Basketbal reasons Boston vs Oklahoma (who wins)

[jpotter33]

I just don't get it. Why wouldnt he  sign 1 year with any other team and then use the cap space next year as an FA again?! Why must be OKC? I think there are other teams who would offer him 1 year, not just OKC.

I was under the impression the $ under bird rights allows for a higher max per year. So his 1+1 is higher in OKC. And then 10 year with bird rights and he makes like 35 million per for 5 years which he can get only with OKC. Boston wouldn't get full bird rights for 3 years so he would have to wait and trust C's would honor it. Think Kobe with Lakers situation. Lakers honored Kobe's deal.

No, correct me if I'm wrong anybody, but I was understanding the reason to do the 1 + 1 with OKC rather than someone like Boston is due to the higher raises per year and the extra year they could have in the latter half of the deal. The max per year is the same starting out wherever he goes, but he gets higher percentage annual raises and the extra year in OKC than he does somewhere like Boston.

So he'd start at 26.6 or whatever it is this year no matter where he goes, and, similarly, he'd start out next year at the same amount no matter where he is with the 1 + 1. What's different is that next summer OKC could still offer him the 5 year max deal with greater percentage annual raises rather than a 4 year max deal with lesser percentage annual raises.

[Csfan1984]

I just don't get it. Why wouldnt he  sign 1 year with any other team and then use the cap space next year as an FA again?! Why must be OKC? I think there are other teams who would offer him 1 year, not just OKC.

I was under the impression the $ under bird rights allows for a higher max per year. So his 1+1 is higher in OKC. And then 10 year with bird rights and he makes like 35 million per for 5 years which he can get only with OKC. Boston wouldn't get full bird rights for 3 years so he would have to wait and trust C's would honor it. Think Kobe with Lakers situation. Lakers honored Kobe's deal.

No, correct me if I'm wrong anybody, but I was understanding the reason to do the 1 + 1 with OKC rather than someone like Boston is due to the higher raises per year and the extra year they could have in the latter half of the deal. The max per year is the same starting out wherever he goes, but he gets higher percentage annual raises and the extra year in OKC than he does somewhere like Boston.

So he'd start at 26.6 or whatever it is this year no matter where he goes, and, similarly, he'd start out next year at the same amount no matter where he is with the 1 + 1. What's different is that next summer OKC could still offer him the 5 year max deal with greater percentage annual raises rather than a 4 year max deal with lesser percentage annual raises.

By drawing out the 1+1 year after year he gets bird rights and 10 year for more $. That is also a main draw for 1+1 for any team. It's what LeBron is doing.

[jpotter33]

I just don't get it. Why wouldnt he  sign 1 year with any other team and then use the cap space next year as an FA again?! Why must be OKC? I think there are other teams who would offer him 1 year, not just OKC.

I was under the impression the $ under bird rights allows for a higher max per year. So his 1+1 is higher in OKC. And then 10 year with bird rights and he makes like 35 million per for 5 years which he can get only with OKC. Boston wouldn't get full bird rights for 3 years so he would have to wait and trust C's would honor it. Think Kobe with Lakers situation. Lakers honored Kobe's deal.

No, correct me if I'm wrong anybody, but I was understanding the reason to do the 1 + 1 with OKC rather than someone like Boston is due to the higher raises per year and the extra year they could have in the latter half of the deal. The max per year is the same starting out wherever he goes, but he gets higher percentage annual raises and the extra year in OKC than he does somewhere like Boston.

So he'd start at 26.6 or whatever it is this year no matter where he goes, and, similarly, he'd start out next year at the same amount no matter where he is with the 1 + 1. What's different is that next summer OKC could still offer him the 5 year max deal with greater percentage annual raises rather than a 4 year max deal with lesser percentage annual raises.

By drawing out the 1+1 year after year he gets bird rights and 10 year for more $. That is also a main draw for 1+1 for any team. It's what LeBron is doing.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. But OKC will will be able to offer an extra year and higher annual raises, which is why OKC makes the most sense from a purely financial perspective.

[knuckleballer]

I just don't get it. Why wouldnt he  sign 1 year with any other team and then use the cap space next year as an FA again?! Why must be OKC? I think there are other teams who would offer him 1 year, not just OKC.

I was under the impression the $ under bird rights allows for a higher max per year. So his 1+1 is higher in OKC. And then 10 year with bird rights and he makes like 35 million per for 5 years which he can get only with OKC. Boston wouldn't get full bird rights for 3 years so he would have to wait and trust C's would honor it. Think Kobe with Lakers situation. Lakers honored Kobe's deal.

No, correct me if I'm wrong anybody, but I was understanding the reason to do the 1 + 1 with OKC rather than someone like Boston is due to the higher raises per year and the extra year they could have in the latter half of the deal. The max per year is the same starting out wherever he goes, but he gets higher percentage annual raises and the extra year in OKC than he does somewhere like Boston.

So he'd start at 26.6 or whatever it is this year no matter where he goes, and, similarly, he'd start out next year at the same amount no matter where he is with the 1 + 1. What's different is that next summer OKC could still offer him the 5 year max deal with greater percentage annual raises rather than a 4 year max deal with lesser percentage annual raises.

By drawing out the 1+1 year after year he gets bird rights and 10 year for more $. That is also a main draw for 1+1 for any team. It's what LeBron is doing.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. But OKC will will be able to offer an extra year and higher annual raises, which is why OKC makes the most sense from a purely financial perspective.

True, but he also has a $300 million deal with Nike.  And I don't think that fifth year will be much of a factor as he will likely get a huge amount of money that 5th year regardless of who he plays for.  So hopefully that won't be much of a factor. 

[Eja117]

Playoffs checks are something. He gets more of them with us.

[Big333223]

Acknowledging whatever bias I have, I think the Celtics have the better roster.

Bradley, Crowder, and Horford are all top defenders in the league and all averaged 14+ ppg last season for playoff teams. The only guy in the Celtics' starting lineup who isn't a two-way player is IT but only because of his size on defense. He's still active defensively and knows where he should be.

In OKC you're starting the #11 overall pick and at least one guy (Adams) who is a standout defender but lacks a reliable offensive game. Waiters, Roberson, and Kanter are all guys who only play one side of the ball (and I personally don't like Waiters as an offensive player, either).

The Celtics also aren't done. They've got a ton of assetts to bring in another impact guy for the bench. OKC doesn't.