|
Post by mistwell on Nov 28, 2018 10:42:18 GMT -8
In what world is a top 12 player a "decent but not top player" who "no other team wants"? It's the very fucking definition of a top player who every team wants! There are 30 teams in the NBA. They all want 1-2 top players. It's very safe to say the top 12 are top players who are in demand! Yeah but by using your flawed logic you’d pay 60 guys max contracts. Every team does not automatically get two max contracts. It depends on how the rest of the roster is structured. For instance we currently have no max players and we are doing pretty good. That's not my logic it's a strawman. Just because all 30 teams want one to two max guys doesn't mean they can all get one to two max guys (and you know damn well that the purpose of writing "1-2" is to say that it's not "2" but " ONE TO TWO"). There is a limit to the number of max guys. I am saying that limit is beyond the top 12. It might be the top 20, it's not the top 60, there is a range and we may not know the precise line to draw between the last max contract and the next which is close to but not a max contract but that line is clearly beyond at least the top 10 and isn't just the top 5. And I think you understood that when you read my post just fine. Is it because people are thinking "max contract" is a sign of ranking? It is, and it isn't. The top player in the league is worth well beyond a max contract. The top five in fact are all worth well beyond a max contract. Getting a max contract is not the same as saying top five player, because teams are not allowed to pay whatever they want for players which would enable them to use salaries as a ranking system. If they could pay what they wanted, then they could pay more to the top five and you could actually use salary to rank people. But because there is a max, and because the max is well below what teams would pay if they could for the very top, paying the max for a player is not a good indication of where they rank at the top beyond saying they're likely top 20 or so.
|
|
|
Post by tullabye on Nov 28, 2018 11:22:21 GMT -8
2nd bananas get max contracts. That's how that works. Teams get two max contracts. I don't know where the concept of "Only the top 5 players get max contracts" came from, but the CBA is more flexible than that. There now...who’s using the straw man? You said teams get two max contracts and now you’re backtracking because you realized that logic is flawed after we pointed it out to you.
|
|
|
Post by mistwell on Nov 28, 2018 12:14:23 GMT -8
2nd bananas get max contracts. That's how that works. Teams get two max contracts. I don't know where the concept of "Only the top 5 players get max contracts" came from, but the CBA is more flexible than that. There now...who’s using the straw man? You said teams get two max contracts and now you’re backtracking because you realized that logic is flawed after we pointed it out to you.No No, you're making what I said into an absurd spin. Teams do get two max contracts, but most don't have access to two people in the max contract category of players. Obviously the Suns don't max two of their players because they have zero players worth the max to them. I am acknowledging that there are not 60 max players in the league, but for whatever reason you keep pretending there are only 5 players in the league worth the max or, in the very least, refuse to talk about how many max players you think there are in the league and will attempt to divert the conversation to anything other than that topic.
|
|
|
Post by hitnrun24 on Nov 28, 2018 12:59:51 GMT -8
I don't pay much attention to this 4th quarter business, a good player is a good player. Maybe some fold under pressure, sometimes I suppose, but you don't suddenly become a better shooter in the 4th quarter. You don't suddenly acquire scoring skills that magically materialize in the 4th quarter. Who ends up with the ball in their hand has much more to do with it. The jury is out on Tobias in three areas: 1) Defense, not exactly a threatening presence 2) he has not yet been the focus of opponents the way he will be going forward, let's see how he handles the pressure and 3) it's only been 19 games, let's see if he keeps it up. I think there is something to scoring down the stretch vs scoring in the 1st 3.5 quarters. Defenses can't play all out every possession all game so there are guys who have games that can take advantage better in those situations and a little less in the last 5 minutes or so because teams will be all out and also play for matchups more rather than just trying to play their rotation. The 1 on 1 scorers become a little more valuable in these situations since just running good system offense doesn't always get you good shots and the shot creators can still get relatively good shots against a lot of defenders. Tobias is a very good efficient scorer, but he may struggle a bit if we asked him to create shots when the other teams have their best defenders on him in late game situations. It just isn't really his game.
|
|
|
Post by hitnrun24 on Nov 28, 2018 13:04:47 GMT -8
Yeah but by using your flawed logic you’d pay 60 guys max contracts. Every team does not automatically get two max contracts. It depends on how the rest of the roster is structured. For instance we currently have no max players and we are doing pretty good. +1 - sometimes it is better to have several good players than a so-called "max" who is not a star. In our case it has been, but typically the max players have been good values. Things have changed a little when they introduced the super max though so you have to differentiate between that. If you're paying the 40m supermax that guy has to be in the top 7-8 players which guys like Wall aren't. the old max of 28-30m is ok to pay to a 2nd best player on the team top 20-25 player. It can work a few different ways since the NBA isn't a hard cap league. You can definitely go 2-3 max players on a contender and the order in which you sign them matters because you can just go over the cap to keep them and a few good role players.
|
|
|
Post by tullabye on Nov 28, 2018 13:18:37 GMT -8
There now...who’s using the straw man? You said teams get two max contracts and now you’re backtracking because you realized that logic is flawed after we pointed it out to you.No No, you're making what I said into an absurd spin. Teams do get two max contracts, but most don't have access to two people in the max contract category of players. Obviously the Suns don't max two of their players because they have zero players worth the max to them. I am acknowledging that there are not 60 max players in the league, but for whatever reason you keep pretending there are only 5 players in the league worth the max or, in the very least, refuse to talk about how many max players you think there are in the league and will attempt to divert the conversation to anything other than that topic. You are the one spinning. I am not saying there are only five players worth max contracts, I just said I do not believe Jimmy Butler is one of them. It’s just an opinion and then you come in and try to conclusively say I am wrong. You said each team gets two max contracts and that second bananas get max contracts. That is implying that there should be 60 max contacts which is absurd. Read your own writing. Also teams do not automatically get two max contracts. There is a salary cap in which teams can maneuver the salaries paid out to what best fits their situation. If teams choose to maneuver in a way that can accommodate two max contracts that’s fine, but it is difficult and not a given.There is no set amount of max contracts guaranteed to every team.
|
|
|
Post by mistwell on Nov 28, 2018 14:01:35 GMT -8
No, you're making what I said into an absurd spin. Teams do get two max contracts, but most don't have access to two people in the max contract category of players. Obviously the Suns don't max two of their players because they have zero players worth the max to them. I am acknowledging that there are not 60 max players in the league, but for whatever reason you keep pretending there are only 5 players in the league worth the max or, in the very least, refuse to talk about how many max players you think there are in the league and will attempt to divert the conversation to anything other than that topic. You are the one spinning. I am not saying there are only five players worth max contracts, I just said I do not believe Jimmy Butler is one of them. It’s just an opinion and then you come in and try to conclusively say I am wrong. You said each team gets two max contracts and that second bananas get max contracts. That is implying that there should be 60 max contacts which is absurd. Read your own writing. Also teams do not automatically get two max contracts. There is a salary cap in which teams can maneuver the salaries paid out to what best fits their situation. If teams choose to maneuver in a way that can accommodate two max contracts that’s fine, but it is difficult and not a given.There is no set amount of max contracts guaranteed to every team. Second banana has always meant "guy who deserves to be second banana". We've frequently discussed teams, including our own team, who at times has no second banana or no player worthy of that description. I've seen people, maybe even you, claim we had two third bananas and no second banana, for example. All of which I am pretty sure you understood from the outset and, for whatever reason, decided to dive into a semantics game rather than discuss the topic. And you had to know it was a semantics game because the way you interpreted my comment led you to an absurd result which should have promoted you to consider if it was a false interpretation. You're acting like you never even considered you had chosen the wrong interpretation. Come on tullabye, are you just bored or something? Cut the crap man. If you think Butler isn't a max contract, that's fine. But that's not the extent of what you said. You said only superstars who you build the entire team around deserve max contracts - which I argue is false. You also argued 2nd bananas never deserve max contracts. I also argue that is false. That's the issue I was getting at with superstars being actually worth MORE than the max and the max isn't itself a measure if someone is a superstar. There are "deserving" max players who are not superstars but who are so good and complimentary to a superstar that they "deserve" the max. The league only has about 5 "superstars" and if only superstars "deserve" the max then you'd be saying there are only 5 players who "deserve" the max. And if you disagree, are you instead saying the league has a dozen superstars?
|
|
|
Post by gilp5 on Nov 28, 2018 16:34:23 GMT -8
You are the one spinning. I am not saying there are only five players worth max contracts, I just said I do not believe Jimmy Butler is one of them. It’s just an opinion and then you come in and try to conclusively say I am wrong. You said each team gets two max contracts and that second bananas get max contracts. That is implying that there should be 60 max contacts which is absurd. Read your own writing. Also teams do not automatically get two max contracts. There is a salary cap in which teams can maneuver the salaries paid out to what best fits their situation. If teams choose to maneuver in a way that can accommodate two max contracts that’s fine, but it is difficult and not a given.There is no set amount of max contracts guaranteed to every team. Second banana has always meant "guy who deserves to be second banana". We've frequently discussed teams, including our own team, who at times has no second banana or no player worthy of that description. I've seen people, maybe even you, claim we had two third bananas and no second banana, for example. All of which I am pretty sure you understood from the outset and, for whatever reason, decided to dive into a semantics game rather than discuss the topic. And you had to know it was a semantics game because the way you interpreted my comment led you to an absurd result which should have promoted you to consider if it was a false interpretation. You're acting like you never even considered you had chosen the wrong interpretation. Come on tullabye, are you just bored or something? Cut the crap man. If you think Butler isn't a max contract, that's fine. But that's not the extent of what you said. You said only superstars who you build the entire team around deserve max contracts - which I argue is false. You also argued 2nd bananas never deserve max contracts. I also argue that is false. That's the issue I was getting at with superstars being actually worth MORE than the max and the max isn't itself a measure if someone is a superstar. There are "deserving" max players who are not superstars but who are so good and complimentary to a superstar that they "deserve" the max. The league only has about 5 "superstars" and if only superstars "deserve" the max then you'd be saying there are only 5 players who "deserve" the max. And if you disagree, are you instead saying the league has a dozen superstars? I think you are generally wrong that there are only 5 superstars. I'd say more like 10 or so superstars (not exact) that deserve the max and then a team gets in real trouble when it gives a max contract to someone like Butler or Harris who is good but should not tie up that much space or turn into an albatross contract. However, if the second banana is a superstar (such as on GSW) then sure give him the max. Also, I am talking about a 30 million/year max contract, not a rookie max.
|
|
|
Post by mistwell on Nov 28, 2018 17:01:46 GMT -8
I guess we disagree about what superstar means then. Klay was a second banana (IMO GSW have two first-bananas, which is extraordinary), and IMO deserved a max contract despite the fact he's not a superstar. He is not eligible for the super-max by the way, so maybe people are confusing super-max with max? Klay can make up to just over $34M/year with his next contract baring super-max qualification (which I do not think he will get but who knows). Klay's worth $34M/year and I don't think a lot of teams would bat an eye about paying him that.
BTW same thing with Paul George. He's paid just over $34M/yr on a max deal, and he also did not qualify for super-max. I'd say Paul George is a max player, worth that $34M/yr, but not a superstar. Max deals do not only go to superstars, nor should they. That's how they worked out the super-max issue in the CBA to begin with. That was sort of the point, to allow actual superstars to earn more than just max players.
|
|
|
Post by dyce on Nov 28, 2018 18:22:59 GMT -8
Second bananas should all be all stars. Now, are there all stars that shouldn't be getting max money?
|
|
|
Post by dyce on Nov 28, 2018 18:30:16 GMT -8
That was sort of the point, to allow actual superstars to earn more than just max players. One of the things the league did was to allow only one super max player per team. So even if you have a max player, teams have to ask themselves is he super max worthy?
|
|
|
Post by hitnrun24 on Nov 28, 2018 20:47:38 GMT -8
That was sort of the point, to allow actual superstars to earn more than just max players. One of the things the league did was to allow only one super max player per team. So even if you have a max player, teams have to ask themselves is he super max worthy? I believe it's 2 guys per team that can get it. Like Harden and Paul.
|
|
|
Post by dyce on Nov 28, 2018 21:56:54 GMT -8
Paul was able to get such a big contract because he is a 10 year veteran. But technically it's not a supermax contract.
|
|