Is Blake really worth $10m per year??

by dcblazer on Jun 22, 2007 12:45 PM PDT Comment 7 comments

Seems a stretch to me...

http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_22427.shtml

"Blake Update

It's looking more and more like Steve Blake will not be back in a Denver uniform next season. This is not because the Nuggets don't want Blake back because they still like him very much as a player. Instead, it's because Blake will just command too much money on the open market.

While no mandate has been handed down to cut salary in Denver, the team has a duty to remain fiscally responsible.

Ask yourself... is bringing Blake back for what would be over $10 million a season with the luxury tax penalty be a smart business decision?"

0 recs | Comment 7 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

5 mil

They're over the tax, so ever dollar the pay Blake they pay again in tax. So it costs them $10 mil to sign him at the mid-level, or 5 mil.

by gcb on Jun 22, 2007 12:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

what gcb said

Any player they sign is going to cost them double. Logically, no player is worth... double what they're worth. But thats how the cap works.

That said, I wouldn't pay him the full MLE unless we were desperate for a point guard (i.e., if we traded Jack).

by matthewcc on Jun 22, 2007 1:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Blake is a MLE contract

nothing more, and I am the biggest advocate for signing Blake. He is obviously not a 10 mil per year player...yet...

by myemic23 on Jun 22, 2007 1:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

nor will he ever

Welcome Greg Oden

by junit3123 on Jun 23, 2007 3:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's kind of silly logic.

Just because Blake is the guy they signed most recently doesn't mean his salary is the one that counts against the tax. It's just illogical to say they're paying him $10 million per year. It makes more sense to say that the guy who's paid too much (Iverson) or the guy who plays too little (Martin) are the ones killing the cap.

Boy, what a dumb trade that was for Iverson. They gave up all their picks in a great draft for another lackluster first round exit, which they probably would have had with their former roster anyway. With multiple picks in this year's first round, they had a good chance of trading up to get a nice player to complement Melo and Nene. Now they have a bloated payroll, no picks, and can't even bring back the players that helped them to get to the playoffs last year. Boy I'm glad we've got Pritchard ...

by bfan on Jun 22, 2007 2:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

But Blake is the one they can opt not to pay . . .

. . . since he's a free agent.

They can't elect to not pay Nene, or A.I.

Blazers have a five-on-three...and they pull it back and wait for help.

by QualityPie on Jun 22, 2007 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Plus, he's pretty clearly bent toward PDX.

Just bought a house in West Linn and all, and is a Pritchard favorite.

Luxury tax issues aside, the Nougats would be inclined
to cite "financial difficulties" when losing a player because, really,
he'd just rather be elsewhere--likes the Blazers more than the Nougats.
Mask that with a "he costs us too much" line.
That's just good spin, solid P.R.

Blazers have a five-on-three...and they pull it back and wait for help.

by QualityPie on Jun 22, 2007 2:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs