oregontrack wrote:that was a neat story about plumlee, but if he was any good and we wanted to retain him we could have. but he was an average center, and we saw an upgrade on a longer rookie contract that also came with a draft pick, and we took the deal. that's not an example of you figuring out the salary cap for the first time. that's an example of a typical nba transaction and you trying to fit it into a narrative.
we can do nothing with our roster and still extend nurk to a mega deal today, tomorrow, or after next season ends. this is not the nfl, where a hard cap keeps everybody under a certain threshold. this is the nba, where if you're willing to pay a tax you have a lot of freedoms with your existing roster. i have given examples of this. you have ignored them. i suppose that's your right, but you're flat-out spreading false information.
paul allen has paid the luxury tax before. it's strange that you don't think he'd do it for nurk. or... maybe you don't know that he CAN go into the luxury tax for him. i'm not sure. your grasp of the cba is shaky.
After reading your posts, it seems like the NBA aren't the only ones with a soft cap. The subject is whether the Blazers are willing to pay luxury tax for any marginal signing, and then even more tax for the next year when they reach 'repeat offender' status. It has nothing to do with whether they can legally sign Nurkic. They won't.
Here is a quote from Paul Allen himself on the topic of the luxury tax:
"That darn luxury tax is pretty painful. You have to make those decisions. As you know, at one point, I believe I had the record for the highest luxury tax payments. In the end, that didn't make sense. So that's something we'll have to look at very carefully. Sometimes you can go into the tax for a year or something and then come out of it if it makes sense as you're transitioning through different player contracts. So it's something Neil and I will evaluate very carefully."
So, according to you, paying tens of millions in luxury tax this year and then signing Nurkic to a near max deal and paying even more millions in tax next year and the following years is no big deal. According to the guy who would actually have to pay that tax, it is a big deal. As has been reported in multiple places, the Blazers are trying to shed salary. I believe they are doing this so that they can re-sign Nurk. The problem is that nobody wants their wide array of overpaid mugs. Besides you, that is. So that will be the challenge this year - can Olshey dump the Old Maid on somebody when everyone in the league knows that's what he wants to do?
At some point, arguing with people who are totally ignorant ceases to be a rewarding exercise. So I will just let you have the last word on the matter, and we will see what happens this season. If they do end up keeping this payroll and signing Nurk, I will apologize. The chances of that happening are currently at -7%.