Lamb Traded To Thunder

[progrocks]

and Harden got another 45 tonight. Lamb may become very good, but I do not think Houston will be regretting its decision anytime soon.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I just want to chime in and say some of you guys are absolute morons. Do you even watch the games?

Harden is a Top 20 player in the NBA and meshed perfectly with OKC's other young stars.

Kevin Martin is nothing more than an average volume shooter at best.

OKC nickel dimed Harden, tried to paint the picture of him being the 'bad guy' by turning down the deal and dealt him so they wouldn't have to pay out more money in the luxury tax. Bottom line.

Durant, Ibaka, Westbrook and Harden had the makings of a team that at worse was making the Western Conference 8 times in the next 10 seasons and probably taking home a couple of titles.

The owner won the absolute lottery by moving a team, getting a new arena, a rabid fanbase, hitting on damn near every pick and he's throwing it away because he's a cheap bastard and is trying to place the blame on Harden. Open market, Harden gets 5 years 80M - that's what the market dictated and what he signed with Houston for after the deal. To place blame on Harden for wanting the max allowed from OKC under the CBA 4 years 60M and turning down 4 years 55M is absurd. He would've agreed to the 4 year max for less years and money with OKC - but OKC felt the need to pinch pennies even though they are pulling in the dough hand over fist.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

OKC nickel dimed Harden, tried to paint the picture of him being the 'bad guy' by turning down the deal and dealt him so they wouldn't have to pay out more money in the luxury tax. Bottom line.

Durant, Ibaka, Westbrook and Harden had the makings of a team that at worse was making the Western Conference 8 times in the next 10 seasons and probably taking home a couple of titles.

The owner won the absolute lottery by moving a team, getting a new arena, a rabid fanbase, hitting on damn near every pick and he's throwing it away because he's a cheap bastard and is trying to place the blame on Harden. Open market, Harden gets 5 years 80M - that's what the market dictated and what he signed with Houston for after the deal. To place blame on Harden for wanting the max allowed from OKC under the CBA 4 years 60M and turning down 4 years 55M is absurd. He would've agreed to the 4 year max for less years and money with OKC - but OKC felt the need to pinch pennies even though they are pulling in the dough hand over fist.

Not to be obnoxious, but you're just as wrong as everyone else by bashing the Thunder here. Harden was offered a deal worth $7-8 million less than what he wanted and that would have already put the Thunder almost $25 million over the luxury tax level. That's bad enough this year, but starting next year it becomes incredibly expensive. That $8 million at the marginal luxury tax level costs them almost $26 million in tax payments ($3.25 from $15-25 million over). Let's say that next year they managed to keep payroll constant at the $95 million it would have cost them with the deal they offered Harden (even with the huge raise Ibaka is due and other smaller ones across the board). That ends up in about a $61 million luxury tax hit, on top of his salary. It's natural for fans to ignore the economics, but this is a business, and that is a lot of money. If they keep that core together for that 10 seasons like you mentioned, then they either get in to repeat offender territory and that same $25 million over the luxury tax costs about $86 million, where they'd have to be forced to trim almost all the payroll outside that core starting group.

The bottom line for me is that Harden was plainly worth more than the Thunder were willing to pay. It's not a matter of the Thunder being cheap or Harden being greedy, it's just how the business works. They are certainly worse off without him, but they got a heck of a lot more than they would if they let him walk or did a sign-and-trade at the end of the season.

 

[caw]

I just want to chime in and say some of you guys are absolute morons. Do you even watch the games?

Harden is a Top 20 player in the NBA and meshed perfectly with OKC's other young stars.

Kevin Martin is nothing more than an average volume shooter at best.

Harden may actually be a top 20 player, he didn't look like one last year, but he has been amazing through the first two games. I can admit he may have been the best player playing the past two games.

I also hate Martins game, from his previous teams, but he is putting up 17, 3.5, 2.5 on some very good shooting numbers so far. It may not be the insane numbers Harden is throwing up but it's close to what Harden was putting up last year. Have you watched Martin this year? He has greatly benefitted from being the #3.

The Harden/Lin backcourt is very interesting and gelling better and faster than anyone could have imagined.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Harden may actually be a top 20 player, he didn't look like one last year, but he has been amazing through the first two games. I can admit he may have been the best player playing the past two games.

I also hate Martins game, from his previous teams, but he is putting up 17, 3.5, 2.5 on some very good shooting numbers so far. It may not be the insane numbers Harden is throwing up but it's close to what Harden was putting up last year. Have you watched Martin this year? He has greatly benefitted from being the #3.

The Harden/Lin backcourt is very interesting and gelling better and faster than anyone could have imagined.

I have to disagree on Harden. For me, he not only passes the eye-test, but his advanced metric statistics were off the wall last season as well.

Martin sucks and is nothing more than stat compiler. I haven't seen Martin/OKC yet because I just got cable back last night, but he's been in the league long enough for me to have an idea of who he is already.

If they keep that core together for that 10 seasons like you mentioned, then they either get in to repeat offender territory and that same $25 million over the luxury tax costs about $86 million, where they'd have to be forced to trim almost all the payroll outside that core starting group.

The bottom line for me is that Harden was plainly worth more than the Thunder were willing to pay. It's not a matter of the Thunder being cheap or Harden being greedy, it's just how the business works. They are certainly worse off without him, but they got a heck of a lot more than they would if they let him walk or did a sign-and-trade at the end of the season.

I completely disagree. From a basketball perspective in the NBA you get the absolute 2-3 best players you can and fill in the gaps however you can. Even if the team has to be comprised of minimum contracts, rookies and veterans minimums they were still better off with an elite talent like Harden.

From a financial perspective, yes it would have been quite expensive. However, let's not sit here and act like OKC was suddenly going to be losing money; they weren't, they would just be making less. When you have a chance to build a Dynasty as an NBA owner and you choose more profit and trading away one of your best players - that's being cheap. Sorry. I don't see any other way you can spin in, let's please not make this out to be the poor little small market club couldn't afford Harden - it couldn't be further from the truth. I read OKC (per Bill Simmons) made an estimate $30M-$35M last season. Did the owner save himself money? Yes. Did he hurt his teams chances of winning titles and wrecked a potential dynasty to make even more money. Yes.

That's being a cheap owner. Not to mention one that has had every single thing for him pre-dating the move go 100% his way.

 

[James]

He didn't "wreck" everything calm down. They got a salary dump and a bunch of first rounders for someone they couldn't even afford. He still has two top 10 players.

 

[SlicinNDyson11]

Harden may actually be a top 20 player, he didn't look like one last year, but he has been amazing through the first two games. I can admit he may have been the best player playing the past two games.

I also hate Martins game, from his previous teams, but he is putting up 17, 3.5, 2.5 on some very good shooting numbers so far. It may not be the insane numbers Harden is throwing up but it's close to what Harden was putting up last year. Have you watched Martin this year? He has greatly benefitted from being the #3.

The Harden/Lin backcourt is very interesting and gelling better and faster than anyone could have imagined.

Harden has always shown flashes and his advanced stats suggest he has always been capable of this (I think i posted them a couple of pages back). The Rockets have a really nice core with Harden/Asik/Lin and tons of cap room so this trade is looking better and better for them, they've been looking for a star for years and they finally got one. OKC really misses Harden's ability to get to the rim and create for others and it showed Thursday night against the Spurs, they are putting a lot of pressure on Westbrook and Durant to do it all.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

He didn't "wreck" everything calm down. They got a salary dump and a bunch of first rounders for someone they couldn't even afford. He still has two top 10 players.

They got 2 1st round picks, a volume shooter and Lamb who is a big unknown.

They could afford Harden - they chose not to.

It has nothing to do with the salary cap, except that they would be further over it and spending more in luxury tax.

In a year when Martin is a free agent and leaves, they will have effectively traded Harden for Lamb, 2 first round picks and their owners wallet getting even bigger.

 

[Brochacho]

One of those firsts is a lottery pick.

 

[caw]

I have to disagree on Harden. For me, he not only passes the eye-test, but his advanced metric statistics were off the wall last season as well.

Martin sucks and is nothing more than stat compiler. I haven't seen Martin/OKC yet because I just got cable back last night, but he's been in the league long enough for me to have an idea of who he is already.

Martin has played with who before? Aside from his rookie year the best player would probably have been Artest or Bibby or Scola. That's pretty crappy.

His rookie year, his team was pretty good with Webber, Bibby, Peja, etc. He played 10 minutes per game. His second year he had Bibby, Artest, Miller and Abdul-Rahim. Third year Bibby and Artest. Fourth year same. Fifth Salmons and Nocionni. Then he was traded to Houston where he played with luminaries such as Scola and that's really it.

Fact is he is a third best player type who has been forced to be the go to guy for most of his career.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

I completely disagree. From a basketball perspective in the NBA you get the absolute 2-3 best players you can and fill in the gaps however you can. Even if the team has to be comprised of minimum contracts, rookies and veterans minimums they were still better off with an elite talent like Harden.

From a financial perspective, yes it would have been quite expensive. However, let's not sit here and act like OKC was suddenly going to be losing money; they weren't, they would just be making less. When you have a chance to build a Dynasty as an NBA owner and you choose more profit and trading away one of your best players - that's being cheap. Sorry. I don't see any other way you can spin in, let's please not make this out to be the poor little small market club couldn't afford Harden - it couldn't be further from the truth. I read OKC (per Bill Simmons) made an estimate $30M-$35M last season. Did the owner save himself money? Yes. Did he hurt his teams chances of winning titles and wrecked a potential dynasty to make even more money. Yes.

That's being a cheap owner. Not to mention one that has had every single thing for him pre-dating the move go 100% his way.

I have two points to make here. First, I'm not making it out to be woe is the small market team. I'm pointing out that this is a business and just like why Lin was gone, the cost to keep Harden is much higher than you're letting on. You're projecting that argument on me (straw man fallacy).

The second point I want to make is that you completely and totally contradicted yourself here. First, it's that even with Harden, they wouldn't be losing money. The second, is that they made and estimated $30-35 million last year. Those two points do not mesh (one has to be wrong). Last year their payroll was right around $60 million, which is well below the luxury tax cutoff. By the information you presented (via Simmons obviously), that would have put their revenue at right around $90-95 million. For argument's sake, lets say that during the '13-'14 season that number goes up to $100-105 million. And for argument's sake, let's assume that $95 million payroll stays the same (again, despite the huge raise due to Ibaka). Just the players' salaries and luxury tax hit put their expenses at right around $155 million (I'm going to ignore other expenses because those should essentially cancel out on both ends).

The more logical argument to make here is that they locked up the wrong player by giving Ibaka a big contract, which is the reason they can't afford to keep Harden (add his $15 million to the mix next year and you have around $61 million locked up in four players). That's definitely a legitimate argument and we'll just have to see how Ibaka and Harden's careers progress to make a judgement on that.

 

[msgordon]

Not to be obnoxious, but you're just as wrong as everyone else by bashing the Thunder here. Harden was offered a deal worth $7-8 million less than what he wanted and that would have already put the Thunder almost $25 million over the luxury tax level. That's bad enough this year, but starting next year it becomes incredibly expensive. That $8 million at the marginal luxury tax level costs them almost $26 million in tax payments ($3.25 from $15-25 million over). Let's say that next year they managed to keep payroll constant at the $95 million it would have cost them with the deal they offered Harden (even with the huge raise Ibaka is due and other smaller ones across the board). That ends up in about a $61 million luxury tax hit, on top of his salary. It's natural for fans to ignore the economics, but this is a business, and that is a lot of money. If they keep that core together for that 10 seasons like you mentioned, then they either get in to repeat offender territory and that same $25 million over the luxury tax costs about $86 million, where they'd have to be forced to trim almost all the payroll outside that core starting group.

The bottom line for me is that Harden was plainly worth more than the Thunder were willing to pay. It's not a matter of the Thunder being cheap or Harden being greedy, it's just how the business works. They are certainly worse off without him, but they got a heck of a lot more than they would if they let him walk or did a sign-and-trade at the end of the season.

the thunder may not have chosen the worst option, but they severely misplayed it. they knew when hardens contract was expiring and had plenty of time to consider all of their options. they could have let ibaka (whos really not that good yet, although he may be) walk and used that money to sign harden, or gotten cheaper value for him in a trade. they could have amnestied perkins who is making $9mil a year and is terrible. they could have sucked it up and paid the luxury tax to max harden, as all signs indicate OKC turns a nice profit and will continue to do so. they could have let harden play out the year instead of breaking up the core of the Western conference champs, and imo gotten just as much value if not more in a sign and trade(considering martin is a 1yr rental anyway). they are selling their fans on acquiring cheap assets to stay just as competitive for the future, but gimme a break. what is their plan, hoping that lamb or one of their draft picks turns into a great young player....that they already had in harden? plenty of statheads would have told you that harden was a top 20 player and rising at age 23, and it seems even they have underrated him. he may legitimately be the best scorer in the league. thunder blew it.

 

[msgordon]

Martin has played with who before? Aside from his rookie year the best player would probably have been Artest or Bibby or Scola. That's pretty crappy.

His rookie year, his team was pretty good with Webber, Bibby, Peja, etc. He played 10 minutes per game. His second year he had Bibby, Artest, Miller and Abdul-Rahim. Third year Bibby and Artest. Fourth year same. Fifth Salmons and Nocionni. Then he was traded to Houston where he played with luminaries such as Scola and that's really it.

Fact is he is a third best player type who has been forced to be the go to guy for most of his career.

unfortunately for martin, you play both ways in the NBA and hes absolutely terrible at defense which makes him pretty useless for a team like the Thunder whos goal is basically to beat the Heat

 

[WhereistheDove?]

the thunder may not have chosen the worst option, but they severely misplayed it. they knew when hardens contract was expiring and had plenty of time to consider all of their options. they could have let ibaka (whos really not that good yet, although he may be) walk and used that money to sign harden, or gotten cheaper value for him in a trade. they could have amnestied perkins who is making $9mil a year and is terrible. they could have sucked it up and paid the luxury tax to max harden, as all signs indicate OKC turns a nice profit and will continue to do so. they could have let harden play out the year instead of breaking up the core of the Western conference champs, and imo gotten just as much value if not more in a sign and trade(considering martin is a 1yr rental anyway). they are selling their fans on acquiring cheap assets to stay just as competitive for the future, but gimme a break. what is their plan, hoping that lamb or one of their draft picks turns into a great young player....that they already had in harden? plenty of statheads would have told you that harden was a top 20 player and rising at age 23, and it seems even they have underrated him. he may legitimately be the best scorer in the league. thunder blew it.

And that's not the argument I'm making. I tend to agree with that as I'd rather have Harden, then pay Ibaka with the hope that he develops a much better offensive game. What my argument is, is that calling the Thunder cheap for not adding a max contract to what they currently have on the payroll is ridiculous.

I think their plan is that Ibaka will develop a better offensive game, they believe they have the scoring ability in their guards, and want to build their post around two great defenders. Whether you agree with that or not is a different question.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

The second point I want to make is that you completely and totally contradicted yourself here. First, it's that even with Harden, they wouldn't be losing money. The second, is that they made and estimated $30-35 million last year. Those two points do not mesh (one has to be wrong). Last year their payroll was right around $60 million, which is well below the luxury tax cutoff. By the information you presented (via Simmons obviously), that would have put their revenue at right around $90-95 million. For argument's sake, lets say that during the '13-'14 season that number goes up to $100-105 million. And for argument's sake, let's assume that $95 million payroll stays the same (again, despite the huge raise due to Ibaka). Just the players' salaries and luxury tax hit put their expenses at right around $155 million (I'm going to ignore other expenses because those should essentially cancel out on both ends).

Approx players’ salaries for 2013-14: (Perkins amnestied) Salary cap at $58M and luxury tax at $70M.

Kevin Durant – $17.8 million
James Harden - $15.0 million
Russell Westbrook – $14.7 million
Serge Ibaka – $12.5 million

That's $60M. So there is still 9 spots to fill for the 13 minimum.

Thabo Sefolosha – $3.90 million
Nick Collison – $2.60 million
Reggie Jackson – $1.25 million
Hasheem Thabeet – $1.20 million
Perry Jones – $1.10 million

That's $10.10M. There is still 4 spots open.

Let's assume the last 4 players make an average of $1M a year.

That brings total salaries to approximately $75M - which exceeds the luxury tax by $5M. That means that they would have to pay $5M x $1.50 (for being a 1st time offender).

That brings team payroll expenses in 2013-2014 to $82.5M. A far cry from the $155M you are suggesting.

So instead of making approximately $30M a year, he would be making approximately $15M.

So, yes it was a business move and a financially sound business.

However, this is sports and in the context of being a sports team owner, he got cheap and chose the money over the potential dynasty.

 

[caw]

unfortunately for martin, you play both ways in the NBA and hes absolutely terrible at defense which makes him pretty useless for a team like the Thunder whos goal is basically to beat the Heat

Harden isn't much better and to get to the Heat they have to go through (likely) the Lakers or the Spurs and they likely can't do that without Perkins' defense. The only way they were keeping Harden was by amnestying Perkins (which would still cost the owner salary, assuming he wasn't picked up off waivers).

That said, Harden has been darn impressive so far, far better than even his mother projected. 37 then 45 and already 13 so far in a low scoring game against the Blazers.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Approx players’ salaries for 2013-14: (Perkins amnestied) Salary cap at $58M and luxury tax at $70M.

Kevin Durant – $17.8 million
James Harden - $15.0 million
Russell Westbrook – $14.7 million
Serge Ibaka – $12.5 million

That's $60M. So there is still 9 spots to fill for the 13 minimum.

Thabo Sefolosha – $3.90 million
Nick Collison – $2.60 million
Reggie Jackson – $1.25 million
Hasheem Thabeet – $1.20 million
Perry Jones – $1.10 million

That's $10.10M. There is still 4 spots open.

Let's assume the last 4 players make an average of $1M a year.

That brings total salaries to approximately $75M - which exceeds the luxury tax by $5M. That means that they would have to pay $5M x $1.50 (for being a 1st time offender).

That brings team payroll expenses in 2013-2014 to $82.5M. A far cry from the $155M you are suggesting.

So instead of making approximately $30M a year, he would be making approximately $15M.

So, yes it was a business move and a financially sound business.

However, this is sports and in the context of being a sports team owner, he got cheap and chose the money over the potential dynasty.

Now you're throwing different variables into this (btw, this http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--thunder-trade-james-harden-to-rockets-27481909.html is where I get the $95 million figure from). Now it's not they should have signed him flat out, it's that they put the money in the wrong place. That opens up a whole other discussion of how much do they need Perkins. When you more than likely have to go through the Lakers to get to the Finals, how much of a premium do you have to put on low-post defense? And who is the starting center in that scenario? Nick Collison (good bench player but do you really want him starting)? That's a bench with two guys I would feel comfortable with in the rotation and whatever you can grab for around the veteran minimum.

 

[Waquoit]

Not to be obnoxious, but you're just as wrong as everyone else by bashing the Thunder here. Harden was offered a deal worth $7-8 million less than what he wanted and that would have already put the Thunder almost $25 million over the luxury tax level.

So what? Why should Harden settle for one penny less that the max? OKC could afford it. You are siding with the billionaire over the millionaire.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Now you're throwing different variables into this (btw, this http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--thunder-trade-james-harden-to-rockets-27481909.html is where I get the $95 million figure from). Now it's not they should have signed him flat out, it's that they put the money in the wrong place. That opens up a whole other discussion of how much do they need Perkins. When you more than likely have to go through the Lakers to get to the Finals, how much of a premium do you have to put on low-post defense? And who is the starting center in that scenario? Nick Collison (good bench player but do you really want him starting)? That's a bench with two guys I would feel comfortable with in the rotation and whatever you can grab for around the veteran minimum.

The only variable I threw in there was amnestying Perkins. Those salaries are directly from here http://www.spotrac.com/nba/oklahoma-city-thunder/yearly/ A lot of people here overrate him as a former Celtic, because if you watch OKC Perkins doesn't even play in crunch time and isn't even that good anymore. Sure, beating the Lakers is harder without Perkins, but that's a different discussion.

My point being all along is that team was making huge money with Harden and now stands to make about half with Harden. By my estimates, they would still be pulling in $10M+ a season.

As I also said before, if this was a regular business that would be a prudent decision. However this is sports. Owners are judged in a different context here. If you have a chance to wins titles and you're still making multi-millions while doing it, don't expect me to call the shooting guard cheap by wanting what his market value dictates. Bennett chose the cheap route when absolutely everything had fallen into his lap better than he could have imagined and he blew it for OKC and NBA fans.

 

[UConnSwag11]

Kmart is having a really good game, he doesnt need to be the man but getting 20+ or so is perfect

 

[Joseph Zocco]

I like seeing Lamb on a better team just as everyone else does. But for someone here to say that the Thunder are better with Martin/Lamb instead of Harden is just absurd. We have seen OKC in their first couple games struggle down the stretch w/o Harden. Looks like Harden had a bigger impact than everyone thought.

But yea now Lamb can really develop behind the scenes and learn a lot from Durant. Was happy to see Lamb heading to OKC.

 

[Lefty2one]

Two games into the borderline-meaningless NBA season and we're already this emotional over it? LOL, let's give it at least a few months.