Wilson Chandler Rejected One Offer Sheet

[Capt. Factorial]

Just a bit of an update on the whole Wilson Chandler scenario here (link).

Once March 1st came and went without Chandler signing an offer sheet, the only team he can negotiate with for this season is Denver. Denver wants to sign him to a long-term deal, and refuses to sign Chandler to his preferred one-year because he would become unrestricted next year.

Long story short, it looks likely that Chandler will sit out the remainder of this season and try again over the summer, when his agent thinks (and I'm not sure why) that the Nuggets will be less likely to match an offer sheet.

Th other interesting new here is that one offer sheet did in fact come in (the agent declined to say from whom) but it was rejected. This is just speculation, but given our cap space and need for a small forward, I'd lay reasonable odds that the offer sheet came from us.

 

[rainmaker]

I'm of the belief if we overpay, SF is one of the positions I'm more than willing to overpay for because of the overall importance it would have for our team. Question is is Chandler worth overpaying for? Not sure. AK is in my mind, and if we're waiting until the summer I'd rather throw a good chunk of money at AK.

I also think overpaying starters if we have to makes sense, because if its done correctly and the starters are successful, it greatly increases the chances the better vets in the league will be willing to play with them for less. The better teams in the league have vets playing for below the market value, mostly because they want to win and at some point they are willing to take discounts to play on better teams. But we consistently overpay for poor bench production.

This is interesting, and obviously more comes into play given Reke/Cuz are on their rookie contracts, but right now roughly
Starting lineup salary= 18.3M
Bench Salary= 30.3M

So I wouldn't really buy an argument overpaying for a SF who'd help is a waste. What is a waste is all the money we're paying for league worst production from our bench, as in 17.3M for the phenomenal trio of Salmons/Outlaw/Cisco.

Who knows if the offer sheet was from us. Definitely possible. I just hope this summer when we really go after a SF, or a FA that we're willing to spend. It's funny how this franchise wastes so much money of unproductive SF's, a terrible bench and paying multiple underwhelming coaches at a time, yet they won't overpay for a vet who could help us. Seems we overpay for everything else.

 

[bajaden]

I'm of the belief if we overpay, SF is one of the positions I'm more than willing to overpay for because of the overall importance it would have for our team. Question is is Chandler worth overpaying for? Not sure. AK is in my mind, and if we're waiting until the summer I'd rather throw a good chunk of money at AK.

I also think overpaying starters if we have to makes sense, because if its done correctly and the starters are successful, it greatly increases the chances the better vets in the league will be willing to play with them for less. The better teams in the league have vets playing for below the market value, mostly because they want to win and at some point they are willing to take discounts to play on better teams. But we consistently overpay for poor bench production.

This is interesting, and obviously more comes into play given Reke/Cuz are on their rookie contracts, but right now roughly
Starting lineup salary= 18.3M
Bench Salary= 30.3M

So I wouldn't really buy an argument overpaying for a SF who'd help is a waste. What is a waste is all the money we're paying for league worst production from our bench, as in 17.3M for the phenomenal trio of Salmons/Outlaw/Cisco.

Who knows if the offer sheet was from us. Definitely possible. I just hope this summer when we really go after a SF, or a FA that we're willing to spend. It's funny how this franchise wastes so much money of unproductive SF's, a terrible bench and paying multiple underwhelming coaches at a time, yet they won't overpay for a vet who could help us. Seems we overpay for everything else.

I think we have to take things in order. If something doesn't happen before the trade deadline, then the draft is up next. So what we do, and what we might be willing to pay for help at the SF position, could depend on our luck in the draft. If the basketball god's were to smile on us, and we win the lottery (not holding my breath, but we certainly deserve a break), then the obvious choice is Davis, and that leaves us still wanting at the SF position. However if we end up picking at 5 or 6 and have a chance at Barnes or Gilchrist, then it still wouldn't hurt to have a decent SF off the bench, but that would be a smaller investment.

So I guess what I'm saying is that until we know what we have come freeagency, its hard to say what we'll do. I certainly wouldn't have a problem drafting Gilchrist, or Barnes, and still signing AK. That would solidify the SF positon for now, and for the future. Problem is, we have some baggage we need to rid ourselves of. While I'd like to move Salmons, he could always move to the SG position as a backup. Outlaw could just be cut. Greene's an expiring contract. Of course either Salmons or Cisco could be amnestied. I think we found out that quanity at a positon, Salmons, Outlaw, Cisco, Greene, and Honeycutt, doesn't replace quality.

 

[Bricklayer]

If it was us, that jsut makes our SF quandry all the more dofficult, with the tow best candiates that have ben available to us -- AK47 and Chandler -- refusing to sign. Underscoring again that Sacto is free agent Siberia, and that's just not an avenue available to this franchise.

 

[SacTownKid]

Might have been Toronto, they went after him hardcore. If it was the Kings it tells me that Chandler is either asking for too much money or really doesn't want to go back to Denver. Rumors have it Toronto's offer was going to be matched because they only had so much space.

 

[SacTownKid]

If it was us, that jsut makes our SF quandry all the more dofficult, with the tow best candiates that have ben available to us -- AK47 and Chandler -- refusing to sign. Underscoring again that Sacto is free agent Siberia, and that's just not an avenue available to this franchise.

In all fairness, it was said to be pretty hard to pry AK away from Russia. If it was just a matter of not wanting to play in Sac he would have joined the Nets if he were set on returning to the NBA.

 

[kingjatt]

how do you guys feel about danny granger? with the emergence of paul george it makes him a little more expendable for Indiana, I like him better than AK as i see him being more of PF with a suspect jumpshot and Granger is more of a true SF with a better shot than Wilson Chandler, He's not a huge star who would be disgruntled by having to come here as he plays in a small market already yet has the shotmaking and defensive ability we so desperately need

 

[cuad]

Check out Granger's field goal percentages. They're not pretty. I haven't watched him play tho so I can't give a final verdict.

 

[Section 101]

Just a bit of an update on the whole Wilson Chandler scenario here (link).

Once March 1st came and went without Chandler signing an offer sheet, the only team he can negotiate with for this season is Denver. Denver wants to sign him to a long-term deal, and refuses to sign Chandler to his preferred one-year because he would become unrestricted next year.

Long story short, it looks likely that Chandler will sit out the remainder of this season and try again over the summer, when his agent thinks (and I'm not sure why) that the Nuggets will be less likely to match an offer sheet.

Th other interesting new here is that one offer sheet did in fact come in (the agent declined to say from whom) but it was rejected. This is just speculation, but given our cap space and need for a small forward, I'd lay reasonable odds that the offer sheet came from us.

There is something wrong here. Either has a 1 year qualifying offer that he can sign at anytime or he is an unrestricted free agent. They have to keep the 1 year offer on the table to keep him restricted.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

There is something wrong here. Either has a 1 year qualifying offer that he can sign at anytime or he is an unrestricted free agent. They have to keep the 1 year offer on the table to keep him restricted.

It's got something to do with his signing overseas. The rules are weird, but they're being reported as such consistently.

 

[rainmaker]

From what I understand, Chandler was free to sign with any team up until a certain date, think 3/1. Denver could have matched any offer however. Now that the date passed, Den, the holder of his rights is the only team he can suit up for this year. Den wants a long term deal. Chandler wants a deal for the rest of the season and then become an UFA.He won't sign with Den for the rest of the season apparently because he then would be a RFA this summer and Den could once again match. Don't think he wants to stay in Den.

 

[Nighthawk1]

From what I understand, Chandler was free to sign with any team up until a certain date, think 3/1. Denver could have matched any offer however. Now that the date passed, Den, the holder of his rights is the only team he can suit up for this year. Den wants a long term deal. Chandler wants a deal for the rest of the season and then become an UFA.He won't sign with Den for the rest of the season apparently because he then would be a RFA this summer and Den could once again match. Don't think he wants to stay in Den.

Why would he want to? He'd play out of position or come off the bench. He's a quality starter SF, and still young. Looks like Gallo is pretty cemented at the 3 there. Looks more like a business decision right now more than anything if it was us

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

As long as were talking about potential SF targets next year, keep an eye out for Ersan Ilysova. He has been playing out of his mind the past 3 or so weeks. Kind of a PF/SF tweener at 6'10, but I think he could play SF on a team like ours. Plus he is one of the few, if not the only unrestricted FA's thats actually in their prime.

 

[Section 101]

It's got something to do with his signing overseas. The rules are weird, but they're being reported as such consistently.

Only thing I can think of was the date last week was the last point he would get credit for the year. At this point it would no longer count as a year of service to become an unrestricted FA after the qualifying offer.

 

[Bricklayer]

As long as were talking about potential SF targets next year, keep an eye out for Ersan Ilysova. He has been playing out of his mind the past 3 or so weeks. Kind of a PF/SF tweener at 6'10, but I think he could play SF on a team like ours. Plus he is one of the few, if not the only unrestricted FA's thats actually in their prime.

No, he can only play backup center on a team like ours.