Andre Drummond - LeBron's Robin

[ACisKING]

I think the buyout market is a serious problem for the NBA because it’s a way for title contenders to essentially circumvent the cap by adding players with minimum cost - sometimes even for just a couple hundred thousand dollars as happened with Andre Drummond. However, I disagree that buyouts are some “big market” advantage. As someone who’s been a lifelong fan of a big market team, I can’t remember the last buyout guy of note that the Knicks added. And for all the whining about the Nets, prior to this year, they weren’t players in the buyout market either. Somehow it’s conveniently forgotten that the Bucks added Austin Rivers and Jeff Teague this year and Marvin Williams last year. Or that the Spurs just added Dieng who could have helped a lot of teams. Or that the Cavs added Deron Williams and Andrew Bogut when they were title contenders. The buyout market is a boon to really good teams - irrespective of whether they are in big markets.

 

[CavsFan07]

The buyout amount may have been agreed to back when all parties agreed for Dre to sit. His good behavior likely earned him that payday.

"Dre, I know you're upset.... but if you just play nice for another month or so we'll give you another $5 million on your buyout."

Must be nice to be Andre Drummond... Correction, must be nice to be any player on the Cavs who want to take advantage of our inept front office.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

All the buyout does is accelerate the inevitable if trades never happen: the player leaves as a free agent when the contract expires.

Perhaps from the perspective of the team that buys out the player, but not from the perspective of the acquiring team that wouldn't have enough cap room to sign the player during free agency.

 

[narbar32]

I can at least understand why people would be upset with him going to the Lakers (personally, I'm not), but why anybody cares how much this cost Dan Gilbert is beyond me.

Maybe because money spent one place can potentially impact his decision to spend / take on money elsewhere? Even for billionaires, it's finite.

 

[Derek]

Maybe because money spent one place can potentially impact his decision to spend / take on money elsewhere? Even for billionaires, it's finite.

I guess I don’t think the money would have been spent elsewhere.

It just would have meant more Thon Maker and Marques Bolden in our lives.

 

[narbar32]

I guess I don’t think the money would have been spent elsewhere.

It just would have meant more Thon Maker and Marques Bolden in our lives.

A valid point, but that's also not far off from arguing that draft picks don't matter that much because we suck at drafting. At some point, in order to be good, we'll have to make good use of our resources, including Dan's money.

Ultimately though I do concede that I doubt it matters much. Plus, doing Drummond a solid avoids feeding the narrative that we're a big mean player-unfriendly organization, though that's a separate issue.

 

[Benway]

Drummond only cost the team cash; cash that was being and will be spent anyway.
That money would never have been kept or saved, only spent differently.

There's even a chance that it may now be spent more wisely, but those odds are looking long.

 

[Derek]

A valid point, but that's also not far off from arguing that draft picks don't matter that much because we suck at drafting. At some point, in order to be good, we'll have to make good use of our resources, including Dan's money.

Ultimately though I do concede that I doubt it matters much. Plus, doing Drummond a solid avoids feeding the narrative that we're a big mean player-unfriendly organization, though that's a separate issue.

I’m not even really commenting on the FO’s ability to use money.

I’m just saying that ridding ourselves of Drummond wouldn’t have opened up $28 million, it probably would have been closer $10 million, and I’m not sure we could have done much with that.

 

[Goldin Brown]

It’s going to be a lot of fun watching the Lakers now, Andre Drummond drinking game! Anytime he‘s called a “lob threat”, anytime he misses a layup or free throw, anytime he puts his head down/slumps his shoulders or anytime he gets dunked on...take a drink! He’s already done all of these multiple times and it’s still the 1st half of his first game as a Laker.

 

[MikeOC33]

It’s going to be a lot of fun watching the Lakers now, Andre Drummond drinking game! Anytime he‘s called a “lob threat”, anytime he misses a layup or free throw, anytime he puts his head down/slumps his shoulders or anytime he gets dunked on...take a drink! He’s already done all of these multiple times and it’s still the 1st half of his first game as a Laker.

It'll be more fun when the L.A. big guns come back and Drummond isn't getting enough touches for his liking.
News flash: If he is in the game, he WILL get his shots.

 

[Goldin Brown]

 

[Cavatt]

A valid point, but that's also not far off from arguing that draft picks don't matter that much because we suck at drafting. At some point, in order to be good, we'll have to make good use of our resources, including Dan's money.

Ultimately though I do concede that I doubt it matters much. Plus, doing Drummond a solid avoids feeding the narrative that we're a big mean player-unfriendly organization, though that's a separate issue.

He was a 28 M expiring in what was supposed to be the Giannis sweepstakes year. If Giannis doesn't sign that deal, I am pretty sure we could have traded him and maybe got a first rounder for it.

Instead Giannis signed that deal and because he did the Cavs got that pick unprotected and we got Allen.

The 28M expiring made a lot of sense before all these guys signed their extensions.

 

[Lee]

He was a 28 M expiring in what was supposed to be the Giannis sweepstakes year. If Giannis doesn't sign that deal, I am pretty sure we could have traded him and maybe got a first rounder for it.

Instead Giannis signed that deal and because he did the Cavs got that pick unprotected and we got Allen.

The 28M expiring made a lot of sense before all these guys signed their extensions.

Exactly, we are trading Allen long term for Drummond. The money we save on Drummond will allow us to sign or match a long term deal for Allen.

Trades do not happen in a vacuum.

 

[Ohioplayer00]

Where I'm at with it, more or less.

On paper, it seems like a huge cheat. In practice, the players that get bought out generally are the ones with albatross contracts that other teams don't bite on before the trade deadline. All the buyout does is accelerate the inevitable if trades never happen: the player leaves as a free agent when the contract expires.

This is why if I’m a small/mid market owner during the next CBA I stand steadfast for no guaranteed contacts or a franchise tag.

 

[Cassity14]

This is why if I’m a small/mid market owner during the next CBA I stand steadfast for no guaranteed contacts or a franchise tag.

What would a franchise tag do to change the buyout market? I'm not sure I see a connection between those two things.


Personally, I'd like to start with a hard salary cap. All of the "exceptions" make it not much of a deterrent right now. Maybe only allow a team capped out to add players via the G League or something.