The State of Play in July '09

by Tom Ziller on Oct 22, 2008 7:49 PM PDT

Allofasudden, there's a lot more clarity on how the books should look come July. Remember: Geoff Petrie's plan is to clear cap space for the summer of 2010. This can be done by chillin' and not signing non-vital players. This summer, Petrie only signed Beno Udrih (arguably vital, given the positional drought) and Bobby Brown (cheap as tusks). He extended Francisco Garcia (arguably important, though the timing can be debated) and added negligible future salary in trading Ron Artest (Donté Greene and Houston's 2009 pick will make a bit of scratch the next few years). Petrie has said he will not likely pick up the 2009-10 options on Shelden Williams ($4.3 million) and Quincy Douby ($2.2 million).

Here are the salaries on the books for the 2009-10 season (via SacBee.com's salary database -- I'm a convert!):

Kevin Martin	$9.68 m
Brad Miller	$12.25 m
Kenny Thomas	$8.775 m
Mikki Moore	$2 m*
Beno Udrih	$6.03 m
John Salmons	$5.456 m
Spencer Hawes	$2.333 m
Francisco Garcia	$6 m**
Jason Thompson	$2.036 m
Donte Greene	$870,000***
Bobby Brown	$736, 420***
Kings 2009 First	$2.5 m**
Houston 2009 First	$1 m**

* If the Kings cut Moore by June 20, 2009.
** Estimate.
*** Friggin' larceny!

As predicted back when Garcia signed his deal, the Kings will be just outside the edge of the salary cap next summer. That means -- barring a trade -- the Kings won't be able to nab any free agents of note in July 2009. If the Kings can lose Brad Miller, a $14-15 million player might be within range. (That's a potential Danny Granger.) If the Kings lose Kenny Thomas, a $10 million player might fit. (More like Ben Gordon.)

Here comes the dead horse: the greater/greatest possibilities come in the form of trades. With Thomas and Miller combining to form some sort of ungodly Theo Ratliff duo, a mysteriously disgruntled superstar could be had in 2009, if the timing is right. It's worked for Boston and L.A. Why can't us?

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Miller

I could see him being a real temptation for a number of teams making a run, teams that wouldn’t mind having a big who can draw an opponent’s big out of the lane to clear space for slashing 2s & 3s. So, that’s $12 million, which is nice. That used to be real money.

Hard to imagine a team willing to take Miller and Thomas, and even if they did, there has to be a limited amount of teams that have that kind of salary to dump, although the Knicks are a class unto themselves. David Lee, somehow?

I don’t think TZ was plying that angle though. Unless Thomas plays himself into viabilty as a trade chip, it’s hard to imagine scenarios where a team will take him solo or as part of a deal.

It’s 2010, I think. And it will be worth the wait.

Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.

by andy sims on Oct 22, 2008 8:02 PM PDT reply actions

Not so sure

about that, Andy. I think the kinds of teams that are looking to unload $20M (as Brad and K9’s contracts will add up to in 2009-10) players will definitely be interested in clearing $8.5M for the vaunted 2010 offseason. What will be more difficult to find, I imagine, will be max contract players that other teams don’t want that are still worth paying max money (Dirk Nowitzki if the Mavs fall apart?). I guess it would have to be a trade demand situation on the other end for a team to want Brad and Kenny. Hopefully our bounty of first rounders on rookie contracts will help.

But, as much as I would love to see another ace in 2009, I think you’re right that it won’t happen that soon.

by furious.d on Oct 22, 2008 8:51 PM PDT reply actions

Small Window of Opportunity

I just recently brought this up in the Douby thread. I’m not sure I’m right but I think I am.

The 09/10 draft picks don’t count against the team salary until their selected. Since Douby and Williams are UFA at the end of this season, their salaries should be off the books when the season ends. Then if Moore is bought out, we would be $4M-$5M under the salary cap between the end of the season and up until the draft.

So, we could add the $ plus a player (ie, Thomas, Miller, Salmons) to trade up. A team over the Luxury Tax would see a $8M savings immediately, and more the following year.

One question I have: Does the Rookie Exemption exist for all draft choices or just the 1st. Would someone familiar with the Cap system care to evaluate?

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Oct 22, 2008 8:51 PM PDT reply actions

UFA but according to the Bee article...

the Kings still own Larry Bird rights to both Williams and Douby even if they don’t pick up options and I think they have to renounce their rights in order to gain the cap space. Purely a technicality but it probably means the Kings have to wait until a certain date to rid themselves of Williams/Douby.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Oct 22, 2008 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes

And, they would have to renounce the rights to Bobby Jackson also. They’d also have to renounce all their exemptions.

Yes, it’s not a perfect option. It just adds another chip that GP could throw into the pot to move Thomas and Miller and their expiring contracts. Another possiblity is adding draft choices. Then there’s my favorite of moving up draft places.

All of which are so far out there that I get a headache just typing it up.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Oct 22, 2008 11:27 PM PDT up reply actions

What I’d be interested in seeing is a more global analysis of the implications of our future payroll freedom, be it in 2009 or 2010.

What I mean is this: Falling under the cap in a given year and having a large amount of room to sign someone with does not mean you will actually be able to sign that key free agent that propels your team to success.

What will the free agent market look like in ’09 and ’10? How many other teams will be serious competitors for them?

To take it a step further, how strong will teams in the West be in 2010? If every other Western team is reloading to compete for a championship in 2010, it would be a poor time for us to make our big push.

The expiration dates on a lot of these contracts point to 2010 being a very significant year in terms of a roster overhaul. However, the factors I outlined above will play a big part in determining whether or not we’ll ultimately remember that year as the foundation for our future championship, or the year we squandered our liberties for an overpaid sap.

If the global outlook is poor for 2010, maybe 2009 IS the year for us to try and make the moves TZ alluded to. Who knows?

by jeremy548 on Oct 22, 2008 9:20 PM PDT reply actions

I fail to see what’s superior about an ugly and barely usable salary ‘resource’ that contains the kind of misinformation that they set out to expose. But, whatever.

by Sham-onnnnnnnnnnna on Oct 23, 2008 11:10 AM PDT reply actions

A few things

It has the most accurate numbers of a few contracts (Kenny Thomas especially) because Amick has taken the info from the actual contract. Other resources are a bit off. I usually use DraftExpress’ resource, though … especially for other teams.

by Tom Ziller on Oct 23, 2008 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions

I should note

That pre-Sham/DX merger, I used your resource, because it’s the most accurate. I trust the Bee on Kings matters though because I trust Amick.

by Tom Ziller on Oct 23, 2008 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions

How “extensive” can research be when it doesn’t include Bobby Jackson’s kicker? And how are Kenny Thomas’s numbers any more accurate than mine, given that they’re exactly the same?

And I don’t like having Draftexpress use my numbers. It’s just my end of a mutual backscratch. It’s painful to watch when you put ten million unpaid hours into researching and.or calculating these numbers, just to see people either copy them or then claim that they’re wrong. But so be it.

It’s not self-effacing to claim that I have the best salary resource on the net, because I do. It may be unwelcome and rather annoying to say so when unprompted, for which I’m only partly sorry, but you’re just going to have to trust me that I’m right. If you can fidn fault with my numbers, do so, but the Sac Bee have not done this.

by Sham-onnnnnnnnnnna on Oct 25, 2008 12:09 PM PDT reply actions

Love seein' a guy that takes pride in his work

The Tom Cruise avatar notwithstanding.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Oct 25, 2008 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions

Tom Cruise is a twat. But Maverick? Legend.

by Sham-onnnnnnnnnnna on Oct 25, 2008 12:29 PM PDT reply actions

You're Classic

Whether you’re an English Classic is up to debate sir.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Oct 26, 2008 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions