6 hours ago 2

ASK IRA: Was Fontecchio best Robinson trade option for Heat or merely Thomas Bryant 2.0?

Q: Ira, I do not understand this Duncan Robinson sign-and-trade deal to Detroit for Simone Fontecchio. Why didn’t the Heat just let Duncan negotiate his own free-agent deal and then have all that cap space available for possibly signing Damian Lillard to rehab this year with the Heat? Fontecchio will be 15th man on the roster at best and we’ve lost all that cap flexibility for any other moves. – Greg, Jacksonville.

A: Because that was not an option. The only reason the Heat were able to get Duncan Robinson to invoke his early-termination option and move into free agency was with the implied agreement that he would recoup at least all of the $10 million in guaranteed money being forfeited by invoking the ETO. That meant the $10 million would either come directly from the Heat issuing a replacement contract or that the $10 million would at least be recouped by Duncan in a sign-and-trade. In essence, all of the money never came off the Heat books. This is similar to a year ago when the Heat got Thomas Bryant to opt out, with the proviso that Bryant would be taken care of if another landing spot could not be found. So, instead, Bryant was brought back. If you recall, at the time there was outside consternation about the Heat reupping with Bryant and clogging a roster spot. Such is the quid-pro-quo element of free agency. Some money, in some form, was going to wind up on the Heat’s books in 2025-26 to cover all or a portion of the $10 million Duncan Robinson (wink, wink) was forgoing. As it worked out, the Heat were able to shave $1.7 million off the total by instead taking on the $8.3 million expiring contract of Simone Fontecchio. It was a trade of convenience once the Heat recognized at Robinson’s Sunday ETO deadline that all of Duncan’s money could not be offloaded in a trade. In essence, the full $10 million savings on Duncan’s opt-out clause never was actually a thing. In the end, the Heat salvaged a portion of it.

Q: Ira, why do the Heat think so much of Jaime Jaquez Jr. Last season he was horrible. He can’t shoot, can’t play defense, what good is he? I just can’t see the value anywhere. Thanks. – Tony, Port Saint Lucie.

A: You don’t sell low. And with Jaime Jaquez Jr. still on the rookie scale, there remains cost effectiveness at play. That said, you also might be overstating the Heat’s commitment. Jaime has been floated in trade permutations and the Heat certainly would include him, if needed, in the right deal. He certainly is not considered untradeable. Far from it. But it also is way too early to give up on a player two seasons into his career. Can Jaime be better than last season? There is little reason to believe otherwise. How much better? That is the next question.

Q: Can you explain this to me: The Heat don’t want to give up the extra asset to get Kevin Durant, but the Heat can’t make any moves because they already have a full team and a logjam of players? The Heat don’t want to run it back, but the Heat are OK making zero impact moves? The Heat don’t want to extend Jimmy Butler because they want max flexibility in 2026-27, but the Heat add 2026-27 money with Andrew Wiggins, Kyle Anderson and Davion Mitchell? – Kris, Oceanside, Calif.