Who would take a pay cut?

[PelsFan2313]

As I was saying. Any player that sees a team with two players that can easily put up 40+ any given night. They've got to be drooling at the chance and would take less than some other team can give pay wise.

And players really don't give two craps about franchise history or who the owner is. It's the top of the roster, the city itself, and the ability of the franchise to sell those two things.

Not saying it will happen or if it's even necessary at this point, but impossible?

You know that, why? I suppose the Clippers players didn't give a ******** that Sterling was their owner. Black players must have flocked to LA.

It's never been a question of whether our team has top-heavy talent. It's been a question of whether that talent can translate into winning.

"Some other team." What the hell does that mean? Are we talking about Cleveland, Golden State, San Antonio? Teams that actually have a chance of winning a championship? Or teams like Dallas, Portland, and Detriot? Borderline playoff-contending teams?

The argument is predicated on the type of player you're talking about in the hypo. Again, if we're discussing ring-chasers, or players that want to play on championship-contending teams, why would a player ala David West come to New Orleans when there are so many better options out there? Teams that have actually proven that they can win and consist of players that have actually accomplished something.

Spare me the city crap. Do you honestly think that matters when we're talking about players that want to win, are at the twilight of their careers, and have priorotized winning?

And does it really matter if there's a 5% chance vs. a 0% chance of it happening? My point is it's much more likely that it won't happen if we're sticking to the class of players the OP discussed. Turning my point into an absolutism argument, while conveninent for you, doesn't change the narrative.

Stop focusing on whether our team is attractive and start focusing on our attractiveness relative to other teams. Because when you look at it that way, we're not in the same class as the top tier franchises.

[luckyman]

You can try to argue your point till you're blue in the face. It's not going to help you make any sense. At all. This is not very complicated. That fact that you have to reach when talking about ownership to someone like Donald Sterling says it all. How many owners have come out to say the things he said? Before that fiasco, even with the negative things surrounding him, players didn't really care about him being the owner. You have players even talking about how they had talked to the guy and didn't really have any bad feelings about him before his Twitter crap. And the issues with the Clippers had more to do with their operations people and coaches. NOT the owner (before his episode). And yes, the city they would be living in also plays a factor.

Also last I checked, Sterling no longer has ties to the NBA. So what's the point of using him as an example? He got removed rather quickly. So no free agent ever had to even make that decision.

The fact remains that players (ANY PLAYER of ANY STATUS) would love to play with 2 top ten players.

It's really not that hard.

[PelsFan2313]

You can try to argue your point till you're blue in the face. It's not going to help you make any sense. At all. This is not very complicated. That fact that you have to reach when talking about ownership to someone like Donald Sterling says it all. How many owners have come out to say the things he said? Before that fiasco, even with the negative things surrounding him, players didn't really care about him being the owner. You have players even talking about how they had talked to the guy and didn't really have any bad feelings about him before his Twitter crap. And the issues with the Clippers had more to do with their operations people and coaches. NOT the owner. And yes, the city they would be living in also plays a factor.

So type your 15 paragraphs of non sense. The fact remains that players (ANY PLAYER of ANY STATUS) would love to play with 2 top ten players.

It's really not that hard.

You're right. It isn't that hard. You are just choosing to make it that way. The fact that you think that players didnt care about Sterling being the owner shows how ignorant you are about the situation. I advise you to listen to Baron Davis' comments on Sterling and how uncomfortable he felt being around him (this was before Sterling's comments even surfaced). But if you want a more direct example, Gordon and Anderson have both come out and made comments about how dysfunctional ownership was during their time in New Orleans. It's something players notice and it matters. It affects the image of the franchise, and in turn, the franchise's attractiveness to potential players.

You also continue to ignore comparative points about how attractive we are relative to top tier teams. Again it doesn't matter if we are attractive if there are several other teams that are even more attractive. Free agency is an open market, stop ignoring that fact and stop ignoring the prioritization of winning when it comes to the class of players we're discussing.

That brings me to the city point. I didn't say the city isn't a factor, so you're point is null. I said that the city isn't a significant factor relative to the class of players we're discussing and their desire to play on a contending team.

Next, Demarcus is not a top 10 player, he's a top 10 talent. And despite that, neither he nor Davis (your other top 10 player) have accomplished anything of significance since playing in the NBA. What's more atttactive to a player? The "potential" to win or a proven track record of winning?

Lastly, stretching the argument to a player of any class is stupid because that's going beyond the scope of the argument.

Take off the tinted shades and see the situation for what it is. Live in reality. Or as you like to call it, nonsense. And if you're going to make a response, stop cherrypicking on one or two points and address the entire argument.

I gave you the courtesy of respecting your opinion, no matter how wrong it likely is. Be mature and do the same thing. Obviously if a person disagrees with your stance, the reality of the situation isn't so black and white.

The potential to be an attractive destination is there. But stop skipping steps. We haven't accomplished ******** yet, and until we do, I doubt we attract the type of players the OP alluded to.

[luckyman]

Last point I'm going to make. You bring up Baron Davis with regard to the Clippers. You do know how the Clippers got Davis right? They didn't draft him. They didn't trade for him. BD was a pretty hot commodity coming off some good years at Golden St. Donald Sterling was the owner at that time. So....good argument? Really disproves all my points huh?

Have a good one.

[PelsFan2313]

Last point I'm going to make. You bring up Baron Davis with regard to the Clippers. You do know how the Clippers got Davis right? They didn't draft him. They didn't trade for him. BD was a pretty hot commodity coming off some good years at Golden St. Donald Sterling was the owner at that time. So....good argument? Really disproves all my points huh?

Have a good one.

And again fixating on the Sterling point and ignoring every other aspect of my post. Cool. When I counter your point that players didn't have negative feelings about Sterling prior to the scandal, I get this crap. I guess that makes my entire post invalid. Bravo.

[Imnos 2]

I would agree with you. We aren't attractive yet. But we look better than we did at the beginning of the season. And are attractiveness will only improve if we have a strong finish to the season.

One thing your forgetting in the equation is how much recruiting AD and Boogie will do this off season. They know we need more talent. Ultimately this I believe will get players to come here on the cheap. If we learned anything with this Cousins trade, is that these guys recruit each other all of the time. We have two All Stars. I think they or if Dell wanted someone he couldn't afford he may try to get his superstars to sell them to take less.

[PelsFan2313]

I would agree with you. We aren't attractive yet. But we look better than we did at the beginning of the season. And are attractiveness will only improve if we have a strong finish to the season.

One thing your forgetting in the equation is how much recruiting AD and Boogie will do this off season. They know we need more talent. Ultimately this I believe will get players to come here on the cheap. If we learned anything with this Cousins trade, is that these guys recruit each other all of the time. We have two All Stars. I think they or if Dell wanted someone he couldn't afford he may try to get his superstars to sell them to take less.

Every team recruits to some degree. What matters more, particularly in the context of the type of players we're discussing, is the strength of the pitch (our ability to sell our team as a winner) relative to rest of the teams, especially those that are already winning and have been winning for a very long time. But I'm glad that you see that our attractiveness is a developing process rather than an established entity.

[Caleb462]

You're just pushing too hard against it PelsFan2313... the attractiveness of NO as a free agent destination has increased, and we MAY be able to lure more good players than was possible previously - that's all anyone is really saying, and that's a perfectly valid and logical idea. Our pitch, as you were just talking about, is now much stronger. Are we Golden State or Cleveland? Nah... but the arrival of Boogie probably jumps us up to the very next tier as far as attractiveness. I mean, I'm definitely guessing on that, but as subjective as a subject as this is - so are you and so is anyone else. It's perfectly logical to assume that there may be valuable players who find the idea of playing next to the core of AD/Boogie or possible AD/Boogie/Jrue to be an enticing idea regardless of franchise history or other factors. We don't know yet but let's not pretend we know the psychology of every available player either way.

[PelsFan2313]

You're just pushing too hard against it PelsFan2313... the attractiveness of NO as a free agent destination has increased, and we MAY be able to lure more good players than was possible previously - that's all anyone is really saying, and that's a perfectly valid and logical idea. Our pitch, as you were just talking about, is now much stronger. Are we Golden State or Cleveland? Nah... but the arrival of Boogie probably jumps us up to the very next tier as far as attractiveness. I mean, I'm definitely guessing on that, but as subjective as a subject as this is - so are you and so is anyone else. It's perfectly logical to assume that there may be valuable players who find the idea of playing next to the core of AD/Boogie or possible AD/Boogie/Jrue to be an enticing idea regardless of franchise history or other factors. We don't know yet but let's not pretend we know the psychology of every available player either way.

Maybe, but I take language literally. So when I see the OP post this:

Of course it does. I'm just having a convo. Not trying to read minds or determine market values right now. But if we can build a nice roster this off season, could I see a player who may want to win, take a pay cut to chase a ring? Yes. Many of the past elite teams have had these types of situations. How cool was it to see Richrad Jefferson not only contribute but ultimately win a title last year. I don't remember but I'm sure he wasnt a priority free agent signing. Probably just filled a roster opening.

I am considering that class of players in mind, and that class alone. It's simple really. Does a Richard Jefferson-esque player who wants to win a championship take a paycut to play for us, when there are other teams like Cleveland, Golden State, and San Antonio out there? The answer is no.

If you want to open up the conversation to other types of players, that's fine. But that's what the OP narrowed the conversation down to, and that's what I'm discussing.

I acknowledge we're more attractive than what we were before, but not to the point where players are going to sacrifice money to pursue championship aspirations. We haven't done anything to inspire that level of confidence.

The gap between Golden State and the rest of the West, and Cleveland and the rest of the East is so freaking significant. I can't stress that enough.

You're correct with the psychology point and it's something I addressed already in a number of posts.

But again that's what drives me crazy about this question, and you alluded to this, is that it's so open to interpretation as to both the type of player we'd be pursuing in this hypothetical and somewhat relatedly his personal biases/preferences.

I think we're in agreement with the status of our team as a free agent destination. The disconnect lies in our interpretation of the OP's question.

[RobertM320]

And its not like we're looking to add a KD or Westbrook to the mix. Just a couple of solid shooters.

Also, just how many spots do you think GSW, SA and Cle have available? There's only 45 players total on the 3 rosters and almost all of those are committed long term.

[PelsFan2313]

And its not like we're looking to add a KD or Westbrook to the mix. Just a couple of solid shooters.

Also, just how many spots do you think GSW, SA and Cle have available? There's only 45 players total on the 3 rosters and almost all of those are committed long term.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with your first point. I didn't say we couldn't fill out our roster with shooters.

With regards to your second point, did that stop Cleveland from getting Andrew Bogut, Deron Williams, or Richard Jefferson? Did that stop Golden State from getting Zaza Pachulia and David West? Did that stop San Antonio from getting David West and Pau Gasol?

I think you're misunderstanding the argument that's taking place.

[RobertM320]

Didn't say they won't get first pick. But they can't take EVERYONE that wants to play on their team.

[PelsFan2313]

Didn't say they won't get first pick. But they can't take EVERYONE that wants to play on their team.

It depends on how you define the class of players the OP alluded to, since that would affect the number of players you're discussing in the first place. I don't think there's a significant number of players who make that sort of sacrifice because, as you said, there's only a finite number of teams that can facilitate that sort of aspiration. So a supply-demand argument doesn't hold much merit in my eyes.

[Caleb462]

Does a Richard Jefferson-esque player who wants to win a championship take a paycut to play for us, when there are other teams like Cleveland, Golden State, and San Antonio out there? The answer is no.

See the only difference of opinion I have is that you are so sure the answer is 'no' and for me, I think its a pretty clear 'we don't know' - but certainly I understand your argument that the ring-chasing crowd is more likely to seek out a Golden State, Cleveland or San Antonio first. You are more than likely correct. That said, there are enough unknown variables involved that I think its fair to leave the idea open as a possibility and a not necessarily a slim one.

[rezburna]

Which combination of guys (2 or 3) below do you think would take a pay cut to team up with Boogie and AD?

Sergio Rodriguez
JJ Reddick
Tim Hardaway Jr
Bojan Bogdanovic
Rudy Gay

Also, what other combination of guys could you realistically see coming here on a discount this off season?

Tim Hardaway Jr. gives us an emerging start at Shooting Guard, allowing Jordan Crawford to be the 6th man and continue giving us that spark off the bench. Signing both him and Rudy Gay would do wonders for this roster. If we could somehow get Patty Mills as well we might actually be able to contend next year.

Starters:
Cousins
Davis
Gay
Hardaway
Holiday

Bench:
Crawford
Mills
Moore
Motiejunas
Hill
Diallo

[Werdiknight]

Tim Hardaway Jr. gives us an emerging start at Shooting Guard, allowing Jordan Crawford to be the 6th man and continue giving us that spark off the bench. Signing both him and Rudy Gay would do wonders for this roster. If we could somehow get Patty Mills as well we might actually be able to contend next year.

Starters:
Cousins
Davis
Gay
Hardaway
Holiday

Bench:
Crawford
Mills
Moore
Motiejunas
Hill
Diallo

That would be kind of a dream scenario. But I'm not sure it would even be theoratically possible. What kind of contracts do you expect Gay, Hardaway, Motie and Mills to take? Don't think we have even the slightest hope to make that fit financially.

[PelsFan2313]

Tim Hardaway Jr. gives us an emerging start at Shooting Guard, allowing Jordan Crawford to be the 6th man and continue giving us that spark off the bench. Signing both him and Rudy Gay would do wonders for this roster. If we could somehow get Patty Mills as well we might actually be able to contend next year.

Starters:
Cousins
Davis
Gay
Hardaway
Holiday

Bench:
Crawford
Mills
Moore
Motiejunas
Hill
Diallo

Tim Hardaway Jr. is in line to make a lot of money this summer.

[PolishFan]

Tim Hardaway Jr. is in line to make a lot of money this summer.

He is the type of a player I would like to get depending on the cost of course

[lsutigers33]

how much better is Hardaway compared to Justin H? Haven't watched Justin play.


Would Jrue take a less than max deal here if we sign Justin first?

[luckyman]

how much better is Hardaway compared to Justin H? Haven't watched Justin play.


Would Jrue take a less than max deal here if we sign Justin first?

Jrue won't have to decide on taking a max deal or not. So there's that.

[All Metro]

Would love T.Hardaway Jr

[Champ]

Conversely, if he doesn't make an All-NBA team, "Zero percent chance it gets done this summer"

Something to watch for

— Michael McNamara (@SilverAndMac) March 25, 2017