Desmond Bane
Albatross risk — −$25.8M on $123M still owed
Desmond Bane projects to 8.9 marginal wins — $31.1M of on-court value — against an apron-adjusted true cost of $56.9M.
Albatross risk — −$25.8M on $123M still owed
At −$25.8M under water the deal drags the books; it still grades "needs-sweetener", so quietly canvassing the market beats waiting for it to worsen.
For $37.9M this season (3 yr, $123M total), you are buying 8.9 marginal wins of EPM production — $31.1M of value at $3.5M/win. Against an apron-adjusted true cost of $56.9M, that nets −$25.8M of surplus, 147th of 178 tracked contracts — it grades as an albatross.
If wins price up toward $4.2M/win and the apron tax eases, production value climbs to $40.9M and surplus swings to −$6.5M — fair value in the optimistic case.
If a marginal win is worth less and the apron bites harder, true cost rises to $66.3M and surplus falls to −$43.9M — an albatross in the pessimistic case; the verdict flips across the band.
Caution — the verdict flips somewhere across bear/base/bull assumptions. This call is assumption-sensitive, not settled.
This call changes under bear assumptions: Desmond Bane grades Albatross risk in the bear case but Fairly pricedin the bull case — treat the verdict above as a live read of today’s sliders, not a settled fact.
The market's own numbers: a win costs what the middle of the league pays for it.
Every apron dollar is real money — the tax ledger, not the highlight reel, decides who wins the summer.
Banners hang forever. A marginal win today is worth almost any tomorrow, and the tax is the cost of doing business.
Wins you buy before you're ready are the most expensive wins in basketball — flexibility is the only asset that never ages.
The tenth man is closer to the star than the star's agent admits — pay for scarcity you can prove, not reputation.
1 of 5 desks disagree with the verdict above — that disagreement is the story.
Take the question to the docket →Similar money band ($38.0M vs $37.9M) and impact (3.2 vs 3.2); his deal grades paying a premium at −$6.9M.
Similar money band ($38.3M vs $37.9M) and impact (3.3 vs 3.2); his deal grades paying a premium at −$6.6M.
Similar money band ($38.7M vs $37.9M) and impact (3.3 vs 3.2); his deal grades paying a premium at −$7.0M.
How the model gets there.
The audit trail behind every figure in the memo above — six steps from raw on-court impact to the final surplus verdict, using the same sliders. Drag any assumption and the memo above updates with it.
AASV = wins × $/win − cap hit × apron multiplier. Set the knobs to your own front-office judgment — every number on this page updates live.
League estimated net rating (per 100 poss. vs. an average player), cached from stats.nba.com (seed snapshot).
Est. Impact = 3.2 · 2025-26 · 72 games · 2,500 minutes
Impact is credited above replacement level (-2.0), scaled by the possessions he actually played (minutes × 2.08/min), then converted at 30.5 net points per win.
(3.2 − (-2.0)) × 5,208 poss ÷ 100 = 271 net pts
271 ÷ 30.5 = 8.9 wins
Wins are priced at your $/win setting ($3.5M per win).
8.9 wins × $3.5M = $31.1M
ORL is a first apron team, so every Desmond Bane dollar is charged at 1.50× — your setting for what that tier’s tax and roster restrictions really cost. Contract: 3 yrs · $123M remaining.
$37.9M cap hit × 1.50 = $56.9M
$31.1M − $56.9M = −$25.8M
Desmond Bane costs more than he produces under these assumptions — the contract eats value.
First season on file — the trend view, and its tie-in to aging risk, unlocks once another season lands.