Julius Randle
Albatross risk — −$35.5M on $64.9M still owed
Julius Randle projects to 7.5 marginal wins — $26.3M of on-court value — against an apron-adjusted true cost of $61.8M.
Albatross risk — −$35.5M on $64.9M still owed
The verdict swings from −$50.9M (bear) to −$18.9M (bull) — too assumption-sensitive to move on; let another season of data settle the call.
For $30.9M this season (2 yr, $64.9M total), you are buying 7.5 marginal wins of EPM production — $26.3M of value at $3.5M/win. Against an apron-adjusted true cost of $61.8M, that nets −$35.5M of surplus, 157th 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 $35.1M and surplus swings to −$18.9M — an overpay in the optimistic case.
If a marginal win is worth less and the apron bites harder, true cost rises to $69.5M and surplus falls to −$50.9M — 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: Julius Randle grades Albatross risk in the bear case but Paying a premiumin 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 ($30.7M vs $30.9M) and impact (2.3 vs 2.4); his deal grades paying a premium at −$5.0M.
Similar money band ($32.0M vs $30.9M) and impact (2.5 vs 2.4); his deal grades albatross risk at −$37.1M.
Similar money band ($32.0M vs $30.9M) and impact (2.5 vs 2.4); his deal grades paying a premium at −$5.1M.
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 = 2.4 · 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.
(2.4 − (-2.0)) × 5,208 poss ÷ 100 = 229 net pts
229 ÷ 30.5 = 7.5 wins
Wins are priced at your $/win setting ($3.5M per win).
7.5 wins × $3.5M = $26.3M
MIN is a second apron team, so every Julius Randle dollar is charged at 2.00× — your setting for what that tier’s tax and roster restrictions really cost. Contract: 2 yrs · $64.9M remaining.
$30.9M cap hit × 2.00 = $61.8M
$26.3M − $61.8M = −$35.5M
Julius Randle 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.