I may be incorrect and it's a different ownership group, but based on 76ers (not sure about the devils) I don't think he's shy on spending. it seems like it has to be the right player. my only concern would be if the "right player" is a Joel Embiid, Ben Simmons, or Paul George kind of player.
I watched their game last night, lol George is coming on.
Washington with all their cap room this year were 14th in FA spending even though they signed 28 players tied for the most. They had to sign many of course because of the one year contracts. but heck even though they signed that many players in total, 13 teams spent more than them, NE for example signed 9 less players than Washington yet spent more than three times the money. In other words they are shooting for bigger fish.
Is this Peters or Harris? i don't know. But if they are going to go medium in FA even though they likely end up having the 2nd or third most cap space to spend than its not going to be easy to revamp this roster with higher end players. You aren't IMO going to retool the roster with journeyman or older players discarded by their teams like a Will Harris, D. Wise, Jacob Martin, etc. You need IMO to aim higher.
With football, not sure about the NBA, you got to put the guaranteed money upfront. Signing bonuses are a way to incentivize FAs by loading up their paychecks from the jump and then spreading out the cap pain over time.
The Eagles have long treated the salary cap as a credit card. Now others are following suit. But does more spending translate to more wins?
www.nytimes.com
The Eagles spend money unlike any other team. Are they the new NFL model, or an anomaly?
This is largely because cap charges associated with bonuses, unlike cap charges from base salaries, can be prorated across up to five years. Pairing large bonuses with small base salaries allows teams to pay players lots of money now while incurring the cap charges over time. The increasingly popular use of void years — dummy years to spread the cap hit beyond a contract’s expiration — magnifies the effect.
...Over three- or five-year windows, there is frequently correlation between spending and winning. This makes sense because teams typically push harder when they think they are close to contending. Also, better players tend to cost more. San Francisco, Philadelphia, Buffalo, Tampa Bay (with Brady, but less so since) and Baltimore (since paying Lamar Jackson) have spent more over the past five years while succeeding.
...The Eagles are the only team to rank among the top five in cash-over-cap rate from 2015-24, 2015-19, 2020-24 and 2022-24.
...The league's requirement that teams place a portion of fully guaranteed salaries and bonuses into escrow is another big dividing line. For example, the Browns' decision to sign Deshaun Watson to a fully guaranteed $230 million deal required owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam to set aside roughly $185 million in escrow. Not even Philly has gone to that extreme, but the Eagles' willingness to fund guarantees is notable. Many family-owned teams with varying degrees of success over the years (the Pittsburgh Steelers, Cincinnati Bengals, Indianapolis Colts and Arizona Cardinals, for example) are less willing to set aside these big checks.
...Focusing on whether the Eagles are living too close to the edge or doing a great job might miss the point.
"Both things are true," another team president said. "They get ahead of things, and they pay. Yet, when you look at their cash spend compared to Buffalo, Baltimore, Kansas City — teams I would put in their category over the last decade — they pay more. And they had a couple of retrench years."
The dead money Philly carries could just be the cost of doing business for the Eagles.
"I do not think (dead money) is quite the restriction it is made out to be," another cap manager said. "If you are operating the way Cincinnati operates, that is going to be a problem. But if you have the cash, you can figure the cap out."
 }})
