The Raptors and the Luxury Tax

[Matt52]

Without Looking, Guess Which Seven Teams Have Never Paid The Luxury Tax
6:14 AM Mark Deeks

......OK, now look.

I have compiled a spreadsheet containing to-the-dollar information on all luxury tax paid to date. In the 11 seasons since the luxury tax was created, it has been applicable in nine seasons; in those nine seasons, 23 NBA franchises have paid over $850 million in payroll excess. The exact details can be found here.



http://blog.shamsports.com/2012/07/w...medium=twitter

Raptors fans might be surprised to learn the Raptors are NOT one of those 7 teams..... although they have only paid $6.7M total and that was in the 2002/03 and 2003/04 seasons.

Brian Windhorst ‏@WindhorstESPN

Last team to win title w/o tax was Heat in '06. Pistons paid less than $1M, made 6 straight conf finals, Spurs have paid only $12.5 total

Brian Windhorst Brian Windhorst ‏@WindhorstESPN

7 teams have never paid tax according to Deeks' numbers including teams in big markets like Bulls, Clippers, Warriors & Wizards.

Brian Windhorst Brian Windhorst ‏@WindhorstESPN

According to the great @MarkDeeksNBA Knicks have paid $195M in luxury tax since '03. Blazers once paid $51M in 1 year: http://bit.ly/PL1Ujx

[Quito]

Geez, NY is the perfect example of money not solving all your problems.

But the chart does show that to win, you do need to spend. With all the cap space the Raptors have in the coming season (Your Beyond 2012-2013 post comes to mind), we could make a big splash. Even if we do pay luxury tax for a player or two, I'd be ok with it if it was for the right player (Paul George...ohhhhh boooooooy).

[thead]

to me paying tax should be a calculated move when you have firmly developed your core.

i.e.

Year 1 - You make the playoffs - make some noise and exit
Year 2 - You make the playoffs - out in the second or swept in the conference finals
Year 3 - Awesomeat McEverything is suddenly available and can really put you over the top

Examples OKC and Perkins

Indiana is another year away from making a similar splash. Unless you consider West that Splash

I've also said for a while now....Miami, New York, LAL is not a formula that would ever work here.

Spurs are probably the best front office we could emulate.

[10 000 Hours]

Geez, NY is the perfect example of money not solving all your problems.

But the chart does show that to win, you do need to spend. With all the cap space the Raptors have in the coming season (Your Beyond 2012-2013 post comes to mind), we could make a big splash. Even if we do pay luxury tax for a player or two, I'd be ok with it if it was for the right player (Paul George...ohhhhh boooooooy).

I don't care if the Raptors pay luxury tax or not because it's not my money. Whatever they are willing to do to win, is up to them.

[thead]

that's kinda the point. You can spend and end up as Miami or you can spend and end up as Brooklyn (their starting 5 = 70 million)

[Risk Mgmt]

We can imploy Moneyball on the Raptors....or are they already doing it and still losing.

RAPS GM BC can attempt to put together a club on a budget by employing computer-generated analysis to acquire new players. Keep the CAP managable forever.

Peace

[Mediumcore]

It should be interesting to see how the Bell/Rogers ownership of the Raptors changes the teams philosophy on luxury tax. Some of the posters mentioned in a previous thread that there would be more to gain by the new ownership to see the team do well, and thus draw more interest from viewers.

[Letter N]

We can imploy Moneyball on the Raptors....or are they already doing it and still losing.

RAPS GM BC can attempt to put together a club on a budget by employing computer-generated analysis to acquire new players. Keep the CAP managable forever.

Peace

Moneyball is a lot tougher to pull off when you're dealing with an actual team sport. I find advanced metrics and all that stuff pretty bullshit for basketball, there are too many intangibles involved to measure it all in numbers. Baseball is easy, it's basically an individual game played with 8 other people.

That's why I find PER to be so stupid, it does a great job of measuring the best in the league but the middle area, the role players, the guys who set screens and make the proper pass at the right time, it's piss poor at recognizing their impact.

[Kuh]

Spurs are probably the best front office we could emulate.

It would be nice to emulate the Spurs. And they are fans of statistical analysis, including the Wins Produced metric as you can judge by their draft picks (e.g., Kawhi Leonard, Marcus Denmon - both had great WP scores and little else).

The Toronto fanbase wants the results of the Spurs, without using their tools.

After all, the Wins Produced metric tells us that the three best - almost allstar - Raptors are Jose Calderon, Ed Davis and Amir Johnson, and the two negative deadweights are Andrea Bargnani and Demar Derozan (according to WP both are inefficient volume shooters who are below average elsewhere). Clearly that must be wrong. It's so obviously wrong it's not even worth discussing (sarcasm alert). So clearly the Spurs are idiots for using that stat ...

... so let's emulate the results of the Spurs front office by NOT emulating their methods. That'll work well!

[Kuh]

We can employ Moneyball on the Raptors....or are they already doing it and still losing.

Raptors aren't doing it yet. Spurs are.

But the secret of Moneyball is that you look like an idiot for using it. Everyone laughs at what you do. They can't copy it, even when you win, because that goes against their conventional wisdom. After all, the person who scores the most must be the star of the team, right? Who cares how many shots they take!

Carmelo Anthony - Andrea Bargnani - Kobe Bryant: stars of their team, right?
Tyson Chandler - Amir Johnson - Andrew Bynum: decent role players, right?
(Check those six names up on thenbageek.com)

Oh, so it's all about the stats. Then we get the stat geeks arguments:

Adjusted plus/minus has horrible statistical significance, but it makes sense, right?
Wins Produced has great statistical significance, but it doesn't make sense, so it must be wrong.
Oh everyone's arguing about what stat is best, so really there is no right answer ...

... that's how San Antonio can keep Moneyballing the NBA, right in front of everyone's eyes, year after year!

P.S. Though Toronto might be changing. Signing Landry Fields was an interesting step.

[ezz_bee]

We can imploy Moneyball on the Raptors....or are they already doing it and still losing.

RAPS GM BC can attempt to put together a club on a budget by employing computer-generated analysis to acquire new players. Keep the CAP managable forever.

Peace

It's a great idea, but what stops a team from overspending on their roster and analytics? Wasn't the moral of Moneyball that if you are a small market team, and you come up with better way to evaluate players and how to win, that it will be adopted by the big market teams in a season or two anyway?

[Quito]

It should be interesting to see how the Bell/Rogers ownership of the Raptors changes the teams philosophy on luxury tax. Some of the posters mentioned in a previous thread that there would be more to gain by the new ownership to see the team do well, and thus draw more interest from viewers.

Great point. Fingers are crossed.

[Puffer]

...P.S. Though Toronto might be changing. Signing Landry Fields was an interesting step.

And drafting Ross was partially about the stats as well.

[Dr. James Naismith]

[Craiger]

Moneyball is a lot tougher to pull off when you're dealing with an actual team sport. I find advanced metrics and all that stuff pretty bullshit for basketball, there are too many intangibles involved to measure it all in numbers. Baseball is easy, it's basically an individual game played with 8 other people.

That's why I find PER to be so stupid, it does a great job of measuring the best in the league but the middle area, the role players, the guys who set screens and make the proper pass at the right time, it's piss poor at recognizing their impact.

People basically said the same thing about baseball at first though didn't they?

Sometimes its not always about getting it 'right' as it is about close to 'right'. You can still extract a ton of value from close to right.

There is alot more to analytics and metrics than PER (which is hardly going to pass as a top choice anyways)

[Letter N]

People basically said the same thing about baseball at first though didn't they?

Sometimes its not always about getting it 'right' as it is about close to 'right'. You can still extract a ton of value from close to right.

There is alot more to analytics and metrics than PER (which is hardly going to pass as a top choice anyways)

Fair enough, and it's a good point it probably gives a better understanding of a player especially if you haven't sat there scouting them in person. But I still think at this point you're just as likely to get a Ty Lawson steal as you are to get a Michael Beasley or Jose Calderon, guys who put up numbers but don't actually get you wins.

[stretch]

Cuban has paid close to 150 million in luxury tax. Ouch!

[white men can't jump]

Man....what the hell was up with Portland in 02-03???? near 52 million in luxury tax in one year!!!!!!! how does that even happen?

[ezz_bee]

Man....what the hell was up with Portland in 02-03???? near 52 million in luxury tax in one year!!!!!!! how does that even happen?

Rk Player Salary
1 Scottie Pippen $19,727,524
2 Rasheed Wallace $16,200,000
3 Shawn Kemp $12,621,028
4 Damon Stoudamire $12,375,000
5 Dale Davis $8,055,000
6 Derek Anderson $7,144,500
7 Arvydas Sabonis $6,850,000
8 Bonzi Wells $6,300,000
9 Ruben Patterson $4,991,800
10 Antonio Daniels $3,375,000
11 Jeff McInnis $3,000,000
12 Zach Randolph $1,095,720
13 Chris Dudley $1,030,000
14 Qyntel Woods $980,280
15 Amal McCaskill $699,935
16 Charles Smith $637,435
17 Ruben Boumtje-Boumtje $512,435

[ceez]

yeah that team was so stacked. i don't know how they never won it all those 2-3 years.

i mean i know WHY but c'mon.