Next off-season Draft/moves predictions for this season's playoff teams:

[buckalis]

They don't because it doesn't even occur to playoff teams to tank, and that draft pick late in the first round of next year's draft isn't valuable enough to risk alienating your fan base (and roster, for that matter). That pick becomes 2 future 2nds if not conveyed.

But I don't want to hear your opinion... I knew what it would be already...

I asked for a similar situation existing in the past, where a playoff team didn't control their record but opted without any real benefit (because in this case here Utah is safely ahead and a better team) to let the pick "fly away" instead of keeping the pick and still be in the playoffs with the same chances as if they would not tank some games.

 

[buckalis]

The Warriors aren't going to concern themselves with luxury tax penalties while their core group is in their prime and healthy. Their new arena will rake in the money when everyone is healthy and winning and make up a portion of those tax penalties.

They are in the same spot a season later too... but because the previous 2 seasons where into the tax, if they go "in" next season, they are repeters tax eligible only a season after, while if they stay under the tax for another season, then they have 3 seasons that follow where they can be in the lux tax but not be repeaters tax eligible... It's not difficult to figure it out what is more beneficial for them... it makes some 100s of millions difference...

 

[shopson67]

But I don't want to hear your opinion... I knew what it would be already...

I asked for a similar situation existing in the past, where a playoff team didn't control their record but opted without any real benefit (because in this case here Utah is safely ahead and a better team) to let the pick "fly away" instead of keeping the pick and still be in the playoffs with the same chances as if they would not tank some games.

LOL. So your deflection from my question is now the more important question because YOU had no answer. Interesting.

 

[shopson67]

They are in the same spot a season later too... but because the previous 2 seasons where into the tax, if they go "in" next season, they are repeters tax eligible only a season after, while if they stay under the tax for another season, then they have 3 seasons that follow where they can be in the lux tax but not be repeaters tax eligible... It's not difficult to figure it out what is more beneficial for them... it makes some 100s of millions difference...

They'll address that down the line as they feel the need. They are already over the luxury tax threshold for 20/21 and 21/22 as things stand today.

Golden State Warriors Multi-Year Cap

 

[buckalis]

LOL. So your deflection from my question is now the more important question because YOU had no answer. Interesting.

But you asked for me to reply on a non existing before case... therefore you invented some logic based on a non existing ever before result... Interesting.

 

[shopson67]

But you asked for me to reply on a non existing before case... therefore you invented some logic based on a non existing ever before result... Interesting.

...then you did the same goddamn thing. If it has never happened before, why would you expect it to happen now? The Thunder are not going to age well when Paul declines but that contract actually increases thru 21/22 (you better believe he's picking up that $44M player option). This surprise playoff run could be their last chance before the rebuild takes over in full force.

 

[buckalis]

They'll address that down the line as they feel the need. They are already over the luxury tax threshold for 20/21 and 21/22 as things stand today.

Golden State Warriors Multi-Year Cap

Exactly my point... They will chose to support the 21/22 season and the two seasons that follow, instead of staying into the tax for 20/21 and have to unload salary for the seasons that follow...

They'll trade Wiggins again next season and get back more players that add up to less salary than Wiggins alone...

 

[Black Adam]

LOL. So your deflection from my question is now the more important question because YOU had no answer. Interesting.

this is why this thread is a laugh track...

 

[buckalis]

...then you did the same goddamn thing. If it has never happened before, why would you expect it to happen now? The Thunder are not going to age well when Paul declines but that contract actually increases thru 21/22 (you better believe he's picking up that $44M player option). This surprise playoff run could be their last chance before the rebuild takes over in full force.

Go to psychiatrist to examine your state of mind mate... You are asking me which playoff team in the past tanked games when there was never before a reason to do so and you want to use that as a reference in order to compare with a totally different situation where there is every reason to tank some games?

Go to psychiatrist, I insist!

 

[shopson67]

Exactly my point... They will chose to support the 21/22 season and the two seasons that follow, instead of staying into the tax for 20/21 and have to unload salary for the seasons that follow...

They'll trade Wiggins again next season and get back more players that add up to less salary than Wiggins alone...

THEY DON'T HAVE TO UNLOAD SALARY. THEY CAN JUST PAY THE PENALTIES. Not sure why this is so tough to understand. If you think they are just going to let that trade exception expire (or not use their MLE) in pursuit of another championship, I think you're mistaken.

 

[shopson67]

Go to psychiatrist to examine your state of mind mate... You are asking me which playoff team in the past tanked games when there was never before a reason to do so and you want to use that as a reference in order to compare with a totally different situation where there is every reason to tank some games?

Go to psychiatrist, I insist!

The reason why it hasn't happened is because IT MAKES NO SENSE TO DO SO. Ultimately, this situation will handle itself, as I don't see the Thunder being able to climb much higher or maintain that higher slot through the end of the season.

TANKING IS FOR LOTTERY TEAMS.

 

[Wamu]

Go to psychiatrist to examine your state of mind mate... You are asking me which playoff team in the past tanked games when there was never before a reason to do so and you want to use that as a reference in order to compare with a totally different situation where there is every reason to tank some games?

Go to psychiatrist, I insist!

Why you always so damn angry when you're on this site? This will be a very difficult concept for you to grasp but you can't expect everyone to always agree with the gibberish you spew.

 

[Wamu]

this is why this thread is a laugh track...

BuckyBoy's comments aren't that funny. Okay, yeah they are.

 

[buckalis]

THEY DON'T HAVE TO UNLOAD SALARY. THEY CAN JUST PAY THE PENALTIES. Not sure why this is so tough to understand. If you think they are just going to let that trade exception expire (or not use their MLE) in pursuit of another championship, I think you're mistaken.

They'll use that trade exception and cash it to unload salary... T.E. works both ways you can add salary or unload salary... it just makes it far easier than it was this season to unload salary for the next... Don't forget that they have the pick to draft and some more roster spots to fill for next season. By unloading Wiggins and use the trade exception, the return they can get would have a high potential future talent still at low salary included (and then next to the pick).

They'll end up much better for next season than if they hold on to Wiggins and still go under the lux tax.

 

[buckalis]

The reason why it hasn't happened is because IT MAKES NO SENSE TO DO SO. Ultimately, this situation will handle itself, as I don't see the Thunder being able to climb much higher or maintain that higher slot through the end of the season.

TANKING IS FOR LOTTERY TEAMS.

It makes no sense to hold on to a 16th-18th pick when you are building on half of the roster and have the other half keeping you competitive on the playoffs... while you end up with the same ability as before to fight in the 1st round... correct?

I insist, go to a psychiatrist!

 

[Sparhawk]

Who said they won't try to win the 1st round? They'll give everything they have to win it!

What and how destroys the team's chemistry? what pisses off the coach?

Tanking.
How can you be so obtuse?????

 

[Sparhawk]

Go to psychiatrist to examine your state of mind mate... You are asking me which playoff team in the past tanked games when there was never before a reason to do so and you want to use that as a reference in order to compare with a totally different situation where there is every reason to tank some games?

Go to psychiatrist, I insist!

Bruh, don’t get so triggered.

 

[CitySushi]

They'll use that trade exception and cash it to unload salary... T.E. works both ways you can add salary or unload salary... it just makes it far easier than it was this season to unload salary for the next... Don't forget that they have the pick to draft and some more roster spots to fill for next season. By unloading Wiggins and use the trade exception, the return they can get would have a high potential future talent still at low salary included (and then next to the pick).

They'll end up much better for next season than if they hold on to Wiggins and still go under the lux tax.

There's no way for what you just proposed to happen. Please propose an actual scenario in which you believe this would work. Because it can't.

 

[CitySushi]

THEY DON'T HAVE TO UNLOAD SALARY. THEY CAN JUST PAY THE PENALTIES. Not sure why this is so tough to understand. If you think they are just going to let that trade exception expire (or not use their MLE) in pursuit of another championship, I think you're mistaken.

Bruh, go back and read all of my recent posts to him. Just nothing gets through.

 

[buckalis]

There's no way for what you just proposed to happen. Please propose an actual scenario in which you believe this would work. Because it can't.

I was suggesting the same would happen the season before, you was insisting:"no way, our owner said "blah, blah, blah "we have 200M to invest" blah, blah, blah", Kerr said: "blah, blah, blah, "we won't trade Russell", blah, blah, blah" what happened at the end?

What I was suggesting, or what your owner and Kerr was ensuring you that "won't happen"?

Eeeeh? What happened at the end?

Please confess: "It happened exactly like you was saying it will happen"...

I will also remind you, that I was insisting that it will happen this way (exactly as it happened) because 200M is not the pocket money your dad gives you to spend...

Now... You are trying to convince yourself that GSW will go into the lux tax next season, while I have tried to open your mind up and explained the obvious... which is: "if they go into the lux tax next season, they lose 200M (may be more) over the two seasons that follow, while if they stay under the tax next season and go into it for three continuous seasons after, the result is the same for the team but they save 200M or more...

and yet you keep insisting!

Now you ask for the method, although you quote on a post that already suggests it!

"T.E. works both ways you can add salary or unload salary... it just makes it far easier than it was this season to unload salary for the next... Don't forget that they have the pick to draft and some more roster spots to fill for next season. By unloading Wiggins and use the trade exception, the return they can get would have a high potential future talent still at low salary included and then next to the (high) pick they'll draft."