Otto Porter Max contract offer now moot

I agree with you. I don't see why we should give up something of value. Remember what we got for Tyreke? Gravis Vazquez and Robin Lopez, who actually was the best player we got but of course our genious GM cut him immediately. And what did we get for Isaiah? I don't even want to mention it...
That is because our brilliant GM at the time was a freaking idiot and he didn't want to re-sign IT and Tyrke, no matter how much talent we bled!

Not that many stupid GMs like PDA out there.:confused:
 
That is because our brilliant GM at the time was a freaking idiot and he didn't want to re-sign IT and Tyrke, no matter how much talent we bled!

Not that many stupid GMs like PDA out there.:confused:
PDA was horrible but I still don't think sign and trades work out too favorably for the team giving up the player. Bottom line is the team making a sign and trade has decided the player isn't worth the price, so they really don't have leverage, even if they act like they do.

Now you could certainly argue we could have kept IT at the price the Suns paid, and I think that would have been the right call. Even if we later traded him.
 
PDA was horrible but I still don't think sign and trades work out too favorably for the team giving up the player. Bottom line is the team making a sign and trade has decided the player isn't worth the price, so they really don't have leverage, even if they act like they do.

Now you could certainly argue we could have kept IT at the price the Suns paid, and I think that would have been the right call. Even if we later traded him.
Again, I'm not sure I understand the statement that they don't have leverage.

If the Wizards see it like this...

Porter Maxed? No
Richardson on the team? Yes
>
Porter maxed? Yes
Richardson on the team? No
>
Porter Maxed? No
Richardson on the team? No


...that would give them leverage because when it comes down to it, they would keep Porter rather than lose him, but just because that's how they value the decisions, it doesn't mean they wouldn't value receiving an asset (or two) like Richardson.

On the flip side, if we see it like this...

Porter Maxed? Yes
Richardson on the team? Yes
>
Porter Maxed? Yes
Richardson on the team? No
>
Porter Maxed? No
Richardson on the team? Yes


...that means we'd rather give up an asset than miss out on Porter. If that's the case, a sign and trade would make sense and both parties would walk away happy. Obviously this is an over-simplication, but I guess I'm just still not sure why people think they wouldn't have leverage if they are willing to match Porter's offer sheet.
 

Capt. Factorial

Cantry Member
Staff member
So, I am trying to melt down some facts:

1. The Wiz get to decide to match or not; no one else can decide anything else.
Technically, the first decision is Porter's. He gets to decide whether he signs an offer sheet, and if so, which offer sheet he signs (if there are multiple offer sheets, which seems likely). If Porter decides to sign an offer sheet, the only remaining decision lies with the Wizards, who decide whether to match the sheet and keep Porter, or to not match the sheet and lose Porter to the team whose offer sheet he signed.

2. If the Wiz decline, Porter could come to the Kings or whatever other team gives him a max offer, right?
Porter has to make the decision of which offer sheet to sign before the Wizards decide to match. Thus, if Porter signs an offer sheet and then the Wizards decline, Porter must go to the team whose offer sheet he signed, not any of the other teams. The decision gets winnowed down to two possible teams when Porter signs an offer sheet.

3. The Wiz CANNOT or CAN do a sign and trade with Porter?
Once Porter signs an offer sheet, then the sign-and-trade is no longer available. He will either go to the Wizards or to the offering team, in either case under the terms of the offer sheet he signed. However, if Porter DOES NOT sign any offer sheet, the Wizards can negotiate a sign-and-trade with any legal team (including teams that did not submit an offer sheet). Typically, the terms of any such sign-and-trade would be identical to the offer sheet Porter is considering signing, and the sign-and-trade would be with the team whose offer sheet Porter intends to sign (because Porter must consent to the sign-and-trade in the same way he would consent to any other free agent contract).

Porter and the offering team have no requirement to enter into a sign-and-trade negotiation with the Wizards. Porter can simply sign the offer sheet and end any consideration of a sign-and-trade. If Porter selected the Kings' offer sheet, and the Kings wanted to play hard ball, they would likely ask Porter to sign the offer sheet and hope that the Wizards did not match. However, if the Kings think that the Wizards might actually match, then they might be interested in negotiating a sign-and-trade, being willing to give up some assets in order to take away the possibility that Washington matches.

My personal preference (if Porter selects the Kings) would be for the Kings to play hard ball, unless the Wizards offer a sign-and-trade for minimal return (say Koufos, or a second round pick or something). Otherwise, have Porter sign the offer sheet and force the Wizards to match. I think with their salary cap situation there is a good chance they will not. If they really wanted Porter on a deal of the max size that other teams can offer, they'd have just put that deal in front of him on July 1 and ended all the drama. (If they offer that contract, they're obviously willing to match the same contract, so why go searching for the offer sheet?) So I tend to think the Wizards are bluffing, and we should call it.
 
If they really wanted Porter on a deal of the max size that other teams can offer, they'd have just put that deal in front of him on July 1 and ended all the drama. (If they offer that contract, they're obviously willing to match the same contract, so why go searching for the offer sheet?) So I tend to think the Wizards are bluffing, and we should call it.
I agree - and teams like the Kings and other suitors can put poison pills in the contract to screw the Wizards if they match. So it is in their best interest to max him out on their terms. And they should have done it sooner rather than later, I think each day it doesn't happen Porter is probably feeling slighted by the process. It can't breed good will.
 

Capt. Factorial

Cantry Member
Staff member
Because the very fact that they are talking S&T rather than just signing him means they feel the price is too expensive. They have played their hand.
You're right, but twslam has a point about the Wizards relative preferences. The relevant part of the equation is probably this:

Porter maxed? Yes
Richardson on the team? No
>
Porter Maxed? No
Richardson on the team? No
If this is true, then the Wizards will match if we play hardball. If the opposite preference is true, the Wizards will walk if we play hardball.
 
Not sure I agree. They just might want another asset more than maxing Porter. It doesn't mean they won't still max him.
Honestly they're a historically cheap team, at the 4 seed level, about to lock in Porter and then Wall to a super-max, be 25+ million over the luxury tax and guarantee at least one year of repeat offender status.

I get what you are saying but I still hardball them and if we miss Porter we will survive with plan B. Which I would guess would be to swoop in and offer a team friendly deal to Bojan and a PF and roll the dice in next year's draft on a SF and free agency when even more teams are going to be capped out.
 
I agree - and teams like the Kings and other suitors can put poison pills in the contract to screw the Wizards if they match. So it is in their best interest to max him out on their terms. And they should have done it sooner rather than later, I think each day it doesn't happen Porter is probably feeling slighted by the process. It can't breed good will.
Poison pills, you say?? Like what, no trade clauses? Player options?
 
Honestly they're a historically cheap team, at the 4 seed level, about to lock in Porter and then Wall to a super-max, be 25+ million over the luxury tax and guarantee at least one year of repeat offender status.

I get what you are saying but I still hardball them and if we miss Porter we will survive with plan B. Which I would guess would be to swoop in and offer a team friendly deal to Bojan and a PF and roll the dice in next year's draft on a SF and free agency when even more teams are going to be capped out.

If I the owner of the Bullets, I am thinking this: "Can I make the playoffs and win in the first round and not pay luxury tax?" If the answer is yes, why bother with Porter? The Bullets are not champion contenders with or without Porter.
 
Poison pills, you say?? Like what, no trade clauses? Player options?
In this case I think front loading it would be huge due to the immediate luxury tax implications. I'm not sure if it's possible but if they could have it pay the highest in years 2-3 that would be even worse given the Wall situation and repeat offender status.
 

Capt. Factorial

Cantry Member
Staff member
But the Bullets do not have to wait until the 8th. They can give him an offer sheet or match at anytime, right?
If I the owner of the Bullets, I am thinking this: "Can I make the playoffs and win in the first round and not pay luxury tax?" If the answer is yes, why bother with Porter? The Bullets are not champion contenders with or without Porter.
Love the 22-year time-travel here!
 
Do you think Sacramento with Porter is better than the following:

Golden St. (duh)

San Antonio (duh)
Houston (Harden and CP3, duh)
Minnesota (with Butler, will be in the playoffs)
Oklahoma City (with PG13, in the playoffs)

Denver (just added Millsap, in the playoffs)
New Orleans (full year with AD and Boogie, above Sacramento)
Utah (if Hayward goes back, another lock basically to make playoffs)
Memphis (while aging, at this time, better than Sacramento)
Portland (not a fan of theirs but I'd say they are in a better position to make playoffs)



that's 10 teams I see that are better than Sacramento. I love the optimism but people need to be realistic also. Honestly think if Sacramento was in the East with all the mid-tier east teams going into a full rebuild that the Kings could sneak into a low spot in that conference behind Cleveland, Washington, Toronto, Boston, Milwaukee, Miami, and maybe Philly.
You greatly underestimate how bad NO is outside of Cuz and AD
 
Technically, the first decision is Porter's. He gets to decide whether he signs an offer sheet, and if so, which offer sheet he signs (if there are multiple offer sheets, which seems likely). If Porter decides to sign an offer sheet, the only remaining decision lies with the Wizards, who decide whether to match the sheet and keep Porter, or to not match the sheet and lose Porter to the team whose offer sheet he signed.



Porter has to make the decision of which offer sheet to sign before the Wizards decide to match. Thus, if Porter signs an offer sheet and then the Wizards decline, Porter must go to the team whose offer sheet he signed, not any of the other teams. The decision gets winnowed down to two possible teams when Porter signs an offer sheet.



Once Porter signs an offer sheet, then the sign-and-trade is no longer available. He will either go to the Wizards or to the offering team, in either case under the terms of the offer sheet he signed. However, if Porter DOES NOT sign any offer sheet, the Wizards can negotiate a sign-and-trade with any legal team (including teams that did not submit an offer sheet). Typically, the terms of any such sign-and-trade would be identical to the offer sheet Porter is considering signing, and the sign-and-trade would be with the team whose offer sheet Porter intends to sign (because Porter must consent to the sign-and-trade in the same way he would consent to any other free agent contract).

Porter and the offering team have no requirement to enter into a sign-and-trade negotiation with the Wizards. Porter can simply sign the offer sheet and end any consideration of a sign-and-trade. If Porter selected the Kings' offer sheet, and the Kings wanted to play hard ball, they would likely ask Porter to sign the offer sheet and hope that the Wizards did not match. However, if the Kings think that the Wizards might actually match, then they might be interested in negotiating a sign-and-trade, being willing to give up some assets in order to take away the possibility that Washington matches.

My personal preference (if Porter selects the Kings) would be for the Kings to play hard ball, unless the Wizards offer a sign-and-trade for minimal return (say Koufos, or a second round pick or something). Otherwise, have Porter sign the offer sheet and force the Wizards to match. I think with their salary cap situation there is a good chance they will not. If they really wanted Porter on a deal of the max size that other teams can offer, they'd have just put that deal in front of him on July 1 and ended all the drama. (If they offer that contract, they're obviously willing to match the same contract, so why go searching for the offer sheet?) So I tend to think the Wizards are bluffing, and we should call it.
I think the Wizards may just have wanted him on a better deal, and hoped no one would've offered that max. I'm personally not comfortable leaving the Wizards with the option of keeping Porter or not getting anything in return for him. But if that happens, and we get our cake and eat it too I will applaud Vlade for the stare down. We have so many young pieces, and Porter can step in and be one of our top players.

I was thinking I'd do youth and Mahinmi, beecause of how I value Otto, but in this situation just one or the other I guess for me. Jackson and another young player seems fair. Or taking Mahinmi too. I know that amounts to ~40, but you have to give to get this type of quality
 
i dunno if it was mentioned here but is it possible to do a double sign and trade with gay and porter? we get porter at max and they get a good small forward to replace him at a reasonable price (if gay and washington agree)
 
i dunno if it was mentioned here but is it possible to do a double sign and trade with gay and porter? we get porter at max and they get a good small forward to replace him at a reasonable price (if gay and washington agree)
They would just not match and sign gay instead... Not a sign and trade situation.
 
so once Porter decides which of the three teams he likes, but before he signs the offer sheet, be a nice guy to Wiz and let them ask for a S & T
so Wiz would get something if he went? Sorta Like Chris Paul did he could have opted out instead of opted in so Clippers could do a trade?

not sure why Porter would do that, but if he did If I were Vlade I would withdraw the offer sheet