The NBA’s early extension deadline has passed, which means we now know who we’ll find in our restricted free agent class of 2016.
Which 2016 NBA restricted free agents could actually leave their teams?
Now that the early extension deadline has passed, it’s time to look at the players who will be restricted free agent this summer.
Gary A. Vasquez-USA TODAY Sports
Quick refresher: a player becomes a restricted free agent after his fourth season in the NBA if he was a first-round pick whose team options were all picked up, or if he’s a second-rounder or undrafted player who becomes a free agent with three or fewer years of service. Early extensions are available to first-round picks entering their fourth year. In essence, the early extensions preempt restricted free agency by locking up the player through at least three additional seasons beyond the fourth year of the standard rookie deal.
And what is restricted free agency? When a free agent has restricted status, his incumbent team can match any offer sheet he signs with another team. Basically, it allows players to talk to other teams and sign offers, but the player’s old team always has the final say. In practice, it’s really difficult to lure away a restricted free agent unless the incumbent team has limited interest in keeping him anyway.
Seven eligible players reached early extensions this year: Anthony Davis, Damian Lillard, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Terrence Ross, Jeremy Lamb and John Henson. That leaves 15 players headed toward restricted free agency. (There could be a couple we missed: as noted, restricted free agency is complicated.) Some of these 15 fellas are really good. Some might even be attainable. As you'll see, these categorically usually don't overlap.
Below we rate each RFA’s quality and their attainability.
THE REAL GOOD
How good is he? Real good. One of the brightest young two-guards in the NBA. An efficient shooter, a perfect match with John Wall and a quality teammate by all accounts. Barring injury or major regression, he's almost assuredly a max player. The only reason he didn't get locked up early is because Washington is preserving salary cap flexibility to chase Kevin Durant in 2016. As it is, Beal's cap hold is a good deal smaller than his first-year maximum salary. Had he signed early, he'd reduce the Wizards' cap space substantially.
Is he attainable? Absolutely not. Teams will not likely waste their time pursuing him unless Washington shows an inclination to undercut him on salary (which seems unlikely). This feels similar to the Kawhi Leonard plan in San Antonio.
How good is he? Real good. He’s already making an All-Star push. The Pistons understand they’ll be maxing him out barring injury. His combination of rebounding, finishing and defensive potential is pretty rare at his size.
Is he attainable? So, the Pistons explicitly laid out that they are pursuing a Kawhi plan with Drummond: waiting a year to max him out in order to keep cap flexibility in 2016. For the Spurs, this was (in the end) a safe bet. They are the Spurs, and we're talking about the extraordinarily Spursy Kawhi Leonard. Drummond's a different dude. He doesn't have an NBA Finals MVP to his name, and the Pistons sure as hell aren't the Spurs.
There’s a touch of risk, even if the Pistons can ultimately decide what to match. You just don’t want Drummond signing a short (three years) or option-riddled offer sheet with another team when you could lock him up for five. My best guess here is that the Pistons will end up pulling the Jimmy Butler Special (a max offer sheet that forces the RFA’s hand) on Drummond. That will keep him in place, but likely prevent the sought-after extra cap flexibility from materializing.
I never really answered the question: Drummond is probably not really attainable. Probably.
THE PRETTY GOOD
How good is he? A fine question! This is a matter of great debate. Does Barnes look better than he is because his teammates are freaking Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson and Draymond Green? Or is the fact that his team is riddled with stars a damper on his production? In other words, what would Barnes look like on a team without all this talent -- better or worse? This question is unresolved, and may remain so.
Is he attainable? I have a bad feeling about the Warriors' ability to retain Barnes. They have the ability to pay him what he wants without getting into crazy payroll trouble: Andrew Bogut is coming off the books in 2017, Curry is still a bargain and Green took a discount on his recent deal. That's not the issue. The issue is whether the Warriors front office can sell Harry Barnes as the highest-paid member of the team to the other guys in the locker room.
Again: Green took a discount to help Golden State preserve its core. Barnes is seeking a contract on par with the 2015 Defensive Player of the Year runner-up. The Warriors can’t easily justify that. That makes me think that Barnes is attainable ... if some other team is willing to pay a crazy price.
THE DION WAITERS
Dion Waiters, Oklahoma City
How good is he? This is a question you ought not ask in polite company. It’s on par with politics and religion. (Needless to say, it’s complicated. The short answer is “no.”)
Is he attainable? Completely. The Thunder will have its hands full with the Kevin Durant Situation, and OKC has been so reticent to breach the luxury tax threshold that throwing a hefty offer sheet at Waiters will almost certainly lure him away. The Thunder's decision to match Enes Kanters' max offer from Portland was stunning enough (though understandable). If they did the same with Waiters, it'd destroy everything we think we know about the franchise.
That said, if Waiters does blossom this season, this question could get mighty interesting. That’s a huge if, though.
THE DARK HORSE HELEN OF TROY
Festus Ezeli, Golden State
How good is he? Well, this is an interesting question. His career has been stunted by injury and, as is the case with Barnes, by the Warriors' immense talent base. He's getting a good chance to shine early this season as Bogut sits, and he's availing himself well, especially as a defender. He's a shade under 7 feet, but could challenge Rudy Gobert and DeAndre Jordan for the blocks title if he were a full-time starter. We know how teams treat long defenders, don't we? The answer: Festus is good enough to GET PAID.
Is he attainable? Ezeli feels like a much stronger candidate to be retained by Golden State than Barnes for precisely two reasons: Bogut is aging and a free agent in 2017, and good centers are far more difficult to replace than good forwards. There’s also the matter of Ezeli having been paid like a low first-rounder (about $1 million) while Barnes has been paid well as a lottery pick. Ezeli seems more likely to take a discount to stay with a great team. So, no, Ezeli does not seem particularly attainable at this point.
EVERYONE ELSE, IN DESCENDING ORDER OF INTRIGUE
Meyers Leonard, Blazers
If he shoots like he did last season (42 percent on two triples per game), he’ll be highly sought-after, and some team will drop a fat enough offer sheet to make Portland think twice despite its enormous cap flexibility. That said, Leonard is just 2-for-17 from long-range this young season, and despite big minutes he’s been atrocious. If he doesn’t come back around, here’s more a player to take a flyer on than a target. Stay tuned.
The two Rockets power forwards figure to make some dough from Houston or someone upon hitting restricted free agency. My working assumption is that neither signed extensions in part because they think 50-60 starts on an elite team will burgeon their value (accurate) and because Houston wants to preserve in-season trade flexibility, something extensions hurt dramatically. Jones will be an eight-figure player in all likelihood, assuming he plays enough to remain on top of mind. He could stand to shore up his jumper, but the rebounding and defense are there.
Donatas Motiejunas, Rockets
Motiejunas, Jones’ teammates and at times rival for minutes, hasn’t played this season. He’s bigger than Jones but more known as a shooter (despite a 31 percent career clip from deep on just three attempts per 36 minutes). Size and shooting are a valuable combo, though, and Motiejunas can score inside pretty well, too. He’s also looking at eight figures per season barring catastrophe.
Fournier has a shot at grabbing the "quiet young stud" tag under Scott Skiles in Orlando. Through four games he's averaging 18 points and taking tons of threes. Small forward (where Fournier is playing mostly this season) is actually a rather thin position in the NBA right now, and the Frenchman just turned 23 with relatively few NBA miles on his odometer. If he keeps this up, it's not outside the realm of possibilities that some striving squad could max him out. That's a huge if, and he really is more naturally a two-guard, but hey, it's the new NBA.
If you give Sully minutes, he’s going to get you buckets and rebounds. It’s the defense, the conditioning, the efficiency and the ball movement that hurt. Despite being more consistent a player than the four above him on this particular list, Sullinger’s future is less certain in my eyes. He could be an eight-figure stud, a third big man with offensive tendencies for a grinder team. Or he could languish as a constantly besmirched waste of potential who doesn’t give his all off the court. I could see Danny Ainge giving up on him soon enough.
Moe Harkless, Blazers
Harkless is getting minutes and hitting threes this season in Portland, two things that didn’t happen last year in Orlando. He’s never going to be a big scorer, but at just 22 years old with a developing deep stroke and great size at a thin position, he could hit the jackpot in July. He’s not getting a Terrence Ross contract (three years, $33 million) unless the number improve, but some team has to offer enough to make Portland blink. (Are you sensing a trend with the Blazers’ 2016?)
Tony Wroten, Sixers
Wroten is intriguing primarily because he could be the first Sixer for whom the Sam Hinkie regime must invest in long-term. Philadelphia jettisoned Michael Carter-Williams before that decision came, and Nerlens Noel's extension deadline isn't until October 2016. Notice I said could be with regard to Wroten. This roster has so much turnover that it'd be no great shock if the wrecking ball guard were traded by the deadline. Wroten isn't Philly's best guard (that'd be Robert Covington) and he's not a pure shooter in a shooting league. But he can score and dish just fine, and might have a Nate Robinson-like career ahead of him. Seattle!
Tyler Zeller, Celtics
Zeller was really useful for the Celtics last season. He’s playing fewer than 10 minutes per game this year. I don’t know either. Like Sullinger, he could be a consistent, useful third big man in the league, but it seems just as likely he never really catches on. I can’t foresee Boston handing Zeller any sort of major commitment unless his production ramps back up dramatically.
Andrew Nicholson, Magic
Nicholson fell almost completely out of Orlando’s rotation last season, and it doesn’t look he’s convinced Skiles to play him, either. In all likelihood he won’t even be a restricted free agent because there’s little chance the Magic pick up his qualifying offer. He probably doesn’t have enough value to be more than a trade throw-in at this point. But I remain intrigued. Power forwards who can reliably hit 30 percent of their threes can usually improve and be valuable! If he’d get some minutes and presuming he works hard off the court, he could be a player in this league.
The eldest Plumlee was a big deal for exactly one season in Phoenix. He slipped substantially under Jeff Hornacek and is now clinging to his spot in the league in Milwaukee. There's little chance the Bucks invest in him given commitments to Greg Monroe and John Henson, and Plumlee seems like a prime candidate to be a midseason trade throw-in. I'm not sure he gets a long-term contract anywhere this summer barring some injuries in front of him.
* * *
SB Nation presents: The most important free agent signings of the past offseason
See More:
