All-Star Weekend: Where Kevin Martin Rumors Go to Die
by Tom Ziller on Feb 13, 2010 7:45 AM PST
in Free Agency/Trades
Email
PrintA quick segue to the real main event of All-Star Weekend: the trade rumors. The most loud reports have been that the Mavericks are close to acquiring Caron Butler and Brendan Haywood from Washington. The other Saturday morning megarumor has Cleveland in discussions to acquire Amar'e Stoudemire.
Dallas has been Martin's most persistent suiter. Phoenix has been up there, too. Knock them two off the list, if these rumors come true.
There's still Houston, and Toronto, and others who will be highly interested in Martin. But taking the best player (Amar'e) rumored in such trades off the table, and taking the owner (Mark Cuban) most likely to spend copious amounts in talent and salary absorption off the table ... and yep, Sam Amick was right all along. Martin ain't getting traded.
Good.
115 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not to go all fanboy
but Amick is almost always right. The beat writers for the bee are pretty solid actually.
she's not a beat writer
she’s a columnist.
"If you told him to head-butt the wall, he would do it." -- Paul Westphal re: Brockness Monster.
by PhutureKings on Feb 14, 2010 6:24 PM PST up reply actions
I still don't get whats up with the Cavs wanting Amare
Didn’t Ferry watch Suns basketball last year? Don’t they know a Shaq-Amare frontcourt won’t work?
And who do they have to trade? all they could probably do is Big Z, Hickson, and a crappy draft pick. The Suns must have better offers than that.
Phil Jackson, after treatment for a kidney stone "When the anesthesiologist leaned over me, he said "We named your kidney stone Kobe because it's not passing."
They are trying to make LaBron happy enough to stay.
Shaq’s deal is up after this season and the Cavs really have a roster of sub-par, over-priced mid level guys eating their cap which can’t be that enticing to LaBron. Phoenix is trying to force Richardson on them in the deal to clear roughly 30 million off next years books. With Z and Shaq dropping off, the Cavs will have some room to lock up Amaré if things work out, if they don’t work out then they could potentially lose both LaBron and Amaré while still being on the hook for Richardson’s 14 mill but its not like Cleavland is high on anybodies list of hot NBA destinations.
The Sacramento Convergence concept offers Sacramento, the Central Valley, and the State a solution to feasibly construct a new multi-use Entertainment and Sports Complex.
who is "LaBron"?
"If you told him to head-butt the wall, he would do it." -- Paul Westphal re: Brockness Monster.
by PhutureKings on Feb 14, 2010 6:24 PM PST up reply actions
He plays for the Nets.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
KMart was not going to get traded unless a super deal came along
and none of the three All-Star names: Stoudamire, Butler, Josh Howard were going to happen.
Next up; Noce?
In other news this morning: Billy Hunter “tore up the CBA proposal after contentious talks on Friday”. The game of chicken starts in earnest. Any Vegas line on a lockout?
I would encourage anyone with NBA TV availability to catch the intreview
with David Aldridge on the CBA meeting. I am basically middle of the road as far as chosing sides and slant slightly more towards the owners as salaries are just so outrageous: that said, Aldrgidge mentions that some of the owners took an unfortunate bullying approach with some distasteful comments (hey, LeBron can go play football, Dwyane Wade can go be a model … (if they don’t like it)).
I am disappointed that the negotiatons would start out this way, I expect a more sensible stance by the owners. They hold the cash, no reason to belittle their employees. Dumb.
by betweentheeyes on Feb 13, 2010 8:23 AM PST up reply actions
pinko
j/k … …………………………………………………………………………………………… … (kinda)
by betweentheeyes on Feb 13, 2010 9:49 PM PST up reply actions
This was an interesting sub-plot to the day.
In other news this morning: Billy Hunter "tore up the CBA proposal after contentious talks on Friday". The game of chicken starts in earnest. Any Vegas line on a lockout?
It looks like the one player one vote has the all-stars a little on edge and rightly so. I like the show of solidarity by the big name dudes to show up and stand by their cohorts but I think this is going to backfire big time. Garnett, Pierce, Rondo, LaBron, etc. ditched their community service commitments to make a point and now David Stern is going to have to fine them and most likely make this whole thing worse. I agree that the joke of a proposal was a non-starter and I’m glad the players made a big play here but they probably should have thought ahead and scheduled the meeting at a time that didn’t interfere with the weekends events.
Interesting tid bits from the contract offer that hadn’t quite made it out before:
Stern wants a contract this June before LaBron, Wade, Bosh, Amaré sign for big money.
If Stern doesn’t get his deal before this years FA, he wants the ability to change the newly signed deals to conform to the new CBA.
Stern wants only half of each contract to be guaranteed.
30% pay reduction on rookie contracts.
20% cut on veterans minimum and the end of MLE.
The Sacramento Convergence concept offers Sacramento, the Central Valley, and the State a solution to feasibly construct a new multi-use Entertainment and Sports Complex.
The owners are playing this really badly
If they really have all the leverage they claim to have, there’s no need to be so transparent about it, its just stupid. The more blustery and the more frontal they are just reveals their apparent fear the cards they’re holding aren’t as strong as they think they are.
I’m glad the players are fighting back a bit, there should be plenty of money to go around in the industry, and I am completely ok with LeBron making $30mil/yr or whatever if that’s what he’s worth in the context on the industry.
What we've got here is, failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach.
Not to pick sides...
but remember that the “context of the industry” will include ticket prices.
I have no problem in theory of these guys making anything. I just know that many fans have already been priced out of the live experience, and it may only get worse.
Personally, I think the owners have the lion’s share of the leverage, if for no other reason than a lot of players in the NBA have not planned for life without paychecks. Sounds crazy, considering how much even the league minimum is, but I think the longer it goes the less united the Players Union will be, which is why the owners are starting so far in their corner.
Ask for EVERYTHING you want, and then when the compromise happens you end up with more than if you came to the table with a reasonable offer to begin with.
topic for discussion: which way will the fans side?
The players are more “like us” in many ways or at least our fantasy versions (does anyone want to be like Donald Sterling? His money maybe, but him? No). We want to see the players rewarded for their skills but no one wants to pay higher ticket prices to do it.
The owners side has us agreeing with the free market system up to a point. There are other Leagues out there (ask Ricky Rubio or Starbury) When the money and the NBA were reaping the rewards of big money, big exposure the players salaries ratched up. Well, the economy is down, the risks are higher and money is tight. The owners have these professional clubs as an amusement business, not a primary money maker.It it loses money they will get bored. TV contracts will most likely go down, advertising dollars are more scarce, disposable income is low – that is a lot of risk. They want to cut expenses and labor costs need to be “re-aligned” (players cannot be furloughed).
My best guess is that the Kings continue to try and cut salary in the wake of these talks and other than the Cavs (maybe Boston as well) who seem to be willing to add salary all other teams will aggressively pursue decreases.
by betweentheeyes on Feb 13, 2010 10:01 AM PST up reply actions
I think the Kings are about fiscal responsibility.
I kind of see Petrie working under the same constraints as Billy Beane of the A’s. By this I mean that Petrie needs to use a combination of young, affordable talent, meshed with veterans players that fit specific roles (Udoka). Like Beane, Petrie is about to have a little bit of cash to spend (see Sheets, Ben) but I think both men understand that you get better through the drafting and development of your young players.
I don’t side with the players or the owners in this debate. Both have had their opportunity to make absorbent amounts of cash. Whether or not they saved some of that hard earned money for the tough times is on them. Obviously the owners and players need each other to make this whole thing work. The one thing that really sits with me is that the owners need to be protected from themselves in this situation which means that as long as there is someone with available cash, even if the numbers have shrunk, a player is going to get paid from someone. That doesn’t bode well for the NBA middle and lower class.
The Sacramento Convergence concept offers Sacramento, the Central Valley, and the State a solution to feasibly construct a new multi-use Entertainment and Sports Complex.
the plight of the bourgeois
in all fairness to the mid level player they are more replaceable. Fans fill the seats to see the stars and buy their merchandise. The NBA is a star driven product.
Part of what undermines the large salary structure is paying $4-8M/year to a Kenny Thomas or Nocioni. The owners write the checks – they are liable for the contracts they sign (I too don’t blame the players. If someone wants to pay me a ridiciulous sum I wouldn’t deny them the opportunity). Your point that the owners worst (financial) enemy is themselves is at the core of the negotiation.
by betweentheeyes on Feb 13, 2010 10:57 AM PST up reply actions
To be fair though....
…many players play for the paycheck. So the effort that went forward to EARN that paycheck, is not the same effort being exerted AFTER the paycheck. Thus, making some signing looks worse than they could be by a true professional.
The size of the pie
is a completely different question from how to divide the pie. Ticket prices are what the league thinks will maximize revenue over time. Do you believe if player costs went down suddenly that ticket prices would follow?
Now, the league could determine that ticket prices were too high for a variety of reasons and determine they need to lower them and that revenue would decrease. In that scenario, they may ask the players for lower salaries. But the cause is too little revenue and the effect lower salaries. I promise the opposite cause and effect wouldn’t work out in anything but the most superficial, appease the masses way.
I don’t think even the most cynical owner would frame the discussion as “we need to win this so we can lower ticket prices”, no one would buy that.
What we've got here is, failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach.
by Grasul on Feb 13, 2010 10:15 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Nope
I wasn’t even hinting that ticket prices would go down if player salaries went down, but I will say that if the player salaries continue to raise that ticket prices will raise right with them. To quote myself:
I just know that many fans have already been priced out of the live experience, and it may only get worse.
Owners will always to whatever they can to maximize profits. I don’t expect ticket prices to fall unless absolutely necessary, and I do expect ticket prices to raise as high as the demand will allow. I’m not naive about it.
I would agrue that ticket prices are not tied to player salary at all
Ticket prices will be as high as possible at all times. A rise in player salaries just cuts into the owner’s profit margin. If the owners start losing money, they do what they are doing now. Squeeze the players, move franchises, etc.
Don't say stupid shit. You won’t be perceived as stupid. - pookeyguru
by Kfan in Korea on Feb 13, 2010 2:32 PM PST up reply actions
I agree
As I said, I expect ticket prices to raise as high as the demand will allow.
That said, they might even go higher than that if player salaries continue to raise. To oversimplify it, think of it as artificially inflating the demand.
I don’t think that player salaries are directly connected to ticket prices, but I do think that they can/have/will be used as a reason/excuse to raise them beyond what the market would settle on otherwise.
maybe
but I don’t agree with using that as a reason to cut the player’s salaries.
The current system of setting the salary cap at a percentage of NBA revenue is perfect, and fair. If they want to make it a hard cap. That would be okay, but the other stuff is just a money grab on the part of the owners.
Don't say stupid shit. You won’t be perceived as stupid. - pookeyguru
by Kfan in Korea on Feb 13, 2010 3:03 PM PST up reply actions
Slow Down, Hoss
I never said anything about cutting players’ salaries.
To be honest, I don’t even know how much I care about the details of the new CBA, so long as it works out well overall.
All I pointed out was that thinking like this:
…I am completely ok with LeBron making $30mil/yr or whatever if that’s what he’s worth in the context on the industry.
had the potential to backfire against fans. Perhaps I’m picking nits here, but “context of the industry” leaves too much room for fans to get the dirty end of the stick. The reality is that I partially agree with the statement, as I won’t lose any sleep if LeBron (for example) makes $50M/year.
Actually, I was hoping Kobe would beat LeBron to the punch and take a $50M Italy gig . . . but that has more to do with him being gone from LA than player salaries in general. As you were.
I never said you ever said anything about cutting players' salaries
but that’s the Owners’ desire. I was just summing up my position.
Don't say stupid shit. You won’t be perceived as stupid. - pookeyguru
by Kfan in Korea on Feb 13, 2010 9:11 PM PST up reply actions
Kfan you get it
I have been self employed most of my working life and as such have been a “boss” for longer than I was a “worker” but nevertheless I have almost no sympathy for the team owners. I don’t get upset by players salary anymore than I do about Tom Cruise’s or Brad Pitt’s contract per movie. They are all in the entertainment business and are going to get as much as the market will bear/bare (wtf?)
If a studio signs a star to a 3 picture deal for $20 mil per film and he stops selling tickets too bad. On the other hand if the movie turns into Avatar or Star Wars or whatever, hurray for everybody involved in the flick. I been watching Harrison Ford movies (occasionally) for the last 30 years and he basically can’t act, has one tortured expression and has been paid hundreds of millions of dollars over his storied career. He was a carpenter, he got lucky, good for him.
In the entertainment business most movies, books, CD’s, TV pilots never make back their production costs. In spite of that, movies are still being greenlighted, aspiring writers are banging away on their laptops and lousy television pilots that will never see the light of day are getting approved for an initial 9 episodes. The entertainment business by it’s very nature is a crap shoot. Investors are still putting their capitol at risk with little chance of earning it back in the hope that the project they’re backing is going to be the next one rocketing up the charts.
In all major league sports the average career still only lasts 3 years. Most second round picks in the NBA draft never have an NBA career. Remember the movie Jerry McGuire? “Show me the money” That’s the main motivation for most players, most owners too. If you think any of them are motivated by more noble emotions you are deluded. We tend to break down to it’s simplest terms, black versus white, owners, (good and honorable) versus the players (greedy primadonnas).
We are going to be discussing/arguing about the next CBA for months and regardless how it all shakes out the solutions are neither simple or easy. At this point a lockout appears almost certain but I can only think that the owners first move was grounded in bad faith.
"I make love to pressure" - Stephen Jackson
A lockout of the NFL and NBA....
…At the same time would be a catastrophe.
It should come down to ticket prices.
When owners don’t get the seats filled at games, they make less money. If they make less money, then there is less money to pay the players. It is a business. Teams cannot operate indefinitely without making a profit. When players end up making so much money resulting in ticket prices going sky high that people can no longer afford them, then something needs to be done. We are at that point.
To be the best, you have to do your best. Otherwise, you are only second-rate.
When you go to the store
and see the big screen TV for $2,000 and think that’s too high, do you blame the workers that made it?
The players make a percentage of revenue, so the owners already have a sweetheart deal. Their main cost is a variable one, in bad economies the players already get less. Its not the player’s job to control the owner’s desire to overspend. When you go ask your boss for a raise, is it your responsibility to worry about whether or not the company can afford it or his/hers?
I’m not taking sides, I honestly don’t care how the players/owners divide up the spoils from the unbelievable money making machine that’s called the NBA, except that I hope whatever system they work out makes for a relatively even playing field for all teams. But the idea that men worth hundreds of millions of dollars, most of whom control vast business empires, can’t control themselves when it comes to playing employees is laughable at best.
What we've got here is, failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach.
by Grasul on Feb 13, 2010 10:51 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
This is part of the point I am making.
Your metaphor of workers making a big screen TV is not the same as players in the NBA. There is a cap on the workers that make the big screen TV. It is supply and demand, which operates to keep salaries in check.
Supply and demand operates differently in the NBA. First, there is the problem that I used in regard to ticket prices. At some point, the players make so much money that ticket prices become too high for a lot of people. Owners jack up prices to cover their overhead. The other problem, that you allude to is the fact that some teams can afford more than other teams. This makes for an unfair playing field. In order for a team to be a contender, it requires a lot of money to get the best players. Here is where it comes down to the day-to-day operations of a franchise to pay these salaries and at the same time take in income in the form of ticket sales and other forms of revenue from the team.
The men “worth hundreds of millions of dollars, most of whom control vast business empires” still need to make business decisions about their franchises that makes financial sense.
To be the best, you have to do your best. Otherwise, you are only second-rate.
Where we disagree is this statement:
First, there is the problem that I used in regard to ticket prices. At some point, the players make so much money that ticket prices become too high for a lot of people. Owners jack up prices to cover their overhead.
I would disagree with you this is how NBA teams price their tickets. They probably don’t figure out what the players cost and then say they have to charge $X.
They determine what the market will bear and charge that, then compare it to their costs. Especially because in the current CBA the players get a percentage of basketball related revenue.
The owners are going to charge you whatever they can, regardless of their cost structure because that’s in their best interests. The salaries they pay players are determined by revenue, not the other way around. So if the players suddenly got paid less, it would be because revenue had declined, but ticket prices have very little, if anything, to do with what the players are paid.
Its why having sides in this dispute as a fan probably doesn’t matter. We just need to hope this pile of dumbass millionaires, on both sides, can come to a reasonable comprimise so we can keep enjoying the league.
What we've got here is, failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach.
by Grasul on Feb 13, 2010 11:47 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Your argument is that ticket sales has nothing to do with player salaries.
So if the players suddenly got paid less, it would be because revenue had declined, but ticket prices have very little, if anything, to do with what the players are paid.
Taken to the extreme, let’s say that there is zero income from ticket sales. If there is no income from ticket sales, then where does all the money come from to pay player’s salaries? Is it just a bunch of rich business men, paying millions of dollars for expensive players, playing a fancy game of team basketball against each other with no financial incentive?
To be the best, you have to do your best. Otherwise, you are only second-rate.
That's not my argument
my argument is ticket prices are set to where the owners think they will maximize revenue. This decision is independent of what player salaries are.
If the maximum revenue the NBA could make were to drop to zero, of course that would impact the players, just like the owners right now are using the recession as leverage over the players.
What we've got here is, failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach.
I can't understand why fans side with owners in a dispute that is about money and nothing else.
It certainly isn’t about making the NBA more competitive.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I don't see ticket prices independent of player salaries.
I see that there are fans, owners, and players. I see all of them connected through money. The owners need to have money to pay the players. The fans are one source of income (money). I don’t any of these factors as independent of each other.
To be the best, you have to do your best. Otherwise, you are only second-rate.
I admire your faith in humanity
while in friendly disagreement.
What we've got here is, failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach.
you can't compare capitilism in a free market
to the free market(agency) in the NBA.
They’re entirely different beasts with SOME similarities. Taking it all the way to compare them as equivalents is intellectually dishonest.
This just shows the trade K-Mart crowd was right
No one wants a soft, injury-prone player who is washed up and mentally weak. So, for the rest of the year, Evans will have to play out of position at the point. K-Mart will hog the ball and whine like he always does. The Kings will lose games they could have won without him. His overinflated contract is worse then K-9’s. Peaches was right all along. I guess they’ll have to become fans of teams with a real backcourt.
"And I never said I don’t like KMart. I just don’t think the duo is good for the team. They are essentially two of the same player"
Sammyp831.
by SavageBeast on Feb 13, 2010 8:53 AM PST reply actions 2 recs
fReke naPG?
Say it ain’t so!
Purveyor of Bull Plop
Yep
Reke isn’t a PG and K-mart can’t shoot and Brock isn’t a banger.
"And I never said I don’t like KMart. I just don’t think the duo is good for the team. They are essentially two of the same player"
Sammyp831.
So Martin and Reke = NaBC
Not a back court?
There are some guys smarter than me, some guys better looking, I take comfort in the fact that there is no guy that is both.
No need to add that
Unless you’re a little slow. Not you mookie of course
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
This.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Peaches=Douche Nozzle!
Purveyor of Bull Plop
Someone fell into the Sarchasm.
Grandmaster of the "Never let AnotherStupidSN forget what a Sham-Wow is" Order and Originator of the "Brock Ness Monster".
It's a joke, son
"And I never said I don’t like KMart. I just don’t think the duo is good for the team. They are essentially two of the same player"
Sammyp831.
That boy is so dumb,
he thinks the Mexican border pays rent.
Classic.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
Is it just me?
Wouldn’t Sacramento want to get in on this if that’s all Washington is asking for?
K9, Hilton, & Sergio (all expiring) for Butler & Haywood works (WAS saves $2.6M this year & $10.5M next year).
K9 & Noc for Butler, Haywood, & Stevenson works as well (WAS saves $3.3M & $7.25M next year).
This just seems to my like a good way to pick up some talent, even if it just facilitates another deal down the road.
Dallas is probably offering Josh Howard
who is a better talent than K9, Hilton and Sergio. They can see how they like him this year and then either pick his option up or not next year.
Grandmaster of the "Never let AnotherStupidSN forget what a Sham-Wow is" Order and Originator of the "Brock Ness Monster".
Let me assure you
The Wizards do not want Josh Howard for his talent. They want to cut the last year out of his contract. They’re the same price. Caron’s having a better year. They want Howard because next year is a team option they can opt out of
www.mancancook.net
The amazing thing is that Dallas could get Haywood for less of a price if he works out next summer than they could if they were bidding for his services over the FA market.
If Dallas ends up getting Haywood, Butler and Stevenson, that is the best deadline deal they could make IMO. None of those deals last past 2011.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I'll be honest
I’m still worried about Boston sending Ray Allen for Kevin and Noc. Maybe it’s because we play them Tuesday but that rumor still bugs me
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
hey everyone (types in whispers so Ed won't hear)
shhhh… ok, let’s go up to Kevin Martin and Ray Allen and before the game begins on Tuesday we ask them to change jerseys for the shoot around just to freak Ed out. Big laughs!
Gosh, I am so funny, sometimes I just kill myself. sheesh.
by betweentheeyes on Feb 13, 2010 10:45 AM PST up reply actions
Haha
I’m actually going to the game. I got a group rate for people in my office and we’re all going on tuesday. My boss is a big Celtics fan and keeps teasing me how I’m going to wear a Kevin Martin jersey at the game but he’s really going to be wearing Celtics green. I’m terrified
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
I actually find that deal a little intriguing
I have to confess I don’t know anything about Noc’s trade value (positive or negative) outside of the summary that’s on the front page.
Would any other team actually want him and his contract? If the answer is no, and they need incentive, sending him to boston sounds kind of interesting, gives us cap room etc.
Just seems like after the Ray Allen rental, we wouldn’t have a real 2 guard anymore.
Ok nevermind, talked myself out of it.
by TheFifthMookie on Feb 13, 2010 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
I think Noce could be attractive to a team like San Antonio or Boston
who are, so far, looking old and looking like they need more help. My hope is that one of those teams realizes they just need more and give up expirings for Noce. As the deadline draws near, more deals like these will be discussed, especially for teams that need to go all in this year if they want to win it all.
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
I always thought that once San Antonio's aging core retires
that they’d be a lottery team, but I’m seriously doubting that now. If Blair’s health holds up, he and Hill are nice pieces, with Blair potentially being a franchise player. The guy is a beast, liable to go for 20-20 all day. And thats not to mention Tiago Splitter, who is probably the best Foreign Center not in the NBA, and is coming over next year.
Grandmaster of the "Never let AnotherStupidSN forget what a Sham-Wow is" Order and Originator of the "Brock Ness Monster".
And Tony PArker is not THAT old either
Maybe one bad year where they pick a good player in the draft and they could go from there. What a great franchise they are
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
Yes and that was luck
Lucking into the 1st pick, and that 1st pick being Tim Duncan was perfect for that franchise. From then on, they’ve made some good decisions
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
How are they going to pay Splitter Aykis?
Because he has a contract with Tau that runs up until 2012. I doubt Tau just releases Splitter out of his contract out of the goodness of their heart.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I'm not sure
but I believe he has a buyout. Plus, the reason he didn’t come over these past few years is because he wanted to avoid the Rookie Scale. Spurs can pay him much more than that and possibly cut the buyout that way.
Grandmaster of the "Never let AnotherStupidSN forget what a Sham-Wow is" Order and Originator of the "Brock Ness Monster".
The only way they can do that is if they are under the cap.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Which unless Richard Jefferson opts out that won't happen.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
They can pay him using their MLE or bi-annual exception, though
When life gives you lemons, just say "f--- the lemons" and bail
by CaliforniaJag on Feb 13, 2010 3:13 PM PST up reply actions
Show me how you can do this.
Show me what proof you have that you can do this under this CBA.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
You gave me this link before:
When a team signs a first round draft pick within three years after he is drafted, they use the salary scale for the year in which he signs (usually the player signs in the same year he is drafted). After three years they have the option of either using the salary scale or signing him like he was a free agent — using their cap room, the Mid-Level exception, the exception or the Disabled Player exception, and with standard raises. They can only do the latter if the player did not play intercollegiately in the interim, and such a contract must be for at least three seasons.
Found via this link.
When life gives you lemons, just say "f--- the lemons" and bail
by CaliforniaJag on Feb 13, 2010 6:34 PM PST up reply actions
Don't see where you're getting that info from.
Now I found the link. Good find PTBNL. (It’s question #42 on the FAQ not 19.)
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Hey Pook, not to change the subject, but
I saw this quote
Hunter detailed that proposal, delivered to the union on Jan. 29, on Friday. Among the league’s ideas, according to Hunter, were a reduction in the players’ revenue share to less than 50 percent, the institution of a “hard” salary cap, elimination of guaranteed contracts, revision of current player contracts and the elimination of cap exceptions, such as “Bird” rights.
I see where reducing revenue share to <50%, having a Hard Cap, ending guaranteed contracts, and revising current contracts helps the Owners. But, how does eliminating exemptions and Bird rights, help teams? I can see where it goes in line with a Hard Cap, but wouldn ‘t the Bird rights be better for small market teams? There are other benefits to big markets besides salary, so if the small markets can’t offer higher salaries what’s to keep the player from moving on and looking for big endorsement money or fancier life style in a Major market.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
The greatest impact player in NBA History - Tim Donaghy
Basically what allows teams to circumvent the cap is cap exceptions
So getting rid of the Bird exception, the Mid-Level exception and Bi-Annual exception means that championship teams couldn’t keep all their players unless they had the ability to pay them all. Or some such. Right now, the only thing keeping teams from keeping all their players is their own choices.
Here is how Coon explains it (it’s at the very bottom of the paragraph of Q20) if you don’t understand what I said:
The whole idea behind an “exception” is that it is an exception to the rule which says a team has to be below the salary cap. In other words, an exception is a mechanism which allows a team to function above the cap. If a team isn’t over the cap, then the concept of an exception is moot. Therefore, if a team’s team salary ever drops this far, its exceptions go away. The effect is that a team may have either exceptions or cap room, but they can’t have both.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I understand that exemptions and Hard Cap aren't compatible
But, my question is Wouldn’t eliminating Bird Rights hurt small market teams more than big market ones, and wouldn’t it be better for the players?
Take the Kings. we have Tyreke and Omri, and say Wall in the next draft. As their rookie contracts expire their going to want a big pay raise. Couldn’t that force a team who drafts well to be forced to let one of their #1 picks go because they don’t have Bird rights anymore. And, with a lower rookie scale they wouldn’t get much in return. Players would be jumping from team to team every year.
I don’t think it’s good for teams to have key players jumping from team to team every year. They’d have to have the names and numbers velcroed onto the fan’s jerseys.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
The greatest impact player in NBA History - Tim Donaghy
nice line HT, rec'd
I don’t think it’s good for teams to have key players jumping from team to team every year. They’d have to have the names and numbers velcroed onto the fan’s jerseys
It is akin to the “make every contract one season long only”, in that it would just kill the fan base and the small market teams. I don’t want to see the NBA become Major League Baseball.
I would hope that the NBA and David Stern have more wisdom than that. They are helping the Kings ownership to stay in Sacramento with the Arena proposal with the promotion of the Kings players this ASW. Eliminating the advantage of keeping players with the teams that draft or trade for them would undermine their franchises and their respective fan base. Perhaps a different exception or salary structure will emerge and Larry Bird will have to be just known as a basketball playing legend, a mediocre GM and the second most famous NBA relation to French Lick, Indiana.
by betweentheeyes on Feb 14, 2010 2:40 PM PST up reply actions
The thing is that the hard cap works in the NFL because I think more fans are attached to the teams than players.
In the NBA it’s really the opposite despite what some will say. The Hard Cap will never work in the NBA. The owners are trying to have their cake, eat it, and have the players cake and eat it on top of that.
For perspective, I would prefer a hard cap and wide sweeping changes come in. All that does though is create new problems. New problems that even the NBA, it’s ownership and GM’s can’t anticipate. The players will have new problems too. It’s a totally different ballgame.
Unfortunately I don’t think the Kings can be a successful with a hard cap AND without a completely unchecked local revenue. Local revenue doesn’t exist in the NFL the way it does in the NBA.
I actually like so many fans care about this topic and are talking about it instead of the summer of ’11. Gives time for people to think about what MAY happen.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
The thing is that the hard cap works in the NFL because I think more fans are attached to the teams than players.
In the NBA it’s really the opposite despite what some will say. The Hard Cap will never work in the NBA. The owners are trying to have their cake, eat it, and have the players cake and eat it on top of that.
For perspective, I would prefer a hard cap and wide sweeping changes come in. All that does though is create new problems. New problems that even the NBA, it’s ownership and GM’s can’t anticipate. The players will have new problems too. It’s a totally different ballgame.
Unfortunately I don’t think the Kings can be a successful with a hard cap AND without a completely unchecked local revenue. Local revenue doesn’t exist in the NFL the way it does in the NBA.
I actually like so many fans care about this topic and are talking about it instead of the summer of ’11. Gives time for people to think about what MAY happen.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
If we're talking about Bird right specifically
we’re talking about the right to pay your player more than anyone else correct?
Without that ability, if, when a player became a free agent all teams under the cap could offer the same contract, the teams it would hurt presumably are “unpopular” destinations.
For example, Toronto right now holds onto hope Bosh will resign with them because they can offer him the most money. If Bird righrs didn’t exist, Toronto would have no plausible reason to believe Bosh would re-sign because its likely all things being equal he’d choose to live in Miami (no state income tax, Wade and the beach) over snow.
At first blush, no Bird rights sounds like a disaster for the league, because it would suck the long-term hope out of less glamorous markets. We all assume Tyreke’s going to be here a long time right? With no Bird rights, how can you presume he’d stay past his first contract? Honestly, why would he? And who could blame him?
What we've got here is, failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach.
I imagine that owners are trying a PR blitz
Especially the few owners who are pushing the hard cap. But, they’ll start discussing it and they won’t be able to figure out how to control their stars.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
It's not just the ability to pay more,
it’s the ability to pay more while going over the cap. It’s a cap exemption.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
The greatest impact player in NBA History - Tim Donaghy
Damn, sorry
I should’ve told you which question it was located in. My bad, man.
When life gives you lemons, just say "f--- the lemons" and bail
by CaliforniaJag on Feb 13, 2010 10:28 PM PST up reply actions
No worries.
Gave me another chance to hone my FAQ skills. LOL
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Cisco coming back is a big key and not out the woods yet
With Cisco coming back, Petrie has to do something. He can play SF, SG, and can handle the Point. And, he plays defense. The “problem” with Cisco is he gives the Kings even more flexibility. IMO, sending Noce or Beno with KT’s contract away is just not enough to really get the KIngs’s roster organized. If Cisco can handle the point duties at times, then what is the need for Sergio? If if can back up Casspi at SF, then what is the need for Noce. At the same time, I believe Beno has to stay to back up Evans, he can play the point when Evans takes a breather and he can play with Evans too. But Beno can be moved to for cap flexibiltiy.
IMO, Noce, KT, and Sergio are definitely on the blocks for the obvious reasons we have known about for a long time. To let KT’s contract expire for the hell of it and get nothing in return or not use it to help us get rid of some of “garbage” does not make sense. Getting rid of Noce by himself is just not gonna work, there needs to be some incentive for the other team. Is KT with Noce enough incentive for someone to take Noce? I do not think so. Yea, maybe for someone lilke Kirk H. which solves nothing.
Between Noce, Garcia, and Beno, one or two of them has to go.
I believe if you wannt get rid of Noce, something else beside KT has to be going out. If we had another big exprining to package with KT and Noce, that would be some incentive, but we do not have that either.
So what is that other piece? I believe we have 3 pieces to offer so Noce can go and so we can get something decent in return. Martin, JT, and Spence. And unfortunately for some members, I keep thinking Martin is that other attractive piece that other teams would want so Noce can leave.
This then leaves KT’s contract for us to make another move.
I keep looking at the possible solutions/combinations in moving Noce, KT, Beno or Garcia for improving cap space, getting better, getting the roster organized and somehow Martin just keeps coming up as a key piece to improve the puzzle.
I do not think you are out of the woods with Martin.
by noreboundsnorings on Feb 13, 2010 10:59 AM PST reply actions
Kevin Martin has value, no doubt about it
and could very well be included in a deal to move of Noce or Beno (or both?). I think it’s up to the FO to decide whether they feel like moving either of those contratcs is worth losing Kevin Martin.
While there’s a clear logjam at a couple spots once Cisco returns, if you just let K-9, Sergio, May, and Armstrong expire, the Kings would still be under the cap and would have just a little to spend. Worst case scenario, you go into next year with the same team (minus the expirings) + your picks next year, that’s not a bad proposition.
I don’t feel like a move absolutely needs to happen.
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
To add
and also please note I’m not advocating NOT making a move, I just don’t think one is absolutely needed at this stage.
This would be the depth chart next year:
PG: Reke, Beno
SG: KEvin, Cisco
SF: Omri, Donte
PF: JT, Noce
C: Hawes, (big man draft pick)
Others: Brockman, resign Ime?, 2nd rounder?
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
Martin>Beno>Noc>Cisco
In terms of real value to the Kings, this is just how it is. Noc is ahead of Cisco, because he at least has some value on the trade market, now, or in the summer. Beno has proven his worth as a backup. Cisco is going to take minutes away from Casspi and Greene, and has the worst contract of the bunch. I’m hoping someone will want him next year.
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
disagree
Cisco has no value, because no one knows what he’ll play like when he comes back, so the market isn’t good or bad, it flat out doesn’t exist.
Noc has negative value, we’ll have to take something bad back to make him go away.
But nothing has to be done, sure the team is unbalanced, but that’s not the end of the world. Its just reality for another year or two.
What we've got here is, failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach.
agreed
either Beno or Cisco should be traded by the deadline next year. We need one of them around to do back up ball handling duties.
by TheFifthMookie on Feb 13, 2010 11:29 AM PST reply actions
I want to see TWO things accomplished in any Kevin Martin deal...
1) It nets us a legitimate upgrade from Kevin’s talent level at the FRONT COURT position. In fact, I would package Martin and Thompson together to get an UPGRADE from kevin’s level at the 4 spot.
2) I want to see him packaged with BOTH Nocioni and Udrih and get us some expirings(or 2011 expirings – McGrady, Kirilenko, Dalemebert etc.) along with at LEAST one B+ level prospect i.e. Aaron Brooks, Knicks pick via Utah, Kendrick Perkins etc.
If neither of those are accomplished, then I’m perfectly fine keeping Martin going forward.
The way I see it we have 6 trade pieces
K9
Noc
HA
May
I didnt put Garcia for now hesitantly because if we do move multiple of these guys we could make him included in the trade. We don’t know how he’s gonna play when he gets back, I like Beno backing up PG and SG more, he’s got 4 more years on his contract, and i can’t see letting him take minutes from Casspi/Donte. We are looking at the remaining players left as
Reke>Beno
Martin>Garcia
Casspi>Udoka
Donte>Brockman
JT>Hawes
I think with JT playing the 5, you get the rebounds that Donte isnt getting at the 4 until he learns that part of his game.
With 14 in EC’s (May, HA, K9), a serviceable SF thats a little more then 20 million. I would like to see someone like Big Z rental for the year, which still gives us EC(For someone not used like HA/K9) or for a Noc and HA.
Judgment day is coming!
FYI
An “absorbent” amount of money wouldn’t necessarily be a lot of money as that would imply only the amount of cash needed to soak up a given amount of liquid. What you probably meant is “exorbitant”. Common mistake… Of course the absorbent amount to soak up lake tahoe would be a shitload of cash. So there’s that.
by TheFNG on Feb 13, 2010 1:06 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Uh what?
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Nice try
But I meant “absorption.” As in, Cuban’s Mavs can “absorb” salaries — Beno and Noc — without batting an eye.
First up, who fuck cares.
I’ve contributed a few thousand words to the discussion today so if you go through my work there may be a few others that won’t pass the OED test.
Learn how to use the reply button, make more than 5 or 6 comments and be a member for more than 4 days and then come back and see me. I don’t want to be an ass but add something to the discussion and not just be a know it all d-bag.
Oh yeah and Cole Aldrich is a stiff.
The Sacramento Convergence concept offers Sacramento, the Central Valley, and the State a solution to feasibly construct a new multi-use Entertainment and Sports Complex.
If Kevin gets traded now,
I blame Ziller for jinxing it. Ziller!
Don't say stupid shit. You won’t be perceived as stupid. - pookeyguru
by Kfan in Korea on Feb 13, 2010 2:36 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Interesting Dichotemy
IMHO the owners have a right to make a profit, capitalism at its finest and as fans we sometimes forget that. A couple of issues that I see are that there are owners that have teams for ego “Mark Cuban” et al that do not care as much about the profits, they impact the salary and how the league operates. So how do you make money, which is their right while still putting an excellent product on the floor? It is not a simple answer, but I do believe gauranteed contracts are a huge problem and need to be limited, and every contract should have a bad behavior clause that immediately fines a player 1 years salary for egregious crimes or acts that negatively impact the brand, and bans then from the game for a second offense. I am not pollyanna by any form or fashion, but gauranteed contracts and shitty behavior detract from a great product and create financial issues that the Fans pay for.
I agree with the points you are making regarding teams and money making.
At the end of the day, there should be an even playing field for everyone and those who manage well should be able to turn a profit. In order for this to occur, some limits need to be implemented. Everyone will benefit. The basketball players will continue to make good salaries. The really big bucks they can make from endorsements.
To be the best, you have to do your best. Otherwise, you are only second-rate.
to be a bit argumentative
you can’t have a free market and restraint. I don’t think that is what either of you (W2W or Slam) are proposing but it may be more difficult to attain this ideal than semantics and writing some new rules.
by betweentheeyes on Feb 14, 2010 2:43 PM PST up reply actions
Who said it would be easy?
To be the best, you have to do your best. Otherwise, you are only second-rate.
Out of curiosity:
What shitty behavior detracts from a great product? What kind of shitty behavior to which are you referring? And how is guaranteed contracts hurting every team?
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
(Point about Guaranteed Contracts: Didn't the Kings have in 2001-02 have guaranteed contracts? I mean, it's amazing how many games they would have won that year IF THEY DIDN'T have guaranteed contracts.)
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I did not say we should not have them I just think they create a huge problem
This is a tough subject, BTE said it well above it is hard to have Free Market with restraint.
Agent 0
I think any behavior that dtracts form the brand like Agent 0’s last stunt is a good example. I just do not belive in gauranteed contracts as you should be paid relative to the value you add to the brand. I am ok with partial gaurantees but think that fully gauranteed contracts do not benefit the league as players coast when they get their pay day. I did not say they hurt every team, but if I were to analyze it I am sure that every team has a gauranteed contract on a player that is coasting, if they got rid of that player then they could improve. Of course the counter is the owners should not have made a bad business decsion and should pay. Of course the owners need gauranteed contracts to be offered to keep a salary cap. so back to my original statement, it is not easy. I
Gil was a quack in 2003, and in 2008. Ultimately that's the Wiz's problem as I see it.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Shane Battier knocks Greg Ostertag
- A preview of Tom Thibodeau’s All-Star coaching style
- The Three-Point Shootout participants have been named
- Jeremy Lin finally gets a new apartment, and a place in NBA history
- Wizards owner Ted Leonsis takes a needless swipe at his team’s fan bloggers
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
