Beal+PHX Agree to Buyout - PHX to S/W Beal | Beal Signs w/LAC 1+1 11mil

[SleepingHero]

@ShamsCharania
BREAKING: Three-time NBA All-Star Bradley Beal has agreed to a contract buyout with the Phoenix Suns and plans to join the Los Angeles Clippers on a two-year, $11 million deal with a player option after clearing waivers, Mark Bartelstein of @PrioritySportstold ESPN.

[SleepingHero]

@BobbyMarks42
Important to note that Beal had to agree on a buyout if the Suns wanted to waive-and-stretch his salary.

This is different from the situation in Milwaukee with Damian Lillard.

[SleepingHero]

@BrettSiegelNBA
The Bucks made a very strong push to sign Bradley Beal, who was interested in MIL, league sources told @ClutchPoints.

The Heat were only able to offer a minimum contract after trading for Norman Powell.

Golden State also wasn’t willing to offer more than the minimum.@BrettSiegelNBA. The Bucks made a very strong push to sign Bradley Beal, who was interested in MIL, league sources told @ClutchPoints.

The Heat were only able to offer a minimum contract after trading for Norman Powell.

Golden State also wasn’t willing to offer more than the minimum.

[SleepingHero]

Brett Siegel (@BrettSiegelNBA)
Beal did not show a lot of interest in playing for the Lakers despite the team holding extensive conversations with him and his representation, league sources told @ClutchPoints.

[omahen]

Brett Siegel (@BrettSiegelNBA)
Beal did not show a lot of interest in playing for the Lakers despite the team holding extensive conversations with him and his representation, league sources told @ClutchPoints.

I don't really see the fit on Lakers. Sure he is an asset at 5 mil salary, but he is exactly the type of players Lakers don't need. Besides, he seems to me he is not a winning player, no matter what role he plays.

[F Gump]

I don't really see the fit on Lakers. Sure he is an asset at 5 mil salary, but he is exactly the type of players Lakers don't need. Besides, he seems to me he is not a winning player, no matter what role he plays.

Lakers still have a 5M salary available to offer?

[omahen]

Lakers still have a 5M salary available to offer?

According to Spotrac they have around 3,9 mil if they release non guaranteed Milton, which is very likely to happen in any case. But it would be fairly easy to get to 5 mil, as Goodwin is also guaranteed for only 20k. Or they could dump one of the expiring deals or trade them for less money.

[omahen]

Interesting turn for the Clippers. They were quite good (above expectations) last two seasons by playing some very good defense, thanks to playing guys like DJJ and Dunn a bunch of minutes. These two will now be (likely) replaced by Beal and Collins in the starting line-up. I see a lot of offense with Zubac, Harden, Beal, Collins and Kawhi, but very limited defensive capability. Bench defense with Dunn, Batum and DJJ might be good, though. But limited scoring from the bench as Bogi is the only offensively capable player there. Might be they will have Collins as 6th man.

[Mavs03]

Question for the board:

Would you rather have Bradley Beal or D'Angelo Russell? Both essentially signed for the same deal.

Give me Russell. He's 3 years younger than Beal. He's more of a PG. He has chemistry playing with Klay, AD and Christie. I think he's a much better fit for Dallas than Beal.

[KillerLeft]

Question for the board:

Would you rather have Bradley Beal or D'Angelo Russell?  Both essentially signed for the same deal.

Give me Russell.  He's 3 years younger than Beal.  He's more of a PG.  He has chemistry playing with Klay, AD and Christie.  I think he's a much better fit for Dallas than Beal.

Yes, agreed. 

And, while it isn't like Russell has no baggage, he certainly comes with less baggage. 

I think. both players will probably talk about how it's a "bet on myself" year, because both are taking pay cuts and both probably see the ends of their careers potentially coming at them fairly quickly. But, it's not nearly the same, because Beal is still getting all of that gargantuan contract. Russell really is taking a major pay cut. I think he'll be very motivated to play well.

[KillerLeft]

I just think this S/W trend is bananas. I'm not sure what alternate route I'd have suggested for either PHX or MIL, but wowzers, what a mess.

[omahen]

I just think this S/W trend is bananas. I'm not sure what alternate route I'd have suggested for either PHX or MIL, but wowzers, what a mess.

I found it interesting that teams are not willing to trade for these expiring vets and we see buyouts that very rarely happened before TDL in the past. Ayton, Clarkson, Okogie, rumors about Smart, Middleton having same fate. Surely I forgot some more examples. Sexton and Collins were just given away and there are probably more examples. OKC made a fortune trading for players on longer term deals (receiving assets in the process) and then flipping them as expiring for new assets. Now it seems teams are just losing with this approach.

[DallasMaverick]

I found it interesting that teams are not willing to trade for these expiring vets and we see buyouts that very rarely happened before TDL in the past. Ayton, Clarkson, Okogie, rumors about Smart, Middleton having same fate. Surely I forgot some more examples. Sexton and Collins were just given away and there are probably more examples. OKC made a fortune trading for players on longer term deals (receiving assets in the process) and then flipping them as expiring for new assets. Now it seems teams are just losing with this approach.

Seems like the greatest sin under the new CBA is overpaying salary.

[omahen]

Seems like the greatest sin under the new CBA is overpaying salary.

I wonder if these buyouts will increase the value of expiring deals at TDL (buyouts decrease the amount of expiring deals on the market), when there will likely be some teams looking to shed longer term salary.

[F Gump]

The massive buyouts make a lie of the idea that "even if you overpay a player badly, you can always trade him." With a hard cap, which LIMITS spending as a whole by the league, you can get stuck. Sometimes the best deal you make now is when you say no, and let a player walk.

I think LAC was a bit ahead of the curve in figuring it out, when they let Paul George simply walk. That seems like a no-no, to lose talent, but if your talent isn’t going to be held at a cap-efficient price, it's a killer in how it lowers your ceiling.

I think teams are going to be forced to rethink the value of players getting a supermax. The value of a max player was in getting someone whose salary is limited and he was worth more, but with a supermax AND an overall spending limit, can that supermax player whose salary now eats up so much of a limited pie really be worth more than their contract?

Thats one of my concerns with AD. With his limited availability, can he ever be worth the amount of your overall cap he will get?

[omahen]

The massive buyouts make a lie of the idea that "even if you overpay a player badly, you can always trade him." With a hard cap, which LIMITS spending as a whole by the league, you can get stuck. Sometimes the best deal you make now is when you say no, and let a player walk.

I think LAC was a bit ahead of the curve in figuring it out, when they let Paul George simply walk. That seems like a no-no, to lose talent, but if your talent isn’t going to be held at a cap-efficient price, it's a killer in how it lowers your ceiling.

I think teams are going to be forced to rethink the value of players getting a supermax. The value of a max player was in getting someone whose salary is limited and he was worth more, but with a supermax AND an overall spending limit, can that supermax player whose salary now eats up so much of a limited pie really be worth more than their contract?

Thats one of my concerns with AD. With his limited availability, can he ever be worth the amount of your overall cap he will get?

Supermax was in large part designed to keep players in the teams that drafted them, not that everyone just runs to attractive destination. Even before these new aprons I thought that supermax deals are actually putting those teams in difficult situation, because while they can pay their star more and keep him, it also limits their team building options. I think the value of supermax would be, if it would only count towards the cap at the regular max value, while the supermax bonus would only be received by the player. I think this could solve a lot of issues.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

The Clippers got Beal for a steal. Even at 32,
If he performs anywhere near like he did a couple of years ago, they might make some noise. Collins and Lopez will definitely help if they stay healthy.

[KillerLeft]

I think LAC was a bit ahead of the curve in figuring it out, when they let Paul George simply walk. That seems like a no-no, to lose talent, but if your talent isn’t going to be held at a cap-efficient price, it's a killer in how it lowers your ceiling.

I think teams are going to be forced to rethink the value of players getting a supermax. The value of a max player was in getting someone whose salary is limited and he was worth more, but with a supermax AND an overall spending limit, can that supermax player whose salary now eats up so much of a limited pie really be worth more than their contract?

Thats one of my concerns with AD. With his limited availability, can he ever be worth the amount of your overall cap he will get?

All very astute points. Great observation about LAC and Paul George (I thought it was dumb at the time, but it has worked out better for them than for Philly, that's for sure).

[KillerLeft]

Supermax was in large part designed to keep players in the teams that drafted them, not that everyone just runs to attractive destination. Even before these new aprons I thought that supermax deals are actually putting those teams in difficult situation, because while they can pay their star more and keep him, it also limits their team building options. I think the value of supermax would be, if it would only count towards the cap at the regular max value, while the supermax bonus would only be received by the player. I think this could solve a lot of issues.

Yeah. This is kind of baked into your point, but it puts teams in a situation where they basically have to pay up or offend their guy, even the ones who would've been borderline max players before the supermax was dreamt up.

[F Gump]

Supermax was in large part designed to keep players in the teams that drafted them, not that everyone just runs to attractive destination. Even before these new aprons I thought that supermax deals are actually putting those teams in difficult situation, because while they can pay their star more and keep him, it also limits their team building options. I think the value of supermax would be, if it would only count towards the cap at the regular max value, while the supermax bonus would only be received by the player. I think this could solve a lot of issues.

While your observations are good ones, I don't think your solutions have any actual chance of being considered. 

IN THE INTEREST OF BETTER COMPETITIVE BALANCE (aka jealousy), no teams will support a system where one team can get all the best players AND somehow get favorable treatment from.the league in that pursuit. At all times, the other 29 teams are all very much in favor of making the team with all the talent let some of it go, for others to use and feature and maybe win with. 

Keep in mind that the tax/hard cap is intended to be a gentle governor on how a team controls its spending, so teams don't go broke chasing titles, and the overall setup is now promoting more balanced spending (and over time, more balanced talent from team to team) as well.

So I think the goal is that everyone must make choices. And if you can't fit all your talent into what payroll you have, some will go elsewhere to get paid better. How you navigate that is up to you.