A look at the 2009-2010 salary structure
Well first off look at Sham Sports for some reference to what I'm talking about. With today's signing of Bobby Brown, who by some accounts, including from Marc Stein's point of view, with Stein having this to say:
I certainly had nothing to do with his progress, but I am naturally loving it, seeing Brown increasingly learn how to get his teammates involved and make decisions on the fly and under control to complement his athleticism and scoring ability. Though he's not a pure point and frequently has to be reminded by coaches to be more vocal, Brown has become an NBA player. And that's according to numerous expert witnesses in Vegas as opposed to a shameless rooter like me.
There have been a handful of breakout performances from little-known players like Brown since the games began at UNLV on July 11. Anthony Roberson quickly earned a guaranteed contract from the Knicks. One Eastern Conference executive is convinced that Anthony Tolliver will make San Antonio's roster as a "shooting 4-man." Some recent second-round picks have been eye-catching as well: P.J. Tucker as an undersized (but rugged) power forward on the Grizzlies' squad and Nathan Jawai, Toronto's so-called Australian Shaq, just to name two.So, you have the meat of Stein's point. Just click on the link to read all of it in case you missed it the first go around. (I like Stein for the most part because he drips stuff like this well. He's good at listening and relaying stuff that other's simply won't because they don't like what they hear.)
But this isn't about Marc Stein's point of view of Bobby Brown, or my opinion of Marc Stein, which does range wildly I admit. This is about the salary starting July of 2009. So let's take a look.
Let's assume that the following players will be under contract and with the Kings next season: Kevin Martin, Spencer Hawes, Jason Thompson, and Beno Udrih for starters. Martin makes almost 9.7 million dollars next season, with Udrih coming in at 6.03, Shawes at 2.332 million (assuming his option gets picked up--a fairly likely assumption yes?), and Justin Thompson at 2.035 million himself. For simplicity purposes you have 20.1 million tied up in those 4 alone. That's also a total third of your active roster.
Then there are players that will probably be here barring an unexpected move that brings in a superior player without touching the top 4. That player is Francisco Garcia. Garcia's number is unknown, but given he isn't as successful as Josh Childress, but Sacramento ownership isn't as stupid as Hawks management, this will make for some interesting negotiations. I personally think Garcia is worth an extension around the current mid level for the next 4 seasons myself. That would seemingly determine whatever baseline value he has. So let's say he starts out at a salary of 5.5 million next season. Your roster is now at 26.6 million. (And that's assuming he doesn't cost more.)
Then you have players like John Salmons, Shelden Williams, and Quincy Douby. Douby being Douby, and assuming the Kings are impressed by him, it stands to reason that they would pick up his 4th year option at 2.197 million putting the at roughly 28.2 million. Salmons makes 5.456 million next season, and assuming the Kings don't trade him in a deal that will almost certainly bring alot more money back in a deal, you're now looking at a team salary of 33.7 million in salary, and that's for 7 players. Shelden Williams makes, during the 2008-09 season, 3.395 million this season. The Kings in all likelihood will consider this a one year audition for Shelden, and would likely consider a 3 year 10 million contract for him next off-season provided he gives them things they're looking for. Or something like that. So assuming they do that, and this is just an assumption for shits & giggles so don't get your panties in a twist, I'd say you're looking at a team salary of 37 million for 9 total players. Keeping up so far?
This leaves Sean Singletary, Bobby Brown, and Patrick Ewing Jr all making the same amount, and assuming all 3 are on the roster next season for whatever reason, you're looking at an additional 2.3 million essentially for all 3 on the roster. That's 12 total players. That's now at 39.3 million.
Now, this doesn't include any calculations for the draft pick since we don't know where the Kings will draft. Let's hold off on that for now.
You have left Ron Artest who will be a Free Agent assuming he stays all season (a poor assumption at this point), Mikki Moore, Brad Miller, Shareef Abdur Rahim, and Kenny Thomas. Rahim is rather simple I think. Either Shareef excepts medical retirement, or he sits on the bench and waits for his ETO next summer to go to a team he thinks can win. Either way, I think it's safe to say the Kings will see the last of Reef come April of 09. I'm good with that. Thomas, if the Kings trade Artest, almost certainly will be attached to any outgoing trade, but if he isn't, a possibility I suppose, then he makes 8.775 million. I won't include him in any team salary for next year since Petrie is so deadset upon trading he and Artest together.
Brad Miller and Mikki Moore are the only 2 that will I think have a chance of starting on the roster next season. Mikki, of course that is, has a buyout I believe for about 3 million if I remember right (it's somewhere around there), and can be waived by July 1st I believe for that amount. The Kings may do that, or trade him earlier I suspect, to open up a roster spot or cap room. Either or works for me. I would be just as happy to see him in a trade for Brian Cook and JJ Redick. Cook has a player option for next season, and Redick's player option for his 4th season can be denied before October 31st by the Kings if they pick him up before then.
I think if Moore doesn't leave the team, a possibility, and Miller doesn't leave the team, it leaves the team in a minutes crunch as Kfan said a few days ago. I also think Moore is the more feasible option to move, and Miller will be more difficult to move as he isn't a true shot blocking/rebounding/defensive force in the middle.
So I'm going to out on the limb and say that Moore leaves, and Miller doesn't. I'm going to say that Reef's salary is no longer part of the team, either ETO or medical retirement, and that Thomas's salary no longer keeps him part of the team's roster. That's nearly 22 million of total salary assuming you pay Moore for the whole year, or 19 million if you waive him at the beginning. So essentially, you're looking at the 39 million I blocked for the 12 guys already figured in, plus the 1st round pick, and Brad Miller at 12 1/4 mil, and you're looking at roughly somewhere in the neighborhood of 54-55 million next season assuming my money projections on Garcia and Williams hold up. For those who do not know I will enlighten you on another aspect of the salary cap age. The Mid Level exception counts against any Projected cap space you would have. So let's assume for a moment that the Kings bring over Brian Cook, and now you've added 3 million to that 54-55 million total. The cap was around 58.5 million this season. See my point?
I don't care what anybody says. Unless this team dumps Artest, Thomas, Moore, Miller, and Salmons this team won't have any cap space in 2009. If it doesn't dump Thomas and Artest there is a strong chance this team will be paying luxury tax in 2010. That isn't necessarily a good thing either. So, my point in this exercise is simple. Just because you're dumping salary doesn't mean you're getting flexibility for the Free Agent Market in either 2009 or 2010. You're just aiming at gaining roster flexibility of young and cheaper players on the overall roster to gain asset's to make a move in a trade. And for those who don't think that is Petrie's end game, I suggest you take your own look at the roster. Because that is the only real suggestion at this point I can make given the contract and young talent on this team. Either the Kings make a run at an outside Free Agent in 2009 via sign & trade, or they simply stay pat with the young talent and build around the edges with fringe Mid Level signings.
To recap, though, here are the salaries I have listed for every player in 2009 that has a good, or strong possibility in being in Sacramento.
Kevin Martin--9,680,170
Brad Miller--12,250,000
Beno Udrih--6,031,800
John Salmons--5,456,000
Shelden Williams--(Preferred salary around 3 to 3.5 Million)
Spencer Hawes--2,232,800
Jason Thompson-- 2,035,920
Quincy Douby-- 2,197,642
Mike Singletary-- 736,420
Patrick Ewing Jr-- 736,420
Bobby Brown-- 736,420
Francisco Garcia-- (Preferred salary around 5.5 to 6 million)
1st round draft pick (With salary from 1.5 to 3 million)
Brian Cook (For shyts & giggles--He has a player option for 3.3 million next season he would likely exercise)
Total Salary? Without the draft pick it's just under 55 million at 54,968,372 dollars. You add that draft pick, plus the Mid Level Exception and you're basically looking at no cap room. Even with any projected raises to the salary cap. It's just not happening no matter how you play with the numbers unless you take more than Artest, Thomas, Abdur Rahim and a chunk of Moore's salary off the books. And that's just the way the cookie crumbles kiddies.
(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)
7 recs |
57
comments
Comments
Great Analysis
Spot on.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Jul 23, 2008 8:46 PM PDT 0 recs
What I'm hoping for Section
Is to stop the idea that the Kings will be able to sign a big money free agent in 2009 without trading half the roster and not getting money back. What is the likelihood of that?
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
Jul 23, 2008 9:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Well,
your analysis does solidify the importance of K9(woof!) going in an Artest deal. If he goes, ‘Reef takes retirement and you buy out Moore you could make a little splash next year, and then dive in a 2nd time once Miller is gone. What cracks me up is listening to Peaches talk about the cap space that we’ll have next year. Dude’s a pistol.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on
Jul 23, 2008 9:28 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I think it goes without saying
that the StR community doesn’t embrace that Saturday Night Special’s point of view.
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
Jul 23, 2008 9:35 PM PDT
up
0 recs
And smgmatt
He and section have the same fantasy. You never know, even a small trade can yeild good results. It takes luck to put togther a winning team – along with work.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 23, 2008 11:51 PM PDT
up
0 recs
You're right
I should really just stop hoping that the Kings get better sooner rather than later. What have I been thinking?
Listen, I know that a lot of things have to fall into place for the Kings to have any shot at real cap space in 2009 (and have explained such on multiple occasions). Does that mean that I shouldn’t want those things to happen?
by smgmatt on
Jul 24, 2008 7:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
So
What would be more difficult? All that crap falling into place – or managing convince one team, one GM, to pull off one decent deal in exchange for Artest that might actually net us something?
You think the Deng idea is ‘stupid’, well, i brought it up because he’s threatening to become unrestricted next year unless they do a contract now. That is pressure on Chicago to either sign him or trade him before they get nothing in the end. If they’re so convinced he’s not a $10+ mil guy they want to wrap up for 5 years – who knows?
That is not the only possible deal either, i just happened to throw that out there as a possibility considering the situation.
And to that current CHI situation – I don’t think it was a ridiculous idea to discuss, an emotional response, or so close minded that I’m not even worth anyone responding to etc.. All things you have impiled or outright said amongst other disparaging comments or dismissively smug (long winded) comments.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 24, 2008 8:46 AM PDT
up
0 recs
OK
I never said it was “stupid”, but your habit of putting things in quotes that I never wrote is very tiresome. The word I used was “ridiculous”, and I have even admitted that it was probably not a fair statement to make. What exactly are you looking for?
Your reasoning for them not wanting Deng doesn’t fly for a Ron Artest swap either. So Chicago won’t take a chance on Deng for one year (and risk losing him), but they’ll take Artest for one year instead (and risk losing him)? How does that work, exactly? I’ve never said a Deng trade would be “impossible” (as you’ve also falsely accused me of), but I believe that just as many things would have to fall into place as the Kings getting 2009 cap space would:
- Negotiations would have to get much worse then they are currently for the Bulls to consider shopping Deng,
- The Kings would have to beat any other offers out there (the Lakers almost traded Kobe for Deng before Kobe vetoed the deal – wanting Deng when he got there – so I think there would be some interest in the league),
- The Bulls would have to be willing to take Artest back,
- The Kings would have to figure out how to stay out of Luxury Tax territory by adding Deng at $10M+,
- The Bulls would have to figure out how to minimize their Luxury Tax implications
It’s not as simple as “one team, one GM” . . . at least no more so than handcuffing Thomas to Artest in a different trade. And as I’ve said many times, I would take a Deng for Artest trade above all other proposed offers that I’ve seen . . . but that doesn’t make it any more likely.
by smgmatt on
Jul 24, 2008 9:12 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Well said smg
Deng to the Kings is almost practically impossible unless the Bulls, and Deng, want to come here. So far there are no indications of that happening. Unless Deng wants to take the Childress route and I doubt he does, then he’s just better off taking the Qualifying Offer.
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
Jul 24, 2008 9:41 AM PDT
up
0 recs
An extension
That starts in ‘09 would nearly solve the Lux tax problem. Wiggle room to keep us under the Tax is possible if ie SAR retires, K-9 and Artest are gone. I’m not talking about the Cap, but the tax. You can exceed the cap if you own the player. If not, well, one season slightly over the tax in order to solve a serious problem? ‘maybe’ GP would do that.
Hey, I have just been saying they have a problem – and we can Ask! We should explore all options, make some offers, let them turn them down if thats the way it is but get a dialogue going and you never know.
I do think one needy GM that needs to take a risk (read DFerry – who may lose LaBron freakin’ James to FA unless he moves towards a title Soooon & Chicago, who look like they may go back to rebuilding mode after just getting out of it) is a possibility.
Losing your job . . . .
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 24, 2008 10:09 AM PDT
up
0 recs
There have been deals
recently, that made a lot less sense, ie Pau Gasol to the lakers and a slightly less unequal trade but still – KGarnet to the Celtics. There are other examples.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 24, 2008 10:11 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Memphis wasn't going anywhere with Gasol
If he hadn’t been traded to the Lakers I doubt people would have made as many waves. That, and many people think West steered the Grizz towards the lakers, but in the end, they still need a physical presence there with Gasol. So, I guess my question is, what are lop-sided trades when nothing by definition is equal?
Doug Christie for Cuttino Mobley? Was that a bad trade because it didn’t work out for Orlando. Some Magic fans would say yes. Was it a bad trade for Sacramento because Mobley opted out and went to the Clippers. Some might say yes, but I wouldn’t.
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
Jul 24, 2008 10:21 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Due Diligence
As long as we’re not holding our breath for such a trade, I agree completely that due diligence is required.
Some of the rumblings around the league after the Gasol trade seemed to be because nobody thought Memphis would sell that “low”. To put it another way, perhaps they hadn’t let Memphis know that they were interested enough to be a part of the negotiation process.
Using this example, I would hope that Petrie has inquired as to Deng’s availablility, and let Chicago know he’s interested (if he is), so that if nothing else the Kings would have a chance to put their bid in should the time come. Again, I doubt that the Kings would get him, but part of Petrie’s job is to leave no stone unturned.
This is actually what I like the most about KP in Portland, because he reportedly burns up the phone lines with any and every deal he can think of to improve his team. We’ve talked about this before, and the downside is that everyone knows what you want, but the upside is that you’re giving yourself the best opportunity to be in the right place at the right time.
by smgmatt on
Jul 24, 2008 10:44 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Hmmm interesting points
As long as we’re not holding our breath for such a trade, I agree completely that due diligence is required.Well I’m certainly not. I’ve never been a big fan of Gasol myself anyway. One of the things I was referencing is that a goal of Memphis was to get as much cap room as possible. The owner, Michael Heisley, is looking to sell the team and trying to make it attractive as possible for a new owner to come in and put their stamp on it. That is possible.
As far as the Grizzlies taking less, most NBA teams talk about getting high amounts of talent for Gasol. I think that’s crap and always will think that’s crap. The Grizzlies could get back if the Gay/Mayo/Conley/Gasol/Milicic pairing works out anyway. So that’s not a huge stretch to begin with. Gasol wasn’t happy, and Memphis was going nowhere. I don’t think Deng would have helped them with Rudy Gay already on the roster right? So, if you’re looking for top tier talent for Gasol I just don’t think it was available.
That being said I’d rather not have Deng. His talent level is high, but he seems too much of a high risk/reward guy. Plus finding talented SF’s are much easier at the bottom of the draft than any other position out there. And it’s very easy to find a stopgap solution until you get that type of player.
That being said KP does alot of burning up the phone lines, but it’s not like what teams are after is any great big secret. Watch the games, and read a few articles, and that pretty much tells you what you need to now. In a 30 team league there are only 29 other options to find in league talent. It makes keeping anything a secret practically impossible. So trying to do so is one of those dumb advantages that some think exist and don’t actually, or ever will really, do exist.
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
Jul 24, 2008 10:55 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Exception?
...it’s not like what teams are after is any great big secret….It makes keeping anything a secret practically impossible.
Isn’t this what Petrie is known for though? Perhaps he is the exception and not the rule, or perhaps it’s all an illusion.
...trying to do so is one of those dumb advantages that some think exist and don’t actually, or ever will really, do exist.
This could be true, but perhaps some of those people who think this advantage exists are one of the 29 other GMs that Petrie is talking to.
Just a thought.
by smgmatt on
Jul 24, 2008 11:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Yeah that's true too
I don’t really think that’s what Petrie does so well. What he does well is like what he did with Bibby to Atlanta. He figures out the nuts & bolts of the conversations before he actually has them with the other team, has them quickly, and decides whether or not to do the deal after talking with ownership.
He also probably presents alot of different angles to the Maloof’s when doing ths type of deal too. Remember the Webber trade? He said talks had only heated up in the last 24 hours. He said almost the same thing with the Hawks. That’s why I think your point is somewhat overblown in a sense. Yes, he keeps things secret because he isn’t talking to anybody. Most teams talk to other teams, and the Kings do that too, but how much of the pre-talk chatter that goes on with rumors actually happens with the Kings? (Artest comes to mind, and it stands to reason that Petrie wasn’t totally sold on Artest.)
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
Jul 24, 2008 11:22 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Something is wrong in Chicago.
Look, I’m not saying they’d make that deal but something is wrong there and Kerr knows it. This wasn’t supposed to be a team that ‘still a few years away’, it was supposed to be a contender LAST year.
Yet, with the same players (two of whom should have been playing for new contracts) and no sig injuries they not only didn’t contend – they dropped off the face of the earth.
Getting lucky and drafting DRose won’t save Kerr for long if they struggle again. He knows something is wrong as well. its Not just Talent on your roster (see PHX, DAL) , its the right balance of talent and attitude.
There’s always the chance that ‘the grass is greener’, an attitude many here are not immune from, and a good team may think thier guy is good – but is he the right guy for them? Could Ron can get them over the top and be happy on a contender? hmmm
Anyway, you take a shot, put the thought in thier heads. Maybe it goes somewhere, maybe not, maybe you get another team thinking the same thought ?
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 24, 2008 1:51 PM PDT
up
0 recs
If you're talking about Steve Kerr
I hope you realize he’s the GM of the Phoenix Suns.
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
Jul 24, 2008 3:09 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I'm not sure
what you’re refering to, but it’s safe to say that (a) you have no idea what I fantasize about, and (b) you don’t want to know what I fantasize about.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on
Jul 24, 2008 7:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Sorry
PG referred to you and I included you without actually having a comment to stand on. No offense meant.
- not that there should be for those who want to tear everything down NOW and start over, hell, I understand the desire - I just don't think it realistic unless you get lucky with some Giant 8 man trade.
In a small market like ours, its also important to balance rebuilding with keeping fans morale up and in the seats. A delicate task.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 24, 2008 8:35 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Good point
That gets lost in our analysis of “what the Kings should do” sometimes. This is a team who’s attendance has dropped dramatically the last few years, and who’s trying to get themselves a new arena built.
It makes GP’s job that much more difficult, but last season showed that the team could both develop some new talent, and improve in the win column.
Kevin Pritchard has Chuck Norris tied up in the trunk of his car.
by otis29 on
Jul 24, 2008 8:37 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Leave your wife out of this discussion Section
I”m sure she’s incredible and all, but she’s your wife. :P
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
Jul 24, 2008 8:42 AM PDT
up
0 recs
That's not fantasy -
That is cold, hard reality.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on
Jul 24, 2008 12:37 PM PDT
up
0 recs
She was watching you over your shoulder as you typed that right?
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
Jul 24, 2008 12:46 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I count my anniversaries
in dog years.
For some reason the wife doesn’t think thats very romantic.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 24, 2008 1:54 PM PDT
up
0 recs
?
That’s what she said?
Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA
by iashwash on
Jul 24, 2008 1:25 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Sorry this is late but I disagree.
The Moore buy out is only 2 million.
Shelden Williams is not going to get 3.5
Douby isn’t going to get 2.2
and Brian Cook on the Kings roster?
If you consider those salaries gone, the Kings sit at 45 million- roughly 12-13 million under the cap. I don’t see the Kings keeping any of the players above. A free-agent and 2 draft picks have a lot more promise than Douby, Williams and Cook.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
by jjham15 on
Jul 25, 2008 9:00 AM PDT
up
0 recs
With both Williams & Moore gone
That FA better play the 4, because otherwise we’re looking at JT & another draft pick manning the post. If they somehow got Boozer then I’d say it’d definitely be worth it, although that’s a pretty big if.
I don’t know what Williams will get, but for what it’s worth I think he could be a good big off the bench. That said, I don’t know that a JT/Williams combo would be significantly better than the previously mentioned JT/draft pick combo.
by smgmatt on
Jul 25, 2008 10:23 AM PDT
up
0 recs
JJ is seduced by the thought of cap space
Like Mrs Robinson seduction type levels.
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
Jul 25, 2008 1:48 PM PDT
up
0 recs
No, I'm just an A's fan.
Why would the Kings pay two guys (Douby/Williams) over 6 million bucks instead of drafting young players or picking up low level free agents to be the 11-15 men on the bench. It isn’t fiscally responsible. There are a ton of guys floating around that could give you the same production or better for the minimum. I understand that you want to post something but if you think the Kings are going to strap themselves with almost 14 million worth of space on Mikki Moore, Quincy Douby, Shelden Williams and Brian Cook when they could either sign a big time free-agent or just let them walk and drop way under the cap is ludicrous. It’s not like we are talking rotation guys other than Moore and won’t he be 34 years old in 2009.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
by jjham15 on
Jul 25, 2008 3:29 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Maybe you misread something in there.....
But Brian Cook INSTEAD of Mikki Moore big guy.
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
Jul 25, 2008 9:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
OHHHH, your right, it all makes sense...wait...9+ mill for Cook, Douby, Williams?
I don’t see it. If Douby and Williams want to sign for the minimum for years of service then maybe but I personally would rather see both Justin Williams or Dahntay Jones than these guys. Yes, I know they are not available but players like them will be and you can shave millions off your cap figure. I understand your argument, I just don’t buy it. Even if the figure is 9 mill, that drops the overall payroll to 46 million leaving the Kings the money to sign a contract starting at 11 mill a year before the salary cap increases (which is a totally different argument). Douby, Cook and Williams or a top tier free-agent, now that’s a hard one.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
by jjham15 on
Jul 25, 2008 10:04 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I do admit you got a point there
but do the numbers really add up that way? And I’m not sure wht kind of FA you’ll get for 11. Not a franchise changer… any names your thinking of worth that much?
Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA
by iashwash on
Jul 25, 2008 10:12 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Uhm okay........
Yeah you don’t see it. And I don’t see how the Kings will automatically pick up cap room by not keeping those guys. Cap holds, and the Mid Level Exception have to be waived, as do the other exceptions, in order to do that type of deal. So in otherwords, unless the Kings are going to make a run at that type of player, and it’s doubtful at best in my opinion at this point, then your scenario works well as a scenario, and not necessarily as one that works in reality.
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
Jul 25, 2008 10:32 PM PDT
up
0 recs
There is no way they use MLE going towards the 2010 season.
And as we have already hashed out, the Kings, by waiving their rights to Williams, Douby and Cook/Moore, trading Artest with K-9 and receiving medical retirement relief from SAR would still have 10 players under contract + 2 draft picks and 1 free-agent = 13 players. This is all a best case scenario situation but one that is actively being sought by Kings management.
iashwash- there are a lot of free-agents in the 2009 off-season, money is going to be tight due to the 2010 dreamfest so a contract starting at 1 million will be very inciting. Even with only 1 million dollar increases that works out to be roughly 5 yr 65 million dollars. That type of money is certainly enough to get a high quality starter.
Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.
by jjham15 on
Jul 26, 2008 9:29 AM PDT
up
0 recs
At which position?
Boozer will make more than that in Utah if he takes a paycut. Ditto with any big. Do you want to commit that type of money with so many role players/budding young stars always available with playing time at the SF position? With all due respect your point is clear, and I get it, and even better I get why, but I just simply disagree. So, in essence here’s why.
The Kings may cut Douby, of which I haven’t ruled out before seeing him given a real shot by Theus, which he hasn’t completely gotten, and I would love to see a year of Singletary and Brown in the backup roles if Theus completely commit’s. (I doubt it. But then again not having Artest on the team could change the way he views next year’s team too.) So, in the end it comes down to what you see as value. I don’t think 65 million on the open market will get you a big like Boozer on the open market (Brand undercut his own market by signing for only “82* million, and Boozer is a better player at this moment in time. Or at least the most “successful” player on a better team than Brand has ever played for. We can leave whose had the better teammates for another discussion though. Boozer win’s that too.)
I think what you’re looking at is Douby and Williams having no value, and I would like to take a what & see approach with regards to both as to what their future value may be. Douby, unlike Williams, makes far less money as a 4th player than Williams would, and it’s unlikely that Douby’s signing would save a substantial money. But because Williams has a higher slot of money coming to him just avoiding the Qualifying Offer stage is reason enough to not offer the 4th year of the rookie scale, and offer a less money/term type of deal. Again, I’ve looked at both’s salaries for next year, and knowing how much Williams would take up cap space, I would rather sign him to a cheap role player type deal next year, than potentially waive him and risk hurt feelings. Or, simply, do whatever need be. I think Douby has more value keeping his contract than Williams, and that’s why I proposed what I did.
I don’t see how the Kings can attract a SG they want over Martin, a PG over Udrih (although there may be one available I’m not thinking about at the moment), a SF that’s worth shelling out that type of dough to, and a PF or C that will come that cheap. I think your point has merit, but doesn’t exist in reality. The Clippers had 2 players opt out of contracts at an unusual time. The Kings won’t be so lucky to have that type of cap room when less teams don’t have it. (I also think signing Baron Davis to a 5 yr 65 mil deal is a huge risk. The Clippers may end up regretting it.)
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
Jul 26, 2008 12:21 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Nice
I plan on reading this at work tomorrow. About to go to sleep for the evening. As much as salary discussions intrigue me, I fear I’d fall asleep at my computer.
Never forget: I am a complete idiot
by Exhibit G on Jul 23, 2008 9:09 PM PDT 0 recs
NICE
Nice numbers work!
I had thought, (without actually crunching the numbers) that if everyting went well, SAR retires ect.., lose Kenny, we’d have only a couple of Mil to play with. (I still think we end up stuck with him – but we’ll see)
1. Thank God someone agrees that garcia should get (soon) and extension at around mid-level. I really do think that a MikkiM trade is the next thing on the list to get our young bigs minutes to develop. Might get something back for him as well. (might not – thats OK)
2. Thats the way it is barring a big trade, Build from what you have now. Maybe a tweak or two with a trade. Sounds about right now for this team to me anyway.
3. So, there’s really no point for Petrie to be in a hurry to trade Artest UNLESS he can actually get something sig. accomplished by doing so. If there are no takers on K-9 (and I’m sceptical [sp? its late) we could be wondering where Artest is going in January ‘09.
Or maybe not. . . .
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on Jul 23, 2008 11:33 PM PDT 0 recs
It's skeptical btw
I don’t think keeping Artest is smart, but I’m sure you could have anticipated that response. I wonder if Petrie and Garcia’s agent have negotiated an extension at all, or if either party is interested in negotiating. We haven’t heard a single word about it. Curious and curiouser I do say.
So, in the end (nothing really matters…..), you still have a capped out team with young players who won’t put the team over the luxury tax to re-sign them. That’s not a bad deal if you ask me.
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
Jul 24, 2008 3:15 AM PDT
up
0 recs
It's still early
on Garcia. An extension by the nd of the season (or sooner) I hope.
My point on Artest is just that I’m not in the ‘addition by subtraction’ camp at this point. Why act like we’ll move him without getting some value (you know the options) in return?
There’s even more pressure on him now to have a good season should he still be with the team come Nov.
As for the young players, I’m encouraged by them. Yes, I’d like to have an Oden or Beasley sitting there developing but:
KMartin: perhaps the best young pure SG in the league 25
Beno: At least a very good PG (neither LA or Boston had a ‘star’) 26
Hawes: We’ll see, considering he just turned 20, its obvious he’s at least a solid NBA player. Not a slug, someone most teams would want in some role.
Garcia: Could become one of the best 6th men in the league, versatile, valuable. 25
SWilliams: I think he could be at least a good #2 PF option, a bruiser/rebounder. It doesn’t look like he’s starter material on a very good team(?) We’ll see if he understands he’s probably a 3-4 mil guy rather than a 8-12 mil guy.
JThompson: ?? shows promise
Singletary/BB; no idea, hopefully one of will stick in this league or better (always intrigued by Petrie’s small school guys like BB) and hell, they retired Singletary’s jersey at Virginia!
Thats a lot of young players, almost all seem to be clearly true NBA talent of some sort and several look like they could be exceptional. I’d like to have a promising 3 sitting there but our other two guys, Salmons and Garcia (who I think is most suited to be a 6th man but would get LOTS of minutes on my team) are both pretty young.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on Jul 24, 2008 8:26 AM PDT 2 recs
That's a mostly fair assessment on what's going on with the Kings minus Artest
I didn’t include Artest in this exercise for several reasons. One he has an expiring contract. Two he has demanded a trade. And Three, he has proven to be unreliable enough for Sacramento that trading him seems more feasible over the summer when complicated deals can take time to sift through. Petrie likes taking time in these matters, as has been stated roughly 3 billion times on StR, and his taking time to do a Ron Artest deal doesn’t necessarily mean one isn’t imminent.
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
Jul 24, 2008 8:46 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I agree
I don’t think there’s any thing I have to quibble with on that. Just expanding and talking about the young players. Too many think the cupboard is bare, its not, though clearly it would be nice to have a really special additional young piece we were Confidant will bloom and get us to the promised land.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on
Jul 24, 2008 9:10 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I agree it was a good breakdown
Now no more catfighting you two!
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
Jul 24, 2008 9:39 AM PDT
up
0 recs
We're actually
crawling with cats at home, they just kept showing up!
don’t know how that happened as I was brought up as a dog person.
(one of them them does like to chew on my shoes and other things for some starnge reason – very un-cat like)
But I guess it rubs off sometimes…..that, and the Sicillian blood.
eternal skeptical optimist
by lietothegirls on Jul 24, 2008 9:45 AM PDT 0 recs
I wish you would have warned me
It appears I fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against a Sicilian when Artest is on the line!
Reference (for any who need it).
by smgmatt on
Jul 24, 2008 9:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
that movie as a reference will never die (thankfully)
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
Jul 24, 2008 10:00 AM PDT
up
0 recs
No
It’s only MOSTLY dead.
TickTickTickTickTickTick
by LeaguePassAddict on
Jul 28, 2008 12:17 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Yes sir you are correct :P
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
Jul 28, 2008 12:24 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I do believe
This is the third time in 24 hours you’ve called me either man, dude or sir.
Obviously my feminine charms aren’t working.
TickTickTickTickTickTick
by LeaguePassAddict on
Jul 28, 2008 12:33 PM PDT
up
0 recs
No they're not
Then again I’m not interested in them either, LPA.
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
Jul 28, 2008 1:05 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I am
PICS PLZ
/ducks SavageBeast haymaker
Kevin Pritchard has Chuck Norris tied up in the trunk of his car.
by otis29 on
Jul 28, 2008 1:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs
No haymaker
I’m more of a shotgun guy. You know, what with the loose Utah firearm laws and all.
"Being loquacious and being right aren't necessarily always the same."
GP, the man, the myth, the legend, puts the smackdown on Reggie
by SavageBeast on
Jul 28, 2008 7:46 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I promise to say 50 feet from you at all times
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
Jul 29, 2008 5:29 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Have funs storming the castle!
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on
Jul 24, 2008 12:38 PM PDT
up
0 recs


