Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Craig Montgomery's avatar

What do you say to the people (not me) who don't think Ezi and Dom can be on the floor together? Or that a lineup of Nneka, Ezi, and Dom won't work?

Are you willing to bring Nneka or Ezi off the bench? I don't think I can endure another season of Dom watching from the bench.

In the words of my friend Erica Ayala, "When you have the number 2 pick, YOU PLAY THE NUMBER 2 PICK!"

Randy Buehler's avatar

I disagree with some of the logic of this post. It doesn't matter who our best players are - it matters way more what our best contracts are. For unrestricted free agents in particular, protecting them doesn't mean we get to keep them. It doesn't give us any edge in resigning them at all unless we're willing to pay them more than the max (you can only go up to the supermax for your own previous year players). Meanwhile, drafting them doesn't mean they play for the expansion team. They can just resign with us if they want. It only helps the expansion team if they are willing to Core them (which comes with a mandatory 1-year super-max contract offer) and/or offer them more than the max. The big conclusion I take away from this is that we don't need to protect anyone unless we think an expansion team would offer them more than the max. Furthermore, expansion teams are limited to drafting just one unrestricted free agent each. So we also don't need to protect people unless they're going to be among the top 2 best UFA's left unprotected. Gabby is in her 20's and likely would be so protect her. Ezi also might be, but we shouldn't protect her unless we actually want to pay her what it's going to take for her to sign with us, which requires her to want to sign with us and also I think we can't afford her if we're running back the Skylar + Nneka core. So don't be surprised if she gets drafted on Friday. Meanwhile I don't think an expansion team would draft Skylar so I think we just risk it with her, even if we do want her back. Nneka is good enough that I think she's probably worth protecting, though I also wonder if an expansion team would really draft her and pay her a super-max at her age.

Anyway, the net net of this perspective is that I think Mackenzie Holmes is a very realistic option for a protection. She was 1st team all WNBL in Australia this off-season, and a Chinese team just snapped her up for their playoff run. We have her on the rookie min for 2-3 more seasons. I also thought Nika Muhl was a reasonable protection until she hurt her (other) knee two weeks ago playing for Croatia. Is either of these players more useful than Katie Lou Samuelson? No ... but no one is gonna pay KLS a million dollars for next season, so we don't need to protect her in order to sign her for next season. (Or Wheeler, etc.)

7 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?