draft) would add around another $5.5 million onto the total. That is $44.75 million ... meaning they could have somewhere around $10 million with cap room.

The Raptors could easily trade Jack and/or Bargnani for further cap flexibility creating $25 million worth of cap room in 2011.

The point here is options ... the Raptors are close to the cap figure but with a move or two they can create a lot of cap space. If they start tying up more of their cap with highly paid role players, then that will become more difficult and limit their options.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The Raptors first priority is to address the core of their roster. It is a disaster area ... and signing expensive role players only makes that more difficult because it takes away cap flexibility and it increases your win total and lowers your draft position.

If the Raptors addressed the core of their roster this summer and a good core to build around going forward ... I would be very happy to spend the MLE this summer.

But, for now at least, an most likely, the Raptors do not and will not have a strong enough core.

You're obviously speaking of next summer. My problem with trying to use the $10 million the Raptors could be under next summer is that it precludes re-signing Amir this summer, as well as Weems and Belinelli next summer. And considering that if Bosh leaves, the Raptors will only have 9 players under contract (10 if you include the draft pick), that means filling out the roster with one year contracts. All in the hopes that the Raptors can convince a free agent to sign with a team that will probably win fewer than 30 games next season.

Keep in mind that between this summer and next summer, only two teams are NOT projected to be under the cap. That's a lot of teams that will be under the cap and a lot of choices for free agents. How high on their list is Toronto going to be, especially since it will have been 3 years since the team made the playoffs?

Cap room is all nice and good, but how much is Sacramento or Minnesota's cap room going to help them this summer? Besides, the fact that teams that are over the cap are given as much chance of signing Bosh as teams under the cap shows that cap room is way over rated. What's more important than cap room are pieces that can be used in trades or simply development.

I don't believe the Raptors should simply spend for the sake of spending, but a guy like Travis Outlaw is a good young player who is exactly the type of player the Raptors could use. He can shoot, defend, rebound, is active and would improve the team. He could also be used, in conjunction with other players, in a trade for a better player down the line, if that's what you want.

[LBF]

I'd completely agree.....if this was 2002.

i think howard would/did want/make close to 3 times the MLE if this was '02.


BTW, who else voted for T-MAC?

[Quixotic]

Tim, there are "right players" to be had in each and every free agency. I'm not saying spend for the sake of spending. I'm saying they better not let the tax stop them because if it does then they're full of shit and what's the point of it all? The numbers say it all. Team who are willing to commit financially win a lot more games than teams who don't want to go there.

I keep hearing about the Raptors being afraid of the tax. Please, name some actual examples of when the tax has stopped the Raptors from making a move that would have clearly benefited the team. The only recent time I can remember was when we picked up O'Neal and had trouble filling the bench, but hey, going even $1 mil into the luxury tax level for a bit player so that we're docked $1 mil in tax, while ending up on the wrong side of the luxury tax distribution (another $4 mil or so), is a great cost-effective way of improving the team.

No, our bigger problems have been (in no particular order) 1) the inability to attract marquee free agents or to get them to come cheaply, 2) overpaying players who are willing to play for us, and 3) being over the cap. That last one is probably the biggest hurdle to the improvement of our team, bigger than the luxury tax level.

[Arsenalist]

Got to go with Outlaw. Matt Barnes is good too, even though he's more of a piece on a good team more than a building block. He made $1.6M last year and has a player option at that rate which I suspect he's not going to pick up. It might take half the MLE to get him.

[Raptorsss]

Would the Raptors take a look at Raja Bell? As for Outlaw, I liked him when he played for Portland, the fact that they deemed him expendable, at a position they could upgrade defensively, clearly means he's overvalued.

[Apollo]

Tim, there are "right players" to be had in each and every free agency. I'm not saying spend for the sake of spending. I'm saying they better not let the tax stop them because if it does then they're full of shit and what's the point of it all? The numbers say it all. Team who are willing to commit financially win a lot more games than teams who don't want to go there.

I keep hearing about the Raptors being afraid of the tax. Please, name some actual examples of when the tax has stopped the Raptors from making a move that would have clearly benefited the team.

Can you tell me the last time they paid a significant amount of luxury tax over the past five years?

Oh and I never suggested that they're afraid to pay tax. They are, however, a corporation owned franchise and corporations for profit care about profit first.

[Tim W.]

Would the Raptors take a look at Raja Bell? As for Outlaw, I liked him when he played for Portland, the fact that they deemed him expendable, at a position they could upgrade defensively, clearly means he's overvalued.

Raja Bell? The guy is 33 years old and pretty much on his last legs. I think he'd be fine for a contender, but completely wrong for the Raptors. DeRozan, Weems and Belinelli need as much time as possible to develop, and signing an over the hill veteran to play the same position as them would hinder their development, which is the most important thing for the franchise right now.

Can you tell me the last time they paid a significant amount of luxury tax over the past five years?

Oh and I never suggested that they're afraid to pay tax. They are, however, a corporation owned franchise and corporations for profit care about profit first.

At what point did it warrant the team going over the tax threshold? They've never even won 50 games, and no GM worth his salt is going to go over the tax threshold without pretty much guaranteeing the team is going to be a contender. You don't spend to become a contender. You spend once you are one in order to reach the next level.

[Apollo]

At what point did it warrant the team going over the tax threshold? They've never even won 50 games, and no GM worth his salt is going to go over the tax threshold without pretty much guaranteeing the team is going to be a contender. You don't spend to become a contender. You spend once you are one in order to reach the next level.

16 teams made the playoffs. 10 of those paid luxury tax. Only one team who didn't pay tax advanced. That team was the Atlanta Hawks and they were swept in four straight in round 2. The team representing the West in the Finals is the L.A. Lakers. They're almost paying $22M in luxury tax. The team representing the East are the Boston Celtics. They're paying almost $17M in luxury tax. The Lakers have the top payroll. The Celtics rank 3rd.

I question your statement. I think you sometimes need to spend to reach the next level. This is especially true when you're capped for probably the next four seasons.

[Tim W.]

16 teams made the playoffs. 10 of those paid luxury tax. Only one team who didn't pay tax advanced. That team was the Atlanta Hawks and they were swept in four straight in round 2. The team representing the West in the Finals is the L.A. Lakers. They're almost paying $22M in luxury tax. The team representing the East are the Boston Celtics. They're paying almost $17M in luxury tax. The Lakers have the top payroll. The Celtics rank 3rd.

I question your statement. I think you sometimes need to spend to reach the next level. This is especially true when you're capped for probably the next four seasons.

Of the 13 teams that were over the tax, 10 were playoff teams. Of those 10 teams, EVERY SINGLE ONE of those teams had been to the Conference Finals at least once in the previous 5 years, and San Antonio and Orlando only went above the tax this year. These are all veteran teams that are playoff tested.

And of the 3 teams that did not make it to the Finals once in the last five years, two are going to be under the cap this summer (along with Miami.

Again, these teams that are over the luxury tax either did so because they are or were very recently legitimate contenders or because they were simply not managed very well.

The majority of the teams that are over the luxury tax only went over the tax once they had most of the pieces to become contenders. And generally teams go over the tax to re-sign their own players as they improve over the years, or gradually through trades. I can only think of one time then the Raptors were limited with what they could do financially, and that's when they traded for Jermaine O'Neal, and the only thing they could have done was sign a free agent. And that wouldn't have made much of a difference, anyway.

Complaining that the Raptors haven't gone over the tax is a complaint that doesn't have much truth behind it. The Raptors simply haven't been in a position yet where they a) could have gone over the tax and b) should have gone over the tax.

[Apollo]

Of the 13 teams that were over the tax, 10 were playoff teams. Of those 10 teams, EVERY SINGLE ONE of those teams had been to the Conference Finals at least once in the previous 5 years, and San Antonio and Orlando only went above the tax this year. These are all veteran teams that are playoff tested.

One could argue they made it to the conference finals because they were aggressive in spending.

The Raptors specific situation is one in that they're capped long term. They need to keep moving forward and buy in a market where many are looking to sell.

[Raptorsss]

I thinking the signing of 'Ball' was an aggressive move by BC.

[Tim W.]

One could argue they made it to the conference finals because they were aggressive in spending.

The Raptors specific situation is one in that they're capped long term. They need to keep moving forward and buy in a market where many are looking to sell.

Well, not really. Most of those teams only went after the tax AFTER they had become contenders. And, as far as I recall, the teams that other teams were over the tax the moment it was implemented.

There's just no evidence that a team can spend it's way into contention. The majority of it supports the fact that teams generally pay after having playoff success, thus giving them a reason to spend.

The Raptors are currently paying their players as if they have had playoff success, which they haven't obviously achieved. Ideally, guys like Bargnani and Calderon would have been paid after the team had been able to make it to the second round. The team's salary commitments are ahead of their success on the floor.