NBA Trade Rumors Member Posts

 

JedIII's Profile

Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded

No Profile Picture uploaded

Team:


Where from:


Favourite player:


Best team moment:


Interests:


Timezone:




JedIII's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To JedIII's Posts

 

 

To JedIII's last 5 talk posts

 

To JedIII's last 5 rumour replies

 

To JedIII's last 5 talk replies

 

JedIII has no Rumours Posts

 

 

JedIII's talk posts with other poster's replies to JedIII's talk posts

 

18 Jun 2017 00:27:38
I know 'tis the season for trade proposals, free agent signings, and other fantasy ideas for changing our favorite teams into title contenders, but I want to change my favorite sport. The NBA is set up very poorly; business wise and basketball wise.

There are many things we all would change, but what is one thing you would change on the court and or one thing you would change off the court?

Off the Court: I would eliminate max contracts; cost certainty for elite players hinders competitive balance in the league and makes the top 10 or so players bargains, which gives those teams a HUGE advantage in a sport so affected by having the best player on the floor.

On the Court: When teams are in the bonus, give the fouled team the choice of free throws or possession. The idea of bonus free throws after so many team fouls was designed to give the team being fouled an advantage. The way the game is played today makes that the opposite. It also slows the game down terribly and sometimes becomes a FT contest.

JedIII

1.) 18 Jun 2017 01:26:50
I'd say max contracts hurt teams more than helping them. There are probably 10 to 15 players in the league worth the max and far more with the max.


2.) 18 Jun 2017 05:25:37
I agree a change should be done around max contracts but I don't think eliminating them is the right thing to do. The player's association would never allow it since what would end up happening is the top 1% of NBA players would make like 90% of all the money. Similar to how the new super-max contracts are I think there should be more explicit criteria that allows a player to get different levels of max contracts. This would not only help reward the best players more but not allow teams to foolishly give max contracts to guys underserving of them. For example hitting certain accolades such as making an all-nba team, starting over 60 games, finishing top 10 in assists and things like that should be able to boost the amount of money you can get from some baseline max which is lower than current numbers. I also, don't like how max contracts are currently tied to how long you've been in the NBA since players typically become less valuable the longer they've been in the NBA and nobody wants to be paying 30+ year olds 30+ mill per year.


 

 

 

JedIII's rumour replies

 

Click To View This Thread

18 Jun 2017 00:30:32
I feel, on this website, most people do not understand the salary cap. Including Saric would add salary and take the Celtics out of the running for Gordon H. Or Blake G. Gordon H. Would cost less on a max deal than Blake G. ( and would also be a better fit) . If the Celtics trade the #1 for the #3 and take on no other salary this year they will be less than $1mm shy of max money availability for Gordon H., and that's if they renounce everyone basically. Part of the lure of this trade to Ainge is the cap space to sign a guy. I only see this trade happening if it is #1 for #3, LAL pick next year and Sac pick in 2019, because Ainge won't trade for "equal" value and he won't take on salary. If PHI is willing it will get done.

JedIII

 

 

Click To View This Thread

17 Jun 2017 19:12:57
I think the Paul contract is too low. I agree that Mills would not be signed because of Bpd0003's thoughts. Lastly, Simmons might get more because of the landscape of contracts this year in the NBA.

JedIII

 

 

Click To View This Thread

17 Jun 2017 19:00:15
The Celtics would not have enough room to sign either Gordon H. or Blake G. In this trade scenario, let alone both. Therefore, the Celtics would say no because it would be Fultz, probable top 5 pick next year, and the ability to sign Hayward or Griffin for Butler.

JedIII

 

 

Click To View This Thread

16 Jun 2017 02:36:07
The Celtics would NOT have nearly enough money to pursue Gordon H. Unless he was willing to take a contract for $15mm per year. obviously a no.

JedIII

 

 

Click To View This Thread

15 Jun 2017 23:05:57
I'm starting to think Okafor has negative trade value. He has been on the block for a while now and no one wants him. Therefore, this trade would not work for Sacramento. assuming they aren't interested in the 5&10 for 3 idea (and they shouldn't be interested) .

JedIII

 

 

 

JedIII's talk replies