Miggs
Well-Known Member
*Trade Burks and a 2nd to the Sixers for Shawn Long, a backup center who can hit the 3 and rebound at a very high rate. He was 16th in rebounds per 36 (Gobert was 11th) and shot almost 37% from three on 1.1 attempts per game.
*Opt out of Boris.
*Max Hayward--He'd be at 30.6M next year
*Sign Hill to 4 years/90M, placing as much of that as possible on the 16-17 cap as a bonus as Locke had mentioned. If we put just 5M (I think we can do more) on 16-17, we could start Hill at about 20M next year, and go up 1M per.
*Re-sign Ingles at 4 years/40M, starting at 8.5M next year and go up 1M per.
*Use some of the MLE on Bogut. 1 year, 2.5M.
*Trade the 30th pick to a team for their 1st next year, thus giving us three 1sts. In such a deep draft, I could definitely see somebody doing this. Maybe a dumb team like the Knicks. This does a few things. It gives us a lot more options next off-season when financial restraints become even tougher. It perhaps more importantly gives us three 1st rounders next year in a draft full of bigs which could be very important as we may likely be looking for a replacement for Favors.
Hill-20M
Exum-4.992M (24.992M)
Neto-1.471M (26.463M)
Hood-2.387M (28.85M)
Hayward-30.6M (59.45M)
Favors-12.0M (71.45M)
Johnson-10.505M (81.955M)
Bolomboy-1.313M (83.268M)
Lyles-2.441M (85.709M)
Gobert-21.225M (106.934M)
Long-1.313M (108.247M)
Ingles-8.5M (116.747M)
24th pick-1.316M (118.063M)
Bogut-2.5M (120.563M)
This brings us just below the LT for 14 guys. We could then keep our other 2nd rounder on the roster as a 15th guy or use more of the MLE on someone else, I'd say a wing.
Hill-Exum-Neto-2nd rounder
Ingles-Hood-1st rounder
Hayward-2nd rounder-other than MLE player
Favors-Johnson-Lyles-Bolomboy
Gobert-Bogut-Long
We'd have the entire core back from last year minus Boris. We'd have added legit toughness and size in Bogut behind Gobert. We'd also have added a 1st rounder and 2nd rounder who could hopefully develop along with the other guys on roster. Namely, Hayward, Gobert, Hood and Exum. Lastly, we'd have a ton of options as the deadline approached.
Yes, we'd be just at or above the LT but Hood, Exum, Favors, Lyles and three 1st round picks next year would give us a lot of options in trades come February if the right situation presents itself. We'd also have added a 5 in Long cheap as **** and he can hit the 3, something we currently don't have, and rebound really well. I could see many here unhappy with trading one of our 1sts and I understand that. It's not a sticking point for me. Heck, maybe we should to draft a 4 and get ahead of the curve on Favors' departure. That would put s just over the LT. No biggie.
The sticking points to get this to work here are:
Opting out of Boris--easily doable
Retaining Hayward at the max--I think we will
Retaining Hill at the salary mentioned-a very reasonable salary. Heck we could go a little higher if we can push more of a "bonus" onto 16-17
Retaining Ingles--seems fairly reasonable...maybe a little low to some, a little high to others here. Just about right.
Trading Burks for next to nothing (and yet getting a killer rebounder/stretch 5 guy)--the toughest to pull off
*Opt out of Boris.
*Max Hayward--He'd be at 30.6M next year
*Sign Hill to 4 years/90M, placing as much of that as possible on the 16-17 cap as a bonus as Locke had mentioned. If we put just 5M (I think we can do more) on 16-17, we could start Hill at about 20M next year, and go up 1M per.
*Re-sign Ingles at 4 years/40M, starting at 8.5M next year and go up 1M per.
*Use some of the MLE on Bogut. 1 year, 2.5M.
*Trade the 30th pick to a team for their 1st next year, thus giving us three 1sts. In such a deep draft, I could definitely see somebody doing this. Maybe a dumb team like the Knicks. This does a few things. It gives us a lot more options next off-season when financial restraints become even tougher. It perhaps more importantly gives us three 1st rounders next year in a draft full of bigs which could be very important as we may likely be looking for a replacement for Favors.
Hill-20M
Exum-4.992M (24.992M)
Neto-1.471M (26.463M)
Hood-2.387M (28.85M)
Hayward-30.6M (59.45M)
Favors-12.0M (71.45M)
Johnson-10.505M (81.955M)
Bolomboy-1.313M (83.268M)
Lyles-2.441M (85.709M)
Gobert-21.225M (106.934M)
Long-1.313M (108.247M)
Ingles-8.5M (116.747M)
24th pick-1.316M (118.063M)
Bogut-2.5M (120.563M)
This brings us just below the LT for 14 guys. We could then keep our other 2nd rounder on the roster as a 15th guy or use more of the MLE on someone else, I'd say a wing.
Hill-Exum-Neto-2nd rounder
Ingles-Hood-1st rounder
Hayward-2nd rounder-other than MLE player
Favors-Johnson-Lyles-Bolomboy
Gobert-Bogut-Long
We'd have the entire core back from last year minus Boris. We'd have added legit toughness and size in Bogut behind Gobert. We'd also have added a 1st rounder and 2nd rounder who could hopefully develop along with the other guys on roster. Namely, Hayward, Gobert, Hood and Exum. Lastly, we'd have a ton of options as the deadline approached.
Yes, we'd be just at or above the LT but Hood, Exum, Favors, Lyles and three 1st round picks next year would give us a lot of options in trades come February if the right situation presents itself. We'd also have added a 5 in Long cheap as **** and he can hit the 3, something we currently don't have, and rebound really well. I could see many here unhappy with trading one of our 1sts and I understand that. It's not a sticking point for me. Heck, maybe we should to draft a 4 and get ahead of the curve on Favors' departure. That would put s just over the LT. No biggie.
The sticking points to get this to work here are:
Opting out of Boris--easily doable
Retaining Hayward at the max--I think we will
Retaining Hill at the salary mentioned-a very reasonable salary. Heck we could go a little higher if we can push more of a "bonus" onto 16-17
Retaining Ingles--seems fairly reasonable...maybe a little low to some, a little high to others here. Just about right.
Trading Burks for next to nothing (and yet getting a killer rebounder/stretch 5 guy)--the toughest to pull off
