How much does Asik get paid this summer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

By your same logic, why would you commit to the player, that fits one coaches system, and not commit to the coach? Seems silly to me. If Asik was a more versatile center, I could buy into signing him long term irrespective of who the coach and GM are. But Asik is a dog that only knows one trick, and it's not hunting.

You say this is how it has always been done, and I question by whom?! Not championship organizations. What type of organization are you having us model?! The Nuggets? They signed Nene, then moved him for Javele. How'd that work out?

I make decisions based on what the organization is doing top to bottom. If you're not picking up options on Monty/Dell, I don't allow them to commit to a deal long term for Asik. Too limited a player.

The logic folks are using regarding resigning him because he's the only option the cap will allow us to exercise this summer, is the same logic people were using to justify matching a max deal for Gordon.

It's shortsighted. Mostly because the player is so limited.

---

Why did OKC allow Brooks to move Jackson and others if they weren't committed? Why did Denver move Affallo if they were just going to fire the head coach? Why have multiple teams allowed guys in the last year of their contract or right before being fired to make moves by either signing or trading players? Because if you don't allow the people you hire to try and build the team they think is a winning team then you have already given up on them and should move on.

Besides, Just because you don't think Asik can fit more than one system doesn't mean he can't.

The fact he was in Houston's run and gun and did very good actually disproves he is only good in one system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Why did OKC allow Brooks to move Jackson and others if they weren't committed? Why did Denver move Affallo if they were just going to fire the head coach? Why have multiple teams allowed guys in the last year of their contract or right before being fired to make moves by either signing or trading players? Because if you don't allow the people you hire to try and build the team they think is a winning team then you have already given up on them and should move on.

Besides, Just because you don't think Asik can fit more than one system doesn't mean he can't.

The fact he was in Houston's run and gun and did very good actually disproves he is only good in one system.

---

What GM/coach on the hot seat ADDED or committed to a player as limited as Asik for as much money and as many years as people are throwing out for Asik?!

The thunder weren't going to be able to keep Jackson anyway, and netted a player in return on a similar contract at more of a need position.

Your examples are apples to oranges.

And Asik was only making $5m in Houston. And his fit in their system is debatable; he was replaced, benched, disgruntled, had a miserable year 2 there, and was traded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

I don't think you fully understand out situation. There's plenty of literature on BSS to educate yourself. I find it hard to believe anyone who knows all the variables would agree with this.

Have you read this:

http://www.bourbonstreetshots.com/20...cap-situation/

---

No, I read the article when BSS posted it. I understand it completely. The main reason I don't want to resign Asik to a 4 year deal worth 10 mil a year, like most have suggested. I want flexibility for 2016. Apparently you need to read my answer more clearly, I don't think anyway that Asik is worth 10 mil a year. I would have to really really think hard about offering him even 8. I think we need more two way players on the team. So what kind of contract would u offer him?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msw2024

No, I read the article when BSS posted it. I understand it completely. The main reason I don't want to resign Asik to a 4 year deal worth 10 mil a year, like most have suggested. I want flexibility for 2016. Apparently you need to read my answer more clearly, I don't think anyway that Asik is worth 10 mil a year. I would have to really really think hard about offering him even 8. I think we need more two way players on the team. So what kind of contract would u offer him?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

With the cap raises this offseason and next makes your point a little moot. Under today's guidelines i agree; 10 million is roughly 16% of the cap. Next year and the year after it would be 15% of the cap and the year after less than 11% of the cap and then 9%, which is a steal.

2014-15: 8.4m 63m 13%
2015-16: 10m 67m 15%
2016-17: 10m 89m 11%
2017-18: 10m 108m 9% of cap (equivalent to 5.67 million in current cap)


If you look at this and think it's overpaid, and also realize that we pretty much have no center option outside of Asik next year withtout a miracle trade, i'm not sure how anyone can come up with another end then resigning Asik.


Also I want to add I agree we need more two-way players but how can we get them? We'd only have 8.7 m to spend and would still need a center.

I really think giving asik a flat 10m contract is a good move. He pisses me off with his stone hands too, but he has value for us.

Since when is a certain percentage of cap the acceptable measuring stick for whether a guy should get a certain dollar amount?! I know, BSS and MM are using, so now all the kids want to use it.

On playoff teams, guys that's take up 10-15% of the salary cap are currently players like Teague, Milsaps, Pau Gasol, Ariza, Jeff Green, Mike Conley, Monta Ellis, Wes Matthews, Afflalo and DeRozan.

Find me the playoff team that pays a guy like Asik 10-15% of the salary cap.

It's an absurd way of looking at.

Paying Asik over then next 4 years has an opportunity cost, the same as paying Gordon over the last 4 years has.

If we're giving $10m to him in 2016-19, that's $10m less we can spend on players that are better players than Asik. Folks that want to do that are doing what we commonly call "chasing" in poker.

9x out of 10 you win by playing better cards.

Asik is a nine deuce suited.

A % of the cap is ALWAYS the measuring stick, whether people consciously use it as such or not. For instance, your grandfather would probably think it was crazy to pay a player of Q-Pon's caliber 3+ mil a year, because even Russell didn't make that back in his day.

As the total amount of money goes up, so does every type of player's share. It's just the intelligent way to look at it. When you budget your bills as a business owner, you should say, "Okay, 30 percent of my budget will go to food costs, 20 percent to employee expenses,etc"

You wouldn't just say "I'm gonna spend 8 grand a month on food expenses until the end of time."

Now, as for your other question- the Warriors are spending 20% of their cap on both Iggy and David Lee- two players who gave us less than Asik gave us this year. The Spurs are spending a higher percentage on Splitter than we will be if we give Asik 10 mil per. If we give Asik 10 mil per, we will be using almost the same percentage as the Clippers are giving Hawes this year and less than the Grizz were paying Tayshaun before they traded him.

It's clear that you are on the other side of the fence, and that is fine. Nobody will convince you. But we should always judge on percentages of the cap, and there are elite teams who give limited players a bigger percentage of the cap out there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Since when is a certain percentage of cap the acceptable measuring stick for whether a guy should get a certain dollar amount?! I know, BSS and MM are using, so now all the kids want to use it.

On playoff teams, guys that's take up 10-15% of the salary cap are currently players like Teague, Milsaps, Pau Gasol, Ariza, Jeff Green, Mike Conley, Monta Ellis, Wes Matthews, Afflalo and DeRozan.

Find me the playoff team that pays a guy like Asik 10-15% of the salary cap.

It's an absurd way of looking at.

Paying Asik over then next 4 years has an opportunity cost, the same as paying Gordon over the last 4 years has.

If we're giving $10m to him in 2016-19, that's $10m less we can spend on players that are better players than Asik. Folks that want to do that are doing what we commonly call "chasing" in poker.

9x out of 10 you win by playing better cards.

Asik is a nine deuce suited.

---

It's an apples to apples comparison. Otherwise you're comparing apples to oranges.

Math good. MM, get out of here with your logic!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Find me the playoff team that pays a guy like Asik 10-15% of the salary cap.

---

Asik- 5 WS (Win Shares)

Warriors- David Lee 24% 3.2 WS
Trailblazers- Affalo 12% 2.6 WS
Grizzlies- Jeff Green 15% 5.2 WS
Spurs- Tiago Splitter 15% 4 WS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

Math good. MM, get out of here with your logic!

---

Wait, i did the math :(

David Lee and Iggy were both signed to those contracts with higher expectations than what they're delivering. I don't think anyone in their management expected a niche or limited role for those players when they were signed.

You can't arbitrarily say a player should get x% of the cap. Value is all relative to what those dollars could otherwise get you not just now, but in the future. That's just basic economic principle.

Every bit of debt diminishes our opportunity to add talent better than Asik in the future years of his contract.

So now it is not about actual value produced, but expected value?

Like I said, you aren't budging, and that's fine. I just didn't want incorrect info out there and you made it seem like great teams don't have more then 10% of their cap tied up in players as limited as Asik. That was proven wrong, and now you go back to another drum you banged previously. This drum can't be proven wrong, because it is based on the future. A future in which not having Asik on the books helps us land some great piece. Sure, that's possible. And if that would be your plan, then fine. But I think there is a lot of logic in giving a solid big who does a lot of little things, takes some pressure off AD, and could get even better with more years in the system, 10% of the cap too

Neither side can be proven right. It's a difference of opinions. But using % as opposed to numbers with no context is the smart way to do it. It's not just what the "cool kids" are doing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

Wait, i did the math :(

---

Haha my bad, does half credit work for you? 50/50 split!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

Asik- 5 WS (Win Shares)

Warriors- David Lee 24% 3.2 WS
Trailblazers- Affalo 12% 2.6 WS
Grizzlies- Jeff Green 15% 5.2 WS
Spurs- Tiago Splitter 15% 4 WS

---

Once a person is proven wrong, they never come back and say ,"oh my bad, thanks for increasing my knowledge."

So I will say it for everyone - Thank you for taking the time and bringing facts to the forum that increased all of our knowledge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

David Lee and Iggy were both signed to those contracts with higher expectations than what they're delivering. I don't think anyone in their management expected a niche or limited role for those players when they were signed.

You can't arbitrarily say a player should get x% of the cap. Value is all relative to what those dollars could otherwise get you not just now, but in the future. That's just basic economic principle.

Every bit of debt diminishes our opportunity to add talent better than Asik in the future years of his contract.

---

Dude, it's all relative. You cant arbitrarily say throw 7 million at someone. That means nothing. It's relative TO THE CAP. Which is why % of cap works and pretty much the ONLY standard to compare to man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nolaslim213

Haha my bad, does half credit work for you? 50/50 split!

---

OFC, they did most the work in the article :D ; i actually love how they produced spreadsheets you could download as well. They probably deserve 51%, since you know we can never agree on anything :hihi:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Once a person is proven wrong, they never come back and say ,"oh my bad, thanks for increasing my knowledge."

So I will say it for everyone - Thank you for taking the time and bringing facts to the forum that increased all of our knowledge.

---

<3

As long as Asik understands his minutes will be limited most nights and some nights very limited, doesn't throw a fit over it then 10% of the cap is fine. However the Pelicans really need to find the polar opposite of Asik for match up purposes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelican_Brief

As long as Asik understands his minutes will be limited most nights and some nights very limited, doesn't throw a fit over it then 10% of the cap is fine. However the Pelicans really need to find the polar opposite of Asik for match up purposes.

---

Greg Monroe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BallSoHard

OFC, they did most the work in the article :D ; i actually love how they produced spreadsheets you could download as well. They probably deserve 51%, since you know we can never agree on anything :hihi:

---

Idk man, I think we're making progress!

:hihi::hihi::hihi:

2017 seems like the big year so if we can just make sure we free up enough for AD and KD I'm good for whatever at center.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

So now it is not about actual value produced, but expected value?

Like I said, you aren't budging, and that's fine. I just didn't want incorrect info out there and you made it seem like great teams don't have more then 10% of their cap tied up in players as limited as Asik. That was proven wrong, and now you go back to another drum you banged previously. This drum can't be proven wrong, because it is based on the future. A future in which not having Asik on the books helps us land some great piece. Sure, that's possible. And if that would be your plan, then fine. But I think there is a lot of logic in giving a solid big who does a lot of little things, takes some pressure off AD, and could get even better with more years in the system, 10% of the cap too

Neither side can be proven right. It's a difference of opinions. But using % as opposed to numbers with no context is the smart way to do it. It's not just what the "cool kids" are doing

---

I don't mind coming across as the curmudgeon. Really don't. At all.

I must have missed the post that proved teams award players salaries greater than 10% of the cap for players as limited as Asik.

David Lee, Afflalo, Jeff Green, and Iggy, players that supposedly prove this point, were significantly better players than Asik when they were awarded those contracts. They weren't niche limited players like Asik. Some thought Afflalo was a top 5 SG.

Again, 10-15% of the cap is what Monta, Conley, Wes Matthews, Teague, Milsaps, and DeRozan get paid.

Anthony Davis is going to get 30%.

Let's think about what you're suggesting.

The Spurs pay Spitter that much, which I've always thought was a good comp (even though Spitter will be making $8m the next 2 season and you've suggested a salary $4m higher for Asik, but whatever), but no one on the Spurs makes 30% of the cap so the distribution is off. With AD making 30% of the cap, how is 10-15% (which seems arbitrary) an appropriate amount for Asik? So between Asik and AD we're talking about an average of 42% of the cap? OK.

Spurs are getting Duncan, Splitter, Diaw, and Kyle Anderson for a similar % of their total cap.
The Bulls are getting D. Rose, Mirotic, Butler, and Hinrich.
Warriors pay Curry, Bogut, Barnes, Draymond, and Livingston.
Rockets are paying Harden, Ariza, Terry, and Montiejunas 42%.
42% for the Clippers is Blake, Jordan and JJ Reddick.

Only way this makes even a tiny bit of sense is if Benson is willing to pay the tax.

Otherwise, The Pelicans have zero value contracts, other than AD, that allow us the flexibility to offer Asik 10% of the cap. When AD bumps up to 30%, we have Zero. Not one key contributor will be on a rookie deal, or below market deal.

Are we expecting Asik to be a progressively better player over the length of his contract? Because I think with a center that will be 29 this summer, that's crazy.

And yes I think it's only you cool kids who are talking about player salieries as a percentage of cap outside of the context of what other teams are paying players and what the Pelicans should expect for similar % of the cap based on what other teams are paying. And what demands will be on the Pelicans cap in 2016 and beyond as they move on from Gordon, Anderson, Jrue and Reke's current contracts and continue to build a championship roster. Only the cool kids.

I do think it appears rather problematic if we are planning on keeping Davis at 30% of the cap, Asik at 10% of the cap and have any plans to keep Ryno long term. I mean if Asik commands 10% what will Ryno command if he gets back to form? We could be looking at upwards of 50-60% of the cap going to 3 players at 2 positions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N.O.Bronco

I do think it appears rather problematic if we are planning on keeping Davis at 30% of the cap, Asik at 10% of the cap and have any plans to keep Ryno long term. I mean if Asik commands 10% what will Ryno command if he gets back to form? We could be looking at upwards of 50-60% of the cap going to 3 players at 2 positions.

---

Just so everyone is clear, AD will not be taking up 30 percent of the cap for most of his contract. He will make a little under 30% his first year, and about 24-25% after that.

Example, he should be making about 26-28 million in years 2-4, when the cap will be over 100 million. Year 2, he will be making about 24.07% of the cap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Just so everyone is clear, AD will not be taking up 30 percent of the cap for most of his contract. He will make a little under 30% his first year, and about 24-25% after that.

Example, he should be making about 26-28 million in years 2-4, when the cap will be over 100 million.

---

So... This year we were an 8th seed, with expectation now being that we will be a progressively better team over the next few years. Is it safe to say that maybe not next season, but certainly the year after, the expectation is going to be that this team is a championship contender?

So, like I was saying, in two years when AD is making 30% of the cap and Asik is making 12% of the cap, how do you justify it and build a contender, while also replacing Gordon and Anderson at the market rate given the increased cap and expectation for higher salaries?!

Seems like you're setting the team up for a step backwards in 2016. How do you replace Gordon and Anderson with only about 18% of your cap available to you? Especially if a player of Asik's skill level is valued at 10% of your cap. Do you think Dell is going to all of a sudden start getting cost effective value out of the draft in 2016?! Cmon man!

What you're suggesting sounds cool and nice, but actually makes zero sense!