League minimum, prorated to the amount of season left. Detroit had 3 point guards last year- Billups, James, and Hunter. James' shooting ability provides flexibility. He can easily play in the same lineup as Sura or Payton- both Payton and Sura's size allow them to cover most 2s in the NBA as well. We're currently playing without a real backup to McGrady. At their ages, I'm sure JVG wouldn't mind limiting the minutes to Sura and Wesley. You could split the minutes on the perimeter... McGrady/Barry 38/10 Sura/Wesley/James 19/24/5 Payton/James/Sura 24/15/9 Sura gets 28 minutes, Wesley 24, Payton 24, James 20, and Barry 10. The guy who gets squeezed is Barry, who is currently getting 24 minutes a game for us. Moochie and Ward cheer on from the bench. Everyone sees a a decent sized drop-off in minutes. Could mess with chemistry on the perimeter, working in 2 new guys. My guess is he goes back to Boston, though. All they have at PG is Marcus Banks right now.
and they don't ?!?! last time I checked they have 15 shooting guards and one over sized small forward, one power forward and two medeocre centers
When Sura comes back, we could always play him at SG, which is his normal position. That wouldn't be bad ... I know its trouble, but it IS tempting. We'd go from that being our weakest position to our deepest. And, all it would take is for someone to get injured and we'd be awfully glad we had him. Its hard to pass Payton up for free. Dang, what a difference a day makes.
isn't there a rule that won't let gary payton go back to the celtics? if there isn't there should be.
There is a rule that he can't be traded back to Boston. But if he is waived and clears waivers, since every team in the league has a shot at him on the waiver wire (though they'd have to be able to absorb his ~5 mill salary), Payton would be free to resign with the Celtics. Why Seattle? They're plenty happy with Daniels and Ridnour. I'm guessing Payton and Seattle didn't part on the greatest of terms, either...
NIKE, glad you're here because you can probably answer my question. With this Payton buyout talk... In the case of players like Mooch and Baker who are not likely to play much, if at all, is it possible to negotiate a buyout of their contracts? I realize these two would be stupid to do it, since nobody would ever give them that kind of money. But say they were weird and wanted to go play somewhere rather than just sit and collect money for doing nothing. Is it possible to do that and would they still count against the cap after this season? Or can the Rockets flat out release them? What would be the cap implications if they can and do?
rockets should simply get rid of strickland and moochie...fine them money every practice until they quit...reasons for the fines can range from simply sucking to amazingly sucking.
I'm really lost. Can someone explain why Atlanta would do this? Do they get any picks? They just gave up Walker and then just are gonna let Payton go. Their attendance must suck..I hope they don't like have to cease operations.
a) i'm pretty sure you can buyout anybody's contract if they'll let you but since it's usually for less than they're owed, most don't. although it's usually a sizable portion of what you're owed. i'm sure there are some restrictions on buyouts but moochie and vin would seem like we would be free to do so. b) they count against the cap. i think you take the buyout and divide it by the years left and then spread if over those years and that's the cap hit each year. c) i'm pretty sure you can release someone whenever. but you still get to pay them. we cut maloney and we've been paying him to play for other teams/sit at home for 6 years. i think they just keep on counting against the cap, otherwise teams would just release guys with horrible contracts to lower their cap number (even if they do still have to pay them, the richer owners would do it). maloney finally comes off this year. cutting people doesn't seem to be a good option ever so i'm not sure why anyone does it unless the guy is just really a cancer and you want him gone. d) the value of guys like moochie and vin is that their contracts expire in a year. which means they will have trade value next year. if we cut them or buy them out, we still get to pay them and don't get to trade their expiring contracts, which would be terrible. e) cutting people has been thrown around here like crazy since these trades. i don't understand why. how often does anyone ever just get cut/bought out except for cases like payton where it's fairly well understood payton isn't going to play for them and he doesn't do anything for atlanta. if moochie and vin expired this offseason (and thus we couldn't trade them at this point), a buyout might make sense b/c they have no value to us and they're not going to play. as it is, they have value as trade bait and cutting them would be ridiculous, besides unnecessary.
Thanks for the comments. I was reading an article earlier today that talked about this new category of NBA player---the cap relief player, who is carried solely for the purpose of his expiring contract, or carried so that his soon expiring contract can be traded to a cap strapped club. Pretty amazing how it's become an accepted slot(s) on NBA rosters. I know it's generally a bad idea to just dump players and keep paying them and having them on your cap. But say the Rocks do sign Payton. Logically you just dump the cheap kid Barrett. But talent wise, wouldn't it make more sense to dump one of the two crappiest PG's on the team, Ward or Mooch, rather than Barrett who has more upside at this time? But I suppose keeping those two pieces of crap is better "capwise" in the long run. What a strange development this cap relief slot has become. Now a team has to have franchise players, role players, bench players, and cap relief players.
f4p hit my understanding of it. At this point, with only 1 more season to bear, buying these guys out or cutting them just doesn't make much sense, unless they have a negative impact on the team- ie, it'd be better to not have them on the roster, and there's no better option. As far as re: Barrett...if Barrett were a talent, it'd be one thing. But, Barrett was an undrafted free agent rookie with no size, and frankly, isn't very good. If Barrett were capable of playing even 10-12 minutes a game, we wouldn't even be in the conversation for Payton.
I don't agree with that part. I think he is not getting much playing time simple because he is a rookie and lack the experiences. I think Barrett will be a decent point guard in this league if he is given the chance. There are a lot of decent guards that were undrafted, Wes, Marquis Daniels, Udonis Haslem just off top of my head.
I don't understand why some posters here think Barett has upside. Barett was terrible in limited minutes he played recently. Lazy passes, poor shooting and defense. He was totally exposed during Spurs games by Parker. I'd have no second thought replace him with GP if at all possible.
First note, none of them are point guards. Point guard is a different animal. Wes is an undersized two. Daniels is combo guard/wing that was athletic. Udonis Haslem? Try power forward. You just don't learn floor vision. Wesley could get stronger, Daniels could learn how to shoot, and Haslem could learn to get his weight under control, but point guards don't learn how to pass. And if you're undersized, not a particularly great floor general, and can't hit the shot, you don't have much of a future. Best case scenario for Barrett is as a backup two.
I hope it happens. This is a pretty sweet roster: PG: Payton, James G/F: McGrady, Sura, Wesley, Barry PF: Howard, Padgett C: Yao, Mutombo Cut Barrett since he's not a valuable expiring contract next year like Moochie. Two out of Norris, Bowen, Spoon and Baker as 11th and 12th men who never need to play. The other two on IR with Ward.
