That has to be a part of it since Chucky Atkins has 2 more seasons and they have the younger Marquis Banks locked up for 3 or 4 more years. No real reason to throw MLE $ at another PG. After giving the PG situation some thought, the Rox are in the Driver's Seat and all of the dominoes could fall downward from Antonio Daniel's. If SEA signs Damon Jones, Daniels is expendable to them. If SEA holds onto Daniel's, DJ is an option as long as ATL doesn't throw crazy money at him. And if that happens, you get a (cheap) Mike James or an equivalent and start Lue. With the TE and the full MLE, a lot of doors are still open IMO.
Gater, please correct if you think I misinterpret. James is coming off a two year deal according to Bender's page. Though he has a new team, he was traded (not waived or leaving via FA), thus I think the Early Bird Rights transfered to Detriot (they can match any MLE contract without costing them their MLE (used for McDyces, sp). Also, James does meet the guidelines to be restricted. I think the only way he is unresticted is if Detriot did not make a qualifying offer by June 30th. It should only have to been like 500K for one season (in cap equivalence). I don't see why they would not provide a qualifying offer unless they were doing James a favor. If anything they could trade him for a 2nd rounder and a TE from us if not more. But maybe they were doing James a personal favor or really didn't want to be on the books for a lowely 500K or so, it would surprise me they didn't make a QO, but is possible. That seems to me the only way Detriot does not have the ability to match any contract we offer. From Patricia benders page: Mike James ............ 7/25/03 2 minimum '05 From Larry Coon FAQ EARLY BIRD EXCEPTION -- ... A player qualifies for this exception after just two seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. Using this exception, a team may re-sign its own free agent for 175% of his salary the previous season or the average player salary, whichever is greater (see question number 22 for the definition of "average salary"). QUALIFYING OFFER -- Certain players become restricted free agents at the end of their contract if their team submits a qualifying offer. For players who entered the NBA in 98-99 or later, through their third year in the league, the qualifying offer must be for 125% of the player's previous salary, or the player's minimum salary (see question number 9 ) plus $150,000, whichever is greater. Teams are given an exception in this amount for the purpose of making a qualifying offer. The current CBA provides restricted free agency on a limited basis. ...It is also allowed for all veteran free agents who entered the NBA in 98-99 or later, who have been in the league three or fewer seasons... In order to make their free agent a restricted free agent, a team must submit a qualifying offer to the player by June 30.... The qualifying offer for all other players must be for 125% of the player's previous salary, or the player's minimum salary (see question number 9 ) plus $150,000, whichever is greater. The qualifying offer must be for one season. The team automatically gets an exception in the amount necessary to make this qualifying offer if they are over the salary cap.
Desert Scar - Let's tackle these easiest to hardest. First, regarding Bird Rights. It does not matter what the length of Mike James' contract was. It matters how much of the contract he has played. For example, a player can get Full Bird Rights by playing with the same team on three consecutive 1 year contracts. But he doesn't get FBR's until he has played in and the 3rd season is over. IMO, this is pretty much a slam dunk. Regardless of whether James' original Celtic deal was for 1 or 2 seasons, he has only played 1 year on that contract and that is the determining factor. He would not get EBR's until the second season is completed and he was not waived before the 2nd years' completion. Secondly, IMHO Bender is wrong about the length of James contract. There are only two ways James could both be a 2004 FA and have had a 2 year contract. The first is if he were waived and we both know that's not true. Second scenario is if DET had a team option on YR 2. (Bender does not list a player or team option). If that is true and the Yr 2 option were declined, there is no way James can be a Piston restricted 2004 FA. Those IMO are mutually exclusive events. James is either a restricted FA or his Yr 2 option was declined and he is an UFA. (That is how I believe the Cavs lost Boozer...they declined their option and he became unrestricted). I don't claim to be omnipotent on this, but that is my interpretation. There are too many reputable sources (including Dumars himself) listing James as restricted for me to believe the Pistons declined a Yr 2 offer. Again, I propose to you the Bender's 2 year contract is wrong and there is enough evidence to support it being incorrect. "Dumars said guard Mike James, a restricted free agent, probably will get a multiyear deal from another team that the Pistons would not match." http://www.freep.com/sports/pistons/pistons16e_20040716.htm The last piece is the hardest for me to understand/determine. The majority of reputable sources list James as restricted but I am unable to find a specific mention of DET giving James an offer sheet. If the offer sheet is what it took/takes for a player with 1 NBA contract season to be restricted, then I have learned something new in the process of disecting James' free agency. But I am not 100% sure of that since I find no media mention of the offer sheet. Perhaps someone else can find it. My assumption has been that players with 3 or less seasons that have entred the league since 1998 were automatically restricted and were categorically different from the rooke scale qualifying offer RFA's. IOW, they were automatically restricted. Perhaps an incorrect assumption, but again...I can't find DET giving James an offer sheet.
I think they lost Boozer because though he was restricted they only had Early Bird rights. He was still resticted, becuase they had the option to match Utah, but they didn't have the cap space once the contract was more than the average salary allowed byt he Early Bird (= to the MLE but the original team can use 12.5% raises instead of 10%). Same thing happened with Arenas and Golden State I believe. It seems to me the above is key. Did Mike James complete two years on a contract or not. If he did he would be restricted IF Detriot provided an offer sheet AND the Pistons could use the Early Bird Exemption. If Bender is correct and James is coming off a 2 year deal he competed, he meets the conditions to be resticted (assuming a QO was provided), and the Pistons must also have Early Bird Rights--of which the 2 year contract completion is the primary requirment. FAQ-Coon EARLY BIRD EXCEPTION -- This is a weaker form of the Larry Bird exception. Players who qualify for this exception are called "Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agents" in the CBA. A player qualifies for this exception after just two seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. Detriot should have EB status as long as was not waived or changed teams as a FA. Was he traded from Miami to Boston before last season, or did he go to Boston as a FA. If he went to Boston from Mia as a FA I think you are right, he only had a 1 year deal and Detriot via Boston would not have Early Bird status. That more sounds to me the Pistons don't plan on matching any long term contract, not that they couldn't match even if they wanted to.
Desert Scar - I'm terminating the discussion. You are locked/fixated on some Mike James Early Bird Rights thing that defies logic. James signed as a FA with BOS on 07.25.2003. It is a CBA impossibility for the Pistons (or the Celtics had he not been traded) to have his EBR's after only the 2003-04 season. It doesn't matter if Bender listed his contract as two years or ten years, EBR's can't happen after only one season. Including EBR's for James in a discussion as part of this summer's free agent market makes no sense. They are non-existent. How you are getting to EBR's on a contract that was signed on 07.25.2003 is beyond my logic framework. Further, I don't think you have the Boozer thing right. The Cavs did have Boozers EBR's. But they did not make an offer because if they had, Boozer would have been restricted and gone to the highest bidder. The Cavs meanwhile, were limited to offering Boozer their MLE. By not making an offer, Boozer became unresticted but the choice of where he wanted to play was dictated by Boozer himself and not the highest bidder which would have been the case if CLE would have made Boozer restricted by using the EBR's (ie, making him an offer). The Cavs felt they had a verbal agreement with Boozer and they would reward him when the Full Bird Rights kicked in after the 2004-05 season. From the pen of Cavs owner Gordon Gund: "Over the course of several months, we had multiple meetings that involved Carlos, his wife and his agent. In our most recent meeting on June 30, Jim Paxson and I told Carlos we had two options. He could play this year on his existing contract and test the market for free agency next year, or we could elect not to exercise the option if we had the understanding with him that as soon as legally possible he would negotiate a contract with us for the maximum we could pay him under league rules." http://www.nba.com/cavaliers/news/gund_boozer_040714.html You can choose to believe what you want to believe. My vote goes to Gordon Gund.
http://www.nba.com/rockets/news/jones_signed.html am i missing the link of this signing? i cant find it on the board.
how is this rewarding him after 04-05, they are rewarding (if giving him less money over 6 years than he was worth can be called rewarding) starting with 04-05 by signing him ASALP, 04-05, for the max they can give, the MLE. if they planned on rewarding him after 04-05, wouldn't they have either just kept him with the team option or agreed to sign him to a one year MLE. but the one year MLE was reported as a last ditch effort to get him back while the 6 year MLE was reported as the illegal agreement. something tells me i'm about to be proven wrong but everything i've read on this says i'm not. but it won't be the first time i'm wrong.
Gater, as a non-capologist and layperson, just doing my best to figure out cap rules and logical manovers from teams, players and agents perspective. I agree with you if James switched teams last summer as a FA, apparently he did, the Pistons would not have EBR rights and have minimal oppertunnity to match given the McDyess signing. So EBR does not apply, that is great Detriot is not really a barrier to us now, I am glad you were correct. I am not sure if I like him or Damon Jones better, but glad both are fully available to us and within our control to pursue. I don't think you are correct about the meat of Boozer situation. Utah has signed Carlos Boozer to an offer sheet http://www.nba.com/transactions/movement2004_index.html. That implies he was restricted and if Cleveland could create the cap space for him they could match. Further, Boozer was a 2nd round pick. Like Arenas who GS could not match (they could only match up to an MLE), like Manu who SA furiously worked to keep the cap space for, there are not the protections and contract controls as there are for 1st round picks. I could be mistaken, but I think it was always up to Boozer to leave the Cavs if he wanted. From FAQ Coon: It may also have been that the original team was incapable of matching the offer sheet. The NBA has a limited right of first refusal for restricted free agents. A team gets an exception big enough to make a qualifying offer, but the team must use its cap room (if it has any) or a different exception to match another team's offer. If a new team signs the player to a very large offer sheet, the player's original team may not be able to match it. If this happens, the original team has no choice but to lose the free agent. This is how Chicago was able to sign Brad Miller in 2000 -- Miller was Charlotte's restricted free agent, but the most Charlotte could give him was $3.9 million (using the Early Bird exception). Chicago signed Miller to an offer sheet with a first-year salary just over Charlotte's limit, and Charlotte was unable to match. Note that for first-round draft picks following their fourth (option) season, there is no way to make an offer the original team cannot match. The teams have full Bird rights to these players, so they can re-sign them (or match another team's offer sheet) for any amount up to the maximum salary.
