WOW! That's how much Garnett can make when his current contract ends. Will he demand that much, when it'll definitely handcuff the team's future moves, or will he be a team player & accept less? Would any team be willing to pay that much money for one player (Jordan in his prime being the exception)? Where will the madness stop? http://www.startribune.com/stories/503/1018648.html Wolves, Garnett haven't started contract discussions Steve Aschburner Star Tribune Published Jan 9 2002 The Timberwolves are winning like never before. Their chemistry is strong, the roster appears to be deep and Kevin Garnett again has some emerging teammates to help shoulder the load. Might this be a good time for Garnett and the Wolves to begin talks of a long-term contract extension to enhance his and the franchise's stability? Apparently not. Neither the Wolves nor Garnett and his agent, Andy Miller, has broached the subject so far. "We haven't discussed it with them. They haven't discussed it with us," Miller said Tuesday. "Yes, there's a good feeling and everything seems to be moving in the right direction. But in fairness to him, he's only 25 years old and he wants to see how this all plays out." Under the NBA collective bargaining agreement, Garnett -- who has two full seasons remaining on the six-year, $126 million contract he signed in October 1997 -- has been eligible since October to sign an extension. Because he is one of the few players "grandfathered" into the current collective bargaining agreement (his salary exceeds the current maximums), a new deal could include a 12.5 percent raise over his 2003-04 salary of $28 million. So it conceivably could pay him $31.5 million in 2004-05 and be worth $192.5 million over five seasons. (No player can be under contract for more than seven seasons.) Miller said he would welcome extension talk this summer. "Ask me again in four or five months," the agent said. That would be just the priciest bit of business on the Wolves' offseason calendar. Among their other chores: •Re-signing guard Chauncey Billups. Billups has an opt-out clause in the deal he signed two years ago and will be eligible for a contract up to six years, starting at the league's average salary (about $4.5 million). •Re-signing Felipe Lopez. Lopez also has an opt-out this summer. •Retaining Gary Trent. Trent, playing for the veteran's minimum ($715,850), will attract bigger offers if he stays healthy and productive. •Fending off competition for Rasho Nesterovic. The Wolves can hang onto their improving center for 2002-03 but they will have to sign him for only one year or match another team's offer or negotiate a long-term deal. •Offering an extension to Wally Szczerbiak. They could wait and take the same path as with Nesterovic. But aggressive teams have signed their most promising young players to long-term contracts before their fourth seasons. Szczerbiak could be in that class. •Deciding the fates of free agents-to-be Dean Garrett, Sam Mitchell, Loren Woods and William Avery. Coach Flip Saunders said all the business issues would be addressed this summer. "There's a saying in the NBA, 'Live for the present. Don't worry about the past, don't worry about the future,'" he said.
No way he gets that kind of money. All Minnesota has to do is offer him $12MM or tell him to walk. If he walks, he gets something like $7MM from anyone else, so I'd bet he takes the offer.
Where did you come up with the $7 mill salary? When his contract expires, he'll be an 8 year veteran. I would expect him to get somewhere between the maximum & 105% of his last year salary of $28 mill. The current maximum for an 8 year veteran in 01/02 is $12.75 mill, which will surely increase by 04/05. Since he falls under the "grandfathered" clause, he could receive up to 105% of his last year's salary, even if he goes to another team. Here's the link to "Coon's CBA FAQ" & the rule that clarifies the point. By the way, I doubt he'll get much more than the current maximum at that time. That might explain why Minnesota is holding back on the extension. http://www.members.home.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#9 10. Are there exceptions to the maximum salary? Yes. In multi-year contracts, only the first season's salary is subject to the maximum (but there are restrictions about how big raises can be from year to year). Also, free agents whose salary for the previous season was higher than the maximum can sign for 105% of their salary in the previous season. So if Michael Jordan hadn't retired prior to the 98-99 season, he could have signed in 98-99 for 105% of his $30 million 97-98 salary, or $31.5 million. A free agent does not need to remain with the same team in order to qualify for this 105% exception, although the team that signs him is subject to the same salary cap restrictions as with any other free agent.
why is kg getting so much, if im gonna anteup that much to one guy he better be a 30 pint 15 rebound 8 asist and 5 blk guy, not barely 21 pts and 11 boards and 4 assists and 1 swat
Since Minny's got more players to re-sign than they know what to do with, particularly Nesterovic, maybe we can steal Loren Woods from them on the sly.
I remember a line I read in a magazine or newspaper somewhere...right after Garnett signed that $126 million deal, he was at practice and was having a really tough shooting day. After missing an easy shot, he said that he couldn't buy a basket...One of his teammates said, "Yes you can!" classic...
I don't think they'll pay him $31.5 million, but I doubt they'll be able to make him take a substantial paycut. Other teams can sign him to 105% of his old salary, but only if they have the cap-space. They won't have the space for $30 million, but probably would be willing to spend $20+ million.
<B>Where did you come up with the $7 mill salary? When his contract expires, he'll be an 8 year veteran. I would expect him to get somewhere between the maximum & 105% of his last year salary of $28 mill. The current maximum for an 8 year veteran in 01/02 is $12.75 mill, which will surely increase by 04/05.</B> I was thinking of Pippen's contract and used that as a basis for what a "veteran" could get. I thought I remembered him getting about $7-$8MM in the first year of his deal with us. I didn't realize it had gone up so much. Anyway, what I meant to infer was that no one else is going to pay anywhere near $30MM to him, so Minnesota certainly doesn't have to offer that kind of money. First off, there's only one or two teams each year with that $15-$20MM+ kind of cap room. Second, if there are other free agents available, they might also be in-demand. Third, if you did have $20MM and there were multiple quality free agents out there, teams may prefer to try to acquire 2 instead of 1. While KG is good (damn good), he hasn't shown himself to be the type of player that can single-handledly make a team dominant. Minnesota has been up-and-down in his years, and he hasn't turned them into anything more than a 6-8th seed. Any team that has $20MM available is most likely a bad team, and they need people who can market and carry them, and I don't think KG is that player. In the end, I think most high-priced free agents end up staying with their teams because they realize the other options out there aren't quite as good (see Chris Webber).
I have to disagree. KG is highly marketable, he's one of the MOST marketable players out there. Besides Kobe/Shaq, I can't think of one that is MORE marketable. Webber, Iverson, Duncan, are equally marketable, but not more. Besides a 6-8 seed is better than anything the Rockets have done in a while... (ouch, that hurts...) But I'm biased towards him. Yes, he's overpaid, but at least he works his ass off to get better and to get his team better. There are dozens of examples of guys who've gotten their paydays, then gone into the crapper. KG has actually gotten better, and his team is getting better as well. I guess we'll see what happens. Anything could happen in the next 2+ years...
The Wolves better tread cautiously. To players money is largely viewed as respect. The last the thing the Wolves want to do is piss off KG and have him sign elsewhere for 13 million because he was insulted by the 16 million offer when he expected 20. It is not like the difference between 13, 16 or 20 million in practice will make much a difference to KG, but it is a symbollic game. Better to sign a happy KG for 20 even if you lose out on a 4-7 million guy you can't sign because of it.
