Everyone knows cavs will match so why bother( especially when the rumor is cavs offered 5/80) . So to pry him, teams have to offer him way more than cavs did but at that he is not worth it, for any team out there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.
Tristan Thompson
- Thread starter Rist77
- Start date
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Or cavs can offer him 5/65, take it or leave it. What is he gonna do?
Sure I get the Lebron angle. But that's a bit over blown I believe. Lot of people thought, cavs would never let him take QO and risk the chance of him leaving in next FA. But here we are, cavs hardly cared.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If Cavs offer him 1 year deal, they will ask themselves what's TT doing next FA?
If TT wants to stay, then work out the long term deal right now.
If TT wants to leave, why help him?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,048
- Reaction score
- 64,136
- Points
- 148
Because - assuming that the/Cavs did make a 5/80 offer - 5/65/will be viewed as a deliberate insult and bad faith. It is the type of thing that might piss off TT enough that he might actually sit out the whole season on principle, and it might tick off LBJ as well.
The Cavs have the upper hand and are winning the PR battle. Importantly, the locker room doesn't seem to have rallied around TT's demands either. So why risk blowing that?
The goal is to build a championship team Dan can afford, which inclides signing TT at an amount Dan ia willing to pay. The goal is not being able to slime the ball because they "beat" TT and his agent.
Hold firm on the 5/80, be the adult, and it's a win that the rest of the league will recognize as a win.
gourimoko
Fighting the good fight!
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2008
- Messages
- 39,845
- Reaction score
- 53,645
- Points
- 148
If Cavs offer TT a 1-year deal, they are essentially giving Paul, James and Tristan all the leverage needed to get Tristan a max deal. It would become a season-long distraction and might affect the playing time and rotations on the floor.
I'd really rather not revisit this in the next offseason.
Also, Portland has no reason not to offer Tristan such a contract, it's not harmful to them in anyway since the offseason is essentially over and they're not really pursuing any other free agents.
If Cavs match, oh well, if they don't, they get Thompson and can trade with Toronto once they implode by midseason.
It's really a small thing from their perspective. Ties up their cap for 72 hours. That's it. In fact, I'd go so far as saying the only reason it hasn't happened is because Tristan/Paul haven't gone that direction yet or met amicable terms with Portland (Portland might want more than 2 years).
I'd really rather not revisit this in the next offseason.
Also, Portland has no reason not to offer Tristan such a contract, it's not harmful to them in anyway since the offseason is essentially over and they're not really pursuing any other free agents.
If Cavs match, oh well, if they don't, they get Thompson and can trade with Toronto once they implode by midseason.
It's really a small thing from their perspective. Ties up their cap for 72 hours. That's it. In fact, I'd go so far as saying the only reason it hasn't happened is because Tristan/Paul haven't gone that direction yet or met amicable terms with Portland (Portland might want more than 2 years).
dark2332
Yeah, I’m thinking I’m back.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 10,807
- Reaction score
- 21,949
- Points
- 135
I may be wrong on this, but I was under the impression that since the QO has expired, we could offer a hypothetical 1-year deal now this offseason (let's say for $10 million) and Thompson would stay a Restricted free agent again next offseason--giving us the right to match any offer he gets. I can't see anyone giving him max-money next offseason either.... so this sounds like a good way to save money this year if you are the Cavs.
Brandname
NBA Starter
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 4,167
- Reaction score
- 3,395
- Points
- 113
I agree wholeheartedly. Now is not the time for the Cavs to start negotiating in bad faith.
Stick to our current offer. Don't raise it by a penny. And just wait. Barring an offer from another team, there is nothing Tristan can do that will work out better for him than accepting the offer. Stick to your guns, don't let him hold the team hostage.
Once he starts missing paychecks, an 80ish million dollar contract is going to start looking mighty appetizing.
shoes22
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2012
- Messages
- 28,379
- Reaction score
- 38,816
- Points
- 148
That is not true. For first round draft picks, restricted free agency only applies to players with 4 or less seasons played in the league (3 for everyone else). No matter what happens this offseason, Tristan cannot be a restricted free agent again, unless he holds out the entire year.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,048
- Reaction score
- 64,136
- Points
- 148
How so?
Maybe i'm missing something, but how would giving him a one year, ten million deal be any different (other than dollar amount) than if he'd taken the QO and was a UFA next summer, when most of us didn't think he'd get a max offer anyway?
But again, wouldn't that be the exact same if he's taken the QO.
I agree, but the NBA seems to have a rather curious lack of the kind of "let's fuck with them" RFA offers we see in the NFL. Teams don't seem to make them unless they think there's a pretty good chance the other team won't match. I wouldn't say it's collusion, as much as perhaps an unstated gentlemen's agreement.
Anyway, I'm not sure Portland's ownership would want to spend an additional $13+
on a guy who just isn't worth that much to them. It's still real money, and their ownership doesn't strike me as willing to blow huge chunks of money just to get a couple of future second rounders, or even a non-lottery first rounder.
KI4MVP
formerly LJ4MVP
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2005
- Messages
- 31,247
- Reaction score
- 41,243
- Points
- 148
It is the same, Tristan didn't sign the QO to be unrestricted next year, we have no incentive to give him a second shot at that. We want to lock him up for 5 years without overpaying more that we've already offered.
gourimoko
Fighting the good fight!
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2008
- Messages
- 39,845
- Reaction score
- 53,645
- Points
- 148
Because LeBron believed the deal was done when Tristan/Paul agreed in principle to the $80M/5yr deal. When they reneged on the agreement, James was already under contract.
If we do this again over the course of a season, James will not likely sign until Tristan's deal is done.
This gives Paul essentially infinite leverage, since without James, we don't really have a functional team.
Read above.
I really don't think it's in Cavaliers' best interest to redo this again next season.
Once Tristan decided to forgo the QO, he lost a great deal of leverage as it meant he would be forced to sign a multi-year deal with some team, and that the Cavs could match whatever offer he signed.
By giving him a $10M/1yr deal, we're essentially just making the situation immeasurably worse because now the entire season will be about Tristan's upcoming offseason demands and how LeBron will act as an enforcer.
I highly doubt Cavs want to go back into free agency negotiations with Rich Paul anytime soon, since I doubt Paul will leave James out of it.
It would be better actually, because he'd be tradeable without his consent. It's not in the Cavs best interest though.
I agree, but this really wouldn't be a "let's fuck with them" moment.
It is in Portland's best interest to try and get Tristan under a reasonable, tradeable contract. They can either keep him, or move him for assets. At $13M in year 1, that might be possible (to Toronto for example).
While Cavs fans might say, well surely Cleveland would match a two-year deal, you cannot say that objectively - and you certainly can't make a logical argument as to why Portland wouldn't want to sign Tristan to an offer sheet.
If this were still the offseason, I would agree. But at this point, it's really no sweat off their back, it's a 72-hour cap hold, that's it.
I think Portland wants to sell tickets and are anxious to leave the rebuilding phase. That town loves basketball and got a raw deal with LMA leaving.
I can see Portland spending $13M on Tristan if they thought he would blossom or be a trade asset to Toronto or another team with interest.
Rimage
Sixth Man
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 5,490
- Reaction score
- 2,495
- Points
- 113
I think it is pretty apparent that any grace or leeway given to TT, will be taken and then demanded twice over. I've not seen or heard any reason why any extensions or further concessions be given to TT's camp. They have taken whatever has been extended to them and then some. They only want total victory at this point.
HurricaneKid
Gold Star Member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2014
- Messages
- 542
- Reaction score
- 739
- Points
- 93
Here are the players Portland has brought in this offseason:
Vonleh, 20, PF
Aminu, 25, Small Ball PF/SF
Mason Plumlee, 25, PF/C
Ed Davis, 26, PF/C
Mo Harkless 22, SF/PF
Cliff Alexander, 20, PF (Draft Pick)
They already HAD Meyers Leonard (23) and Kaman.
And you think they want to pay ANOTHER PF? And Olshey has publicly said they have no interest in him. I laughed when I heard him attempt to say it diplomatically. There is literally NO REASON for Portland to DO ANYTHING in re: TT. Nevermind that they lost LA, Wes Matthews, Batum, and ROLO and that they are rebuilding and would have no interest in paying a role player that much at this time (same with Philly).
What Port DOES do is allow another team that needs to dump salary to trade them salary in order to sign TT. But they would need to make the trade to Port (which would certainly include draft picks to offset the salary dump) just to sign him to an offer sheet which the Cavs would CERTAINLY match (given that they could only offer 4 years with 4.5% raises). Which makes this exercise completely irrelevant.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 34,048
- Reaction score
- 64,136
- Points
- 148
I know that's what we want. The question is what the Cavs do if RP brings up a discounted one year deal, and the alternative is a continued holdout of unknown duration.
gourimoko
Fighting the good fight!
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2008
- Messages
- 39,845
- Reaction score
- 53,645
- Points
- 148
Not sure if you even read my post based on your comment.
Did u just make this up?
When asked he said they targeted certain players and not others but he couldn't comment on any one specifically.
I don't recall him ever mentioning Thompson's name whatsoever.
What has been reported by numerous insiders and analysts is that Portland does have some interest in Thompson - just not for the max; which is what they might feel it takes to get him.
Can you cite your source?
Again, I really don't think you fully understand what is being argued if this is the position you're taking.
The point is that Portland might want to use their remaining cap space to acquire an asset. It doesn't matter what position he plays. Right now, Thompson is the biggest name free agent still available, and they might be able to work out a short-term deal.
Do you get that this has nothing to do with Thompson being a long-term Blazer?
I'm not sure why you're speaking matter of factly about something none of us knows about.
To be quite honest, I think you missed the point of my post.