01-16-2024, 04:15 PM
(01-16-2024, 02:13 PM)omahen Wrote: Seems like he wants to be the man in Toronto. His stance is reducing his price and making it less likely he gets traded. If he is not traded, he can negotiate extension with Toronto or go to FA, if they are not willing to committ. Toronto can't afford to lose him for nothing in the summer too. I think his plan might work.
If he gets traded anyway, I think the team trading for him will have best chance to keep him, as they can offer him most money. But the team would need to risk it.
It's a fascinating strategy: to drive down his attractiveness to acquiring teams, thus reducing the return that Toronto can expect in a trade. So essentially, it's a squeeze on Toronto to ante up the max.
It also means that, if indeed a trade happens, the acquiring team won't be giving up many assets. So he'll be joining a decently strong team, not one with a bare cupboard.
Now, let's say no trade is made, he hits free agency. Who can sign him? Seems like a short list. If he wants to play for a winner, maybe Philadelphia? But they will recognize the lack of competition, and perhaps offer somewhat less than the max.
So really, Siakam's maximum leverage is right now, prior to the trade deadline.
What if the offer to Toronto was, say, Klay Thompson (with a promise to re-sign 3 years @$15m/yr)?
Or, how about Gordon Hayward, with a similar promise?
Not exciting players, by any stretch, but at least they get something.
My issue right now with any Mavs offer is that, for salary matching purposes, we've got to include some serviceable pieces: THJ, or Maxi, or GWill, along with Holmes. Based on Siakam's stated intention of testing the free agent market, and my unwillingness to give him a max contract, it seems too rich.