I think the writer you're quoting is misinterpreting her source. Up until I read the very end, I got the picture that Morey would be willing to take on Dalembert's contract if the Rockets can get Igoudala + at least one of Philly's young prospects too. This would fit with the idea that Morey would have to be "knocked over" in order to take on that contract.
Can the Rockets get a good player for McGrady? LINK Can an insider post the entire article? Thanks in advice.
I agree option 2 is best, but if they do option 1 then this requires Morey to stay aggressive in more moves, we can't sit around and do nothing more and expect things to happen. Maybe he is willing to take on Dalemebert with Iggy only if this means getting Butler in the process.
The way i see it is Philly does Iggy+Dalembert. Then since we won't be able to sign Scola we move him with Ariza for Butler. Hang on to Cook so we can resign Lowry. At this point moving forward i'd much rather have Chase then Scola especially since Landry is here and will need more minutes. Would Washington do this deal? They would not do Artest because he was expiring, so this time around we offer Ariza with Scola. This is the only way i'd see management taking on Dalembert, but Washington would probably want Budinger too.
Nobody has mentioned the possibility of just releasing Dalembert after we get him. We can negotiate his release with him, and simultaneously reduce the cap hit. He's making $11.3 million this year, $12.2 million next year. We all know that nobody is going to want to pay him those amounts, but he has to believe that somebody will pay him decent money if we make him an FA. He has $6.7 million due for the rest of the year. Let's say we buy him out for $7.6 million, which is about 40% of the rest of the contract. He could then sign with whichever team he wants. If he can get 60% of his current salary from the new team, about $7.2 million a year, he's breaking even. He wouldn't then be stuck on the 76ers. Also, if we pay him the whole thing at once, up front, he will probably agree to take a little less. The cap hit is then basically the buy-out amount. I'm a little fuzzy about this year, though, since he's already been paid a good chunk at the higher rate. But, assuming he's paid 40% of what remains on the contract: he's already been paid $4.6 this year, we pay him $2.7 more for this year, $4.9 million next year. He'd have made $7.3 this year, and $12.2 million for the 2 years, versus the $23.5 he was going to make. My guess is that we save $7.3 million in cap next year, which lets us re-sign Scola. Again, what I'm not clear on is how this season affects things; Larry Coon's examples assume the buy-out is at the beginning of the year. If we don't do this before 1/10, this season's money is guaranteed, and he can't even agree to take less, though I guess we can just say the reduction all takes place next season. If you remember, when we traded Pippen away, we immediately released most of the players that Portland gave us. I think this also happened when NY traded Steve Francis, though I don't remember exactly.
The whole point I was making about Dalembert's contract was that it would likely prevent the Rockets from being able to take on ANY additional salary. Trading Ariza/Scola for Butler would probably save Les about $4M or so in salary and taxes next season over what it would cost to re-sign Scola. But either way, Les is paying a TON of luxury tax, on top of a seriously bloated team salary. That is why I think it would be more likely at that point for Scola to either be traded for a future draft pick or just renounced at the end of the year. Just better not to make the Iguodala/Dalembert at all. No player in his right mind would leave $13M on the table in a down economy. Nice thinking, but no way in hell Dalembert would agree to that. Even if he was, I think his agent would threaten to kill him if he did.
What he has right now is $12.2 mil to play in Philly next year. We'd be giving him the chance to pick for whom he plays, and to get a contract that goes past next year. Think about it - he's negotiating with some teams that need him for the playoff stretch, not teams that are about to start the season. Let's use that $5 mil figure (though I think he could do better than that): We give him $6.5-7 million per year through the end of the contract, and we save $5 million cap hit on Year 2. OK, let's say you'd want to hang onto that $12.2 mil guaranteed for next year. What if you thought you'd make $5, and we offer $8 million? You look to make $13 mil, versus the $12.2. Actually, the tough part here is, you need a team that has $5 mil in cap space, though if they did, you could optionally sign for 1-2 years.
Probably because they gave Steve the entire amount remaining or an extremely high percentage of the amount. <hr> From the descriptions of his play, Dalembert sounds similar to K Cato and content to cash his checks, so the quality of the team that he is playing on is a low criteria - priority for him. You are suggesting that Dalembert takes a significant <i>haircut</i> and expect to get <i>lucky</i> in signing with another team. Under your <i>Buyout</i> scenario, he would lose his <i>Bird Rights</i> and I can't imagine his agent signing off on that. You keep suggesting teams that he could pick from for the Playoffs, yet most of the better teams already have large payrolls and they aren't going to <i>throw money</i> at Dalembert for the remainder of this season and in future seasons. <b> Since you seem confident that there is a strong <i>Market</i> for Dalembert, why don't you list the teams that would be willing to pay him enough to recoup from a <i>Buyout Haircut</i></b>?
OK, Mr. Straw Man: I wouldn't be at all certain that he wouldn't like to play for a winner, at least for this season. You are being highly presumptuous; not only about Dalembert, but also about Kelvin Cato. Nowhere did I suggest that Dalembert take a haircut. I assume that he could make $7 million a year, and we would pay him enough to make up the difference. If I'm wrong about how much he can make, and I'm not so sure that I am, then change the percentages. My point is, the cap hit can be reduced by buying him out. Bird rights are useless to somebody that's overpaid. Bird rights would preserve his right to get a raise after his $12.2 million expires next year. Make up your mind - can he get more than $12.2 million, or less after this contract? Yeah, Bird rights also allow a team to sign him for 6 years with nice raises from year to year, but that really doesn't change anything - his Bird rights are pretty much useless to him. Let's see - a playoff team wouldn't be willing to overpay for an asset during a playoff run? Yeah, I guess that never happens. Besides, the main reason to play for a playoff team versus the 76ers is personal satisfaction, at least from my POV. Portland did pay him a high percentage, but not all. Let's remember, though, Steve hardly had a future left. Actually, the New York-Portland trade very closely mirrors this potential Philly-Houston trade. New York wanted an asset (Zach Randolph), and Philly wanted cap relief to help pay Greg Oden. Buying out Steve Francis gave Portland about $3.5 million over two years. An interesting side to this is that the deal also gave Portland a Traded Player Exception, which they used to complete "a deal that sent James Jones and the draft rights to Spanish guard Rudy Fernandez to Portland in exchange for $3 million." I am saying that Houston mirrors Portland, in that they used Steve Francis for cap relief like we could use Dalembert. http://www.cbc.ca/sports/basketball/story/2007/07/11/blazers-francis-buyout.html http://blog.washingtonpost.com/wizardsinsider/2007/07/francis_is_free.html http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2932433
pbthunder, I don't think you fully understand Bird rights. Bird rights don't just mean that you can get a RAISE without regard to the salary cap. Bird rights allow you to be re-signed (for whatever salary, large or small) without regard to the salary cap. By giving up his Bird rights, Dalembert would lose the options of being re-signed (or signed and traded) by his team to a new salary (at whatever amount he and the team could agree on). Instead, Dalembert's options would be limited to (a) trying to convince a team with cap room to waste it on him; (b) signing under a salary cap exception (all/part of the MLE; maybe the LLE); or (c) taking the veteran's minimum salary. Of those options, (a) is unlikely. Option (b) is the most likely, meaning that he could end up only making $4-5M per, as opposed to maybe $7-8M per if he could be re-signed without regard to the salary cap. I'm not necessarily agreeing with Mango here. Just saying that you are misusing Bird rights in your argument. Perhaps this clarification might alter your view somewhat.
I know all that, though I hadn't considered some of those points. Still, I don't think your argument holds; I don't think that losing Bird rights under such a situation is such a big deal. To start with, Dalembert will end his contract in another year and a half. If he doesn't re-sign with whatever team he ends his contract with, at what we assume to be a significant salary hit, then his Bird rights will have apparently not meant so much to him, after all. I don't have any data (though I'd like to see any, if anybody has any), but I believe that players in this situation usually sign with a new team. Secondly, your arguments suggest that he is more likely to get a fair contract with Bird rights than without. I don't think this is the case. You think it would be hard for him to find a team with $7-8 million in cap space that wants him. It is also quite possible that whatever team he is on might not want to pay him that, for any of several reasons. Another team will have to give up something to do a S&T; how sure are you that a team that wants him is more likely to do that than sign him as a FA, in which case they give up nothing? I realize that a team that is over the cap can't sign him without a S&T. Even if you think it is better to be S&T'd than be a FA, you can be S&T'd without having Bird rights. Actually, your arguments have nothing to do with Bird rights; they apply to anybody that isn't an FA, i.e., to anybody whose contract is ending, without having been renounced by his team. If he signs a one-year contract as a FA, when that year is up, he will have each of the benefits you mention, without having Bird rights. Having Bird rights means you don't have the freedom that comes with being a FA. In order to take advantage of those things you mention, you are stuck with your current team, or a team that will trade for you, which you might like even less than your current team. There are a lot of reasons that a player might not want to play for a particular team: weather, taxes, coach, organization, lack of good Mexican food, and most of all, that a team does/does not have a chance to win. As a FA, OTOH, you have a lot of choice as to whom you're going to sign with (though nothing is forever, not even with a trade kicker). Before the deal, we talk to him, and find out if we can make a deal. If not, maybe we don't trade for him.
It is interesting that you quoted quite a bit of my post, but avoided the <b>Bolded</b> part at the end. Let me do a quick list of the teams expected to be Playoff candidates and you can tell us which ones would be willing to <i>throw money</i> at Dalembert. <hr> <center> <b>Eastern Conference</b></center> Boston I think KG chewed out Big Baby in the past for a lack of effort and probably would do the same for Dalmebert. Cleveland Already has Shaq and Big Z, no real need for Daelmebert. Orlando Has Gortat riding the bench behind D Howard, can't see a need for Dalembert. Atlanta Has Horford, Collins, Morris and Pachulia. No need for Dalembert there. Miami Has J O'Neal and J Magloire. They are looking to <i>rearrange</i> their roster this Summer. I can't imagine them offering anything significant and/or longterm to Dalembert. Toronto With the C Bosh issue looming this Summer, it is hard to imagine them offering anything significant and/or longterm to Dalembert. Chicago Has B Miller, A Gray, J James and J Noah. They also need to <i>rearrange</i> their roster this Summer. Charlotte Since last Summer, there have been rumors about the Bobcats having financial troubles. Has T Chandler, N Mohammed and Diop. Milwaukee Has Bogut and Gadzuric and this team is borderline to make the Playoffs. New York Desperate to move the contracts of Curry and Jeffries. They already have David Lee on the roster and no need for Dalembert. Another team that wants to <i>rearrange</i> their roster this Summer and wants to throw money at <i>Elite</i> players.Dalembert doesn't qualify as an <i>Elite</i> player. <hr> <center> <b>Western Conference</b></center> Lakers Has Bynum and Gasol to man the 5 spot. Dallas Has Dampier and Gooden to man the Center position. Perhaps they would sign him if he was bought out by the Rockets. Portland This might be the best candidate to pick up Dalembert since they have had significant injuries this season. Still, they would likely <i>lowball</i> the offer since they wouldn't have much competition to sign him. San Antonio Has Duncan, Blair and others to cover the Center position. Denver Has Nene, Chris Andersen and Petro to cover the Center position. Phoenix Has Frye, Collins and Lopez to cover the Center position Houston Already discussed. Oklahoma City A small market team that could use some help in the Front Court, but I have doubts that Dalembert would be deemed as significant help. They might take him on a cheap deal, but can't see him being given signifcant money. Utah They have plenty of <i>Bigs</i> and Dalembert doesn't seem to be a Jerry Sloan type of player. Memphis They have Gasol and Thabeet to cover the Center position. A small market team that has to watch their payroll. New Orleans Desperate to cut payroll and surely wouldn't offer much to Dalembert. Clippers They have Camby, B Skinner, D Jordan and Kaman to cover the Center position. Sacramento They have shown a bit of interest in Dalembert, but they are in a small market and have been on a cost cutting - efficiency drive to be able to <i>Make their Numbers</i>. They probably would like to move a few longer term contracts (Udrih, Nocioni and maybe maybe Martin) and would paint themselves back into a corner by signing Daelmbert to a significant deal. <hr> Sacramento, Oklahoma City, Portland and Dallas are the only four teams that I could identify as serious candidates for signing Dalembert and none are likely to <i>throw money</i> at him and make a longterm offer at this point in time. <hr> Here is a link that lists player contracts. NBA Contracts Just doing a quick glance, most of the backup Centers aren't making significant money and Dalembert would be likely lumped into the backup category. With the current economic environment not likely to change soon, teams will likely stay with a cost containment strategy and signing backup Centers to large contracts is doubtful. <hr> With a fair number of teams having already used their MLE this past Summer - Fall, they won't have much flexibility in offering much to Dalembert if they were to sign him after a buyout this Winter from the Rockets. Per Sham Sports: NBA Team Salaries Code: <b>Team Team Salaries (rounded)</b> Boston 85 million Cleveland 82 million Orlando 82 million Atlanta 65 million Miami 74 million Toronto 68 million Chicago 69 million Charlotte 69 million Milwaukee 68 million New York 83 million Lakers 91 million Dallas 88 million Portland 56 million San Antonio 80 million Denver 75 million Phoenix 76 million Houston 73 million Oklahoma City 48 million * Utah 82 million * Memphis 57 million New Orleans 73 million Clippers 60 million Sacramento 53 million * Needs to be updated for the recent Maynor & Harpring trade. <hr> 61. How do buy-outs affect a team's salary cap? <i>The agreed-upon buy-out amount (see question number 60) is included in the team salary instead of the salary called for in the contract. If the player had more than one season left on his contract, then the buy-out money is distributed among those seasons in proportion to the original salary. For example, say a player had three seasons remaining on his contract, with salaries of $10 million, $11 million and $12 million. The player and team agree to a buyout of $15 million. The $15 million is therefore charged to the team salary over the three seasons. Since the original contract had $33 million left to be paid, and $10 million is 30.3% of $33 million, 30.3% of the $15 million buyout, or $4.545 million, is included in the team salary in the first season following the buyout. Likewise, 33.33% of $15 million, or $5 million, is included in the team salary in the second season, and 36.36% of $15 million, or $5.455 million, is included in the team salary in the third season. The distribution of the buy-out money is a matter of individual negotiation. Changing the number of years in which the money is paid does not change the number of years in which the team's team salary is charged. In the above example in which the player's contract is bought out with three seasons remaining, the buyout amount is always charged to the team salary over three seasons. It does not matter if the player is actually paid in a lump sum or over 20 years (a spread provision).</i> If the Rockets would be charged a <i>prorated</i> amount of the buyout in the 2010 - 2011 Season, then the Salary Cap for that season would still take a hit even though Dalembert wouldn't be on the roster.
You missed my point entirely. Whatever salary he thinks he can get, he probably believes he can get some decent salary. Hence, we can buy him out at less than 100% of his $12.2 million next year. I believe he might be worth $7-8 million a year, but I don't actually care if that is true or not. You feel that you are good at figuring out who can pay him what. I'm not even going to comment on whether I think your analysis is correct. Were I to try and put that together, I wouldn't have much confidence in the results. So, you are probably better at that than I. I know this is all for entertainment purposes, and I could take a stab at it just to be a good guy. That's just not my thing. Cheers.
As to what you wrote about how buy-outs affect the cap: I read all that before posting. Your analysis of that passage does not affect what I wrote. And, looking back over your numbers (congratulations on putting that together, BTW), I still expect he will get some real money from somebody. I'm guessing $7-8 million, but, so what? $5 million? Tell us how much you think he would get, were he an FA.
So you think Dalembert and his agent are stupid? Wouldn't he have his agent check out what teams are willing to offer him before forming a belief as to what he woudl be paid?
I understand the <i>Point</i> that you were attempting to make, but I am still waiting for some type of documentation to support it. The best that I can tell is that you are trying to do some type of <i>projection</i> of what Dalmebert thinks he could sign for and that is beyond <i>sketchy</i>. Where did you get that <i>$7-8 million a year</i> from?
1) Umm, I'm saying that we can pay him less than the full $12.2 million next year, because he should expect some non-zero salary from somebody. This doesn't require documentation; it is conjecture based on my experience paying attention, whatever that is worth. 2) See 1). Just my belief. I'm puzzled by the idea that that might not be enough to post here. As I said, my point doesn't actually require that I be anywhere near right on how much he can get, merely that the two sides can come to some kind of agreement that makes sense to both parties. Thank you for responding to my posts. I hope I have not been disrespectful to you.
