Almost immediately after Kevin Durant announced he was leaving Oklahoma City (well before the hot takes related to Durant’s decision had been extinguished), nervous OKC fans and pundits across the country began discussing what would happen to the Thunder as a result of this monumental turn of events.
Specifically, how would the franchise handle the impending free agency of Russell Westbrook?
If Westbrook is unwilling to commit to Oklahoma City before hitting the open market next summer, can General Manager Sam Presti and the Thunder take the chance that they might lose two future Hall-of-Famers in consecutive offseasons with absolutely nothing to show for it?
Surely Presti and company will have to at least explore the possibility of trading Westbrook this summer.
However, attempting to trade a star player with just one year left on his contract is always an arduous task. The Thunder could only realistically expect to get back cents on the dollar. It’s almost impossible to receive equal value in return when trading away a superstar, even under ideal circumstances. Having little to no leverage makes it that much more difficult.
The teams that are most commonly assumed to be pursuing Westbrook via trade (such as the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers) are obviously hesitant to fork over significant assets for what could result in simply a one-year rental; especially when the Celtics and Lakers are fully aware they’ll likely be able to make a push to sign Westbrook as an unrestricted free agent next summer.
Thus, it has been rumored that the Celtics would make Westbrook agreeing to a restructured extension a prerequisite to completing a blockbuster deal.
So, how likely it is that Westbrook actually would consider an extension?
Well, TNT’s David Aldridge reported in early July that there was “no chance” that Westbrook would agree to an extension.
Is that still the case?
Aldridge also tweeted that, “It just makes no sense financially to do renegotiation/extension.”
While the potential financial benefits of playing out the 2016-17 season and then hitting free agency next July are significant, it would be fiscally prudent for Westbrook to at least weigh the pros and cons of inking an extension.
If Westbrook knows where he wants to spend the prime of his career, agreeing to an extension would greatly increase the probability of his preferred destination trading for him now, as opposed to having to wait to relocate next summer.
It’s true that we rarely see extensions in today’s NBA, due primarily to the complexities of the current collective bargaining agreement. The first impediment is that only a limited number of veteran players qualify for such an extension. Per salary cap expert Larry Coon’s FAQ: “A contract for four or more seasons can be renegotiated after the third anniversary of its signing, extension, or previous renegotiation. Contracts for fewer than four seasons cannot be renegotiated. A contract cannot be renegotiated between March 1 and June 30 of any year.”
Westbrook, who has completed four seasons of his current contract, does have the ability to renegotiate and extend his contract, just as James Harden and the Houston Rockets did earlier this month. Would Westbrook be willing to follow Harden’s lead?
Let’s look at the financial implications of such a decision.
There are a number of varied options for Westbrook to consider. Each one offers a complex mix of positives and negatives. In the end, he’ll have to weigh the relative importance of immediate financial security and establishing roots sooner rather than later versus the appeal of a prodigious payday a bit further down the road.
The first, and seemingly most likely scenario, is refusing to renegotiate/extend his current contract. That means simply playing out the final year of his deal, the 2016-17 season, and hitting the market as an unrestricted free agent on July 1st, 2017.
Following the conclusion of the 2016-17 season, Westbrook will have nine NBA seasons under his belt, which means he will be a Tier 2 Free Agent (those players with between seven and nine years experience), and thus eligible to sign a contract with a starting salary that accounts for approximately 30 percent of the salary cap. (As Coon clarifies: maximum salaries are based on 42.14% of Basketball Related Income [BRI], rather than 44.74 percent. For this reason the maximum salaries are not actually 25 percent, 30 percent or 35 percent of the cap, and instead are a slightly lower amount.)
In early July our Eric Pincus reported that the NBA has informed teams that they anticipate the salary cap to land at $102 million next season.
Thus, Westbrook will be able to sign a contract next summer starting at roughly $28.8 million. If he was not traded, the Thunder would possess his full Bird Rights and they would be able to offer both more years (5) and larger annual percentages (7.5 percent).
Westbrook is currently scheduled to make $17.8 million this season. Here is what the max offer from OKC next July would look like (estimates based on a cap number of $102 million):
|$17.8 MM||$28.8 MM||$30.9 MM||$33.2 MM||$35.7 MM||$38.4 MM|
If a team such as the Celtics or Lakers traded for Westbrook this year they would also then possess his Bird Rights and could sign him to the same contract.
However, if Westbrook plays next season in Oklahoma City, and then signs elsewhere, a new (non-OKC) team would be unable to offer him the same lucrative package. Boston, for instance, would be able to offer a max contract of only four years in length with annual increases of just 4.5 percent.
Here’s the breakdown:
|$17.8 MM||$28.8 MM||$30.1 MM||$31.5 MM||$32.9 MM|
Next summer, OKC (or whichever team controlled his Bird Rights) would be able to offer a max deal that sums to $167.0 million over five years. The max any other team could offer would be $123.3 million over four years.
Okay, with that as the baseline, let’s now look at the extension options on the table for Westbrook.
The benefit of a renegotiated extension is two-fold. First, Westbrook would be able to increase his 2016-17 salary from $17.8 million, all the way up to $26.5 million. Secondly, Westbrook would be able to immediately lock in a contract, which guaranteed him payment through 2020, thereby avoiding the risk of the catastrophic economic loss associated with a career-threatening injury suffered over the next 12 months.
However, there are some stipulations associated with extensions. Veteran extensions are limited to four seasons, including the seasons remaining on the current contract. Thus, Westbrook would only be able to lock in three additional seasons. So, while he’d be able to cushion himself from a worst-case scenario, he’d eliminate the potential of a big, long-term payday in July of 2017.
Another stipulation related to negotiated extensions is that the team signing Westbrook would need to have at least $8.8 million in cap space.
When Dion Waiters signed with Miami, his $12.8 million cap hold was wiped off OKC’s books, which means the Thunder now have the room required to tack on the additional $8.8 million to Westbrook’s deal.
If a team such as the Celtics were to receive confirmation from Westbrook’s agent that he would be willing to renegotiate/extend his current contract, they would need to clear the required cap space via trade to be able to offer a “max extension” as well.
Here is what restructured/renegotiated extension for Westbrook would look like:
|$26.5 MM||$28.3 MM||$30.4 MM||$32.7 MM|
Westbrook would secure approximately $118 million in guaranteed money the moment he signed the extension. He would miss out on the free agency bonanza of 2017, but he would only lose about $500,000 per year, when comparing his annual salary from 2017-18 through 2019-20. That’s a total of roughly $1.6 million over those three years. However, it is important to note that when you factor in the $8.8 million more he’d make in 2016-17, that’s a net gain of about $7.2 million ($117.9 MM vs. $100.7 MM) over the next four seasons.
There is one other of option Westbrook could consider. He could sign a shorter extension with guaranteed money in 2016-17 and 2017-18, but with a player option for the 2018-19 campaign. This would essentially be a compromise between playing out his final season, and signing a full four-year extension.
“Westbrook, currently with eight years of service, could renegotiate his salary for this season to reflect a max-level contract while adding two additional years, with the third being a player option. This approach would have Westbrook becoming a free agent in 2018, when he reaches 10 years of service and becomes a Tier 3 max player. Waiting another year for free agency would see Westbrook’s salary start at $35 million in 2018 instead of $28.6 million.”
|$26.5 MM||$28.3 MM|
Then, in the summer of 2018, Westbrook (assuming he’s still healthy and can command a max contract) could opt out and would be able to sign a massive, mind-boggling five year contract worth north of $200 million, with the team that owned his Bird Rights at that point:
|$35.4 MM||$38.1 MM||$40.8 MM||$43.4 MM||$46.1 MM|
There are clearly plenty of appealing options for Westbrook to choose from. His ultimate decision will have a massive impact on multiple franchises. However, Westbrook has yet to even publicly address his feelings regarding Durant’s departure, let alone his own foreseeable future.
Thus, the Oklahoma City Thunder will remain stuck at a fork in the road until Russell Westbrook decides which direction he wants to head in.
Reviewing the Nurkic Trade: Denver’s Perspective
The Denver Nuggets have been on a miraculous run this postseason, but that doesn’t mean that they’re infallible. Drew Maresca reviews the 2017 trade that sent Jusuf Nurkic from Denver to Portland.
The Denver Nuggets are fresh off of a 114-106 win over the Los Angeles Lakers in the Western Conference Finals, pulling within three wins of the franchise’s first trip to the NBA Finals. But what if I told you that the Nuggets’ roster could be even more talented by acting more deliberately in a trade from three years ago?
While Denver won on Tuesday night, they lost a nail bitter on Sunday – for which most of the blame has been pointed at a defensive breakdown by Nuggets’ center Mason Plumlee, who was procured in the aforementioned 2017 trade. What did it cost Denver, you ask? Just Jusuf Nurkic and a first-round pick.
Nurkic was a 2014-15 All-Rookie second team member. He played 139 games over 2.5 seasons in Denver, averaging 7.5 points and 5.9 rebounds in approximately 18 minutes per game. He showed serious promise, but Denver had numerous reasons to pursue a trade: he’d suffered a few relatively serious injuries early in his career (and he’s continued to be injury-prone in Portland), butted heads with head coach Michael Malone and – most importantly – the Nuggets stumbled on to Nikola Jokic.
The Nuggets eventually attempted a twin-tower strategy with both in the starting line-up, but that experiment was short-lived — with Jokic ultimately asking to move to the team’s second unit.
The Nuggets traded Nurkic to the Portland Trail Blazers in February 2017 (along with a first-round pick) in exchange for Plumlee, a second-round pick and cash considerations. Ironically, the first-round pick included in the deal became Justin Jackson, who was used to procure another center, Zach Collins – but more on that in a bit.
As of February 2017, Plumlee was considered the better player of the two. He was averaging a career-high 11 points, 8.1 rebounds and 4.0 assists through 54 games – but it was clear that at 27, he’d already maximized his talent.
Conversely, Nurkic was only 23 at the time of the trade with significant, untapped upside. In his first few seasons with Portland, Nurkic averaged 15 points and 9.8 rebounds per game, while establishing himself as a rising star. As noted above, injuries have continued to be a problem. Nurkic suffered a compound fracture in his tibia and fibula in March 2019, forcing him to miss a majority of this current campaign. The COVID-19-related play stoppage in March gave Nurkic extra time to get his body right, and he returned to action in July inside the bubble.
And he did so with a vengeance. Nurkic demonstrated superior strength and footwork, and he flashed the dominance that Portland hoped he would develop, posting eight double-doubles in 18 contests. He averaged 17.6 points and 10.3 rebounds per game and while his play dipped a bit in the playoffs – partially due to a matchup with first-team All-NBA star Anthony Davis – he still managed 14.2 points and 10.4 rebounds in the five-game series. So it’s fair to say that Nurkic is still on his way toward stardom.
But the Nuggets are in the conference finals – so all’s well that ends well, right? Not so fast. To his credit, Plumlee is exactly who Denver expected him to be. He’s averaged 7.5 points and 5.5 rebounds per game in three seasons with Denver since 2017 – but to be fair, Plumlee is asked to do less in Denver than he had in Portland. Still, it’s fairly obvious that they’re just not that comparable.
Plumlee is a good passer and an above-average defender that’ll compete hard and isn’t afraid to get dirty – but he has limitations. He doesn’t stretch the floor and he is a sub-par free throw shooter (53.5 percent in 2019-20). More importantly, he’s simply not a major offensive threat and his repertoire of moves is limited.
High-level takeaway: Defenses tend to game plan for opponents they view as major threats – Nurkic falls into this category. Other guys pack the stat sheet through putback attempts, open looks and single coverage alongside the guys for whom opposing defenses game plan – that’s a more appropriate description of Plumlee.
On to the wrench thrown in by Zach Collins’ involvement. Statistically, Collins is about as effective as Plumlee – he averaged 7 points and 6.3 rebounds through only 11 games in 2019-20 due to various injuries – and he possesses more upside. The 22-year-old is not as reliable as Plumlee but given his age and skill set, he’s a far better option as a support player playing off the bench. He stretches the floor (36.8 percent on three-point attempts in 2019-20), is an above-average free throw shooter (75 percent this season) and is a good defender. Looking past Nurkic for a moment, would the Nuggets prefer a 22-year-old center that stretches the floor and defends or a 30-year-old energy guy?
Regardless of your answer to that question, it’s hard to argue that Nurkic should have returned more than Plumlee, definitely so when you factor in the first-round pick Denver included. There is obviously more at play: Denver was probably considering trading Nurkic for some time before they acted – did they feel that they could increase his trade value prior to the trade deadline in 2016-17? Maybe. Further, Nurkic and his agent could have influenced the Nuggets’ decision at the 2017 deadline, threatening to stonewall Denver in negotiations.
Had Nurkic been more patient or the Nuggets acted sooner before it became abundantly clear that he was on the move, Denver’s roster could be even more stacked than it is now. Ultimately, the Nuggets have a plethora of talent and will be fine – while it appears that Nurkic found a long-term home in Portland, where he owns the paint offensively. Denver can’t be thrilled about assisting a division rival, but they’re still in an enviable position today and should be for years to come.
But despite that, this deal should go down as a cautionary tale – it’s not only the bottom feeders of the league who make missteps. Even the savviest of front offices overthink deals. Sometimes that works in their favor, and other times it does not.
NBA Daily: They Guessed Wrong
Matt John reflects on some of the key decisions that were made last summer, and how their disappointing results hurt both team outlooks and players’ legacies.
It doesn’t sound possible, but did you know that the crazy NBA summer of 2019 was, in fact, over a year ago? Wildly, in any normal, non-pandemic season, it all would have been over three months ago and, usually, media days would be right around the corner, but not this time. The 2019-20 NBA season is slated to end sometime in early to mid-October, so the fact that the last NBA off-season was over a year ago hasn’t really dawned on anyone yet. Craziest of all, even though there will still be an offseason, there technically won’t be any summer.
Coronavirus has really messed up the NBA’s order. Of course, there are much worse horrors that COVID-19 has inflicted upon the world – but because of what it’s done to the NBA, let’s focus on that and go back to the summer of 2019. It felt like an eternity, but the Golden State Warriors’ three-year reign had finally reached its end. The Toronto Raptors’ victory over the tyranny that was the Hamptons Five – as battered as they were – made it feel like order had been restored to the NBA. There was more to it than that though.
Klay Thompson’s and Kevin Durant’s season-ending injuries, along with the latter skipping town to join Kyrie Irving in Brooklyn meant two things.
1. Golden State was down for the count
2. Brooklyn’s time wasn’t coming until next year.
A one-year window was open. Even if neither Golden State nor Brooklyn posed the same threat that the former did when it had Kevin Durant, those were two contenders out of commission. If there was a time to go all in, it was in 2019.
Milwaukee certainly seemed to go all in. For the most part. Malcolm Brogdon’s departure seemed a little odd since he was arguably their best non-Giannis playmaker when they were in crunch time. Not to mention there was nothing really stopping the Bucks from keeping him except for money. Detractors will call out Milwaukee for electing to cheap out by not keeping Brogdon and hence, avoiding the luxury tax. However, there’s more to it than that.
Milwaukee thought it had enough with the core it had on its roster. Coming off the best season they had put up since the eighties, they believed the franchise built the right team to contend. There was an argument that keeping Brogdon may have been overkill with their guard depth – let’s not forget that Donte DiVincenzo did a solid job in Brogdon’s role as the backup facilitator. This would have been more defensible had it not been for Milwaukee picking the wrong guy to let go. That was the indefensible part- electing to keep Eric Bledsoe over Brogdon.
Bledsoe wasn’t necessarily a bad investment. No one’s complaining about an almost 15 point average on 47/34/79 splits or playing individual defense tight enough to get named on the All-Defensive second team. By all accounts, Bledsoe earns his keep. That is until the playoffs. Bledsoe’s postseason woes have been a weight ever since he first entered Milwaukee, and this postseason was more of the same.
Bledsoe’s numbers dwindled to just 11.7 points on 39/25/81 splits, and Milwaukee getting ousted in five games at the hands of Miami made his struggles stand out even more than it had ever been. Bledsoe may be the better athlete and the better defender, but Brogdon’s all-around offensive savvy and his only slight dropoff defensively from Brogdon would have made him a bit more reliable.
Milwaukee guessed wrong when they opted to extend Bledsoe before the postseason last year when they could have waited until that very time to evaluate who to keep around. Now they face a hell of a lot more questions than they did at the end of last season – questions that may have been avoided had they made the right choice.
Now they could have kept both of them, yes, but it’s not totally unreasonable to think that maybe their approach with the luxury tax would have worked and maybe they would still be in the postseason right now had they gone with the homegrown talent. And just maybe, there wouldn’t be nearly as much of this Greek Freak uncertainty.
The Houston Rockets can relate. They got bruised up by a team that everyone thought Houston had the edge on going into the series and then crushed by the Lakers. Now, Mike D’Antoni is gone. The full-time small ball experiment likely did not work out. Since the Rockets emptied most of their assets to bring in Russell Westbrook and Robert Covington, there may not be a route in which they can become better than they presently are.
The mistake wasn’t trading for Russell Westbrook. The mistake was trading Chris Paul.
To be fair, most everybody severely overestimated Chris Paul’s decline. He’s not among the best of the best anymore, but he’s still pretty darn close. He deserved his All-NBA second team selection as well as finishing No. 7 overall in MVP voting. OKC had no business being as good as they were this season, and Paul was the driving force as to why.
For all we know, the previously-assumed tension between Chris Paul and James Harden would have made its way onto the court no matter what. Even so, Houston’s biggest obstacle in the Bay Area had crumbled. If they had just stayed the course, maybe they’re still in the postseason too.
To their credit, none of this may have happened had it not been for the Kawhi Leonard decision. Had he chosen differently, the Thunder never blow it up, and Houston might have very well been the favorite in the Western Conference. Instead, the Rockets took a step back from being in the title discussion to dark horse. But at least they can take pride knowing that they weren’t expected to win it all – the Clippers can’t.
Seeing the Clippers fall well short expectations begs the question if they too got it wrong. The answer is, naturally: of course not. They may have paid a hefty price for Paul George, but the only way they were getting Kawhi Leonard – one of the best players of his generation – was if PG-13 came in the package. As lofty as it was, anyone would have done the same thing if they were in their shoes. They didn’t get it wrong. Kawhi did.
On paper, the Clippers had the most talented roster in the entire league. It seemed like they had every hole filled imaginable. Surrounding Leonard and George was three-point shooting, versatility, a productive second unit, an experienced coach – you name it. There was nothing stopping them from breaking the franchise’s long-lasting curse. Except themselves.
Something felt off about them. They alienated opponents. They alienated each other. At times, they played rather lackadaisically, like the title had already been signed, sealed, and delivered to them. The media all assumed they’d cut the malarkey and get their act together – but that moment never really came. They had their chances to put Denver away, but even if they had, after seeing their struggles to beat them – and to be fair Dallas too – would their day of destiny with the Lakers have really lived up to the hype?
Even if it was never in the cards, one can’t help but wonder what could have happened had Kawhi chosen to stay with the team he won his second title with.
Toronto was the most impressive team in this league this season. They still managed to stay at the top of the east in spite of losing an all-timer like Leonard. That team had every component of a winner except a superstar. They had the right culture for a championship team. Just not the right talent. The Clippers were the exact opposite. They had the right talent for a championship team but not the right culture. That’s why the Raptors walked away from the postseason feeling proud of themselves for playing to their full potential while the Clippers writhed in disappointment and angst over their future.
In the end, everyone mentioned here may ultimately blame what happened to their season on the extenuating circumstances from the pandemic. The Bucks’ chemistry never fully returned when the Bubble started. Contracting COVID and dealing with quad problems prevented Westbrook from reviving the MVP-type player he was before the hiatus. As troubling as the Clippers had played, the extra time they would have had to work things out in a normal season was taken away from them.
For all we know, next year will be a completely different story. The Rockets, Bucks, and Kawhi may ultimately have their faith rewarded for what they did in the summer of 2019 – but that will only be mere speculation until the trio can change the story.
Looking Toward The Draft: Power Forwards
Basketball Insiders continues their NBA Draft watch, this time with the power forwards.
We got some updated NBA draft news this week when the league announced that several key dates have been pushed back including the draft, the start of free agency and the beginning of the 2020-21 season.
The 2020 draft was originally scheduled for Oct. 16, but it will now likely occur sometime in November. Obviously, with the COVID-19 pandemic still wildly out of control in the United States, all of these potential deadlines are fluid and subject to change.
With that said, we’re continuing our position by position breakdown here at Basketball Insiders of some of the top 2020 draft prospects. We looked at the point guards and shooting guards last week, and this week we’re covering the small forwards and power forwards.
The power forward crop, like the draft overall, doesn’t appear to be as strong as recent years, that doesn’t mean there aren’t potential contributors and high-level NBA players available, as well as one who might just turn out to be a star-caliber player.
Onyeka Okongwu, USC – 19 years old
Okongwu is the player who just might develop into a star on some level. He was actually underrated in high school and was snubbed for a McDonald’s All-American selection his senior year. He established himself early on at USC as the team’s best player as a freshman and now appears to have turned some heads.
He’s been mentioned as a lottery pick and in some mock drafts, he’s top 4-5. He possesses a great all-around skill-set; he can score in the post, he can put the ball on the floor and attack and he can shoot. But perhaps his biggest attribute is his versatility on the defensive end. He’s got quick feet and mobility and can guard multiple positions.
Okongwu might actually play center in the NBA, especially in small-ball lineups, but he’s mostly played power forward and so he’ll probably see time there in the league. His skill-set fits perfectly with today’s game.
Obi Toppin, Dayton – 22 years old
Toppin is one of the older players in the draft, and in recent history, players that age tend to slip on draft boards. In Toppin’s case, it looks like the reverse might actually be true. He’s been projected as a lottery pick, and even going in the top 3.
He’s an incredibly athletic player who thrives in the open court. He looks like he’ll do well in an up-tempo offensive system that has capable playmakers who can find him in transition. He’s extremely active around the rim and he can finish strong. A decent shooter too, something he’ll need at the next level.
Toppin has the physical tools to be an effective defensive player, but that’s where the questions marks on him have been. In the NBA, he’s likely going to have to play and guard multiple positions. Whether or not he can adapt to that likely will answer the question as to what his ceiling can be.
Precious Achiuwa, Memphis – 20 years old
Achiuwa is another intriguing prospect. this writer actually got to watch him play in person while he was in high school and he was very impressive. He looked like a man among boys. He’s projected to be a late lottery pick.
He has an NBA-ready body and he’s got some toughness around the rim and in the paint. He was a double-double threat during his one season at Memphis and his knack for rebounding is something that should translate to the NBA. He’s a very good defender too, in particular, as a rim protector. He’s very quick and has the ability to guard multiple positions.
One of the main knocks on Achiuwa is his shooting ability. He didn’t shoot that well in college and power forwards being able to space the floor is almost a requirement in today’s NBA game. It’s something he can certainly work on and improve on though.
Paul Reed, DePaul – 21 years old
Xavier Tillman, Michigan State – 21 years old
Killian Tillie, Gonzaga – 22 years old
NBA2 weeks ago
Looking Toward The Draft: Power Forwards
Headlines2 weeks ago
Sources: 2020-21 Regular Season Won’t Start Before Christmas Day
Headlines2 weeks ago
Sources: Rockets Interested in Tyronn Lue, Sam Cassell for Head Coach
Headlines2 weeks ago
Sources: Pacers Interested in Chauncey Billups as Head Coach