B/R Eric Pincus, CLE MIA PHI WAS

[toooskies]

again we can't double count salary to demand extra pay. Yes Simmons isn't worth his money. But that money is already allocated to Mitchell. So you would get compensated for the better player, you don't also get to claim an additional $40M of salary you must be compensated for.

I also notice we never do this when our team uses bad money as salary matching. Kevin Love was sold to this board as an asset because he would eventually be an expiring contract. He wasn't an asset, but if he had been used as matching as an expiring and the team getting him was sending out as much or more money there wouldn't have been a Kevin Love tax. Cleveland would have just been expected to pay for the upgrade.

No idea why this continues.

Cleveland did, in fact, have to pay neutral player value instead of Kevin Love's expiring salary (or LeVert's salary in the place of Markkanen or Sexton) in the original Mitchell deal. It's literally an example of expiring salary having less value than what was looked at at the time as roughly neutral salary going back to Utah.

Philly offering 4 1sts and a trade exception (and/or Reed, and/or a S&T of Melton, Hield, or Harris) is worth more to the Cavs than the Nets' offer of 4 1sts and Ben Simmons. It might be worth more to the Cavs than five 1sts, given the Cavs' tax situation after taking back Simmons.

(Morey tries to go for a Kawhi + PG-style free agency move here, as Mitchell's salary is relatively low for a max. Even if it's just luring Siakam or OG to play with Nurse again.)

[Texas Chuck]

Niang being painted as a positive worth draft compensation while DFS is being painted as a contract a team would be delighted to get off because...checks notes...he only started more than twice as many games last season than Niang has in his career.

It's almost like we are valuing players for reasons other than their actual play.

Are you even reading the posts?

Yes. You said Simmons would only be around one year, but Niang would be around longer(A good thing iyo). Then you cited spinning him off for draft capital. Then with DFS you said the Nets would love to get off his contract with your only reasoning be he started only twice as many games as Niang ever has.

And you spun those descriptions after saying you wanted to swap the two. Which means you would prefer DFS to Niang. If you meant something else, write something else.

[Godaddycurse]

(Morey tries to go for a Kawhi + PG-style free agency move here, as Mitchell's salary is relatively low for a max. Even if it's just luring Siakam or OG to play with Nurse again.)

Mitchell's salary would leave them with <30M capspace left which isn't enough for another max

[jbk1234]

Niang being painted as a positive worth draft compensation while DFS is being painted as a contract a team would be delighted to get off because...checks notes...he only started more than twice as many games last season than Niang has in his career.

It's almost like we are valuing players for reasons other than their actual play.

Are you even reading the posts?

Yes. You said Simmons would only be around one year, but Niang would be around longer(A good thing iyo). Then you cited spinning him off for draft capital. Then with DFS you said the Nets would love to get off his contract with your only reasoning be he started only twice as many games as Niang ever has.

And you spun those descriptions after saying you wanted to swap the two. Which means you would prefer DFS to Niang. If you meant something else, write something else.

I literaly wrote that I would push for that swap, as in the Cavs would have to push the Nets to do it. It's the first thing I wrote.

The *minor draft capital* would go to a *3rd (non-playoff team)* with Niang in the event the Nets didn't want him.

Hartford suggested that Niang is a good fit alongside Simmons and my reply was "the problem" with that was Niang would still be on the Cavs after next season.

As far as DFS, he was healthy for a lot more than the 56 games he started, they're deep at the wing, and if the plan is to add a third star in 25, DFS could screw that up by opting in especially if he gets injured again.

[toooskies]

(Morey tries to go for a Kawhi + PG-style free agency move here, as Mitchell's salary is relatively low for a max. Even if it's just luring Siakam or OG to play with Nurse again.)

Mitchell's salary would leave them with <30M capspace left which isn't enough for another max

Well, that depends on a lot of things.

In the hypothetical Mitchell trade, Philly could include Paul Reed or Philly's 2024 first to clear more cap space.

The final cap number isn't set, and is likely to be adjusted up when the final number comes out. This happens nearly every year that there wasn't COVID, and the NBAPA may want smoothing to kick in early if the new TV contracts are set.

Vets like Siakam, DeRozan, or Paul George may take less than a max for more years on the back end, especially if their teams don't offer them a max. OG isn't likely to get that from NY and may be poachable with a near-max, depending on his relationship with Nurse.

Or the Sixers could use the space on multiple higher-level defensive players (i.e. KCP and Claxton), which would be less sexy but possibly a better team.

[toooskies]

Are you even reading the posts?

Yes. You said Simmons would only be around one year, but Niang would be around longer(A good thing iyo). Then you cited spinning him off for draft capital. Then with DFS you said the Nets would love to get off his contract with your only reasoning be he started only twice as many games as Niang ever has.

And you spun those descriptions after saying you wanted to swap the two. Which means you would prefer DFS to Niang. If you meant something else, write something else.

I literaly wrote that I would push for that swap, as in the Cavs would have to push the Nets to do it. It's the first thing I wrote.

The *minor draft capital* would go to a *3rd (non-playoff team)* with Niang in the event the Nets didn't want him.

Hartford suggested that Niang is a good fit alongside Simmons and my reply was "the problem" with that was Niang would still be on the Cavs after this season.

As far as DFS, he was healthy for a lot more than the 56 games he started, they're deep at the wing, and if the plan is to add a third star in 25, DFS could screw that up by opting in especially if he gets injured again.

The bigger issue in this whole situation is that, even if Simmons's $40m expiring contract isn't an objective imposition to take for a year, it is larger than Mitchell's $35m contract. And while that's not a huge difference, the Cavs don't have a lot of wiggle room to stay under the tax while keeping Okoro and adding draft pick salary. (Final cap numbers and Okoro's contract will determine the specifics.) Simmons's $40m contract is a literal problem that needs to be resolved in the deal-- it's way more money than the Cavs need to take on.

Adding LeVert, whether adjusting compensation or not, resolves that. Adding Niang, whether adjusting compensation or not, probably resolves that. If you start adding other players going back to the Cavs, then you again have to resolve how a Cavs team without Mitchell stays under the tax. Otherwise, the Cavs need to make another move to stay under the tax, or lose a young player for nothing. (Because they're definitely not paying the tax just to keep Simmons around.)

[HartfordWhalers]

Fixing taking on 5m by sending out 16.6m is definitely a bigger switch and would absolutely cut down the compensation if we are viewing it as a 'need equal salary' sort of thing that I don't really see often.

For what it is worth: Schroeder/Simmons for Mitchell/LeVert/Jerome looks very salary balanced.

[jbk1234]

Fixing taking on 5m by sending out 16.6m is definitely a bigger switch and would absolutely cut down the compensation if we are viewing it as a 'need equal salary' sort of thing that I don't really see often.

For what it is worth: Schroeder/Simmons for Mitchell/LeVert/Jerome looks very salary balanced.

With Okoro's RFA status and an in-bound rookie, the Cavs would really need to shed a little salary. I'm not against taking back Simmons per se (mostly because he could develop into a useful trade piece at the deadline with picks attached), but I really struggle to think of a 3rd team that would, even as an expiring this summer, unless they got value to do so. His contract is just too big.

[tidho]

Fixing taking on 5m by sending out 16.6m is definitely a bigger switch and would absolutely cut down the compensation if we are viewing it as a 'need equal salary' sort of thing that I don't really see often.

For what it is worth: Schroeder/Simmons for Mitchell/LeVert/Jerome looks very salary balanced.

With Okoro's RFA status and an in-bound rookie, the Cavs would really need to shed a little salary. I'm not against taking back Simmons per se (mostly because he could develop into a useful trade piece at the deadline with picks attached), but I really struggle to think of a 3rd team that would, even as an expiring this summer, unless they got value to do so. His contract is just too big.

Simmons-Okoro-Wade-Mobley-Allen? We'll have opposing veterans retiring at halftime because 'the game just isn't fun anymore'.

I don't object to an expiring Simmons being the offsetting salary if Mitchell is dealt. Fully expect CLE is going to be well over the tax line anyway. Plus Summons as an 8th/9th type guy probably works given his versatility.

[jbk1234]

Fixing taking on 5m by sending out 16.6m is definitely a bigger switch and would absolutely cut down the compensation if we are viewing it as a 'need equal salary' sort of thing that I don't really see often.

For what it is worth: Schroeder/Simmons for Mitchell/LeVert/Jerome looks very salary balanced.

With Okoro's RFA status and an in-bound rookie, the Cavs would really need to shed a little salary. I'm not against taking back Simmons per se (mostly because he could develop into a useful trade piece at the deadline with picks attached), but I really struggle to think of a 3rd team that would, even as an expiring this summer, unless they got value to do so. His contract is just too big.

Simmons-Okoro-Wade-Mobley-Allen? We'll have opposing veterans retiring at halftime because 'the game just isn't fun anymore'.

I don't object to an expiring Simmons being the offsetting salary if Mitchell is dealt. Fully expect CLE is going to be well over the tax line anyway. Plus Summons as an 8th/9th type guy probably works given his versatility.

I don't think you or I objecting to going into the tax a year early is what will be determinative.

[toooskies]

Fixing taking on 5m by sending out 16.6m is definitely a bigger switch and would absolutely cut down the compensation if we are viewing it as a 'need equal salary' sort of thing that I don't really see often.

For what it is worth: Schroeder/Simmons for Mitchell/LeVert/Jerome looks very salary balanced.

With Okoro's RFA status and an in-bound rookie, the Cavs would really need to shed a little salary. I'm not against taking back Simmons per se (mostly because he could develop into a useful trade piece at the deadline with picks attached), but I really struggle to think of a 3rd team that would, even as an expiring this summer, unless they got value to do so. His contract is just too big.

Simmons-Okoro-Wade-Mobley-Allen? We'll have opposing veterans retiring at halftime because 'the game just isn't fun anymore'.

I don't object to an expiring Simmons being the offsetting salary if Mitchell is dealt. Fully expect CLE is going to be well over the tax line anyway. Plus Summons as an 8th/9th type guy probably works given his versatility.

If Cleveland trades away Donovan Mitchell for picks, there is no way this team goes into the tax anytime soon.