• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

JR Smith

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
One other point: if the Cavs do let JR go, instead of trading him, then they're going to cause some bad blood between the team and the players.

The Cavs could have just cut JR during the season. They could have paid him the rest of his salary (or negotiated a buyout), and then JR would have been free to resume his career with another team. (I'm not 100% sure he would have found one, but at least he would have had the chance.) That would have been the right thing to do by JR, and it would have allowed the team to move on as well.

Instead, they've kept JR in limbo for six-plus months. They wouldn't let him around the team, but they refused to cut him, with the justification that his contract would be a valuable trade chip. Which is fine -- they shouldn't have tossed away that asset for nothing.

But keeping him hanging on for over six months, only to end up cutting him anyways ... that would be shitty. They could have cut him in November, and he would have had a chance to latch on elsewhere.

While it would be shitty, the Cavs would be well within their rights. So I'm not sure they'd face any discipline. (I could see a grievance from the players' union; probably not one that JR would win, but it would still be a nuisance to the Cavs.) But players notice when a team does a player wrong. And they could very well think that JR has been done wrong here.

I agree with you. I think they thought it was a more valuable asset than it really was because the structure was unique. They messed up not cutting or buying him out, but for all we know he didn't want a buyout. I know they explored trading him, but it seemed like nobody wanted him. Only Houston was ever linked to him.

I think it is problematic to string him along all that time, but on the other hand, WTH JR just be a good guy and support your team that you won a chip with and paid you handsomely when nobody else wanted you.
 

“We’re definitely going to investigate what we can do there,” Altman said. “There’s a pain threshold of doing it, going into the tax, which we would have to do in terms of taking back money and the rest of the NBA knowing that we’re in the tax and my job would be getting us out of the tax.

"Is there enough value there to do that, to put ourselves out there like that? I think that’s something we are weighing these last few days. There’s opportunity to do it. It’s just how deep do we want to go into the tax to bring back an asset? Also, what does it take us out of into the year? We’re still looking to add assets throughout the year, so using JR now might take us out of that.”



Seems like Koby wants to keep his options open for deadline deals and didn't want to compromise potentially attractive TT/Clarkson deals provided they were not in the luxury tax. They're also still looking for something of "value" so it's not over yet but not looking likely like you mentioned. I certainly hope they highlight Clarkson early and trade him ASAP.

I agree with Koby here in one respect. That asset you get for JR has to be better than the assets we send out with our other expirings to get out of the tax. It would take at least some 2nd rounders to get out of the tax if not a late 1st. If we are only getting late 1sts back, then what is the point?

JR is not looked at as a player that can even soak up minutes, he will just be waived. Clarkson and TT can still play at a fairly high level and we would get something like what we got for Alec Burkes. So, I think this is the right call. They could have got 17, they thought they could do better, and nothing ever materialized because people have been hoarding cap space for this summer for years.
 

“We’re definitely going to investigate what we can do there,” Altman said. “There’s a pain threshold of doing it, going into the tax, which we would have to do in terms of taking back money and the rest of the NBA knowing that we’re in the tax and my job would be getting us out of the tax.

"Is there enough value there to do that, to put ourselves out there like that? I think that’s something we are weighing these last few days. There’s opportunity to do it. It’s just how deep do we want to go into the tax to bring back an asset? Also, what does it take us out of into the year? We’re still looking to add assets throughout the year, so using JR now might take us out of that.”



Seems like Koby wants to keep his options open for deadline deals and didn't want to compromise potentially attractive TT/Clarkson deals provided they were not in the luxury tax. They're also still looking for something of "value" so it's not over yet but not looking likely like you mentioned. I certainly hope they highlight Clarkson early and trade him ASAP.

How does being in the luxury tax impact our trade options? Sincere question...
 
How does being in the luxury tax impact our trade options? Sincere question...

We didn't reset the repeaters tax so this is what the luxury tax would be for anything above 132 million

  • 250 percent up to $5 million
  • 275 percent up to $10 million
  • 350 percent up to $15 million
  • 425 percent up to $20 million
  • 475 percent up to $25 million
The Cavs would be at 142 million with the rookies signed and if they used JRs contract at the same amount as his full contract number.

Basically it comes down to if you can buy a late 1st round pick for 5 million and 3 not so good seconds. Why pay $25+ million in luxury tax to do the same thing?

Same thinking has to be used for future trades while in the luxury tax.
 
How does being in the luxury tax impact our trade options? Sincere question...

Because presumably you would want to use the expiring later in the year at the deadline to get off money, and that would require picks most likely to save money. So, if you aren't in the tax, you take on money with no restrictions, but asking for cost savings costs assets.
 
How does being in the luxury tax impact our trade options? Sincere question...

After re-reading, I got mixed up and it really doesn't impact trades and it simply is about staying under the luxury tax this season UNLESS the value is there. Fedor was speculating about a move that would take them over the luxury tax being remedied by using the stretch provision on TT/Clarkson in order to get back under.

Like @Cavatt mentioned

That asset you get for JR has to be better than the assets we send out with our other expirings to get out of the tax

Hence, the pain threshold Koby is referring to. In the end they got the 30th pick for 4 2nd round picks and $5m cash and acquired the guy they were looking at in KPJr. I think the value might have been there if certain guys they really wanted (Romeo Langford) slipped to an available pick but it wasn't in the cards.
 
Don't we believe one of our expirings would have some value at the deadline?
We wouldn't necessarily have to include an asset to get rid of a Clarkson or Thompson.
We got assets back for Burks and Hill didn't we?
 
Don't we believe one of our expirings would have some value at the deadline?
We wouldn't necessarily have to include an asset to get rid of a Clarkson or Thompson.
We got assets back for Burks and Hill didn't we?

This is true but if the goal is to get out of the repeater tax, the best deal for a draft pick might not get us out of the luxury tax.

The more we are over the luxury tax, the harder it will be to get the best value out of the players/contracts while also reducing our cap number. There could be a scenario where we take less salary and assets back with all our expirings to stay out of the luxury tax because we took on money for JRs contract.

In season salary dumps into another teams cap space are rare. A team who has 10 million in cap space available will want a 1st round pick back because they know they will get that at someone point. I don't see a team giving an asset for any of our expiring players if they lose out on free agency and have cap room. Ultimately it would be more likely we give up the most valuable expiring player for no assets exchanged or an asset from us to have it get absorbed into another teams cap. It's all opportunity cost.
 
Don't we believe one of our expirings would have some value at the deadline?
We wouldn't necessarily have to include an asset to get rid of a Clarkson or Thompson.
We got assets back for Burks and Hill didn't we?

This is what I was trying to say. We didn't "save" money in these trades. A lot of times with expirings you take back more than you send out. If we go over the tax with JR, the team would want to save money on the TT and Clarkson deals, which could require additional assets. Teams would hold our feet to the fire because they would know Cleveland wants to get under the tax, so if they could get an extra 2nd rounder out of it they will.

It's just about having your cap right so you can make the deals you want. Teams just don't usually take expirings so they can take on extra money. The teams sending out the expirings do that.

It's fine if they want to pay the repeater tax on these guys, but I don't think they really want to be spending extra millions on weakish assets.
 
Last edited:
We didn't reset the repeaters tax so this is what the luxury tax would be for anything above 132 million

  • 250 percent up to $5 million
  • 275 percent up to $10 million
  • 350 percent up to $15 million
  • 425 percent up to $20 million
  • 475 percent up to $25 million
The Cavs would be at 142 million with the rookies signed and if they used JRs contract at the same amount as his full contract number.

Basically it comes down to if you can buy a late 1st round pick for 5 million and 3 not so good seconds. Why pay $25+ million in luxury tax to do the same thing?

Same thinking has to be used for future trades while in the luxury tax.
I am fairly confident we will be under when the year ends. Hell, I dont know how we were under this year, but we were. Clarkson & TT will have some value for these young teams looking to get into the playoffs and make noise. At minimum they are expiring contracts. Knight & Henson are expiring deals. If need be one could be stretched. Then you have JR and has magical contract.

We will be under & I have little doubt we can nab a few assets from those guys.
 
I just read this and it got me thinking. I assumed we changed out pick to Dylan Windler at #26 because we got the offer to trade for #30. Now I wonder if there was a trade on the table to get someone who was already taken and Keldon Johnson at #26 was never a pick for the Cavs but for another team.

Maybe Koby opted not to use the JR contract because he rather bring in 3 1st round pick instead of 2.

This talk about the luxury tax and how it can be painful might be Koby resetting the market for JRs contract. Koby must be telling teams we aren't going to trade the JR contract to to just to trade it. A good asset has to be involved.
That’s a good thought. Perhaps the Spurs were attempting to move up to take Keldon Johnson and the Cavs were going to get back a second round pick or something for sliding back 3 spots?
 
Add JR to Wally Szczerbiak and Brendan Haywood as the most overhyped trade chips of all time for the Cavs.
Lol. Yes indeed. The. Cavs primed the pump and got us all excited for a possible deal at that end of the year presser, when Koby was talking about how much value they felt the contract held. He was either trying to drum up interest in trades and/or he really overplayed his hand.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top