How the Oklahoma City Thunder saved money - and whether they might have to save more
[...] It does not help that the team's best shooting options outside of George are Abrines and Patterson, the two movable expiring mid-range salaries per the above who could otherwise theoretically be moved to provide short term financial relief. It further does not help that Grant is a limited shooter from the outside, and Schroeder is a sub-par one for a lead guard as well. It only makes it worse that both Noel and third string point guard Raymond Felton are also not plus shooters, and that while Terrence Ferguson projects to be a decent shooter in his future, he is not one yet. Luwawu-Cabarrot has a similar projection yet has not done enough in two years to show himself as being worthy of a spot in the rotation; the rotation, then, features one good shooter (George), two decent ones who do little else, don't do anything significant to get open and who would ideally be salary dumped (Abrines and Patterson), and a bunch of mediocre to bad shooters. [...]
[...] Internal growth projections for the Thunder's shooting disparity are not favourable. Westbrook would have to make a significant post-30 improvement, and in five years, Schroeder has somehow gone back under the 30% mark again. Felton has managed only a 32.9% career mark in 13 seasons. Abrines has the best looking stroke, but his physical profile makes a high volume of shots hard to foresee, while Patterson's knee problems have seen him really regress as a player. Ferguson could be a good one, but needs to prove himself capable of a sizeable role for that to be of true value. The same is true of rookie Hamadou Diallo, whose form thus far has been better than his results. Adams and Noel have shown no signs and should be on the offensive glass anyway. And although Grant is now likely getting the starting stretch four role, he has never been a good one anyway.
Additionally, the need to move either Abrines or Patterson may be too strong to resist. Starting from the above post-Singler, post-Nader tax position ($212,302,746 combined tax and salary expense), that number would plummet to a combined $182,904,953 if Abrines was salary dumped for no returning salary, or $182,924,042 if Patterson was. If we play devil's advocate for a moment (and conveniently ignore minimum roster size rules for the sake of argument), that number could be $158,590,895 if both somehow were.
The Thunder need both plenty of outside shooting, and salary cap flexibility. And yet they could save $54 million by getting rid of Abrines and Patterson. $54 million they could reinvest, both immediately and in the future, on better players, and via otherwise exhaustible assets they currently stand only to lose. Do they really need Abrines and Patterson that badly?
It is of course neither hugely realistic nor ever required to completely pass off their salaries for nothing in return, particularly in the case of Patterson, who is older and who has an option for next season. Yet were it to be done, those are the savings that could be recouped. Savings which could then allow the team to utilise its as-yet mostly unused mid-level exception and eight figure trade exception to get better quality players than those two. They are the two best shooting role players that the Thunder have, but this does not make them good value. [...]
Read full article
[...] Internal growth projections for the Thunder's shooting disparity are not favourable. Westbrook would have to make a significant post-30 improvement, and in five years, Schroeder has somehow gone back under the 30% mark again. Felton has managed only a 32.9% career mark in 13 seasons. Abrines has the best looking stroke, but his physical profile makes a high volume of shots hard to foresee, while Patterson's knee problems have seen him really regress as a player. Ferguson could be a good one, but needs to prove himself capable of a sizeable role for that to be of true value. The same is true of rookie Hamadou Diallo, whose form thus far has been better than his results. Adams and Noel have shown no signs and should be on the offensive glass anyway. And although Grant is now likely getting the starting stretch four role, he has never been a good one anyway.
Additionally, the need to move either Abrines or Patterson may be too strong to resist. Starting from the above post-Singler, post-Nader tax position ($212,302,746 combined tax and salary expense), that number would plummet to a combined $182,904,953 if Abrines was salary dumped for no returning salary, or $182,924,042 if Patterson was. If we play devil's advocate for a moment (and conveniently ignore minimum roster size rules for the sake of argument), that number could be $158,590,895 if both somehow were.
The Thunder need both plenty of outside shooting, and salary cap flexibility. And yet they could save $54 million by getting rid of Abrines and Patterson. $54 million they could reinvest, both immediately and in the future, on better players, and via otherwise exhaustible assets they currently stand only to lose. Do they really need Abrines and Patterson that badly?
It is of course neither hugely realistic nor ever required to completely pass off their salaries for nothing in return, particularly in the case of Patterson, who is older and who has an option for next season. Yet were it to be done, those are the savings that could be recouped. Savings which could then allow the team to utilise its as-yet mostly unused mid-level exception and eight figure trade exception to get better quality players than those two. They are the two best shooting role players that the Thunder have, but this does not make them good value. [...]
