IH posed a pretty cool question in the sporting events forum. I took a bit of time to write out a reply, so figured I'd repost it on my blog, since I haven't done an NBA post in a while. (And besides, it's the offseason, so it's the one thing I can really write about!)

You guys need to realize this is an exercise in a vacuum. Joe Johnson, this year to the hawks, was simply irreplaceable; they were able to offer him a lot of money (that they couldn't offer to anyone else) to get a player of a skill level (that they couldn't get anywhere else). To a team w/ no players, however, Johnson is the epitome of a bad max. And that's just in year 1!

With that forward, here is what I view as the best to worst deals: (Essentially, any contract is "skill level now," "age year 1", "skill level at the end of the contract").

Big Money
F Paul Pierce, 61M/4 Pierce is a top-rate wing who brings it on both sides of the ball. His skill set figures to age well, since he gets to the line due to ball fakes, not aggressive takes. He has a wide/strong body and defends using position and angles, not sheer athleticism. He's a max player who will be making less then that; he can be the 2nd best player on a championship team.

F David Lee, 80M/6 Dude has been playing out of position, and people are right, he's a turnstile defensively. Although he's not NEARLY the stud David Berri make him out to be ("lol"), he's a net positive player. Although I don't agree with how much the Woyas gave up to acquire him (Azu, Ronny, AND Randolph!? Why don't you just empty the cupboard) he's being paid fair value. To boot, he has no injury problems and even in the last year of his deal, he should be just leaving his prime. In other words, I expect him to either get better then this year or at worst stay at this production, even in the 6th year.

F Amar'e Stoudamire, 100M/5 Amare is basically David Lee, except a little older, more injury concerns (even if they're flukish, the fact is, he gets hit in the eye and his career is over) and has a larger mainstream reputation which is based on his scoring. (So he's overrated) Is he worth a max year 1? Meh. Is he worth it in year 5? He's still youngish, so only the 4th and 5th year may look bad. For those wondering, Amare vs Lee is basically even but I give the edge to Amare in skil. But when you factor in injuries and age and more dollar/year, Lee's contract in a vacuum is flatout better.

F Carlos Boozer, 80M/5 The 3rd guy in the "I like to score" PF trifecta. Keep in mind I feel all 3 players are basically even. The reason Boozer is last of the 3 though is last year was a contract year; I have seen (WITH MY OWN EYES!) the difference between "playing for a max Carlos Boozer" and "cut the check Carlos Boozer". When he's in the "I don't care" mode, well, Victor once said I care more about the Jazz winning then he does. He's correct. Regardless, I feel next year he probably is the best of the 3, but he figures to age the worst (based on athleticism/finishing around the rim/strength, none of which age well) so year 4 and 5 have the potential to be bad. Regardless, like the 2 guys above him, he's a net positive player that is way overvalued by the mainstream media.

F Dirk Nowitzki, 80M/4 Probably the toughest guy to rate. Fact is he'll always be 7ft (until he shrinks an inch or two) and he'll always be able to stroke it. If you had to name a player who could still play NBA-level basketball in their mid-to-late 40s, Dirk would have to be on the top 3 list. That said, people don't realize just how much his game has slipped. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news (Dallas Fans) but... Dirk is not worth the max. Not in year 1, and especially not in year 4. (Even though he figures to age incredibly well, it doesn't mean he's IMPERVIOUS to aging!) Like the 3 guys above him, he's a score-first PF. He used to be the best of the bunch, and the laughing matter is he's probably the best defender of the 4. But he stopped rebounding and his offense is no longer top-echelon elite. (So year 1 he's simply not as good as the guys above him) For a team starting out, this would be a bad max yr 1, even though yr 4 I prob take Dirk>Booze.

F Rudy Gay, 82M/5 Well, at least he is the only player on this list that has upside! Other people have nailed this, and it's true: Rudy Gay has never been the best player on his team. Truthfully, he probably isn't even the 2nd best player and ARGUABLY isn't even the 3rd best player! It's tough to be competitive when you're giving ~1/4th of your cap to your ~3rd best player. The good news is this takes him throughout his peak, so last year was probably the floor. (Whereas other players above, you're seeing their ceiling) I worry that without playing for a contract you've probably seen the best he has to offer, as well, which is a score first player (who doesn't even do that all that well) with limited secondary statistics and less-than-average defense.

G Joe Johnson, 119M/6 All the deals above are either +EV or borderline (like the Gay deal). This is the one that is sheer -EV every part of the way. First, ask yourself: Is Joe Johnson, aged 29, worth a super max? The answer is maybe. I mean, he's slipped from his peak years (as a 25yr old, 19.5 PER) and his main attributes (health and playing TONS of minutes) have slipped a bit too. He's logged an incredible amount of NBA minutes for someone who didn't come out of high school (over 27k minutes including playoffs). So, year 1 maybe he'll be a fringe all star and maybe is worth the super max. But year 2... and 3... 4, 5, and 6 (You get the idea!) you're paying an awful lot for a scorer who isn't a surefire max.

Next I'll do Mid-Money wings.

*Keep in mind for the Hawks Joe Johnson's deal was alright. It wasn't great, but their options were either: 1. Keep the team together, albeit at a cost 2. Break it apart, don't really get much from JJ, and become incrementally worse next year. In a vacuum though I'd surely pass on this.

Mid Money - Perimeter Guys

Forward - My god, there are a lot of them. The main issue here is my rankings are not contextually based: Remember, IH said to examine everything "as though you're starting out". So Ray Allen is worth a lot more to the Celtics then he is to a team like the Kings. (He's worth more then 10 million to the Cs but less then that to the Kings, is what I'm trying to say ) All rankings are from best to worst.

Mike Miller, MIA, 25M/5 The dude took a paycut. He'll be 30 next year (wow!) but he has size and can shoot really well. He's never been good defensively, and his game (smart passing, hitting open shots) doesn't get hurt by age to the extent of others. Basically, even at 35, is the man worth LESS (!!!) then the MLE? Absolutely! (I'm surprised IH didn't list JJ Reddick, 3 years/21 Mil on this list. Basically, JJ's best is MM's worst, and MM is making less money then him...) MM's contract for any team would be hugely +EV, so the fact he's going to SBST, just sickens me.

Kyle Lowry, HOU, 24M/4 Lowry should be a starting PG. He's the best PG on his team. It seems like he's been in the league for a while, but he'll only be 24 next year... So he expects to get better throughout the length of the deal. (Paid until 28, just about when he starts declining slowly) Lowry is a +EV player making about what the 5th starter on a team (~the MLE) should make. Basically, this is a good contract for any team in the league. The fact Lowry is defense-first and gets to the line a lot are nice, since most supporting guys being paid this are in the "space the floor/hit the 3ball" mold.

Ray Felton, NY, 16M/2 It was close between this and Ray Allen. Quick: Who's better?! Makes you think. I'd probably say Ray Allen, but they're both a little below all star caliber. Felton makes 2m/less per year, and this contract pays him at 26 and 27. For a starting PG who is a net positive defensively, can run an offense, is entering his peak, and suddenly discovered how to shoot, I like it.

Ray Allen, BOS, 20M/2 VERY close to the Felton deal. Quick... Who had the higher PER last year? Kinda a trick, since Ray was 15.2 and Felton was also 15.2. The main difference is Ray is making more money, and this contract pays him at 35/36, so Ray should continue to see gradual slippage. (As a 31yr old, Ray had 21.6 PER, to give you an idea) Ray's a net positive defensively and obviously a huge positive in the locker room, but I'm hesitant to say his contract to a team starting out is hugely or even thin +EV. It looks about fair value. (But, as noted in the forward, context trumps all, so to the Cs his contract is great but for the Kings it's awful)

Note: Those deals are either good or OK. Now we start to see the OK to bad to really awful...

Al Harrington, DEN, 34M/5 IH neglected to mention Al Harrington's deal is not guaranteed in the 4th or 5th year. That changes things drastically. Harrington will be paid essentially full MLE+, and what he brings is a 6th man ("of the year") type scoring mentality off the bench. He's a bulk scorer on league average efficiency with very low turnover numbers. That's really, really good. His big flaws are that he's a flex 4 who doesn't like defense very much, and for an outside shooter, his shooting numbers are very pedestrian. (League average 3pt shooter) He also doesn't rebound or get his teammates involved, so he's a pretty lousy fit for a starting unit. In any event, he's tall, he's churned out about the same stats the past 4 years with remarkable consistency, so even at 30 you could do a lot worse then Al Harrington. Note that if his contract in year 5 (as a 35 yr old) was guaranteed, he'd be somewhat of an albatross, but since the Nuggies have the option in yr 4 and 5, he becomes about market value. Not special, but a fine pickup.

Wes Mathews, POR, 33M/5 Another example of contextually a team getting what it needed/wanted, but paying a fair shade over market value. I like Wes Matthews; he was a core role player for the Jazz. He is a good defender and can hit open shots. He's also really young. He played all 82 games for the Jazz... But the real question is, does he have any upside? With all the nice things I said about him, the dude put up a 12.3 PER. If he's a starter, he's regarded as a weak link. He is making a little more then 6m (he was given the full MLE) for basically a defensive stopper who isn't an elite defender. He'll be 24 next year, so this pays him throughout his peak. At best I think this is net neutral, but for a team starting out, can probably do a little better.

John Salmons, MIL, 40M/5 The first slightly bad deal. Again, like JJ, Salmons to the Bucks was valuable: They weren't going to be able to replace his production, and they were only able to overpay HIM. The big issue is he's not a particularly great scorer or anything, (about average usage + efficiency, although he has low TOV numbers) and he's also slightly net negative defensively. And he'll be 31 next year. So, next year, at a 8m clip, you get basically a league average player. Ok, fine, sign me up. But years 3, 4, and 5? Yuck! His game figures to decay a bit, and at best, he's a league average player. But he'll be paid quite a bit more then that.

Travis Outlaw, NY, 35M/5 One of the 2 horrific deals this offseason. Salmons, above, is at least a league average player. And doesn't miss games (Salmons has had a remarkable run of consistency in terms of logging tons of minutes, which has a lot of value) Outlaw? When has he proved anything? The other deals are all fine in year 1 (or good value). Generally it's the end of the contract that brings the contract down for others. For Outlaw, even year 1 he's overpaid! Yes, he'll only be 26 in year 1, so technically his prime. (Although he was a high schooler, so already been in the NBA for a while) I guess the Nets will use him as a starter, but he's just not good. He's a below average scorer, rebounder, defender, he doesn't pass, he's not a complimentary role player for a star, etc... I mean, what does he do well? Hit midrange jumpers? Yes, it's nice he can play the 3 or the 4, but when you can't play either particularly well, it's not valuable being a jack of all trades. I wouldn't even have signed Outlaw for 4m/year. At more then the MLE, lol, makes me cringe!

Richard Jefferson, 39M/4 It's most likely the Spurs had some sort of deal arranged with Gay Jeff, since he opted out of a LOT of money. Regardless, we can't really speculate on that, we can only view his nearly 10mil/year deal in a vacuum. RJeff had a bad year last year - his last good year was probably his last year with NJ. As a 30 yr old, should we expect him to buck the trend? The dude lost his starting gig for a bit in San Antonio, and I highly doubt he rebounds to even an average starter. But he's being paid a whole lot more, and that's just year 1. Years 3 and 4 (as a 32 and 33 yr old) his contract might be the league's worst. (Note his game doesn't/hasn't aged well, since he's an explosive slasher/leaper, who all of a sudden just isn't that explosive) Although he has always defended well, that's starting to slip, too. For a team just starting out, this deal is a killer. Again, though, it did make a bit more sense for the Spurs, but even that's pushing it.

I'll do the posts last

Mid Money - Posts

Well, there are fewer posts. And there is a greater dichotomy between "good" and "bad", so I think this is the more "accurate". Here goes:

Amir Johnson, 34M/5 Seriously, Amir is a stud. He's only be 23 next year (can you believe that?) and figures to keep improving. Most of his value comes on the defensive end, so the mainstream tends to underrate him. Regardless, he's a solid starter in the league making about the MLE. He has upside, and is actually a positive (in small doses) on the offensive end. Very few of these deals ooze EV, but I feel comparable players to Amir (like Varejao) generally get paid 10m/year. He's making a little more then half. Count me in! If only he could play with a good center...

Tyrus Thomas, 40M/5 Tyrus is basically Amir 2.0. Well, actually, let's reverse that, since Amir is younger and better. (Amir is Tyrus 2.0) Most (actually, all) of Tyrus's value comes on the defensive end. And he's just 24 next year. He, too, is a fine starter, although he's a net negative on offense. Anyway, everything I said about Amir applies to Tyrus, with the understanding paying a little less for a younger version is obviously the better contract.

Brendan Haywood, 55M/6 Haywood is a guy who got a MUCH longer contract then I anticipated. Is he the best player of all the posts? Absolutely. Like the 2 guys above him, most of his value comes on the defensive end, so he tends to be underrated. And he's a legit C who has been in the L for a while. The good news is he's a legit 7ft who has excellent defensive understanding. He has slight injury concerns (whereas Amir and Tyrus do not) but figures to age well. (Case and point is that his PER has basically hovered around the his career 15.5 mark for nearly all of his career - only time it was significantly worse was his rookie and sophomore years) The big issue is when he's 34, 35, etc. he'll be paid like he is now, and it's hard to imagine he'll be worth it. But yr 1 he's the best value + the best player on this list, so that is very helpful. (Another guy who is worth more to the Mavericks then to a team like the Nets!)

Luis Scola, 47M/5 Meh, he's a solid player. Good compliment to Yao. He'll be 30 next year and is basically a league average starter, but he's being paid nearly 10 mil. I feel he's not as effective as the 3 guys ahead of him, but is paid the most/year and is the "oldest". (Younger then Haywood, but his game figures to age much worse then the defensive-minded 7ft center) The big positive is Luis hasn't missed a game in his career yet, and has seen an uptick in minutes every year in the league despite already being "on the decline". (Technically) Luis got as much money as he did because the Rockets had his rights and could pay him that much; if this was a team starting out, I'd feel they got a decent player on an OK contract (that could come back to haunt them the 4th or 5th year of the deal) but wasn't a particular win.

Drew Gooden, 32M/5 Now, onto the -EV deals! Gooden is a ****ing retard. On B-ref, he has worn 9 different uniforms. And has been in the league only 8 years. (With Milwaukee, this will be his 10th unique uniform) Although he's always produced reasonable numbers, he's a negative defender who also is a headcase. He'll be 29 next year. What I'm trying to say is, well, maybe year 1 he'll be OK. (A little less than 7mil, so the MLE) But there's a reason he hasn't stuck with any team despite decent scoring production, and when the Bucks pay him on the downslope of his 30s, well, this deal will be looked at with horror.

Channing Frye, 30M/5 Channing probably owes about half his contract to Steve Nash. I could go on, but there are about 30 different Channing Fryes in the league. Or in the world. (Essentially, he's very replaceable) There is only 1 Steve Nash. (Well, CP3 is the similar type of player that extends/increases teammates' production, so maybe 2 Steve Nashes) Yet he's making 6m per. For a guy who is a weak defender and rebounder, I do not like this one bit.

Darko Milicic, 20M/4 LoL. KAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHN