Regrading last summer’s Jarrett Allen contract for the Cavs

Regrading Jarrett Allen’s contract: What we thought then

Jarrett Allen and the Cavaliers agreed to a new contract just minutes into free agency last summer, and the immediate reactions to the deal came in right after. Here at King James Gospel, we broke down the new contract on three levels: the fit, the value and the opportunity cost.

Evaluating fit, we characterized Allen as a modern big who wouldn’t demand touches, would set hard screens and roll to the rim. That archetype projected to pair well with ball-dominant guards like Collin Sexton and Darius Garland. The downside was that paying Allen meant committing even more team assets (salary and draft capital) to bigs in a league that was downsizing. If Evan Mobley was going to be a long-term center, Allen’s role would either be reduced or he would be traded.

Much more difficult was how the contract came out in looking at value. The Cavs had restricted free agent rights on Allen, and his production to that point had not been earth-shattering. Who were the Cavs bidding against? They paid Allen like a top-6 center, and at the time he was not. We even wrote the line “…even if he improves the gulf between Allen and an All-Star season is wide” which was both true and aged incredibly poorly.

Finally, the opportunity cost of the deal tilted the evaluation back towards the positive. If Allen had walked there was no obvious replacement on the market for him. Locking up Allen gave the Cavs a good player in his prime, and for a team with very limited cap flexibility Allen’s talent level was by far the highest they had access to signing.

In total, then, it was an overpay at a non-premium position for a roster loaded with bigs, but it also meant locking up a young player on the rise for years to come.