Reports are that Odom wants 9 mil per or more. Let's see how bad Miami wants him. Supposedly pretty bad. I don't see Miami offering the Clips anything they want (no cheap contracts, rookies or picks they'd part with). So it's just match game time; and only if Odom signs an offer sheet. Maybe he'll wait and go unrestricted. Right now, any S&T suitor has to convince Odom's agent Odom gets a better deal than the Miami offer. Then they have to convince the Clippers to take the deal. I don't think that's gonna happen.
just for the record: $9m/yr is what Rashard Lewis got. He actually kinda got more. Reports were $60-65m for 7yrs guaranteed money, and upwards of $15m more in performance incentives.
HP, I think he's referring to the minimum team salary described here: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#7 . It says, in part: Since the cap will be $43.84 million, the minimum salary Sterling must pay one way or the other is $32.88 million. Who knows where the Clippers' payroll currently stands?
HeyP should have his own salary guru info service. Dingbat radio hosts could have him on for 15 minutes to discuss player movement. You could host a pay site with your "insider" takes .
JuanValdez, OK, I knew I must not have understodd something, because NIKEstrad said it more than once. I thought he was talking about minimum salary in terms of your salary total in terms of the cap, which is what I defined. I actually thought that was the only definition of minimum salary. learn something new every day. thx NIKEstrad and JuanValdez.
I believe that NIKE is correct. At the start of the free agency period, the Clips were said to be $20M under the minimum. They signed Brand and Maggette for deals starting at around $17M. So, they should still be somewhere around $3M under the minimum, which means that they are nowhere near the actual cap. They could sign Odom to a max deal and still not be over the cap. I'd have to believe that they will match any deal that Odom gets.
thanks Juan, that's what I was referring to. aelliott- I think the Odom situation is an interesting one. The Clippers have been spending (partly out of need), but I'm still not sure how they're gonna play Odom. I think it actually depends on Quentin Richardson. Right now, here's how their lineup shakes out minus Odom... Jaric/Dooling Richardson Maggette/Foulkes (I think they're keeping him?) Brand/Wilcox Kaman/Ely/Zhi-Zhi With Odom, Maggette starts in the backcourt, and Richardson off the bench. The question IMO is, would Sterling pay a decent amount for a bench player next year (Richardson)? If not, it comes down to Odom now vs. Richardson next year. The advantage of Richardson would be that it seems that the Brand/Maggette offer sheets included big time signing bonuses, and potentially Odom's would as well. Passing on Odom, and thus waiting and signing Richardson next year would make the signing bonus stuff a little more palatable. Of course I've been drooling over Odom being a Rocket for 3+ years now. Only way I see it happening would be sending Rice to Utah for nothing, then convincing a sign and trade using Nachbar, picks, and the trade exception created. Juuust a little out there.
Would Quentin even want to be just a "decent" backup to Odom/Maggette? I think he'd be looking to move to a starting position somewhere, especially if he gets his 3p% back up. Do you really see the Clips basing a decision on Odom by looking ahead to Quentin. This could all still be about Odom's slipping performance, pot situation and injuries and people just not offering him enough to sign...much like how Rashard didn't get what he wanted for so long. btw: Doesn't Brand have a max contract? If so, a signing bonus can't take him over the max, and it's hit towards salary is spread over the course of his contract. btwbtw: does this ESPN analyst make any sense: "The Clippers matched on Brand after just three days to free up Miami's cap space, figuring that would convince the Heat to make Odom a firm offer. Matching on Maggette now is supposed to tell the Heat and Nuggets that this might be the time to strike on Odom, since Sterling is still Sterling. No way he keeps Odom by taking on a third long-term contract. Right?" His point is that Sterling is using offers sheets to establish the market. Not too surprising. But if that is true, then what difference does the timing of Brand's match have to do with helping out Miami give Odom an offer, so he can match it? What difference would it make to Sterling when the offer came if he just wanted to sign him? I'm confused. And here I was thinking they matched Brand on first day of receiving the offer in hand, to send Odom that they were serious so come on board because Dunleavy wanted to get them all back.
HP, One interpretation is that the Clips want Odom back and they're letting Miami do all of the negotiating and then are planning to simply step in and match. Smart move if they believe that a) Odom won't want to resign with the Clips or b) a Miami negotiated contract would be alot more reasonable than anything that the Clippers would negotiate. Either way, I think that it shows that the Clippers do indeed intend to retain Odom. Otherwise, they could simply renounce him or do nothing.
aelliott, you know the very popular opinion that it is better to be a high lottery team than a mediocre team with little playoff hopes and mediocre mid-round selections. Well, that's what could be happening all these years with Sterling, just that it occurred over a very extended period of making bad lotto selections. So, Sterling gets labelled by fans as cheap, when he might actually being applying a very popular fan strategy, and just has never thought it wise to say it publically--do any owners say they would rather lose than be mediocre? Looking at the history: Sterling's first round picks were not that good. So,the theory goes, that he chose to stay a high lottery team by not resigning any of them, waiting for the day to come where his picks really did give him serious hope. Only then does he start spending. Isn't that the approach many people say is the right approach. Afterall, he did try to win, if you look at some of his coaching signings. He was over the cap for 6 of 7yrs in the '90s. He signed Larry Brown. He signed Bill Fitch to a big contract. He had to keep paying Fitch his contract after firing him, because Fitch couldn't find a job. Now he signed Dunleavy to big bucks. I agree; he'll either match Odom or Odom will not get an offer sheet from anyone....then it comes down to whether Odom wants to fight for more than the 3yrs $24m that we heard about (which could be done with performance-based incentives ala Rashard Lewis), or Odom passes on the money. If he doesn't get an offer sheet, I think it comes down to Odom comtemplating playing with Maggette and Brand or not really caring about the them, and going all out for unrestricted FAncy $$.
HP, aelliott, everybody else, what do you think Odom's market value is? IMO it should not be higher than Maggette. Maggette was the better player last year. Maggette isn't the passer nor quite the rebounder Odom is, the he is but a better shooter, much better at getting to and better at converting at the line, more efficient offensively (best PPS on the Clips) and the better defender. Maggette also has increased his game each year and looks like steadily on the rise, Odom though he is similarly young doesn't seem any different than his first 18 months in the league. You also have to consider questions about work ethic, potential drug suspensions, etc, that are relevant to Odom. In sum, if I am the Clips and am very cautious before spending big money long term contracts I probably would not match a deal above 6 years 42 mil for Odom. If I were the Clips I would try to be proactive and try to trade Odom if for nothing more than a 1st round pick from Miami or Utah and cap space. Miami especially might do that because they don't have to risk Odom getting matched or overpaying Odom thinking they have show bigger money than they need to keep the LAC from matching. To me a S&T for 5 years 35 mil for Odom for a Miami's 1st rounder and Rasual Butler should be reasonable for all parties. Odom may balk, but he may get screwed by taking a 1 year deal being frozen out of LAC and having a nonproductive year and really be in a bad position like Kandi next year. Miami might balk, but you could save youself 20+ million for only a #1 and Rausal Butler.
HP, I see what you're saying about Sterling, but I really think you give him too much credit. There is some anecdotal evidence about his cheapness outside of team payroll (the one that comes to mind at the moment is his displeasure at having to pay for his players' socks). Maybe the rumors are unfounded but I know there are several circulating and that robustness makes you wonder. Plus, they are buttressed by some of Sterling's legal troubles. On the docket at the moment is a sexual harrassment (or is it abuse?) suit and a racial discrimination suit. Neither directly relate to his cheapness, but they don't exactly attest to his integrity either. Another thing I have to wonder is, if he was relying on the lottery to provide the cornerstones of his franchise but was consistently coming up empty while other teams came up with franchise players, why didn't he fire the guy making the picks? Coaches got fired about once a year for most of his tenure, but Elgin Baylor enjoys some long stability. If anything, frequent coach firings would indicate that the owner felt that the talent was good but wasn't being used right. I think the real reason for the firings, though, was that he wanted a quick fix for his team without bothering with the underlying faults in the foundation. So, he wasn't fishing the lottery in any serious way, that is, looking for the big fish -- that would require a good fisherman, not Baylor. He was just finding some young, exciting talent cheap. That's not to say there isn't a question of cost-effectiveness. Winning brings fans and if you have a guy (Brand) who can bring wins, you want to keep him if you can. And, when the man's salary is capped well below market-value by the CBA, he is certainly a good buy. That Sterling would be interested in winning for the sake of making money, though, is a far cry from him being interested in spending money for the sake of winning. In the winning-profiting ratio, there is a point of diminishing returns that I doubt we'll see Sterling cross.
Desert Scar, I'm thinking 3yr $24m is about right on, and if he wants more yrs, they'll make it incentive based--topping out near Rashard's numbers. the guy does have a lot of baggage for his suspensions and injuries, and that won't help him in negotiations, with any team. imo, he's just going to have to get used to fact that his suspensions blew millions and millions of dollars for him. The deal with a 3yr is that is what Duncan did in order to get to the higher 7yr vet max limit. If Odom rights himself and becomes an allstar that many think he can be, then a 3yr could get him the most money in the long run. For your first quote, I don't follow him too much to really know if i'm giving him too much credit or not. Hell, I didn't even read any articles that consistently mentioned the minimum salary that NIKEstrad mentioned. I look at myself more applying Ockam's Razor to the plethora of educated guesses of what is in Sterling's mind. One thing that I think has to be true, is people who think he doesn't care about winning at all are probably not giving him *enough* credit, more than I'm giving him "too much credit." I don't see how a man chooses to buy a sports franchise without having some interest in the sport of winning. There's better invest out there. Maybe the deal is he was excited early, then got jaded with injuries and mediocrity and took a big loss in 1994 when he was Top 10 salary in the league. Who knows? As for your second quote, that is consistent with what I am suggesting. He probably is indeed interested enough in winning to look for "quick fixes," but not interested with a mediocre team with a $50m payroll fighting for ticket sales and TV revenue against the Lakers. I do give the guy enough credit to say that his franchise location is primed to be a serious losing proposition if he gives guys like Bison Dele, Maurice Taylor and Kandi the money they were asking for. His situation is not that common around the league. He can't play on hometown loyalty when he's in the same town as the Lakers. Whether he's cheap or not, I think there's an argument that he has to be until he can be sure that he can compete for revenue with the Lakers. Brand is a draw, and Odom might become more of one, for being flashier. I also think that the Clippers are just naturally not much of an attraction to any Free Agents ... players don't want to be in the Laker's shadow, either. As far as player attitudes contributing to losses being his fault, well, revolving doors of coaches does that to a lot of teams. There are more than one destinations in the league where players don't want togo, and they just play for stats to get themselves out of there. I guess I just don't know enough about Sterling to know why his rap is so bad versus other owners. Maybe it's because he is an easy target in a big media town who will write about him, and maybe it is a little bit that he has stuck it out for so long, where many owners would have left or sold, which makes him look complacent or uncaring...which is probably unfair vs moving or quitting.
quick cap question. If the Clipper's make Odom's contract heavy on incentives (the Likely to be achieved vs the Unlikely), then they count against the cap, whether achieved (and paid) or not. So, could Sterling use Likely incentives to clear the minimum salary requirements, or does it have to be actual paychecks going out? Also, making it heavy on Likely incentives is a way to delay payment to offset the bonus that Maggette (and maybe Brand) are getting. fyi: Unlikely incentives are stuff like becoming MVP, or Clippers winning 55 games, or Shaq shooting 70% freethrows. Those incentives don't count against the cap, until achieved. Likely incentives are things like playing 70 games each of 3yrs (injury protection).
Has Odom played 70 games in a season yet? - Oh, ok, I checked, season 1 and 2 - 76 games, then 29 and 49. Not a good average. Hmm...don't "likely" incentives need some historical track record - eg - hitting yr average? Might have to be 16pts, 4.5 asst (and 3.3 to), 7 boards. 44% shooting, .31 3pts. Gee, not too impressive. The triple doubles are great, the passes are impressive, but... Great talent - not applied in any systematic way. Does Dunleavy have the 9 mil. $ key to use that skill set with Brand and Mags? Much as I like Odom - I'd say NO. They still need shooters, more than anything, on that team.
Very interesting question and one I'm sure you'd have to address to Larry Coon. I would guess Likely Incentives would count against the minimum since they count against the cap. But, I could easily see it going the other way too. It would be a very cool trick if it worked and you happened to be a very cheap owner who wanted to pay as little as possible on payroll.
Well, the idea is Likely bonuses would be met, but a delayed payment upon achieving the incentive. The idea is mostly to offset his signing bonuses. Note that his signing bonuses must be paid upfront, while their cap hit each yr is just the average spread out. The incentive pay is more the opposite of that. Anyhoot, Rashard got huge incentives. It can come down as a compromise..."I'll meet you half way, but the other half of it has to be in the form of Likely incentives." Where the incentives are merely insurance to keep his performance up to his contract pay standards. You can probably also tie it to standard business incentives where your set bonus kicks in if a certain BRI number is met, each year. Incentives aren't cheap to me...they are insurance.
<i>HP, aelliott, everybody else, what do you think Odom's market value is? </i> DS, Sounds to me like you and HP are stating what you think Odom's true value is. His market value is completely different, that's whatever somebody will pay for him. You guys are both perfectly correct about all the negatives related to Odom. But, he's still got a huge upside and nowdays, teams pay for upside. Somebody will give him a longer deal for more money. It always seems like when a team has lots of cap space and they can't find anybody to take their money, then they get anxious and end up overpaying a player in order to sign somebody. I'd be surprised if Odom didn't get at least a $50M+ deal.
