Player Movement Thread (Was Free Agency Thread)

[jemagee]

The problem I've found is that there's no rationality in it, at least when it comes to phillies fans and guys like abreu, rollins, howard, the criticisms are stupid, moronic (howard isn't any 'fatter' than he has been years before and he's not a worse fielder than he was before he's always sucked at it)...hatred for abreu was beyond stupid, he WALKED TOO MUCH? 

My personal experience is that all the contract will do is people will focus more on the 'stupid numbers' and criticize without praising a good job done...

[The Poster]

How much does the salary cap go up each year, or better yet how much has it increased the last 5 years % wise? Is that a good measure for the next 5 years?

My question is will Iggy contract be considered reasonable in 5 years because of the cap % increases?

I know the NFL kind of works that way( contracts written for 5+ years look good later because of the rising cap in the NFL)

[tk76-]

The cap raises between 2-3M each year.  It should be about 71M the 5th year of his contract.

His raises would eat up about 1/2 of the cap raise each year.  Brand's rasises will eat up the other 1/2.

[jemagee]

The cap raises between 2-3M each year.  It should be about 71M the 5th year of his contract.

When's the CBA expire?

Stern is going to want to up the age limit to two years, and that's going to cost him dollars in terms of percentage of revenue to 'salary pool' which could impact how much the cap goes up each year.

[TheGuiltyParty]

I'm not so sure about him going after the age increase anymore. With the Euro's now going after American talent and a high profile player like Brandan Jennings going to Europe over college, I'm not so sure that Stern really wants to push prospects across the Atlantic.

[jemagee]

I'm not so sure about him going after the age increase anymore. With the Euro's now going after American talent and a high profile player like Brandan Jennings going to Europe over college, I'm not so sure that Stern really wants to push prospects across the Atlantic.

We'll see, I don't think the jennings thing is going to encourage anyone else to do the same thing, besides, i'm not sure i want my team drafting anyone who can't possibly qualify for college within the crooked set up of the NCAA anyway

[darius08]

Such a large contract with Iggy dramatically reduces flexibility. Suppose 'Dala doesn't play up to the contract, i.e. simply performs at last year's level (maybe with increased fg% or 3pt% but essentially last year's level).  Then he becomes untradable.  Not that he wouldn't be a valuable player, but that he wouldn't be valuable for the contract he has. So if we're not clicking and need to make some changes, we wouldn't have many options. We'd be forced to build around 'Dala, meaning we'd have tradable pieces of:
*Brand (if he recovers from injury, he'd be movalbe; if not, we're in trouble there too). What a pity to have to move him?
*Miller. It's unclear to me what his market value really is.
*T.Young. It'd be a real pity to trade him.
*Speights. It'd be a pity to trade a young guy showing promise.

All our other players would have negative value relative to their contract or would just not bring much back (J.Smith).

Now I realize you shouldn't give out contracts solely with an eye towards tradability. But this is a team that does not have lots of talent on reasonable contracts and therefore doesn't have lots of flexibility. Iguodala on this huge contract could really push us towards a dead end.

[pointguard86]

darius,

good point on flexibility.  this iggy thing already dragging on, i have a feeling that he's going to sign the QO.  that would still give us some flexibility next year, maybe fast eddie will take his chances.

[Skates]

Such a large contract with Iggy dramatically reduces flexibility. Suppose 'Dala doesn't play up to the contract, i.e. simply performs at last year's level (maybe with increased fg% or 3pt% but essentially last year's level).  Then he becomes untradable.  Not that he wouldn't be a valuable player, but that he wouldn't be valuable for the contract he has. So if we're not clicking and need to make some changes, we wouldn't have many options. We'd be forced to build around 'Dala, meaning we'd have tradable pieces of:
*Brand (if he recovers from injury, he'd be movalbe; if not, we're in trouble there too). What a pity to have to move him?
*Miller. It's unclear to me what his market value really is.
*T.Young. It'd be a real pity to trade him.
*Speights. It'd be a pity to trade a young guy showing promise.

All our other players would have negative value relative to their contract or would just not bring much back (J.Smith).

Now I realize you shouldn't give out contracts solely with an eye towards tradability. But this is a team that does not have lots of talent on reasonable contracts and therefore doesn't have lots of flexibility. Iguodala on this huge contract could really push us towards a dead end.

Actually, unless you are signing an absolute franchise player who will get the max no matter what, I believe one of the primary ways to evaluate the "market" value of a proposed contract is to determine, in your own mind, what the contract does with regards to the player's future trade value.  WG is a good example.  He is not getting paid a ton of money every year, but combining his salary and the number of years on hisw contract he basically cannot be traded, and certainly not for anything of value. 

I think that if a contract gives a player significant negative trade equity, it is a bad contract.  I discount the final year of a contract, since teams are looking for expiring contracts, and the first year since you already made a huge mistake if you need to immediately trade a guy you just signed and becasue BYC issues can make trades nearly impossible.  In a six year contract can the guy be traded in years 2-5 without his contract being a major impediment to getting good value back.  All contracts have some detrimental value on trade flexibility simply because of cap constraints and the arcane CBA trading rules and exceptions, but if a player's possible value return in a trade is diminished by 25% or more by their contract then I would consider it a bad contract.  As a caveat, a team that needs one final piece to truly be a CHiP contender might well give that last piece a bad contract and if they win the title it suddenly becomes a good contract.

[TheGuiltyParty]

I agree with the above Skates but answer me this... what are your thoughts about Iguodala's deal in years 2-4 of a 5 year/$70MIL deal. To me, it's too risky because if he doesn't perform up to expectations, no one will want to take on the deal hence leaving us a mediocre team and wasting Brand's remaining years.

[Skates]

I agree with the above Skates but answer me this... what are your thoughts about Iguodala's deal in years 2-4 of a 5 year/$70MIL deal. To me, it's too risky because if he doesn't perform up to expectations, no one will want to take on the deal hence leaving us a mediocre team and wasting Brand's remaining years.

That is my concern as well.  I think not having the sixth year on there helps becuase it reduces the time and financial commitment a trading team would have to assume.  I think he might be tradable for a year or two, especially with a lot of teams shedding salary for the next two years, the next two summers may be unique in that there may be more money than available players making it a seller's market.  After that I think he will become very difficult to move him based on the rumored contract and what I believe his value as a player is.

[jemagee]

Well there's two kinds of expectations.

There's fan expectation and then there's reality, whose expectations are we talking?

[Sub]

After that I think he will become very difficult to move him based on the rumored contract and what I believe his value as a player is.

I don't know if that's an assessment that can be now, though. I guess it depends on where you feel Iguodala is in his development. I think there's still room for growth, so I wouldn't project his contracts value in years 3-5 based on the player he is right now.

[TheGuiltyParty]

Well there's two kinds of expectations.

There's fan expectation and then there's reality, whose expectations are we talking?

So fans are always wrong?

[Skates]

After that I think he will become very difficult to move him based on the rumored contract and what I believe his value as a player is.

I don't know if that's an assessment that can be now, though. I guess it depends on where you feel Iguodala is in his development. I think there's still room for growth, so I wouldn't project his contracts value in years 3-5 based on the player he is right now.

Well there's two kinds of expectations.

There's fan expectation and then there's reality, whose expectations are we talking?

What I am talking about is the expectations of the decision maker, in this case Stefanski.  If I was in his shoes the analysis I discussed above would be based on what I and my staff project to be Iggy's future level of development and a projections of where the market will be in years 2, 3 and 4 of the contract.  My presumption is that if a GM gives a contract for a certain number of years and dollars that they project the player to be worth the investment through at least 80% of the contract's duration.  If Stefanski gives Iggy $70 million over 5 years it should be because he thinks that Iggy's production will fairly evenly match his contract cost for at least the next four years.  

So two projections, and their inherent potential for error, are needed.  One if of the player's future level of play and the second if what the future trade/salary market will be like in terms of contract dollars.  I don't think fans' expectations should be an issue, the expectations and projections should be those of the FO staff.  One of the items not discussed above is the danger inherent in any contract of a major injury.  In the world of guaranteed contracts and salary caps those kind of injuries can be devastating and are in most cases unpredictable.  All you can do there is your due diligence through physical exams (i.e. don't just believe that Freddy Garcia is sound) and keeping the contract as short as possible.  On that front the five year deal is safer than a six year deal.