With all due respect, your post is riddled with problems. Shorter contracts aren't always better. If you got a player who is obviously worth it, longer is always better. You can only use a MLE every other year, IIRC. ...and we will NEVER be under the cap as long as we have Yao and TMac. That's pretty much a fact. It just won't happen. Have you ever noticed the only teams that go after big name FA's are mostly teams with no max players (which means they probably suck)? ...we have two. So if you want to clear cap space to pick up a big FA, then you gotta cut your roster and be a lottery team. Other than all that, I agree with you.
You have MLE every year. You have the "lower level" bi-annual exception (at around $2 million, the one Rockets used on Derek Anderson a couple years ago) every other year. which will happen in just 2 years, when TMac's contract comes off the books and the Rockets have the room to chase Lebron (or we can settle for Wade, Bosh, etc). This, of course, assumes we don't give TMac an extension or add signficiant long term deals to reduce cap room. I wonder what happens to Tracy and Yao after their current contract runs out... don't know if either will take a pay cut, given age, injury history.
there are few teams in the league that are in a position to make solid long-term offers to players. Yes, it's better for the Lebron's of the world. But for everyone else, I disagree. Even if they are "worth it", once you have a player's bird rights, you can always resign them. I don't really understand the point, for example, of signing Baron Davis to a super long term contract. Baron with the Clippers is just as likely (if not moreso) to not work as to work. Fortunately, the Clippers got a really good deal on a salary per year basis. Similarly, I don't think the Warriors have been "screwed" this offseason. Sure, they lost Baron for nothing, but please explain to me how they were about to win an NBA championship with him? Might as well go in a different direction. Of course, players want the longer term contracts and that's market, so you have to go there. don't think so that's what i said. we won't be under the cap. TMac's contract comes off the books soon, at which point we would be far enough under the cap to sign someone else, but why wait 2 years for that to happen? That makes no sense. It's not clear you got my point at all. The point is we are trying to improve and win now. I strongly believe Posey, even if not the perfect fit on the Rockets, IS the type of player who would have good value, even at MLE type money, for a number of teams throughout the league. That's just my opinion, though. That said, the only reasons i would not go after a Posey type player (even on a longer term type contract) are all lost opportunity costs - i.e. by going after Posey were are prevented from going after a better player/fit either this year, or in future years.
Who would you rather have Head or Posey? I will take Posey every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Again the upgrade is about value with someone who can atleast help. Head has tiny value and dont bring any thing close to what Posey can bring us. Late in games i would much rather have Posey and Battier on the court with T-Mac then Alston and Head. The point of the signing has enough reason to go after him. A) Match-up B) Force Boston into a finacial mistake C) Provide more rest for T-Mac untill the last 3 minutes of playoff games and season D) Replacing trade chips E) Signing a proven veteran F) Provide the team more options to look into G) T-Mac at point for some minutes or crunch time minutes
If Posey wants the full mle, then it becomes a choice between him and landry since landry's contract will tie up a good chunk of the mle. If I they have to choose between Landry and Posey, I hope they go with Landry.
I thought they can still match any offer up to the MLE amount since no team can offer him more then the MLE because that is all the Rockets can pay themselves. I thought that is the rule It would put us over the thresehold, but Les has already said for that right player he dont mind doing so. Morey has already indicated that he has every intention to match Landry's offer. So it sounds to me they have a double MLE to work with at most. Regardless on who we sign for the MLE we still hold the right to match any offer as long as its not more than the MLE.
True when Posey and Battier were teammates in 04, Posey was the starter and Battier came off the bench all but one game.
There are different categories that we can use to sign a player, such as Bird, early Bird, MLE, and what people here call LLE. You only have so much MLE that you can spend (something over $5 million this year). You can't spend more than that in MLE money.
Are you sure about that? I think the rules are mis leading. It layes in the Rockets hands if they are willing to match up to the MLE amount (5.8 million), Since no team can offer him more than that, this dont mean we have no options to use the MLE on someone else and still not be able match up to that amount for Landry. You can spend more then the MLE this season ( up to 5.8 million) to match Landry holding the rights. The 5.8 million is just a measuring stick of what other teams can offer, having Landry's rights gives us an option to spend more if needed to match or let him walk. When the article said Rockets can only match up to the 5.8 million as long as it dont exceed that amount of the MLE, it really means they have the option to match up to that amount because no team can offer him more then that.
You are reading the rules about the MLE correctly, but the problem is this. If a NBA team is over the salary cap. You can only bring in a player using certain exceptions: Bird rights, Trade Exception, Rookie, etc. As far as I can read, Landry does not fall into any of those exceptions (I'm not a 100% sure I understand the Early-Bird & Non-Bird Exceptions, and who qualifies for those two). If Landry does not qualify for these, meaning we have to use the MLE, LE, or Vet Minimum restrictions. Right now it looks like the LE and Vet min won't appease his agent, meaning we will have to use part of the MLE.
"Baker, however, said Landry is generating interest around the league. The Rockets can match any offer Landry receives, as long as it fits within their salary cap limitations or exceptions. If he receives and accepts an offer, the Rockets would have to choose whether to match it without the further examination, unless Landry reverses his position and undergoes more testing." Key word: limitations "or" exceptions it means we have the right to match up to the level amount of 5.8 million.
But that money we give him still has to be applied under one of the exceptions. Most of the time for restricted FA, they fall in the Bird, Early Bird, & Non-Bird exemptions so then you would be right. I'm not sure Landry does.
http://www.yardbarker.com/nba/articles/Where_is_the_Money/286135 Posey's agent says that Boston and San Antonio are the finalists, but they both are in the same situation as the Lakers.
BARF!!!!!! I guess if I had to pick between the two i'd prefer he went to Boston. Granted, I don't understand why he'd even want to play in Boston in the first place. Sure, competing for a title is quite the incentive but with Pierce/Allen logging 40 MPG he's essentially replacing Posey's 20 MPG role off the bench. In that scenario, he's nuts if he thinks he's even going to remotely sniff the 22 PPG he averaged this year. Oh well, i'd take that scenario over seeing him go to SA and replacing Michael Finley. Maggette on the Spurs makes them very, very dangerous.
Posey is just testing the field. If he fancies the Rockets its only because of more money and playing time. Someone mentioned Boston and San Antonio are the finalist. He would get less playing time in SA because of Ginobli, Finley and Bowen. I would not be surprised he remains in Boston.
Not really, he is to be used here just like their anyways. Allen/Pierce cant play 40MPG every games especially during a season.
