View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24484 Location: London
Back to top |
|
RavenDog
Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Posts: 6893 Location: Home
Back to top |
Posted: 09/13/23 2:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Thanks for the Information!!!
|
|
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009 Posts: 6835
Back to top |
Posted: 10/02/23 11:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Since we have started to do the 2024 projections just thought I would do a quick round up for discussion purposes.
UFA
Big names I don't really see changing teams (but you never know)
Griner-Has consistently said she loves PX can't see why PX wouldn't just super max her for as many years as possible.
Bonner-Had best season of her career and is engaged to A. Thomas
Stewart-Actively was a part of bringing Cloot, Herself and J. Jones to NY and they are in the finals (thought it was weird she only signed for a year so maybe not completely committed) I would expect her to get maxed out this year with cap space opening up
J. Jones-same as above. Actively wanted to join Sloot and Stewie in NY and the are doing well. Will NY super max her? I would assume so unless her and Stewie decide to take less to keep a stronger team around them in NY.
N. Ogwumike-There doesn't seem to be any evidence that Nneka and LA wouldn't just continue business as usual for a great player who has been there her whole career. Maybe LA refuses to re-sign Chiney and that causes some friction but one Chiney could just retire and two I don't really see any other team offering Nneka and Chiney contracts either. LA probably has room for Chiney in the vet minimum to 100k range but big picture I don't think what happens with Chiney is as big a consideration as it might appear.
pretty confident they will return to their team but their seems to be some possibility they go elsewhere
B. Jones-I don't see why Conn doesn't bring her back (I could theorize that Bonner and A. Thomas proved they could win without a dominant big and maybe investing in a big scoring PG or Combo guard would be an interesting direction to move in playing a very different more position less style then the other top teams but that seems like a risky proposition). Nw if B. Jones is tempted to go somewhere else (she did only sign the one year core contract she was offered last season) would she, and if Conn is worried about that could they core her one more time and at least do a sign and trade for a decent return? While I think it is possible I am going to say probably not.
EDD-There are rumbling on the Washington page that maybe it is time to move on from EDD or their is some sort of chemistry issue (I would love her to go to PX and team up with DT and Griner in a one year ship/Olympic or bust campaign) but I would put my money on EDD staying with Washington for another year and maybe trying to chase the Olympics with a health proving season (and then retiring whether it works or doesn't)
Cloud- If Cloud is really available this will be the player to watch. LA, Dallas, Minny, Atl all seem like viable options, even Seattle could make an argument that adding Cloud to Loyd with a lottery post to Magbegor with role players could move them into lower contender status. But at the end of the day I think Washington decides to run it back with this group one more time and Cloud seems to love DC. If it falls apart mid season Cloud would be an excellent trade piece midseason to a contender and Washington can go with a bigger rebuild in 25. (When everyone say Washington shouldn't run it back assuming that means move on from EDD and Cloud and go younger considering the lack of bigger success since they won the championship my one question is who are you going to replace Cloud and EDD with that would make The Mystics better than just keeping Cloud and EDD?
Can. Parker-I am not sure Parker is going to return to the W, if she does going back to Vegas on a team friendly contract seems like the best move for her and the team.
so While I think Cloud and B. Jones will at least think about leaving and EDD could throw a curve ball the only really big name out their I seeing changing teams is
Diggins-Smith-Skylar going to LA has seemed like a very reasonable assumption. I think Diggins-Smith and Atlanta could be a really nice pairing. Minny also seems like an option. In my Conn goes in a different direction to a more position less style I could see Diggins-Smith being the type of player that could take that system to another level, not sure I could see Diggins-Smith getting all that excited about going to Conn. If Indy misses out on the top two spots in the draft would Diggins-Smith and The Fever be a good fit?
Next level of free agents who can help a team
I am sure Chicago will try to bring them back
C. Williams
A. Smith
If LA is looking for a solution at the SF spot I would consider a vet minimum to a 120k offer to either (also seems like possibilities for a one year trying to with Taurasi a championship move if PX misses out on trying to pull in bigger names)
A. Powers
or
D. Deshields
Hayes- I don't see Conn passing on her, she had a good season, unless their is a bigger name out there to invest in
Dolson-someone will pay Dolson a more reasonable contract to have some size on the bench if it is vet minimum to say 90k I wouldn't be surprised if it was NY
L. Allen-even if Minny is able to bring in a true starting level PG keeping Allen seems to make a lot of sense, If Cloud goes somewhere else Washington will need someone at the PG spot
R. Allen-like Hayes played well in Conn was a nice compliment to The Bonner/Thomas duo can't see why the Sun wouldn't try to bring her back, would LA look to her to fill the hole at SF.
Billings-I think Atl needs an upgrade at the 4 spot or to draft a PF with more potential than either Billings or Hillmon has, but Atl probably keeps Billing at the right price.
Canada-Even in a world where LA lands Diggins-Smith or Cloud I don't see why LA wouldn't bring back Canada on a decent deal 150k or so. I am not sure there is anyone out there that would offer more and Cloud and Diggins-Smith are big enough that you could play them with Canada. If for some reason LA doesn't make a decent offer I would look to Atl or Minny as the two we need a better PG teams to move up the standing to show interest if they miss out on the premiere names.
Clarendon-If LA doesn't land a premier PG bringing back both Canada and Clarendon makes sense, IF LA does bring in a top PG I don't see both Clarendon and Canada returning So it is Clarendon who I think would most likely be available. Would they join PX in the one year chip hunt, would Minny be an option, If the chips fall in a way where Dallas misses on the top PG options would Clarendon be a better answer to improve their chance than Dangerfield, Sims or Burton?
N. Coffey-seems like the type of player Chicago would slightly over pay to improve their standing if Atlanta doesn't just keep the team together.
KLS- I really don't know where she goes, maybe LA offers her a vet minimum to 100k kind of deal and she stay. Feels like another player I could see PX take a chance on for a year if they can keep the contract on the cheap side.
There are a lot of other unrestricted free agents
when it comes to RFA
Wvwryone should try and poach Sabally so,
S. Sabally-Dallas should just pay her. I think she is only eligible for regular max so sign her up for as many years as possible
I don't see anyone else being offered any sort of deal from another team that could pull them away and a couple will be lucky to get an offer from their current team
AD Dura-Atlanta probably keeps them at team friendly price
Hebard-Chicago does the same for Ruthie
George, Holmes and Willoughby- will be interesting to see if they are offered qualifying deals or if they become UFA
that is it for now
hope this leads to discussion
feel free to throw out other crazy ideas
one I will put out is a sign and trade between Washington and Conn of
Bri. Jones for Cloud
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67491 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 10:52 am ::: |
Reply |
|
The logical place for Diggins is Dallas. That's a solid, well coached team that needs a PG. Failing that, I'd guess Atlanta or Minnesota.
_________________ The truth is like poetry
Most people hate poetry
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24484 Location: London
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 2:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
The logical place for Diggins is Dallas. That's a solid, well coached team that needs a PG. Failing that, I'd guess Atlanta or Minnesota. |
Dallas would probably mean a significant paycut. So depends on how much getting paid is important to her. |
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24484 Location: London
Back to top |
|
scullyfu
Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 8888 Location: Niagara Falls
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 2:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Re: Stewie signing a one year deal. From what I read, probably here at aRebkell, was that if she’d signed a two-year it would’ve locked her into only a 3% raise in 2024. A one-year allows her to renegotiate to a potentially much larger contract in ‘24.
_________________ i'll always bleed Storm green.
|
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014 Posts: 3510
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 3:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Salary aside, if I were on a title contender, and I was anticipating league expansion, and I actually cared about the team I was on remaining a contender, I would not be signing any multi-year contracts right now.
There's no question that the Liberty would protect Stewart in the event of an expansion draft, but having to protect Stewart may or may not make the difference between whether or not they get to also keep Johannes. Depending on how many players you're allowed to protect in the WNBA (they got to protect 6 in the men's league, but they're also allowed to have up to 15 players on the roster), it could even make the difference between whether or not they get to protect Laney.
_________________ Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67491 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 3:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core).
_________________ The truth is like poetry
Most people hate poetry
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004 Posts: 16516 Location: Chicago
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 4:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
If the Fever get the No. 1 pick again, I would be in favor of them trying to get Deshields. When healthy, she is a major improvement over Vivians or Hull and the Fever are only going to get so much better without addressing the wing. Adding both Clark and a healthy DD would put the team in position to take a major step next year.
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004 Posts: 16516 Location: Chicago
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 4:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Question: Jordin Canada is also on Richyy's list. Why all of the focus on Cloud with basically no mention of Canada?
I would think of them of them as pretty comparable.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24484 Location: London
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 5:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
PUmatty wrote: |
Question: Jordin Canada is also on Richyy's list. Why all of the focus on Cloud with basically no mention of Canada?
I would think of them of them as pretty comparable. |
Cloud had a really good game in her final game of the season, and fans have very, very short memories. |
|
ChasingRatDogmaSalade
Joined: 05 Apr 2008 Posts: 627 Location: Las Vegas, NV
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 5:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core). |
That was only with one expansion team, though, correct?
During the days of multiple team expansion, we could protect 5. And I believe there was at least one year where you protected 5, and then once you lost 1 player, you could protect 3 more.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67491 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 5:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ChasingRatDogmaSalade wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core). |
That was only with one expansion team, though, correct? |
That was Atlanta in 2008.
Quote: |
During the days of multiple team expansion, we could protect 5. And I believe there was at least one year where you protected 5, and then once you lost 1 player, you could protect 3 more. |
The last multiple team expansion was 2000, when there was no meaningful free agency. I'm not sure those rules would be appropriate today.
_________________ The truth is like poetry
Most people hate poetry
|
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014 Posts: 3510
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 9:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core). |
It feels like it would be a violation of the spirit and intent of free agency if an expansion team can simply supersede your free agency and say, "You belong to us, now."
_________________ Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
Queenie
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 18131 Location: Queens
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 9:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ChasingRatDogmaSalade wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core). |
That was only with one expansion team, though, correct?
During the days of multiple team expansion, we could protect 5. And I believe there was at least one year where you protected 5, and then once you lost 1 player, you could protect 3 more. |
That was the 2000 expansion, IIRC, because they had to stock 4 teams, so there were multiple multiple rounds of picks.
_________________ "We all have a platform. We all have a voice & they all hold weight. Silence is a luxury."
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67491 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 9:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Silky Johnson wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core). |
It feels like it would be a violation of the spirit and intent of free agency if an expansion team can simply supersede your free agency and say, "You belong to us, now." |
Maybe so, but the Dream did select and core a UFA in their expansion draft
_________________ The truth is like poetry
Most people hate poetry
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24484 Location: London
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 10:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
Silky Johnson wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core). |
It feels like it would be a violation of the spirit and intent of free agency if an expansion team can simply supersede your free agency and say, "You belong to us, now." |
Maybe so, but the Dream did select and core a UFA in their expansion draft |
It was added to the process because teams were essentially gaining extra 'protected' slots by ignoring their own free agents, who in many cases they knew were going to re-sign and return anyway. Adding the option to draft and insta-core a UFA meant teams had to protect those players if they wanted to be sure. For instance, right now, Breanna Stewart is about to become a UFA again but New York wouldn't have needed to protect her under the previous rules because she couldn't be picked anyway as a free agent. Adding that insta-core rule, they'd surely have to include Stewart on their protected list.
I totally understand seeing it as an unfair restriction on a player who would otherwise have become a UFA, but technically all that's happening is the right to core Player X is being passed along. Instead of their current team having that option, now the expansion team would have it. So it's not actually any more restrictive than it already was. |
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014 Posts: 3510
Back to top |
Posted: 10/03/23 11:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Fuck that noise: if I were going into free agency, and an expansion team drafted me, I would retire on principle. Either that or, considering that the WNBA is the "summer job" for most of these women, I'd simply refuse to report, and never play in the US again.
_________________ Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24484 Location: London
Back to top |
Posted: 10/04/23 7:44 am ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core). |
I remember all of that except the RFA part. Are you sure they were limited to only one of those? Can't find anything stating it either, but there's not a whole lot of info left to find. |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67491 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 10/04/23 8:14 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Richyyy wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
In the last expansion existing teams protected six. The expansion team got one from each team. They could select no more than one RFA and no more than one UFA (which they could then core). |
I remember all of that except the RFA part. Are you sure they were limited to only one of those? Can't find anything stating it either, but there's not a whole lot of info left to find. |
I apparently misread. The only limit was for UFA.
As explained here
https://www.wnba.com/archive/wnba/sky/news/Atlanta_Dream_Expansion_Draft.html
_________________ The truth is like poetry
Most people hate poetry
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004 Posts: 16516 Location: Chicago
Back to top |
Posted: 10/04/23 9:39 am ::: |
Reply |
|
The core limit is quite a bit lower this time around than it had been, and many more players are ineligible to be cored. I would assume that would be part of the rules this time around ... A player who can't be cored by her current team wouldn't be eligible to be cored by an expansion team.
|
|
johnjohnW
Joined: 11 Aug 2020 Posts: 1977
Back to top |
Posted: 10/04/23 11:43 am ::: |
Reply |
|
How soon can an expansion team qualify for a lottery pick? If the presumed Golden State team starts play in 2025 per the USA Today article, could they finish last their first year in the league and then get possibly get the #1 pick in 2026? I feel like SF will be an attractive FA destination and they will be contenders quickly, likely with some lucky ping pongs from the league to accelerate that process.
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008 Posts: 14141
Back to top |
Posted: 10/04/23 12:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
johnjohnW wrote: |
How soon can an expansion team qualify for a lottery pick? If the presumed Golden State team starts play in 2025 per the USA Today article, could they finish last their first year in the league and then get possibly get the #1 pick in 2026? I feel like SF will be an attractive FA destination and they will be contenders quickly, likely with some lucky ping pongs from the league to accelerate that process. |
The Chicago Sky and Atlanta Dream were part of the lottery after their first season, I don't see why a rule would be made now that an expansion team would have to wait so many years before they can be part of the lottery.
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004 Posts: 16516 Location: Chicago
Back to top |
Posted: 10/04/23 12:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
johnjohnW wrote: |
How soon can an expansion team qualify for a lottery pick? If the presumed Golden State team starts play in 2025 per the USA Today article, could they finish last their first year in the league and then get possibly get the #1 pick in 2026? I feel like SF will be an attractive FA destination and they will be contenders quickly, likely with some lucky ping pongs from the league to accelerate that process. |
That is exactly how Atlanta got Angel McCoughtry.
|
|
|
|