Trade & FA 2023-24: Stein-Ingram Trade Inevitable| LAL Want Lebron Back On Any Terms

[KillerLeft]

That is interesting.  Did not know that was an option.  That makes this move even more curious.

Samesies. 

Like the man said, either something is afoot or they are making a pointless move without any real planning. I have a hard time believing it’s the latter, given all the overt intent we’ve witnessed this summer.

Kind of excited - I just hope it’s not about Ayton.

[mvossman]

Samesies. 

Like the man said, either something is afoot or they are making a pointless move without any real planning. I have a hard time believing it’s the latter, given all the overt intent we’ve witnessed this summer.

Kind of excited - I just hope it’s not about Ayton.

One possibility is that this is being slightly misreported and they ultimately waive year 1 and stretch waive 2.  I agree that there is nothing they have done this offseason to suggest they would make a pointless move.

There has been a lot of talk about Ayton, but I am still struggling to see the Suns do that without a legit center coming back.  My question would be how does this make sense from a Capela standpoint?  That still seems like the most likely move to me.

[surfpuckmd]

That's not the answer to the SW question. In waiving McGee, they can eat the current salary this year in full when they have the room, then SW the next year's when we get there (assuming they need the room).

Assuming they are going to SW this year's too, it means they either have a need for an extra $4M in under-tax room THIS YEAR, or they just aren't planning very well.

If they can eat the current salary this year then stretch waive him next season, this become a less terrible decision.  Still bad but less terrible.

[surfpuckmd]

You have omitted the 3rd possibility (in which JM wasn't going to play because he sux, but neither coach nor star had any input or preference on whether JM was on the roster or not).

In that one, the Mavs roster planners decided they need the cap/tax room for something. The deadline is Sept 1 to make a decision one way or the other on how you are going to account for the 5.7M this season. They still want to move his salary, but don't seem to have a taker, so they are at a crossroads.

This seems to imply Mark Cuban would like to make a bold move but refuses to pay the luxury tax for it this season.  It is disturbing he is carefully avoiding the tax as every other potential NBA contender (other than maybe the Grizzlies) will likely be paying the tax this season.

[surfpuckmd]

MLE (begin)   12,405,000
Curry              4,000,000
Exum              3,000,000
MLE (still left)   5,405,000

Maybe a good player is bought out by a tanking team later in the season and we use our remaining MLE to sign him?

[mvossman]

This seems to imply Mark Cuban would like to make a bold move but refuses to pay the luxury tax for it this season.  It is disturbing he is carefully avoiding the tax as every other potential NBA contender (other than maybe the Grizzlies) will likely be paying the tax this season.

Given that the difference between paying the most we can and avoiding tax is only 6-7 million, and there are significant penalties for repeater tax I can live with it.  I mean if the only decision regarding avoiding tax is to stretch waive McGee, then I have no problem with it.

[Chicagojk]

I would have gone a different direction, but in the long run I don't think it matters much. I don't expect they have anything in the works either.

They probably just came to the conclusion that McGee was never going to be a piece moved in a trade. He was either going to have a seat next to Cuban for the next two years or he would be waived. So they decided to waive him.

Then the decided for future flexibility they would sign someone to a non guaranteed contract in case there is a future 2-1 trade at some part next year. They probably looked at a few guys and made decision with an older veteran was better than the younger, more raw options. I just wished Morris could still move. He just doesn't look like he can move at all on defense.

[KillerLeft]

I would have gone a different direction, but in the long run I don't think it matters much.  I don't expect they have anything in the works either.

Honestly, if this was the only way to dump enough money to feasibly make some other move in the near future, I can even understand the direction. I might even end up liking it. 

It's not like any of us were excited about McGee being on the team - we're just surprised about the stretch waive. But, if we learn something else soon that makes their motivations for this move make sense...

[mvossman]

I would have gone a different direction, but in the long run I don't think it matters much.  I don't expect they have anything in the works either.

If they have nothing in the works, then the only reason to stretch the first year is to give them flexibility in case something comes up.  We have seen this FO do that a lot in the past, and it almost never amounts to anything.  They seem to be operating differently this offseason and I am of the hope that if they are stretching the first year, its because they do have something in the works.

[michaeltex]

Stupid question here...

IF they can waive this year + Stretch waive next year (didn't know it was possible, thanks for the education!), are they locked into a simple waive for this year or can they change it to a SW later if the extra cap space is needed?

[KillerLeft]

Stupid question here...

IF they can waive this year + Stretch waive next year (didn't know it was possible, thanks for the education!), are they locked into a simple waive for this year or can they change it to a SW later if the extra cap space is needed?

I don't think that's a stupid question at all. In other words, could they be stretch waiving because they have to declare one way or the other and are hopeful to find a use for the money in the near future but don't yet have something lined up?

I'm curious, too, but my guess is that the deadline mentioned in the Shams tweet (next week, I think) means they can't change after the fact until year 2.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Stupid question here...

IF they can waive this year + Stretch waive next year (didn't know it was possible, thanks for the education!), are they locked into a simple waive for this year or can they change it to a SW later if the extra cap space is needed?

What FG wrote when he first brought this up a few weeks ago was….

They have a decision to make by 9/1 as you can’t use the S/W past that.  If you S/W, by then, it is 2x remaining years + 1 year for the whole contract (which was always the case).  The thing that is new is IF you do a straight waive for year one, you get a second decision point later for the second year.  In the past, the Waive was a Waive for both seasons.  The new part is the ability to Waive year one and then later be able to decide to S/W the second year.

[chaparral]

My question would be how does this make sense from a Capela standpoint?  That still seems like the most likely move to me.

Would you do Holems and Kleber (23mm) for Capela and Garrison Mathews (22.6mm)?

C : Capela - Powell - Lively
PF: Williams - Jones - Morris
SF: Green - Hardaway - Prosper
SG: Irving - Exum - Mathews
PG: Doncic - Curry - Hardy

[KillerLeft]

What FG wrote when he first brought this up a few weeks ago was….

They have a decision to make by 9/1 as you can’t use the S/W past that.  If you S/W, by then, it is 2x remaining years + 1 year for the whole contract (which was always the case).  The thing that is new is IF you do a straight waive for year one, you get a second decision point later for the second year.  In the past, the Waive was a Waive for both seasons.  The new part is the ability to Waive year one and then later be able to decide to S/W the second year.

My interpretation of this is that a decision to S/W without having a reason to do so would be silly. With no immediate use for the savings, the practical choice would be to eat as much of that money as possible this season, since doing so won't trigger any tax payment. Even if you know you're going to S/W year two, getting as much as possible off the books right away would only improve matters.

Do you concur, or am I missing something?

[michaeltex]

What FG wrote when he first brought this up a few weeks ago was….

They have a decision to make by 9/1 as you can’t use the S/W past that.  If you S/W, by then, it is 2x remaining years + 1 year for the whole contract (which was always the case).  The thing that is new is IF you do a straight waive for year one, you get a second decision point later for the second year.  In the past, the Waive was a Waive for both seasons.  The new part is the ability to Waive year one and then later be able to decide to S/W the second year.

Thanks for the clarification!

I was wondering if a waive this year could be changed to a stretch mid-season and sort of act like a secret bank account in case the half-salary was needed for a trade. But it doesn't work that way, so there goes that idea. 

Waive or stretch waive, it will just be the lingering smell from a bad deal that should have never happened.

[michaeltex]

My interpretation of this is that a decision to S/W without having a reason to do so would be silly. With no immediate use for the savings, the practical choice would be to eat as much of that money as possible this season, since doing so won't trigger any tax payment. Even if you know you're going to S/W year two, getting as much as possible off the books right away would only improve matters.

Do you concur, or am I missing something?

To expand on your thought. I agree with a waive in year1 to clear as much off as possible. My question is whether, given the cap room, you could accelerate some of the year2 salary into year 1 making the future hit less. The player gets paid either way.

[Chicagojk]

Would you do Holems and Kleber (23mm) for Capela and Garrison Mathews (22.6mm)?

C : Capela - Powell - Lively
PF: Williams - Jones - Morris
SF: Green - Hardaway - Prosper
SG: Irving - Exum - Mathews
PG: Doncic - Curry - Hardy

I don’t think the Mavs are shopping Kleber but I think he is an important name to keep in mind.   He is important to this current team.  But if Dallas wants to hold on to the kids in any trades (or at least most of them), then I think Kleber with a pick is going to be the package that could get some traction.    

I don’t think I would move him for Capela though, but would need to think more about it.   I expect Kleber will be on the team for the full year.  But if someone gave me an over/under if he is with the team still in two years…I think I may go with the under.

[DanSchwartzgan]

My interpretation of this is that a decision to S/W without having a reason to do so would be silly. With no immediate use for the savings, the practical choice would be to eat as much of that money as possible this season, since doing so won't trigger any tax payment. Even if you know you're going to S/W year two, getting as much as possible off the books right away would only improve matters.

Do you concur, or am I missing something?

I think you’d have to know what possibilities are out there for a deal using the extra space under the tax to fully evaluate this.  

$3.4mm of ‘extra’ space under the tax could open all sorts of possibilities.  The difference between the two options isn’t that much…$2mm in a single year.  This is a comparison of the two options:

      W/SW.  SW/SW
23.  $5.7.    $2.3
24.  $2.0.    $2.3
25.  $2.0.    $2.3
26.  $2.0.    $2.3
27.              $2.3

---

Would you do Holems and Kleber (23mm) for Capela and Garrison Mathews (22.6mm)?

PF: Williams - Jones - Morris

Yeah, the depth at both C and PF seems to at least open the possibility…not to mention OMax could also play this position.

[MarkAguirreWrathofGod]

I wouldn’t do a Maxi for Capela deal. Maxi unlocks so many different lineup combinations for us. I understand the appeal of Capela locking down the Center spot until Lively is ready. I’d rather continue to cultivate the positional versatility that Maxi, Grant Williams, Omax, Josh Green, Dwight Powell and Derrick Jones can afford us. And eventually add Lively to that group too. He probably won’t ever be Mobley level, but I think he’ll prove to be highly switchable.

[F Gump]

If they can eat the current salary this year then stretch waive him next season, this become a less terrible decision.  Still bad but less terrible.

They can do it like that if they want to. In fact, if they don't SW this year's salary, they can roll into next summer with the ability to choose to do that final year either way. But the reporting is telling us it will all be SW'ed now. 

Technically, JM doesn't have a 3rd year yet -- its only a PO. In past eras, a waiver would only pay the PO on a waiver if the PO had already been exercised prior to the waiver. Now the contract is allowed to specify. A smart FO would have given him a contract in which he would not receive his salary for the option year if he is waived prior to exercising his option. This was a really bad exercise in negotiating.