RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Chicago Sky 2021
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mavcarter
#NATC


Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 5611
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 8:11 pm    ::: Chicago Sky 2021 Reply Reply with quote

2020 Roster

Vandersloot/Colson
Quigley/Prince
Copper/DeShields/Williams
Stevens/Parker/Hebard/Mavunga
Dolson

Free agents: Parker - UFA, Colson - UFA,
Replacement player: Prince
Suspended: Gillespie
Stash: Conde



_________________
wrote:
Or maybe said poster should quit being a nuisance when people don’t agree?


Last edited by mavcarter on 09/15/20 8:30 pm; edited 1 time in total
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 26839



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 8:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Other than dumping Dolson, I'm waiting to see what Rockhard wants for his team.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 3858
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 8:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The coaching staff will have to develop a defensive system that will help this team win games. They will also need to add some tough minded players that want to play defense.



_________________
Sky Nation! We are in this together!
Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 1571
Location: Seattle, WA


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 8:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Sad

Sky need their players to be healthy. And a little good luck along the way - certainly more than they got this season. Several people were unhealthy/injured at or before the start of the season, and none of them ever recovered. Despite all that, it was really Stevens' midseason season-ender that was the straw that broke the camel's back.

In terms of revamping the roster, if the Sky have to do anything, imo they need to (continue to) add athleticism to their post players. That'll help with the defense (so will healthy pre-existing Sky members). Stevens is a good start, but I'm now giving her the 'injury-prone' label; even before this year, she missed most of last year with a foot injury. I wouldn't be relying on her in a full season, and this one wasn't even a full one. I agree that they should move on from an expensive Dolson - and she'll still have takers in a League where teams are always looking for post players. Parker is good but just not athletic like that. Hebard was a great pick for where they picked in the Draft. I don't think the Sky ultimately do anything, but I think they should try and get creative somehow, like they did at the trade deadline (even if that move didn't pay off as things stand now). The window of contention is closing, and even if everyone were healthy, I just don't think they'd have the post players to compete with Seattle's, LA's, or Vegas' in a 5-game series. Not to mention, Vanderquigs are getting up there in age, and at some point - maybe not this offseason, but next - they'll need to cobble together some sort of contingency plan for one/both of them.



_________________
Man, f*** all this f***ing horsesh*t (no, yeah, for sure [RIP RBG])


Last edited by Stormeo on 09/15/20 11:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 3858
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 8:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
Other than dumping Dolson, I'm waiting to see what Rockhard wants for his team.

I didn't want to bring up her name because I would think by now people on this board should know my feelings about her. Cool



_________________
Sky Nation! We are in this together!
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 9899
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 9:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Maybe trade Parker while she still has value? It’s only down from here everyone in the league knows what she can do! Cheyenne to Dallas for #5?



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 26839



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 9:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

well, when they said he wanted to run the offense thru Parker, that made my opinion of Wade plummet. Parker has improved a lot this year and been a good player for the Sky, but she has never been a passer - in this game she got the ball and went one on three repeatedly, totally ignoring open teammates several times. I think you want to "run the offense" thru a player who is willing to pass as well as shoot. (maybe he was thinking he had Candace...but no it is Cheyenne). At any rate for a team with three very good guards, their post players without Azure should never be the focal point of their offense. I realize he had to get creative without those two players, but still....

And yeah, defense is an issue.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
mavcarter
#NATC


Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 5611
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 9:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

WNBA 09 wrote:
Maybe trade Parker while she still has value?


She’s a UFA, no need. Make a pitch to her counsel. Wink



_________________
wrote:
Or maybe said poster should quit being a nuisance when people don’t agree?
root_thing



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 5962
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 9:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

WNBA 09 wrote:
Maybe trade Parker while she still has value? It’s only down from here everyone in the league knows what she can do! Cheyenne to Dallas for #5?


Parker is a UFA. I don't know if their core designation is available, but even if it is I doubt Chicago would use it on her.



_________________
Aside from separately going on trial for murder and treason, Aaron Burr seemed like a pretty nice guy.
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 9899
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 9:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mavcarter wrote:
WNBA 09 wrote:
Maybe trade Parker while she still has value?


She’s a UFA, no need. Make a pitch to her counsel. Wink


Oh let’s do it....ayeeee. Laughing Laughing Smile Smile Very Happy Very Happy



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 22475
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 9:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mavcarter wrote:
WNBA 09 wrote:
Maybe trade Parker while she still has value?


She’s a UFA, no need. Make a pitch to her counsel. Wink

They do still have their core designation, having decided they didn't need to use it to keep Vandersloot/Quigley last year (correctly). Wouldn't be totally shocked if they used it on Parker.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 1571
Location: Seattle, WA


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 11:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
mavcarter wrote:
WNBA 09 wrote:
Maybe trade Parker while she still has value?


She’s a UFA, no need. Make a pitch to her counsel. Wink

They do still have their core designation, having decided they didn't need to use it to keep Vandersloot/Quigley last year (correctly). Wouldn't be totally shocked if they used it on Parker.

Considering Parker was their only non-rookie post that wasn't injured for a stretch of games this season, taking the risk of her signing with another team for nothing could be a disastrous move for the Sky's window of contention - even if Parker doesn't deserve a supermaxer.



_________________
Man, f*** all this f***ing horsesh*t (no, yeah, for sure [RIP RBG])
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 22475
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/20 11:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The problem is that I'm not even sure that they can core Parker, having looked at some numbers and thought about it more. In order to give out the core qualifying offer that comes with the designation, you have to have room for it. And even carrying 11 rather than 12, I don't think they do. I think they're probably stuck hoping they can just convince her to stay (barring trades that change their calculations).



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 3858
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/17/20 11:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
The problem is that I'm not even sure that they can core Parker, having looked at some numbers and thought about it more. In order to give out the core qualifying offer that comes with the designation, you have to have room for it. And even carrying 11 rather than 12, I don't think they do. I think they're probably stuck hoping they can just convince her to stay (barring trades that change their calculations).

The numbers will work when they dump Dolson.



_________________
Sky Nation! We are in this together!
J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 5693



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/17/20 11:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Rock Hard wrote:
Richyyy wrote:
The problem is that I'm not even sure that they can core Parker, having looked at some numbers and thought about it more. In order to give out the core qualifying offer that comes with the designation, you have to have room for it. And even carrying 11 rather than 12, I don't think they do. I think they're probably stuck hoping they can just convince her to stay (barring trades that change their calculations).

The numbers will work when they dump Dolson.


I think Dolson/Stokes is a passable two headed center for NY certainly better than what we have now, but I am not sure we are going for that kind of better in NY in 21, if we are I think NY would be willing to swap one of our many rookie wings )or Shook who comes expendable if we have Dolson and Stokes for the 5 who are borderline for making the team in 21_ which seems fair as Chicago is doing a salary dumps

so
pick 1
Willoughby, Walker or Shook (Shook might make the most sense in terms of position but the other two have higher ceilings) for Dolson (I like Odom and want to keep her the most)
We could probably throw in pick 16 because we have so Manuy players at the moment but don't really want to or maybe just pick 16


Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 22475
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/18/20 2:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Rock Hard wrote:
Richyyy wrote:
The problem is that I'm not even sure that they can core Parker, having looked at some numbers and thought about it more. In order to give out the core qualifying offer that comes with the designation, you have to have room for it. And even carrying 11 rather than 12, I don't think they do. I think they're probably stuck hoping they can just convince her to stay (barring trades that change their calculations).

The numbers will work when they dump Dolson.

You saying it a bazillion times doesn't mean it's actually going to happen. Not everyone thinks she's a waste of space like you do. Presumably including the Sky front office who gave her quite a bit of money to hang around for a couple of years.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 3858
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/18/20 4:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
Rock Hard wrote:
Richyyy wrote:
The problem is that I'm not even sure that they can core Parker, having looked at some numbers and thought about it more. In order to give out the core qualifying offer that comes with the designation, you have to have room for it. And even carrying 11 rather than 12, I don't think they do. I think they're probably stuck hoping they can just convince her to stay (barring trades that change their calculations).

The numbers will work when they dump Dolson.

You saying it a bazillion times doesn't mean it's actually going to happen. Not everyone thinks she's a waste of space like you do. Presumably including the Sky front office who gave her quite a bit of money to hang around for a couple of years.

I do know that the Sky are not serious about winning a championship with her on the roster.



_________________
Sky Nation! We are in this together!
DFWub2018



Joined: 24 Aug 2018
Posts: 416
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/19/20 8:04 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

WNBA 09 wrote:
Maybe trade Parker while she still has value? It’s only down from here everyone in the league knows what she can do! Cheyenne to Dallas for #5?


C. Parker to Dallas for: Meagan & M. Jefferson/Thornton


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 55014



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/19/20 8:25 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Seeing that Dallas seemed to get the worst end of a couple of trades with Chicago this season, maybe even Bibb will become gun shy going down that pipeline again.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
mavcarter
#NATC


Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 5611
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/19/20 10:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
The problem is that I'm not even sure that they can core Parker, having looked at some numbers and thought about it more. In order to give out the core qualifying offer that comes with the designation, you have to have room for it. And even carrying 11 rather than 12, I don't think they do. I think they're probably stuck hoping they can just convince her to stay (barring trades that change their calculations).


So I was interested in doing the math, I’ve got the Sky at $287,554(guessing) in cap space with 10 players if we’re including Gillespie making the team and Conde being stashed again. If Parker was cored and offered the super-max($221,450), that would leave them with $66K(guessing) for one more minimum. So I’m assuming it could work? Or would it not work because they have Conde’s legal rights?

Then again, no way is Parker getting super maxed and still not 100% sure if Sloot didn’t get cored last year(I’m assuming no at this damn point), but still interesting to look at. Very Happy



_________________
wrote:
Or maybe said poster should quit being a nuisance when people don’t agree?
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 22475
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/19/20 10:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I don't know how we're ending up with such a discrepancy, but I have them with only $200,144 of space after adding up the 10 you suggest. Which means less than the supermax available even staying at 11, never mind a 12th at the minimum.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
mavcarter
#NATC


Joined: 02 Sep 2010
Posts: 5611
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/19/20 11:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I got:

Vandersloot - $200K
Quigley - $194K
Dolson - $175K
Copper - $165K
DeShields- $67K
Williams - $67K
Hebard - $66K
Stevens - $58K
Gillespie - $58K
Mavunga - $53K

Max cap is $1,339,000?

Would that be $230K in space or something like that?



_________________
wrote:
Or maybe said poster should quit being a nuisance when people don’t agree?
root_thing



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 5962
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/19/20 11:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Spotrac has similar numbers. According to them, the Sky have 10 players signed for 2021 with $228,854 left in cap space. The ten players include Conde, but replacing her with Mavunga basically makes no difference ($58k each). If that's correct, Chicago has enough cap space to offer Parker the max -- assuming they want to do it.

I thought Chicago would have cap issues in 2022 that necessitated planning ahead of time. However, Spotrac shows them as a blank slate for 2022. Only Hebard and Gillespie (in theory) are signed, and those are unguaranteed rookie contracts. This could be either good or bad. The Sky won’t be stuck with any bad contracts, but on the other hand all their horses are out of the barn.



_________________
Aside from separately going on trial for murder and treason, Aaron Burr seemed like a pretty nice guy.
Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10384



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/20 8:13 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Hayes (or E. Will) for Dolson solve everything. Just ask Rock Hard.



_________________
#NADF
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 22475
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/20 8:51 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mavcarter wrote:
I got:

Vandersloot - $200K
Quigley - $194K
Dolson - $175K
Copper - $165K
DeShields- $67K
Williams - $67K
Hebard - $66K
Stevens - $58K
Gillespie - $58K
Mavunga - $53K

Max cap is $1,339,000?

Would that be $230K in space or something like that?

Ah okay. The problem is the section of the newest CBA on p36-37 that says:
Quote:
"d)In the event that the Base Salary in any Player Contract entered into prior to January 17, 2020 and covering the 2020 Season and, if applicable, any Season thereafter (an “Existing Contract”) is below the Minimum Annual Salary, the Base Salary in such Player Contract shall be automatically adjusted so that the Base Salary in 2020 and, if applicable, any Season thereafter shall equal the Minimum Annual Salary. Nothing herein shall in any way prevent a Team from terminating an Existing Contract at any time."

And as DeShields, Williams, Stevens and Mavunga are all 2018 players who have three years of WNBA experience, they all should be adjusted up to next year's 3+ minimum of $70,040.

One of Spotrac's problems for the WNBA is that they took Megdal's numbers and a bunch of them were never fixed.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin