And he did the second half of the season. 47% from 3 off of the dribble, 52% in transition.
Those were probably the best looks he could get. Telling you I watched a lot of tape and he had to take a lot of contested 3’s because that St. Thomas team had zero athletes
I know I’m in the wrong thread, but I’m more excited about Rohde’s multi-positional offensive versatility and ability to contribute out of various ball screen or 5-out sets than I am about him as a pure shooter.
He seems to shoot very well from 3 on the types of screening and handoff actions we employ.
Fwiw, here’s some summary data on contract status for guys who went in the 2nd round last year:
31-40:
- 7 guys getting multi-year guaranteed deals, from ~1mn to just over 2 mn per year
- 2 going overseas
- 1 2-way (~500k)
41-50:
- 6 2-ways
- 2 overseas
- 2 multi-year minimum deals (~1 mn), both with multi-year guarantees
51-58:
- 1 2-way
- 2 multi-year minimum deals, one with 1-year guarantee, other with partial year guarantee
- 4 overseas
- 1 G-League
Mostly doing this because (1) it’s hard to keep this stuff in your head, and (2) I’m seeing some folks on other boards think that latter 2nd round still means multi-year deals. Re: #2, it might, but it’s not the typical outcome.
I’m interested to see the effect of the additional 2-way contract per team. That’s another 30 guys, and out of your whole second round list, only 9 guys failed to get at least a 2-way. So now, should the entire second round feel pretty confident about at least getting a 2-way? Along with some undrafteds and some full-time G-Leaguers.
Agree the additional 2-way likely changes this math a bit. Doesn’t seem unreasonable that scenario couldn’t play out. But then I see how GS handled their 2ways and I feel like that was a great way to store and develop guys who already went through the seasoning period and wonder if more teams would use that extra slot for that.
I think the overseas guys will mostly stay overseas (“draft and stash”). Not sure whether there would be fewer draft and stash guys. I think that just depends on the talent (in general, it seems more non-US guys are coming to the US to prep, play college, etc. but that’s a separate issue).
I think it will basically mean better spots for undrafted guys, which means the risk of going undrafted is lower.
My question was whether it will affect that “guarantee line” – i.e., the line at which a guy can fairly expect a guarantee. A few years ago, I thought it was closer to high 40s. Last year, it seems like it was 40 or so.
All TBD. I find this stuff interesting, but don’t really have any insight. I think @4547Lambeth follows it more from the pro perspective.
Is there a limit on how many 2way deals a player can sign? I thought I saw they can only be signed to one once is that right?\
Doesn’t seem like it, though players have to be under four years of NBA experience.
Interesting so there is a limit so to speak. Also didn’t realize a player could sign a 2 year 2way
Yeah, I didn’t know that was a thing either until I saw it there
Surprised that’s not used more. Feels like that would be an easier albeit more expensive alternative to going straight gleague
Adding another 2-way does seem like a good way to add an additional 30 guys to the G-league rosters as well and prop those up by adding “almost first rounders” and popular college players to their league.
I also think that- if the 2nd rounders are now mostly guaranteed *some time on the NBA roster with the opportunity to work out with, travel, network with the Pros then that may keep some more guys here in the states and looking forward to the G-league games vs. saying “Nah- I’d rather go to Spain”…although Spain, Australia, NZ, and rest of the Europe is very hard to pass up.
I imagine the possibility of a 2way and actual NBA time/exposure would be more enticing
Yeah, I think a lot of stuff that Silver has done over the last several years has been aimed at getting/keeping more players in the NBA “eco-system.”
I think the additional 2 way slot might actually encourage more teams to go with 14 man rosters until the playoff roster eligibility deadline, specifically those teams already in the tax or those just barely under the cap.
I know the Sixers rostered 14 instead of the 15 maximum because they used a certain mid-level exception to sign a FA which hard capped them at the apron, so they basically couldn’t afford to pay a 15th player. The Warriors rostered 14 because they were so deep into the tax that even signing a guy to a minimum deal would’ve incurred like a 300% tax on that salary, so why not just use 2 way contract guys (who don’t count against the salary cap) who could give you roughly the same performance as a minimum salary 15th guy type for 1/8 the cost and you can convert the contract later if you want to get him on the playoff roster.
For a team like the Spurs that are way under the cap (or in their case, way under the minimum), it doesn’t matter.
@haney explained already and I posted something a few weeks back on it, but players with less than 4 seasons of NBA experience can sign a 2 way deal. A player can’t play for the same team on a 2 way for more than 2 seasons. A single game (can’t remember if that’s a game played or just a game on the roster) counts as a season.
That makes a lot of sense. Do you expect, then, that next CBA they tweak things again to try to prevent that behavior? I don’t imagine that outcome was the intent of the change, or that the players union will be happy with it.