ESPN: Team-by-team analysis -- who should Houston cut?

I don't really think it's a conspiracy theory. Just a incentive to actually cut a guy from a roster.

Basically for any team not named the New York Knicks, if you cut a guy all you do is relieve yourself of the potential of losing chump change you would have had to otherwise pay (the luxury tax). We're not talking about saving real dollars here (you still have to pay the player's guaranteed salary). And we're not really talking about getting wiggle room under the salary cap to sign more players. So why bother dropping a guy like Finley or even Howard who could otherwise contribute to your playoff efforts, or at least trade for something of value? Unless, of course, someone calls Cuban and says, "so hey, I'm looking for a SG/SF type. If you decide you want that 'luxury tax' relief and cut Finley, we could try to make it worth your while ..." It'd be like trading players for monetary considerations, which happens in other sports in this country ...

 

It happens in other sports, great. In the NBA, it's called CBA circumvention.

 

Nike, it is suggested in the new CBA the lux tax threshold is not as sevier, correct? In other words you just pay double the salary, but not lose out in the redistribution on top.

I am 90% sure JB will not get a 2 year deal from us. I think it is better than 50/50 Deke gets a 2 year deal--but we will have to see the new rules (e.g., min 2 year contract) for EBR FAs and other "own team" free agents.

It would be a lot better to cut Mooch or Baker than Spoon. 1) Spoon is still our 3rd team PF. An injury to any of Yao, Deke, Swift or JH means playing time for Spoon. 2) it gives more flexibility to pull a S&T. Since Baker and Mooch are pretty close in salary, with Spoon substantially more and Ward substantially less, we have a lot more trade flexibility with Spoon, one of Mooch/Baker and Ward as expiring contracts.

In the end if the difference between cutting Mooch versus Spoon is just a one time 4 mil surcharge (the diff in their salaries x 2), I hope we keep Spoon. But I could understand if it went another direction.

 

The one thing that really upsets me about this exemption is it's happening this year. It helps out most teams a hell of a lot more than it does us. And it's called the "A. Houston exemption" for a reason.

The only player whi I want to dump whose contract is not expiring is Ward. It make a hell of a lot more sense to "shop" JHo than to cut him and I hope we don't do even that. Unless we get a starter we really want.

I do understand where NikeStrad is coming from here in defending the rationale behind Ford's thought, but I completely agree with Deuce: You can't dump someone you'll probably need just to save money. And most people here have no problems with Howard's contract.

In fact JHo's contract looks cheap compared to what happened to us in the Mav's series. Stro still has some "if's" surrounding him and I'd argue that JHo thus far was the only guy on our roster that really finally figured out how to play with T-Mac and Yao on the floor. I'd hate to lose this guy.

 

Yes, it really favors the rich teams. They pay less tax and also now get a share of the luxury & escrow tax - a double coup on their part. They will make their luxury tax cut and keep spending & spending.

 

We must keep JH if he is completely healthy or take the same PF risk as last year. If we cross the luxury tax line this year, cut Spoon or Baker. Besides Finley & Allan Houston, I don't think many other players of note will be cut. This whole one-time amnesty thing is not that a big deal for the NBA because it offers no salary cap relief.

 

Despite the Luxury Tax implications of Howard's deal - we cannot go into an NBA season with only three big men - Yao, Deke and Swift.

Spoon is an easy cut - he didn't play much - and he'll probably play less this year.

The rule is such a cop-out to the fiscally irresponsible teams - was there anyone who thought that the Houston deal was a good idea? Thankfully, it only affects the luxury tax, and not the salary cap.

 

The infernal A. Houston Exemption Rule has been something I've been wanting to get off my chest. He's likely one of the only ones that will get cut, maybe the only one. And what team does he play for?

Brian Grant is another name mentioned, what team does he play for?

And finally, guess what two teams would the league most like to see rebound into predominance?

Ugh.

Teams that are small market - and hence have had to be fiscally responsible for the most part - get no benefit whatsoever. I've heard no major media outlet focus on this injustice; instead they point out the rule is "very interesting". Oh wait, where are the major networks headquartered?

 

The rule will look a lot better if we sign Allan Houston for the veteran minimum, and he makes a legitimate comeback. I'm guessing we have a good shot at signing any ex-Knick. All he would have to do would be to stand out at the three point line, and heave open jumpers when either TMac or Yao is doubled. He could perhaps take Barry's place, coming off the bench for 20 minutes a game. Kind of like Eddie Johnson at the end of his career. Heck, even with the blown knee, he's still probably faster than Bullard ever was. A dead eye shooter can play in this league until about age 40, even when the speed goes.

 

Very similar games at this point, but Barry seems like someone that instantly doubles your team chemistry. I'd hate to mess with the chemistry too much after striking gold last year, having endured years of boneheaded play.

Your points are well taken, but I still think the benefit to the spend-crazy teams overwhelms the marginal benefit another team might get from a fringe-quality player like Houston/Finley/Grant at this point in their career. The whole scheme is a handout to the rich or 'elite' NBA franchises, as well as to those lucky players who get to double-dip, and the losers are the fiscally responsible. I still marvel at how the NY-based NBA elites had the audicity to put out such a pro-NY measure like this.

There, I've got it off my chest at least. We'll see if Houston (and maybe Grant) are the only ones to go when this all shakes out...

 

Shawn Kemp and the Badman were jokes but i would still take them with their small salaries compared to cash out Juwan. Juwan is going to be making 6+ Million for the next 4 thats right 4 years. Do you want to pay Juwan Howard 7.3million backing up SS when he is over 35 years old? Hes going to be making then our starter. Juwan might not even have anything left in the tank by then.It is a risk if Stromile dosent pan out and were stuck with nothing at the PF but it is a necceasry risk. Thats saving nearly 6 million a year for a BACKUP.If we cut Juwan now we have a chance at getting cap space next year.Juwan did a solid job for us last year but we have our future with SS and we can pay some bum 1 mil a year for 12 mins a game. Im glad you can compare stats but if Shawn Kemp started for Juwan's spot he could put up 8 and 6 which are close to his numbers. You cant just say well he averaged more points so lets keep him. Sorry bud that logic just dosent pan out. We dont want to become any more like the Knicks by paying our backups millions. CW will come off the books and unless we dont feel confident with SS wish Juwan the best of luck.Also that Guiness Draft commerical is no longer funny thanks to people like you who have probaly abused it to death.

 

That is wrong on two accounts. 1) We will not have cap-space in the forseeable future. Period. 2) This amnesty doesn't affect cap space, only luxury tax space.

We can't go into the season with only three reliable big men - all with duration issues - and hope that CBA invites and bench scrubs fill the minutes.

We have to pay Howard regardless of whether he's on the team
His contract counts towards our cap space regardles of whether he's on the team.

There's really no positive to cutting a key contributor like Howard.

 

Where is all this Kemp talk coming from?.. i heard he wants to comeback, but i'm pretty sure JVG aint gonna risk it to take on kemp's offcourt Problems. however, if he comes in anysort of BBall shape, he'll be just as good as howard.

 

Correct me if I'm wroing here, but, given the length of their respective contracts, isn't Finley actually a bigger payout than Allan Houston?

 

Hey, nWo ... I'd like to know who from other teams will potentially become available via the amnesty rule. Could you possibly post Ford's entire article or direct me to another listing? Thanks for your help.

 

All this salary cap talk is giving me a headache!!!

Ratify the freakin' CBA already!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I said a chance at cap space. If we cut Juwan we it still lowers our cap into less luxury tax plus all of our expiring contracts Moochi CW etc... Yao's contract extension wont kick in til 2 years so. The more we are out of luxury tax the closer we are to being under the cap. I wasnt talking about this year but next year or even the year after that.

 

Cutting Howard will have no impact on the Salary Cap. Yao's extension will go into effect in 1 year.