Marcus Thornton Front-Loaded Contract Can Help Only A Little

by Tom Ziller on Nov 30, 2011 7:53 AM PST in Commentary

In comments and the FanPosts, there's been talk about the idea of frontloading a contract for Marcus Thornton to help the Sacramento Kings getting closer to the payroll minimum ($49 million) without blowing all of the team's cap space on a bad free agent class and keeping the cap sheet a bit cleaner going forward as Tyreke Evans approaches a lucrative extension. It's a great idea.

Unfortunately, assuming that the new collective bargaining agreement limits frontloading in the same fashion that the old one did, it's not going to make a massive impact.

The old CBA limited frontloading for cap purposes to the inverse of the maximum raise. For instance, teams could sign another team's free agent to a contract with maximum raises of 8 percent. The CBA allowed contracts to decrease that same amount -- 8 percent.

The new CBA will limit Bird rights free agents (of which Thornton is for the Kings) to maximum raises of 7.5 percent. Assuming the frontloading rule is not adjusted under the radar, that means that Sacramento -- if Thornton agrees to it -- could invert the traditional contract.

Say Thornton and the Kings agree to a five-year, $34.5 million deal. (That's just a hair under $7 million per season.) A normal contract with 7.5 percent raises would start at $6 million. In 2012-13, it'd go up to $6.45 million. In '13-14 (when Evans' extension kicks in), it's $6.9 million. In '14-15 (when a prospective DeMarcus Cousins extension would kick in), it's $7.35 million. In '15-16 (Jimmer time), it's $7.8 million.

Under the old rules that we can assume will remain the new rules, the best the Kings could do as far as frontloading on the cap sheet on a five-year, $34.5 million deal is ...

$7.8M | $7.35M | $6.9M | $6.45M | $6M

Again, that helps. But the team can't pay him $10 million this deal and $4 million in 2016. Not unless the rules change dramatically.

This is all separate from the signing bonus, which doesn't have a real salary cap impact but forces the team to pay more of the actual salary up-front. I imagine the Kings would oppose such a deal based on the team being kinda broke.

Tweet Comment 51 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Thanks for clearing that up!

Still would help us a couple million to get to the minimum this year though.

by rekehavoc13jimmer7 on Nov 30, 2011 8:11 AM PST reply actions

Watever it takes for us to be able to keep Evans, thorton & cousins togetha im all for it.

by Shabazz916 on Nov 30, 2011 8:26 AM PST via mobile reply actions

But any three guys can pass to Jimmer just as easily. I guess I don’t see the importance.

"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!

by caseycheesecake on Nov 30, 2011 8:34 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs

Good point!

Thomas,Honeycutt,Whiteside can pass the ball to Jimmer just as well as Evans,DMC,& MT saves us 30M to give Jimmer his 500M 4 year deal!

by rekehavoc13jimmer7 on Nov 30, 2011 8:46 AM PST via mobile up reply actions 2 recs

Glad you posted this TZ

I knew frontloading wouldn’t help as much as people had hoped, but I didn’t know the specific rule. It still helps some though, and I think we should definitely do it anyway, so we have a little bit more room going forward.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Nov 30, 2011 8:44 AM PST reply actions

I agree. I'd still front load it. The Kings could need all the money they can get as Evans/Cousins/Jimmer contracts start coming up

by HeuristicLineup on Nov 30, 2011 9:32 AM PST up reply actions

Nice Write-up, TZ

Frontloading helps, even if it’s minimal. If the team were to make frontloading a normal practice, the sum of contracts would incrementally benefit the salary cap situation. Thornton’s contract alone may not be a major deal, but combined with another FA or two, it could be important. It’s basically deciding when the cap space is important. Now, or a few years form now? Plus, it may make it tougher for a team to match a restricted FA’s offer sheet if the Kings were to offer bigger money now.

by IamPurple on Nov 30, 2011 9:07 AM PST reply actions

Good Stuff

It seemed too good to be true, but it looks like something that could help out some. Now if only we could find a way to amnesty Slamson…

by gregory l on Nov 30, 2011 9:08 AM PST reply actions

I don't understand TZ

According to what I can find Wesley Mathews signed a contact with Portland

9.2
6.1
6.5
6.8
7.2

The front load on that is supposedly why Utah didn’t match

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 9:08 AM PST reply actions

I believe that's just restructured is all.

The years if aligned in numerical order of greatest to least or vice versa still falls within the 8% raise/decline rule.

by Smills9133 on Nov 30, 2011 9:22 AM PST up reply actions

Your salary info is incorrect.

Use ShamSports, best cap/salary info around.

According to that, Wes signed a full 5 year MLE starting at $5.765 million.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Nov 30, 2011 9:32 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Sham has a note on Matthews

That Wes had a $5.7 million signing bonus, which could be where that 9.2 number is coming from, but that doesn’t count with regards to how the contract affects the salary cap.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Nov 30, 2011 9:33 AM PST up reply actions

Right

That’s just actual salary paid by the team. The cap hit is as Sham has it.

by Tom Ziller on Nov 30, 2011 10:01 AM PST up reply actions

I see, he's actually getting paid less than shown now

but the signing bonus is spread out over the length of the deal as far as a cap hit is concerned.
I assume the first year payroll hit as regards to Cap, lux tax and team salary minimum still applies however.

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 10:24 AM PST up reply actions

I had a feeling there was some rule like this

I had OKC’s contract with Nick Collison in mind during yesterday’s discussion, but apparently that was done via signing bonus.

TZ, you seem to say that because the team is broke they wouldn’t consider the signing bonus route. But again, they’re going to have to spend a certain amount to meet the floor anyway. Why not do it in a smart and proactive way?

by LPKingsFan on Nov 30, 2011 9:21 AM PST reply actions

To be more clear

does a signing bonus not count in terms of meeting the salary floor?

by LPKingsFan on Nov 30, 2011 9:23 AM PST up reply actions

Nope

It does not. A signing bonus can discourage an RFA’s team from matching. But it doesn’t affect the actual salary cap, only cash flow.

It comes down to reality
And it's fine with me 'cause I've let it slide

by SavageBeast on Nov 30, 2011 9:26 AM PST up reply actions

Gotcha, thanks

Got confused because you can only use space below the cap as a signing bonus, but it doesn’t end up counting against the cap once you do use it.

Can we lobby to get this change in as a last minute alteration to the CBA?

by LPKingsFan on Nov 30, 2011 9:27 AM PST up reply actions

yeah

Thanks for the question and the answer. I was wondering the same thing. Nice clarification on the front loading TZ.

by wildcard530 on Nov 30, 2011 9:40 AM PST via mobile up reply actions

I'm still for

Front loading as many contracts as possible. Every little bit helps and helps more if the player doesn’t live up to his contract. Signing bonuses are another reason the NBA needs to force a sale. Ahhh.

by wildcard530 on Nov 30, 2011 9:48 AM PST via mobile up reply actions

It certainly would seem to make sense for this team

Considering they have some work to do to get to the salary minimum this year, and that won’t be as big of a problem the next few years (when Reke and Cousins’ new deals kick in).

It would be nice if we could wait a while to sign Marcus though, in case some team needs to do a fire sale (trade) based on the new cap rules.

"If you can’t make a profit, you should sell your team." - Michael Jordan (Owner, Charlotte Bobcats)

by otis29 on Nov 30, 2011 9:51 AM PST up reply actions

Don't forget amnesty

I can still see R Lewis in Purple, I can also still see us claiming a guy(s) off amnesty/waiver and using them in a trade.

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 10:17 AM PST up reply actions

Also keep in mind that Westphal...

was Lewis’ coach went he came into the NBA with the Sonics. There is definitely a bond there.

The world is not your Trade Machine.

-Ziller

@James_Ham
www.cowbellkingdom.com

by jjham15 on Nov 30, 2011 10:45 AM PST up reply actions

I can't see Lewis getting Amnestied until next year with the Wizards current payroll make-up

by Smills9133 on Nov 30, 2011 10:58 AM PST up reply actions

Remember, we would take some of that money off their hands

say 5-6 mil a year.

That’s not nothing, though I’ve heard some of the same things.

I’m trying to figure out what teams have to get up to for minimum. $49 mil?

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 11:22 AM PST up reply actions

Man, thier roster sucks eggs

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 11:25 AM PST up reply actions

They have a nice foundation in John Wall

Nick Young is very promising, and JaVale McGee could definitely become a player. And they have cap space. So would you take Wall/McGee/Young or Evans/Cousins/Thornton?

I do agree with you, though. Their roster as a whole has issues.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Nov 30, 2011 11:36 AM PST up reply actions

I'd take Evans/Cousins/Thornton every time

But I think Wall will end up being the best single player of the bunch.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Nov 30, 2011 12:02 PM PST up reply actions

The rest of our roster is better

I’m fine with Wash young 3

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 12:55 PM PST up reply actions

Never mind. I lied!

It comes down to reality
And it's fine with me 'cause I've let it slide

by SavageBeast on Nov 30, 2011 2:02 PM PST up reply actions

And another question, re: restricted free agents

Does a qualifying offer dictate the terms of an extension? Could the team offer a $14 million 1-year qualifying offer, and then, once signed, sign him to a 4-year, $16 million extension at $4 million per year?

by LPKingsFan on Nov 30, 2011 9:26 AM PST up reply actions

Qualifying offer amounts are set in stone by the CBA according to the rookie scale

But they can be disregarded once an actual contract is signed.

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 9:31 AM PST up reply actions

QO is a pre-set value determined by where a rookie was drafted

You have to offer it in order for a player to become a RFA. Most teams offer it, although there was some debate whether Portland would offer it to Greg Oden since his QO is a large $8.2 million, but Paul Allen is super rich and Oden is still young, so they’ll offer it.

If a player doesn’t receive any other offers and does not sign a new contract with his team, the qualifying offer becomes a one year contract and then the player becomes an unrestricted FA.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Nov 30, 2011 9:40 AM PST up reply actions

It does!

Good point. In the old deal, some of money paid out is the measure. This is potentially big for the Kings.

by Tom Ziller on Nov 30, 2011 10:01 AM PST up reply actions

I love Thornton

But is signing Afflalo a smarter move? He’s not ball dominant, he’s a great defender, efficient shooter and great locker room guy. It would be great if we could have both, just not sure there’s enough minutes.

by KeonClark on Nov 30, 2011 9:57 AM PST reply actions

Could go with an Evans,Thornton,Afflalo,Hickson,Cousins lineup.
Afflalo is only an inch shorter than salmons and 8lbs heavier according to NBA.com

by rekehavoc13jimmer7 on Nov 30, 2011 10:01 AM PST up reply actions

After drafting Jimmer

A solid case could be made that Afflalo is a better fit with Evans. But I don’t think the Kings lose Thornton … so tantalizing at the end of last season.

by Tom Ziller on Nov 30, 2011 10:03 AM PST up reply actions

Why not play Afflalo at backup SF?

and could play some SG minutes too?

by rekehavoc13jimmer7 on Nov 30, 2011 10:08 AM PST up reply actions

because he's better than Salmons

dude is an NBA starter

by KeonClark on Nov 30, 2011 1:19 PM PST up reply actions

I don't think the Nuggets can afford to lose anymore players. They'll match

by HeuristicLineup on Nov 30, 2011 10:08 AM PST up reply actions

yeah good point

we would probably have to overpay him by 2-3M to have denver not resign.

by rekehavoc13jimmer7 on Nov 30, 2011 10:12 AM PST up reply actions

Is it a one shot deal?

If the Kings makes an offer on an RFA and the player’s team matches, can the Kings make a higher offer?

Not that we would want to.

by markdog333 on Nov 30, 2011 10:30 AM PST up reply actions

Nope

If Afflalo signs the offer, that’s the deal he’s getting either with new team or old.

by Tom Ziller on Nov 30, 2011 10:37 AM PST up reply actions

Nope - that's it

Once someone else’s RFA signs our offer sheet, if the home team matches it’s over, that’s the contract.

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 10:38 AM PST up reply actions

Thornton is dynamic

He can/does energize a whole offense,I think he’s a leader. That’s something that’s hard to statistically quantify.

Afflalo is a rock – and would do wonders here as well. In Chicago where they already have a leader – ouch, he makes them a real contender in the East.

"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower

by lietothegirls on Nov 30, 2011 10:14 AM PST up reply actions

I was thinking about this too

But if the goal is to eventually move Thornton to the bench as a 6th man, i think Afflalo makes less sense. Afflalo is a better defender, and spot shooter, but after watching him play i am not sure he can create his own shot. I think if our long term goal is to start Jimmer, than Thornton makes more sense.

Adoptive father of Caleb Hous.... hous... housyourdaddy?

by OmahaGiants on Nov 30, 2011 10:04 AM PST up reply actions

my point is that we may not need a guy that can create his shot

a smart, efficient, defensive-minded wing may be more valuable on a good team.

if you’re saying also get Afflalo… that would make us super deep, but I just don’t think it makes sense. if you start Afflalo and Tyreke, then Jimmer and Thornton are redundant.

by KeonClark on Nov 30, 2011 1:25 PM PST up reply actions