All Cooper Flagg needed was one year of playing college basketball with the Duke Blue Devils to show he’s worthy of becoming the consensus No. 1 overall pick in the NBA Draft. Now, Flagg is in line to join the Dallas Mavericks after they lucked into winning the NBA Draft Lottery.

Last year’s No. 1 overall pick, Zaccharie Risacher, signed a preset contract for four years and $57 million. He earned $12.5 million in his first season. Flagg will eventually sign a similar contract (estimated at $62.7 million) with the Mavericks, yet he won’t make anything close to the same amount of money as he earned in NIL money while at Duke.

According to ESPN’s Howard Bryant, Flagg raked in roughly $28 million in NIL earnings. The money came from a $13 million contract with shoe company New Balance and another $15 million thanks to a contract with Fanatics.

There’s nothing preventing Flagg from signing similar contracts and earning even more money once he officially arrives in the NBA. At least at that point he’ll be doubling down, thanks to having a salary with the Mavericks too. Plus, he’s still under contract with New Balance and Fanatics, giving him even more earning potential.

In other words, Flagg was never hurting for money in college and that’s surely going to continue once his NBA career tips off too.

Related: Chicago Bulls were ready to offer ‘everyone’ for this player

By: Justin Lafleur

WEST WINDSOR, N.J. – The Dartmouth women’s rowing team wrapped up a strong weekend, and season, by finishing in 16th place at the NCAA Championship on Sunday at Mercer Lake. The Big Green varsity eight and second varsity eight each finished fourth in their C finals on Sunday, good for 16th nationally, with the varsity four winning its D final to come in 19th in the country.
 
“It was everybody’s first NCAAs, including mine,” said John Graves, The Elizabeth C. McNabb Head Coach of Women’s Rowing. “After a really big emotional high at Ivies, it’s definitely a challenge to come and reset and get back to work, but we did a good job doing that.”
 
As a team, the Big Green accumulated 39 points, which tied Penn, but Dartmouth owned the tiebreaker to capture 16th.
 
On Sunday, the varsity four began by winning its D final, posting a time of 7:22.173, which was better than Northeastern (7:27.367), Rhode Island (7:54.079) and Fairfield (7:57.115).
 
The second varsity eight followed by placing fourth in its C final with a time of 6:38.672, only trailing Rutgers (6:34.238), UCF (6:36.666) and Penn (6:37.494) while ahead of Northeastern (6:39.158) and Indiana (6:40.556).
 
The varsity eight had the same finish, coming in fourth in its third-level final. A tight final saw all six crews finish within seven seconds of each other. Dartmouth’s time was 6:24.173, with Syracuse coming in first (6:20.367). The Big Green were ahead of Oregon State (6:26.071) and Penn (6:27.151).
 
“This weekend was an incredible end to my Dartmouth career,” said Jenna Martin. “I could not be more proud of the team of how we carried ourselves throughout this whole season. To end at the NCAA regatta is such a privilege and an experience I will remember for the rest of my life.”
 
The Big Green will head into the offseason looking to build on their first NCAA Championship appearance since 2011 and carry that momentum into next season.
 
“The seed of belief in the team, and the confidence that they’ve built this year, is going to bear fruit in the future,” said Graves. “We’re still in the early stages of building the culture of the team, building the speed here and I think this experience is going to inform what we do next.
 
“Nobody at the beginning of the year expected us to be here,” Graves continued. “And I’m proud of [the student-athletes’] trust in the process and trust in how we’re doing things. My hope for them is they’re using this as a fact-finding mission, filing things away, having a really clear image of where we want to go next year. I think they see the level that’s needed to come back next year and compete for top 12 and push the team forward.”
 
Complete Results
 
Varsity Four
D Final
1. Dartmouth – 7:22.173
2. Northeastern – 7:27.367
3. Rhode Island – 7:54.079
4. Fairfield – 7:57.115
 
Second Varsity Eight
C Final
1. Rutgers – 6:34.238
2. UCF – 6:36.666
3. Penn – 6:37.494
4. Dartmouth – 6:38.672
5. Northeastern – 6:39.158
6. Indiana – 6:40.556
 
Varsity Eight
C Final
1. Syracuse – 6:20.367
2. Harvard – 6:22.937
3. UCF – 6:23.115
4. Dartmouth – 6:24.173
5. Oregon State – 6:26.071
6. Penn – 6:27.151
 

Luzerne County Council is debating the pros and cons of setting county real estate tax break guidelines by category to provide realistic expectations for prospective developers.

Councilman Jimmy Sabatino, who chairs council’s infrastructure committee, had proposed the idea to his council colleagues during discussion about a tax break in March, saying council should decide in advance what fees and discounts it deems acceptable for warehousing and logistic, manufacturing and tech-based development.

The infrastructure committee subsequently agreed to present the resulting recommendation to the full council for its consideration and input, prompting last week’s discussion. Council majority approval would be necessary at a future meeting for a schedule to take effect.

The schedule would apply to breaks requested under the Local Economic Revitalization Tax Assistance (LERTA) program for blighted properties, which means the property owner pays real estate taxes on the land throughout the break and receives a discount on taxes for the new development.

Under the suggestions presented last week, warehousing and logistic development would receive the least favorable break — five years instead of the maximum allowable decade, with a discount of 50% the first year and decreasing 10% annually to a final 10% off taxes in the fifth year.

A development fee of $5,000 per acre also would be owed to the county, it said.

The discount for manufacturing and tech-based development would be 90% the first year and decrease by 10% annually to a final 10% in the ninth year, it said.

Development fees would be $2,500 per acre for manufacturing and $3,500 per acre for tech-based development.

Council would use the schedule for guidance in evaluating tax break requests, the proposed resolution said. The adoption and publication of a standardized LERTA fee and abatement schedule would “provide clarity to prospective applicants, improve administrative consistency and help align economic development efforts with county priorities,” it said.

Council members presented mixed reactions during last week’s work session.

Councilman Greg Wolovich said he believes the schedule is a “great idea” because it will provide “clear direction” to prospective developers and “more definition of what we are looking for.”

But Councilman Kevin Lescavage said he has reservations about putting out “cookie-cutter numbers” because each project is unique and must be weighed individually.

Councilwoman Joanna Bryn Smith said she supports the concept because it would be advertising a “ballpark” of what the county expects while providing council with flexibility to deviate if there are special circumstances.

Sabatino agreed, saying the schedule is a “starting point for negotiations” and a tool for developers to determine if it would be worth investing resources in requesting a county tax break.

Because these standards only apply to county taxes, developers would still be free to seek school tax breaks — which make up the lion’s share of real estate tax bills — as well as municipal tax reductions, Sabatino said.

Council Vice Chairman Brian Thornton expressed concern that the schedule would deter prospective developers with worthwhile projects. He worries that a schedule would automatically prompt developers to bypass the county and take their projects elsewhere, leaving the county in the dark about negative impacts.

Councilman Chris Perry commended the committee for its work on the proposal and said tax breaks will always be a “touchy subject.” He hesitated to commit, saying he does not know if categories are appropriate and worries a schedule would “turn people away.”

Council Chairman John Lombardo said he does not want to “turn away any economic development” due to a fee schedule and added that negotiation is always an option if council is dissatisfied with a proposal.

Lombardo said “everything we do is about optics,” and he does not believe it will be positive for the county “if it appears we are trying to put a knee on a certain type of development.”

Councilman Harry Haas said he wholeheartedly supports the plan and stressed the standards are not binding.

Haas said he does not believe a schedule would discourage developers because they already have been using the most recent negotiated county tax breaks as their guide on what council has been accepting over time. The county must be proactive, he asserted, predicting that any developer who “sees profit” will not hesitate to seek a break.

Lescavage pointed out most of the land involved in LERTAs is mine-scarred with limited reuse options. These projects are “pumping a lot of dollars into this county,” and the resulting revenue as the breaks expire is needed to avoid or minimize future school, county and local tax increases, he said.

Sabatino said he does not disagree with these arguments, but he wants to avoid development-related problems in the Lehigh Valley and other markets by determining “how much is too much.”

“Nobody at this table is against development, but we want to use this as a tool to get the right development,” Sabatino said.