http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/nba/rumors/ Interesting they mention OA would be very difficult to trade after the trade dealline due to his contract considerations.
This article is so ridiculously mis-informing people its not even funny. Why would the media want to focus on his salary when it really shouldn't matter in the end as its the salary cap that really is the number that should matter to NBA Gm's and fans. Yes this is the total that a team trading for Asik will have to write a check out for, but its what counts against the cap that should be the only concern for fans. Asik's salary only counts 8.4 mil this year and 8.4 mil next year. Yes the fact that the owner will physically have to write out a check for 15 million next year will be a bump in the road for teams like the Clippers who have cheapskate owners, but where someone like Sterling would see this as a negative, an owner like Cuban might see it as a blessing since he would essentially get a center worth 10 to 12 million a year, pay a little extra off the record, and only have it count 8.4 mil against his cap so he can make even more upgrades to his roster. Asik's salary shouldn't really affect that many trade scenarios, but I do agree with the writer here that his value will decrease after this February.... However that's more to do with the fact that he will be a free agent after next year... the extra you have to pay him off the record is a caveat.
It never talks about the salary cap hit but the article is not wrong, how is it misinforming? You don't think paying OA almost 20 million dollars for one year may get a team to reconsider trading for him. Some NBA owners are cheap, thankfully OKCs was.
Its misinforming because fans and GM's shouldn't care about how much money that player is getting checks for. Its the salary cap management that matters when it involves deals getting done that matters. Its a caveat yes when dealing with cheap owners but it shouldn't keep Morey from dealing him any more than before. Some owners will balk at that, and some will see it as opportunity since they can get a starting center valued more than 10mil + for only 8.4 against their cap next year. Also paying him off the cap might actually help teams save lux tax money since almost half of his salary doesn't count against the cap. In the end, it shouldn't matter and if its brought up a ton its really just a way for teams to try and try and bring him value down as a negotiation ploy to get a better deal.
This. Doesn't matter that an owner will have to pay Asik 15M give or take in the last year of his deal. All that matters is a team is getting a defensive big that would only count as an 8m or so cap hit the rest of the way.
I would love to get Turner and Hawes, but with the way they're playing Hinkie would probably ask for Parsons as well...
$7M extra matters to those footing the bill. But it can be partially or even entirely offset if (1) Houston pays the cash allowed to be put into a trade (can be done this summer, the 2013-14 allotment is at least mostly used up in the Royce White deal) and (2) Houston takes back some extra unwanted contract. Houston is allowed to take back roughly $12.6M in 13-14 contract for Asik alone (150% of Asik's cap hit plus $100k). It can take back more if the team throws in other guys (even some of the minimum wage guys). For example, if Houston is to deal Asik for Jeff Green, they can take back a Brandon Bass or Courtney Lee if Boston is really worried about $.
Yes That's why the focus on the $15 mill in the last year always seemed strange to me. When the $8.3 million cap hit is what can't be altered, and that level is fine. The actually salary can be handled any number of different ways if the team wanting Asik's services could not accept paying $15 mill in the third year.
It matters to the owner. Lots of owners aren't willing to pay 15m on a 8m contract, so there'll be less interest in Asik than there would be if he had a straight 8m/yr contract. It's an unattractive contract because Morey WANTED it to be an unattractive contract so Chicago wouldn't match. But as long as we trade him this season, it shouldn't be too much of a problem. Whoever gets him will end up paying 20m over 2 years, and an elite defensive center is easily worth that.
Of course 15 million dollars matters, because its 15 million dollars that owner has to pay. Some of you guys live in a fantasy world.
owners are smart enough to realize that, if you pay a player $1M one year, and 19M the next, and if the cap hit is say, $10M per year, that it's not a bad deal. OMG!!! your paying him so much that one year!!! well, yeah. because you get a discount on the other year...
This is only true if they get him for a majority of the cheap year, otherwise you're just paying up the wazoo for Asik.
I agree. It really depends on the owners. Every year we see teams selling their picks for different reasons--cap space, trade for an established player, $3million, etc. If money doesn't matter to the owners, teams will never sell their 1st and 2nd round picks simply for the sake of cash, but we know some teams have done it before. Also, why would some teams give up assets to get below luxury tax threshold (just to save a few million dollars under the old CBA) if money doesn't matter to the owners? Note: I am not saying those are the right decisions, but Asik's salary could be a major factor for certain teams. Having said that, I agree with Carl that there are many ways for Rockets to address the money issue. The negotiation may take several months though since the other team may want us to take a bad contract. If we wait until the trade deadline, it will depend on whether the other team is fighting for postseason hopes. If not, getting Asik will lower their draft position (they are getting "worse" for the current season). Those teams will most likely not be contenders next season, so they have to consider if it is worth for them to spend $15M on Asik next season. Also, Asik will be a free agent after next season, so they can try to sign him by that time if they really like his game. For those teams, the only advantage for getting Asik now is that if other teams offer him similar contracts, he is more likely to stay with them. On the other hand, teams that are fighting for playoff position will be interested in Asik, but I am not sure if Morey is willing to improve another playoff team in the same conference.
i dont get why people saying this....his numbers were tyson chandler #s and he is an expiring deal at 15mil...the cap is only 8mil anyway. even paying him 15mil which is the same as tyson chandler is worth it. He is also healthy unlike Tyson. Last year's stats: Chandler 10.4 pts, 10.7 reb Asik 10.1 pts, 11.7 reb
The only reason Chicago and New York didnt match the contracts was because if the poison pill was matched, the cap hit for those teams would be 15m in the 3rd year. Add that too luxury tax penalty and that would've been way too hefty. If we trade him now there is no cap hit of 15 mill. You just have to pay 15m but with a 8.4m cap hit
Bima has been helping me out on twitter to understand the real dollar <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/dewah07">@dewah07</a> $10.86M on Dec. 15. Closer to $12.5M at the trade deadline.</p>— David Weiner (@BimaThug) <a href="https://twitter.com/BimaThug/statuses/402137295714660354">November 17, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Bima also worked out <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Assuming Asik is traded Dec. 15 (when FAs like Millsap can be traded), his salary over remainder of contract is $63,865 per "season day"...</p>— David Weiner (@BimaThug) <a href="https://twitter.com/BimaThug/statuses/401797311292276736">November 16, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> worse case scenario for the new owner of Asik (my own workings) If dealt at deadline 5,225,000 – 3,534,712.5 = 1,690,287.5 (year 2 salary – what has already been paid and in year 2 which is nov1 -deadline date) 14,898,938 + 1,690,287.5 = 16,589,225.5 (year 3 salary + remainder year 2) 16,589,225.5/ 170 + 55 = $73,629.89 (per NBA day salary as a posed to Bimas 63k for Dec15, also 170 signifys days in a NBA calender year for year 3 and the 55 is the number of NBA days post Trade deadline in year 2) Year 2 average 55 * 73,629.89 = $4,049,643.95 Year 3 acerage 170 * 73,629.89 = $12,517,081.3 so after all of that the owner would only pay at worst just over 4 million in year 2 and 12.5 million in year 3 and when you think of other centres and what they make you can see even the 12.5 million dollar figure is not a huge amount if that was in fact his cap hit <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Asik comps for defensive starting Cs (avg salary): McGee ($11.3M), Bogut ($12.5M), Jordan ($11.2M), Sanders ($11M), Chandler ($14.4M).</p>— David Weiner (@BimaThug) <a href="https://twitter.com/BimaThug/statuses/401801512042901504">November 16, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> thanks again bima for the tweets recently to me im the guy in the stands your your parsons who has actually fist bumped me
Asik is good value in relation to his cap hit. In relation to actually money spent next year 15 million, not so much. And for those of you acting like Asik is as good as Chandler are dumb. Chandlers ability to finish around the basket is 100x better than Asik.
