People keep saying 50 mil a year and I would like to know if there is any source for this number at all, or are you guys just growing things out there?Originally Posted by Pelicanidae
 |
| . |
|
People keep saying 50 mil a year and I would like to know if there is any source for this number at all, or are you guys just growing things out there?
He will want a max contract. And he'll get it because that's what players make at his level of play. Whether fans like it or not.
And I'm saying that I do not care.
If you keep BI, you are not getting anyone else because you are going to be over the second apron and hard capped IMMEDIATELY. That alone makes even trading CJ harder, because we won't be able to take any money back beyond what we send out, which means we'll have to ship out a bunch of picks that we no longer have because Griff wasted the war chest, so we'd have to gut the future draft just to move CJ to get a guy who likely won't be much better than CJ already is.
I've said it time and again and my position has not changed: I do not see any justification to hard-cap this team in order to keep together a squad that has won nothing. Nothing at all. You spend and go into the luxury tax to keep Denver together, or Golden State, not a perennial play-in team that has won zero playoff series in five years.
I don't know how many times I need to tell you that the ''you won't get another guy on his level!'' argument means nothing to me. I don't care. I would rather have 2 guys who are only 80% as good as Ingram but who actually fit and who actually play the offensive scheme.
Basketball.
Well then they (Pels) shouldn't pay him like one and trade him fro whatever they can get.
Great post!
His max contract this off-season is the 30% max. At the incoming salary cap, that would make his pay:
Year 1 of the new contract: $49,375,623
Year 2: $53,325,672
Year 3: $57,275,722
Year 4: $61,225,772
Assuming the standard 8% annual increases.
It's the same contract that KAT is on, but starting later and starting with the new salary cap and therefore being even higher.
good call. its not about how good someone is its whether they fit with the 1A.
Name one player who, coming off a contract in which they made zero All-NBA, All-Defense, or All-Star teams, and who have won zero playoff series in their life, got paid the 30% max.
Edit; the closest you can get is Beal, who had gotten 1 All-NBA appearance in the prior few years, and he's widely regarded as one of the worst contracts in basketball.
Maybe you aren't up on salaries but non superstars make 50Mil a year in the NBA.
The arena is gonna be real empty if there arent big changes. I'm getting these games for FREE and can barely stand to watch them. I can only imagine paying for overinflated parking, concessions, tickets, etc.
It's pretty simple. If Griff can't see that Zion and Mr Contested ISO Middy are a horrible fit for spacing then he is the wrong man for the job. On top of that, the "player's coach" has zero movement in his offense, can't scheme up any easy shots, has no idea that he needs to develop young players during the year so they will be ready during the playoffs, has no idea how to create mismatches with switches, etc..
It's been a painful 5 years, and if the front office can't learn from their mistakes and cut bait then they will have to deal with the coming fallout.
Someone already posted a graphic of about 14 guys in another thread. He makes what guys at his level make. No debating that.
You don't care and that's fine.. Zion won't care to play for a squad of that make-up. And once he leaves, those two guys you trade Ingram for are leaving as well.
With that being said, we can agree to disagree.
The answer is that you actually can't, because nobody has ever gotten the 30% max in that scenario. BI currently makes about the same amount as his companions, I'm talking about the proposed next contract.
The only players currently in line to make over $50m per season over the life of their current contract are Steph Curry, AD, Giannis, Jaylen Brown, Lillard, KAT, Booker, Jokic, Embiid, and Beal.
That's 4 MVPs, 6 guys who have played in the finals, 8 guys who have made All-NBA teams in the last few years, and all of them were All-Stars for the last several years in a row.
The one guy who is glaringly out of line with everyone else there is Beal, and even he's made one All-NBA team in his life. And even still he's regarded as a horrible contract.
BI has zero of those accomplishments, he would be the first person to ever get paid a contract which averaged over $50m a year who had never made an All-NBA team, ever.
i just had a quick look. https://www.spotrac.com/nba/rankings...ort/cash_total
Let's not act like, there aren't players down the pike that are going to get the same compensation Ingram is getting. No matter how you shake it, players of Ingrams caliber are going to get max contracts.
maybe so but lets not be the ones that pay it.
Thank you.. So we don't have to act like Ingram is some outlier. That list is about to get bigger.
That's fine if you dont want to pay it. I get why. But Pelicanidae is acting like it would be something unusual.
Shaq lost his mind, and there was a lot of talk among the professional pundits when Gobert got his big deal. It seemed excessive but that's just what the league pays now.
I just explained why it would be unusual. Your defense is ''well, it probably won't be unusual in a couple of years'' to which I say that I don't care. Saying that you should make a mistake now just because someone else is likely to make a similar mistake later is absurd.
To a multiple time All-NBA, All-Defense, DPOY centre.
Not to a guy who has never made an all-league team in his life.
Your logic is flawed, and you're trying to muddle the convo with the technicalities of the contract. Bottomline. Ingram will be making what players of his caliber make yearly. Everyone here sees that. They may not want to pay him that amount, but we all know that's what players in his tier make.
Nichols let another team pay him that after he gets traded
That's fine if you feel that way. After this performance I totally get the sentiment.
He played a whopping 4 minutes. Is that what Willie meant about getting more shooting into the lineup?
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote