Pelicans & Asik are talking new deal (deal is done-- 5/60)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Yeah, and maybe they were. But with RoLo, Koufos, Monroe, etc. still on the market, I don't believe Asik was atop anybody's list - and definitely not for that money.

Now, this could have been a combo deal to appease AD (same agent) or Dell was scared to risk it for some other reason. But I just feel a master negotiator plays this differently and comes out with a better deal. Again, I am not saying F, just C- because I think it is below what the average expected outcome should have been.

---

In a vacuum, I can certainly live with this deal. My concern is more long term and a perceived inability for Dell to play hardball. I guess as a Saints fan, I'm spoiled by Loomis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkHornet

In a vacuum, I can certainly live with this deal. My concern is more long term and a perceived inability for Dell to play hardball. I guess as a Saints fan, I'm spoiled by Loomis.

---

Loomis has overpaid several guys big deals in regrettable fashion. He's also let the wrong guys walk by not paying them. Also, comparing a NFL and NBA GM's negotiating strategy is apples and oranges, as they play by completely different rules.

Dell is now perceived as having the inability to play hardball and is a soft negotiator? LMAO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintsinNO

Loomis has overpaid several guys big deal in regrettable fashion. He's also let the wrong guys walk by not paying them. Also, comparing a NFL and NBA GM's negotiating strategy is apples and oranges, as they play by completely different rules.

Dell is now perceived as having the inability to play hardball and is a soft negotiator? LMAO.

---

I suppose my statement reads a little more definitive than I meant it to be. I don't know that he's a soft negotiator. It's just a concern. Hopefully unfounded, because I generally like the moves Dell makes. I'm simply saying, I hope that Dell is willing to use leverage he has at his disposal if he has it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintsinNO

Loomis has overpaid several guys big deals in regrettable fashion. He's also let the wrong guys walk by not paying them. Also, comparing a NFL and NBA GM's negotiating strategy is apples and oranges, as they play by completely different rules.

Dell is now perceived as having the inability to play hardball and is a soft negotiator? LMAO.

---

HOT TAKES!!, LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkHornet

I suppose my statement reads a little more definitive than I meant it to be. I don't know that he's a soft negotiator. It's just a concern. Hopefully unfounded, because I generally like the moves Dell makes. I'm simply saying, I hope that Dell is willing to use leverage he has at his disposal if he has it.

---

Oh ok, I misread then. To play devil's advocate, the alternative risk is alienating a player that wants to be here and he goes and leaves for even less money. MM is working under the assumption that if Asik were to garner interest from other teams, that would only serve to set his contract value, but in actuality, it means you potentially (and likely IMO) lose him. Nothing says that bad negotiations don't lead him to take less money elsewhere. Not having to risk that is worth something. Not to mention, if we are trying to become a place people want to go, you want Dell to be known as a fair guy, not just a hard negotiator; front office reputations are huge when it comes to that. If you don't open the door, the guy can't leave; that's what Dell did here for a fair price.

Simply put, to say that a guy may only be worth $8mil/year to another team and that's what we should've paid him is way over-simplified and just not the way negotiations work. There is no way that, all factors considered, Asik's deal is a C-, particularly from a guy who has maintained that there is no other realistic alternative. Doesn't equate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Here's my thing. Another possibly bad deal doesn't make our bad deal better - and I see many justifying it by pointing out other deals.

Again, I don't think it is a terrible deal, but in all honesty, do people think there was another team out there offering 4/42 that we had to top? Obviously, none of us can know, but what does your gut tell you?

I just think that with patience, Dell could have secured a shorter deal, maybe even for less annually. Again, I can't know but we are all just posting our opinions here.

What is done is done, and I do still think Asik can live up to the value of this contract, but I can not agree that we paid market value of him at this current point because I simply do not believe he had any similar offers out there. That is my issue, and it can't be proven or disproven, but it is my one issue with this deal.

---

I have no idea whether there were other suitors. I could see any of the following potentially holding interest in Asik:

Celtics: Playoff team with tons of space and a terrible front court
Bucks: Playoff team with cap space, starting Zaza Pachulia at center
Knicks: Tons of cap space, and likely to miss out on LMA and Monroe; Asik could be a plan C kind of guy
Mavericks: Lost Chandler and likely to miss out on DeAndre Jordan and LMA; Asik could be a plan D kind of guy
Lakers: Tons of cap space, and likely to miss out on LMA, DeAndre Jordan, and Cousins; Asik could be a plan D kind of guy

Maybe none of those teams ever held interest. We'll never know. But all it takes is one interested team to start a bidding war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintsinNO

Oh ok, I misread then. To play devil's advocate, the alternative risk is alienating a player that wants to be here and he goes and leaves for even less money. MM is working under the assumption that if Asik were to garner interest from other teams, that would only serve to set his contract value, but in actuality, it means you potentially (and likely IMO) lose him. Not having to risk that is worth something. Not to mention, if we are trying to become a place people want to go, you want Dell to be known as a fair guy, not just a hard negotiator; front office reputations are huge when it comes to that. If you don't open the door, the guy can't leave; that's what Dell did here for a fair price.

---

Yeah that's how I see this. Maybe Asik doesn't get as long of a contract elsewhere but maybe he does get a 2yr/24m deal and then hits FA again after the huge cap spike. Asik's agent could have easily said he would take a shorter deal for more money elsewhere.

When you combine it all with the fact that Dell really wanted that non-guaranteed 5th year to be able to bring in a big piece later it really is a fair market contract.

It really feels like people talking themselves into something happening and then real life happens and it didn't match up with their dream so it's a bad move. "Asik is our only realistic option." *signs Asik* "Bad deal." Lol. I'm really confused because it seems like nearly all of the people who were anti Asik have seen the contracts being thrown around and realized it's a fine deal. But the person who defended Asik against all of them is having a bigger issue with the actual deal.

Agree 100%....I didn't hear his name mentioned by any of the other 29 teams as a potential FA signing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Here's my thing. Another possibly bad deal doesn't make our bad deal better - and I see many justifying it by pointing out other deals.

Again, I don't think it is a terrible deal, but in all honesty, do people think there was another team out there offering 4/42 that we had to top? Obviously, none of us can know, but what does your gut tell you?

I just think that with patience, Dell could have secured a shorter deal, maybe even for less annually. Again, I can't know but we are all just posting our opinions here.

What is done is done, and I do still think Asik can live up to the value of this contract, but I can not agree that we paid market value of him at this current point because I simply do not believe he had any similar offers out there. That is my issue, and it can't be proven or disproven, but it is my one issue with this deal.

---

I like Asik in an "open" system.. he did real good in houston in space. I think he'll justify his contract.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stormcenter

Agree 100%....I didn't hear his name mentioned by any of the other 29 teams as a potential FA signing.

---

I think Asik could have been a plan C or D for some teams, after the LMA/DeAndre/Monroe dominoes fall. It's possible Dell wanted to sign Asik before teams became desperate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stormcenter

Agree 100%....I didn't hear his name mentioned by any of the other 29 teams as a potential FA signing.

---

So does that mean Ajinca was an overpay as well? We didn't hear his name and he got 5m/yr. Was Cole an overpay even offering the QO? We haven't heard him mentioned at all.

Maybe we didn't hear names because the player WANTED to sign with us and so he didn't put his name out there as a FA. He acted on good faith that we would get a deal done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greewe

I think Asik could have been a plan C or D for some teams, after the LMA/DeAndre/Monroe dominoes fall. It's possible Dell wanted to sign Asik before teams became desperate.

---

Good point. I certainly see a possibility when a team that loses out on their target or their current starter begins to look around and might be more willing to overpay Asik. So, even if technically there were no teams vying for him now, there could have been later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Yeah that's how I see this. Maybe Asik doesn't get as long of a contract elsewhere but maybe he does get a 2yr/24m deal and then hits FA again after the huge cap spike. Asik's agent could have easily said he would take a shorter deal for more money elsewhere.

When you combine it all with the fact that Dell really wanted that non-guaranteed 5th year to be able to bring in a big piece later it really is a fair market contract.

It really feels like people talking themselves into something happening and then real life happens and it didn't match up with their dream so it's a bad move. "Asik is our only realistic option." *signs Asik* "Bad deal." Lol. I'm really confused because it seems like nearly all of the people who were anti Asik have seen the contracts being thrown around and realized it's a fine deal. But the person who defended Asik against all of them is having a bigger issue with the actual deal.

---

Exactly. The long and short of it is Dell got a starting center who is a good rebounder and solid defended for the 18th overall pick in a weak draft for probably about 10% of the cap. Asik leaving would cost us way more money than Asik staying. It's a good deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Yeah, and maybe they were. But with RoLo, Koufos, Monroe, etc. still on the market, I don't believe Asik was atop anybody's list - and definitely not for that money.

Now, this could have been a combo deal to appease AD (same agent) or Dell was scared to risk it for some other reason. But I just feel a master negotiator plays this differently and comes out with a better deal. Again, I am not saying F, just C- because I think it is below what the average expected outcome should have been.

---

How much do u think asik is worth paying per year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

How much do u think asik is worth paying per year?

---

I think MM has said its the 4th year he has an issue with not the amount.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintsinNO

Oh ok, I misread then. To play devil's advocate, the alternative risk is alienating a player that wants to be here and he goes and leaves for even less money. MM is working under the assumption that if Asik were to garner interest from other teams, that would only serve to set his contract value, but in actuality, it means you potentially (and likely IMO) lose him. Nothing says that bad negotiations don't lead him to take less money elsewhere. Not having to risk that is worth something. Not to mention, if we are trying to become a place people want to go, you want Dell to be known as a fair guy, not just a hard negotiator; front office reputations are huge when it comes to that. If you don't open the door, the guy can't leave; that's what Dell did here for a fair price.

Simply put, to say that a guy may only be worth $8mil/year to another team and that's what we should've paid him is way over-simplified and just not the way negotiations work. There is no way that, all factors considered, Asik's deal is a C-, particularly from a guy who has maintained that there is no other realistic alternative. Doesn't equate.

---

Certainly, I've considered that this is the reason for it. If it is, I say "Bravo!" to Dell and I respect doing business that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I think MM has said its the 4th year he has an issue with not the amount.

---

I see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stormcenter

Agree 100%....I didn't hear his name mentioned by any of the other 29 teams as a potential FA signing.

---

Which means nothing.

It also seems like Dell had to slight overpay to get him to agree to the non garunteed money

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 504ByrdGang

It also seems like Dell had to slight overpay to get him to agree to the non garunteed money

---

Possibly so. Maybe he could get him for 4yr/40m without it but he really wanted that last non guaranteed year so gives him 4m as a kicker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Possibly so. Maybe he could get him for 4yr/40m without it but he really wanted that last non guaranteed year so gives him 4m as a kicker.

---

Why is the last non-guaranteed year so important? Is it as a potential trade asset or more to keep him if he really flourishes in the next few years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkHornet

Why is the last non-guaranteed year so important? Is it as a potential trade asset or more to keep him if he really flourishes in the next few years?

---

It's also the year before AD's new deal expires, could have something to do with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

So does that mean Ajinca was an overpay as well? We didn't hear his name and he got 5m/yr. Was Cole an overpay even offering the QO? We haven't heard him mentioned at all.

Maybe we didn't hear names because the player WANTED to sign with us and so he didn't put his name out there as a FA. He acted on good faith that we would get a deal done.

---

Huh? How does a QO have anything to do with this? A team gets a chance at the QO before free agency even begins. Ajinca is a backup C. You would not expect him to be the hottest name in a big free agent market for centers early on. However, starting caliber centers were the hot players in early free agency and Asik was never mentioned. I do think we outbid ourselves with him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkHornet

Why is the last non-guaranteed year so important? Is it as a potential trade asset or more to keep him if he really flourishes in the next few years?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

It's also the year before AD's new deal expires, could have something to do with it.

---

Both of you seem to be right. MM talked to his source last night and he stated this non guaranteed 5th year was key because it allows us to make a big move the summer before AD's contract expires.

Dell thinking long term on how to keep AD here for good. Being able to trade a 13m non guaranteed contract allows you to take a ton of money and the other team can just cut him and pay nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I think MM has said its the 4th year he has an issue with not the amount.

---

He said he thought we could get him for 3 years/$27-28 million.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Both of you seem to be right. MM talked to his source last night and he stated this non guaranteed 5th year was key because it allows us to make a big move the summer before AD's contract expires.

Dell thinking long term on how to keep AD here for good. Being able to trade a 13m non guaranteed contract allows you to take a ton of money and the other team can just cut him and pay nothing.

---

That last unguaranteed year could become a valuable trade chip, which is good if he is still here by then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Both of you seem to be right. MM talked to his source last night and he stated this non guaranteed 5th year was key because it allows us to make a big move the summer before AD's contract expires.

Dell thinking long term on how to keep AD here for good. Being able to trade a 13m non guaranteed contract allows you to take a ton of money and the other team can just cut him and pay nothing.

---

Now that's some serious chess playing there!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Huh? How does a QO have anything to do with this? A team gets a chance at the QO before free agency even begins. Ajinca is a backup C. You would not expect him to be the hottest name in a big free agent market for centers early on. However, starting caliber centers were the hot players in early free agency and Asik was never mentioned. I do think we outbid ourselves with him.

---

The point is: Because we don't hear a name means nothing. We didn't hear Draymond Green's name either. Why? Because he had no interest? No. Because he wanted to resign with GS. Why is it impossible to believe we didn't hear Asik's name because he wanted to resign with us and acted in good faith to not put his name out there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

He said he thought we could get him for 3 years/$27-28 million.

---

MM tweet this morning:

@McNamara247: No problem with years 1-3 of Asik deal. None. If you shave the 4th yr off, I give it a B or B+

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

The point is: Because we don't hear a name means nothing. We didn't hear Draymond Green's name either. Why? Because he had no interest? No. Because he wanted to resign with GS. Why is it impossible to believe we didn't hear Asik's name because he wanted to resign with us and acted in good faith to not put his name out there?

---

Compare apples and oranges. Green was restricted and there was talk of other teams attempting to get meetings with him. Asik was apparently not in high demand. However, hopefully Gentry sees something in him and he comes back from the back ailments that he struggled with last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

MM tweet this morning:

@McNamara247: No problem with years 1-3 of Asik deal. None. If you shave the 4th yr off, I give it a B or B+

---

Can't access twitter from work, but if you search his tweets, you will see that he felt we could get him for 3 years/$27-28 million. That was his opinion, but we all are entitled to our own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Can't access twitter from work, but if you search his tweets, you will see that he felt we could get him for 3 years/$27-28 million. That was his opinion, but we all are entitled to our own.

---

Not saying he didn't think that. I'm giving you his updated opinion on it. He has zero problem with the amount paid. It's the 4th year he has an issue with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Not saying he didn't think that. I'm giving you his updated opinion on it. He has zero problem with the amount paid. It's the 4th year he has an issue with.

---

That is my biggest issue is anything past 3 years. A 4th unguaranteed year would obviously have been fine. However, that extra 4th guaranteed year seems a bit much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Compare apples and oranges. Green was restricted and there was talk of other teams attempting to get meetings with him. Asik was apparently not in high demand. However, hopefully Gentry sees something in him and he comes back from the back ailments that he struggled with last year.

---

No restricted players take meetings? We cannot judge demand because we have no idea what it was. Asik signed a contract Day 1 of FA. If every call is answered with, "I'm resigning with New Orleans." It would just as easily appear as no demand because he is not drawing up his market. He is acting in good faith that the team who he plays for will pay him his worth without needing to threaten with other teams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Can't access twitter from work, but if you search his tweets, you will see that he felt we could get him for 3 years/$27-28 million. That was his opinion, but we all are entitled to our own.

---

My final guess last night before news broke was 3 for 30-32. I would have been fine with that.

Year 1 doesn't matter because we don't have space anyway.

Year 2, it will be about 12% of the cap, which is fair

Year 3, it will be about 10% of the cap, which is good.

Year 4, it will be about 12% again but I don't think he is a quality player at that point.

Year 5 I like because of it's trade potential, but not enough to offset year 4

Same deal, but one year shorter and I love it. But 1 year does matter. It's less than ideal, less than good, but not horrific

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

That is my biggest issue is anything past 3 years. A 4th unguaranteed year would obviously have been fine. However, that extra 4th guaranteed year seems a bit much.

---

What is very obvious at this point is that Dell really wanted that 5th non guaranteed year. To get to 5, you have to go past 4. I just assumed it was going to be a 4 yr deal as basically every C is signing long deals this summer. I'm actually really impressed with how Dell managed it.

It looks like LeBron James will be severely overpaid this offseason. I'm not hearing his name attached to any teams besides Cleveland so they shouldn't outbid themselves, but I'm thinking they will... smh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

He said he thought we could get him for 3 years/$27-28 million.

---

Well then Dell would have done that if he could, but obviously Asik refused to those terms?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

My final guess last night before news broke was 3 for 30-32. I would have been fine with that.

Year 1 doesn't matter because we don't have space anyway.

Year 2, it will be about 12% of the cap, which is fair

Year 3, it will be about 10% of the cap, which is good.

Year 4, it will be about 12% again but I don't think he is a quality player at that point.

Year 5 I like because of it's trade potential, but not enough to offset year 4

Same deal, but one year shorter and I love it. But 1 year does matter. It's less than ideal, less than good, but not horrific

---

That's an unrealistic expectation given the market. What starting center has gotten less than 4 years? Only one I can think of is Lopez and the Nets had to drastically overpay to do so. Even older players have gotten 4 year deals. You shorten the deal, the money goes up. Less than ideal is true, less than good is not unless you can show other similar players who have received that. The only one close that I can think of is Brandan Wright who is frail and a terrible rebounder.

Monroe just got 3 years with the 3rd being a PO. 50mil though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

Monroe just got 3 years with the 3rd being a PO. 50mil though.

---

"You shorten the deal, the money goes up." If Asik got 3 years, the money would be closer to $40mil, then people would have an issue with him making $13.5mil/year. Expecting 3/$27-28mil is unrealistic. That's asking for a short deal AND to underpay the player. Asik is a very solid player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintsinNO

"You shorten the deal, the money goes up." If Asik got 3 years, the money would be closer to $40mil, then people would have an issue with him making $13.5mil/year. Expecting 3/$27-28mil is unrealistic. Asik is a very solid player.

---

You asked a question.......I answered it. I never though anything less than 10mil per year was realistic. I would have started negotiations at 9 but never realistically expected Asik to take that. When free agency is all said and done he might have the cheapest new deal for a starting caliber center. Or at least close to it. Curious to see what Rolo gets.

I thought asik would get between 10-12. So 11 is fine with me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

You asked a question.......I answered it. I never though anything less than 10mil per year was realistic. I would have started negotiations at 9 but never realistically expected Asik to take that. When free agency is all said and done he might have the cheapest new deal for a starting caliber center. Or at least close to it. Curious to see what Rolo gets.

---

I would imagine RoLo gets a deal larger than Asik's, especially given that NY and LA have missed out on all the other bigs. I think they may have to overpay someone. I think that will help put Asik's deal into perspective, as I think Asik is a superior player to Lopez as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintsinNO

I would imagine RoLo gets a deal larger than Asik's, especially given that NY and LA have missed out on all the other bigs. I think they may have to overpay someone. I think that will help put Asik's deal into perspective, as I think Asik is a superior player to Lopez as well.

---

Also adds to how important it was to go ahead and get Asik's deal done. We could be sweating a lot more now if he were still out there with a desperate Knicks or Lakers team looking.

I know in late to the party, and I know I'm in the minority but I think this is s fantastic deal for both sides.

I don't have time for too much detail but this is market value contract that has a trade asset attached to the end. In other words if asik stays a top 10 rebound and defensive center over the length of the deal he lives up to the contract and the closer it comes to the end of the deal the more valuable his contract is to possess.

I love the length. If the deal was for 3 years that means we would need to find a replacement level player by that time or then resign him to a higher valued deal with the cap expansion. And if we do find a replacement level player at any point, understand that the closer we get to the end of this deal the more valuable a trade asset it becomes. This deal can be moved, as a matter of fact people will likely call us to acquire this contract.

Think about in today's terms; how valuable would Tiago splitter have been if this was his last year under contract at 8.5 mill and next year his contact was worth 9 mill non guaranteed. Look at what the cavs get for Hayward and think that is exactly the same asset asiks final year is worth.

And by the way, the Spurs, Knicks, lakers, mavs, clippers, blazers, and whoever else, still are trying to get bigs. And as of now the only ones left are jordan, Lopez, and Aldridge. The next best big available in the FA market was asik. If you ask me his demand, and hence value, was about to go up not down the longer he sat on the market. Remember what boozer got with the Bulls the year after lebron and bosh signed up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmariaou

And by the way, the Spurs, Knicks, lakers, mavs, clippers, blazers, and whoever else, still are trying to get bigs. And as of now the only ones left are jordan, Lopez, and Aldridge. The next best big available in the FA market was asik. If you ask me his demand, and hence value, was about to go up not down the longer he sat on the market. Remember what boozer got with the Bulls the year after lebron and bosh signed up?

---

None of those guys were going to overpay though. That's the thing. Lakers and Knicks were big names or tank. Spurs overpaying? Yeah, no. Blazers? Well if Aldridge is gone they aren't going to be throwing big money around. Clippers? Asik doesn't fit with CP3.

I am really interested to see what rolo and Koufas signs for as I see them as roughly near Asik's value on either side.

If Asik is the player we saw last year, and not the player his fanboys want to make him out to be based on goofy advanced stats and 1 year in Houston, this deal will be Okafor 2.0.

But if Asik's play matches the wishes of his ardent supporters, it's a good deal. "Good" meaning, Dell can move it any time he wants if a better option comes along, Ajinca outplays him, or he gets unhappy with his role and minutes.

I'm not a big fan of Asik nor his contract but I get it. Sometimes, you just have to overpay for size in the league. However, I'm really concerned about whether or not Cole gets a long term deal here. I feel like he was the best addition last year to this team. His ball handling skills and experience to control the second team (and in clutch situations) is critical for the success of the pelicans during the playoffs. I don't feel comfortable going into the season with Holiday (who we don't know if he can last a whole season let alone make it through the playoffs), Gordon (who is SG that can handle the ball), and Evans (who makes alot of bone headed mistakes) as our only primary ball handling options.