Tribune Update

by Dave on Jul 3, 2007 12:56 PM PDT in News

I didn't have time this morning to address one of Dwight Jaynes' assertions that has now shown up on TrueHoop as well. Dwight said that if the Blazers were willing to buy out Steve Francis' contract they should buy out Darius Miles' as well. They're two different situations.

Steve Francis, despite his flaws, is an NBA player with NBA offers. The rumor is he'd accept a buyout at $25 million which means with a new Clippers contract he'd make his entire current contract money and maybe then some. That makes sense for the Blazers because they save about $8 million on his contract over two years...a small amount but every little bit helps. Obviously it makes sense for Francis and his agent too.

Darius Miles, on the other hand, is not an NBA player right now. He's a 6'8" ice cream inhaling machine. He will have no NBA offers waiting for him if he's bought out. That means the team would have to pay his full contract price because there's no advantage to him to take less and he'd never do it. As soon as we sign that paper his full salary is stuck on our cap for the next three years and it's unalterable.

Now, is his salary going to be there anyway? Probably. But a lot of things could happen. He could have a miraculous recovery and change of heart. He could voluntarily take medical retirement. He could trip on the steps to the Country Buffet and wrench both of his knees out, forcing him to take medical retirement. Or he could be force-fed to another team as an extremely unpleasant trade throw-in. You never know. The point is there's no advantage to the team to etch his contract in stone at this point. You have more flexibility just leaving him on the roster. There's no extra cost. He doesn't have to practice. He doesn't have to be around the team. He can keep doing whatever it is he's been doing and everyone will be happy.

I'm not saying the Blazers would never buy him out, but if they don't there's a reason for it. This isn't the same as the Francis situation.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Darius is our final hurdle

If he would just retire we would achieve salary cap nirvana.

by jayseyfield on Jul 3, 2007 1:06 PM PDT reply actions

There are two cost to keeping Darius

but they are small ones:

1) As long as he's on the roster, he consumes one of 15 precious roster spots.

That's probably a small price to pay for having a bit more flexibility in how we deal with him, but it's something to consider:

2) His continued affiliation with the team--even if he were to officially become persona non grata--annoys a few cantankerous sportswriters and cranky fans. Even though Darius was never around during the Whitsitt years (the only player on the roster Whitsitt had anything to do with is Travis Outlaw; Whitsitt urged his selection in the draft on his way out the door)--he remains the last link to the Jail Blazers. For some (like me), his current situation isn't a problem--Darius right now is a ghost. For others, though, the team won't be fully cleansed until Darius is completely separated from the team (other than payment of his contract as might be required)--having him hanging out with the team is seen as unacceptable.

I agree with you, Dave--the best thing to do with Darius is to do nothing (unless Isiah wants him). His contract isn't that bad (nowhere near Zach's), and he may retire. But some want to see him kicked off the island--they want to see Pritchard extinguish his proverbial torch and tell him to leave the tribe; and will accept nothing less. Paul Allen's money and the salary cap be damned.

by EngineerScotty on Jul 3, 2007 1:10 PM PDT reply actions

Roster spots

You're probably right on, but is there some way to keep him on contract and not consume a roster spot?

I'm sure the CBA has provisions for events like 5 players getting mono or a severe accident involving the team bus. They wouldn't ask a team to dress 8 players indefinitely?

by Engineering Problem on Jul 3, 2007 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Exactly.

He can try and play if he wants to. McMillian should make this call if you ask me. Darius is going to want to stay now that we are about to dominate. He's never played for a winner, and I'm sure he wants to see what it's like.

I agree with Scotty that he's still fan cancer. But I don't think that's going to be a concern this year. I say if he won't retire, we bench him and take the league insurance. No way do we buy him out.

Hell, make him practice, if he doesn't show, fine his ass. If he complains, fine his ass. Get your money back bit by bit if neccesary. Quite frankly I have no tolerance for whiners, and ne'er do wells. We are officially in the Roy, Oden, Aldridge era. No room for could have beens.

by mjm6783 on Jul 3, 2007 2:26 PM PDT reply actions

Maybe I'm wrong

but my interpretation is that we buy out Steve Francis for the cost of the 2 years and he opts out of the second year. We pay the same money, but the 2nd year doesn't count against the cap. I think we'll probably do the same for LaFrentz at some point too (according to storytellersalary, he has an opt out of the 08-09 season as well).

Someone please tell me if I'm wrong about this...

Is it okay in the CBA to buy someone out for more than they're contractually supposed to earn?

- Sam

by Samuelson on Jul 3, 2007 4:13 PM PDT reply actions

The only rule I read

concerning time was that the buyout was more or less averaged out over the remaining years of the contract. I believe that would preclude him waiving the second year, or at least make the NBA take a really hard look at it. Unless, of course, he already had a player option on the second year. But then that brings up your second point as soon as they try to cram two years' salary into one...

I believe the league would take a VERY dim view of renegotiating a contract buyout for more than was originally agreed. If it's not prohibited already it would be just as soon as somebody tried it. Think of the implications. "We can't pay you much under the salary cap but we're going to sign you for a year more than strictly necessary. That last year we're going to buy you out with a huge balloon payment that'll make your overall salary average an astronomical amount."

--Dave

by Dave on Jul 3, 2007 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Player option

Francis does have a player option on the second year, so in theory he could waive it (just like Fred Jones waiving his player option was a requirement of his trade to Portland. But you're right...paying more than the contract was worth in a buy-out is probably not going to be the most popular move in the league office.

I still say we just keep him. Let him come in as instant offense off the bench, or inactivate him. But don't just hand him to a team who will be competing with us for that last playoff spot.

by HarryManback on Jul 3, 2007 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions

I have not seen or read

about the player option anywhere but people's comments. Is there a site that shows it?

--Dave

by Dave on Jul 3, 2007 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions

hoops hype says no

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/portland.htm

maybe this player option was concocted out of thin air.

by matthewcc on Jul 3, 2007 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions

Wow.

You're right. Looking around, I don't see it anywhere. Strangely enough, I did a news.google search for "Steve Francis" +"Player Option", and two of the four articles were written by me (since when is a basketball blog "news"? I'm going to have to start concocting trade rumors just to get them to appear on google).

I swear I didn't make up this player option thing. I must have heard it on a live broadcast somewhere, either on the radio or on ESPN. Sorry about spreading rumors.

by HarryManback on Jul 3, 2007 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions

Maybe this is where I got it from...

http://blog.mlive.com/ganggreen/2007/06/former_spartan_randolph_traded.html

"June 28, 2007, ESPN.com: The Knicks and Trail Blazers reached agreement on a deal that swaps Randolph and teammates Dan Dickau and Fred Jones for guard Steve Francis and Channing Frye.

Francis has only two seasons left on his contract, worth just over $34 million, but possesses the option to become a free agent after next season. The Blazers, however, are planning to buy out Francis' contract and make him a free agent this summer, sources said."

Doesn't seem to be accurate, but at least it was written down somewhere.

by HarryManback on Jul 3, 2007 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions

I get all my info from here.

http://www.storytellerscontracts.info/resources/07-08salaries.htm

It seems to be more accurate than anything else out there.

- Sam

by Samuelson on Jul 4, 2007 5:09 AM PDT up reply actions

Can someone clarify...

How roster spots work, especially for guys who are going to spend some time in Europe?

Some simple questions:
How many guys can be on an active roster?
How many guys can be reserved?
When players are injured, do they count against active or reserve rosters?
Are there ways to retain rights to players beyond the above?

Thanks!

by little joey @ Blazer's Edge on Jul 3, 2007 4:22 PM PDT reply actions

Basically

Teams must have between 13 and 15 players under contract during the regular season and playoffs. These players make up the "roster". The roster can be bigger than this during the off-season and preseason, but rosters must be trimmed to 15 players before opening day.

Twelve players are "active"--they are available for game duty. The other 1-3 are "inactive"; they are availble for practice and such, but may not play in games on days they are inactive.

Teams may change the active list (among their players under contract) at any time during the season. There is no minimum length of stay on the active or inactive list--a player can be active one day, inactive the next, and active again.

There is no injured list; injured players are simply made inactive. Players who are hurt don't have to be made inactive (though usually they are unless a team has less than 12 active players otherwise).

Players who are suspended consume a roster spot.

Any player who is currently under contract must consume a roster spot--even if injured. Darius Miles consumes a roster spot.

Players who the team owns the draft rights to, but have not signed to a contract, do NOT consume a roster spot. For example, Joel Freeland and Vladimir Stepania do not consume roster spots; nor will Petteri Koponen and Rudy Fernandez, assuming they stay in Europe this season.

Players who retire, are waived, bought out, or kicked out of the league, do not consume roster spots--even if the team still owes them money under a guaranteed contract. Right now, Stevie Franchise consumes a roster spot (though its the off-season and the 15-man limit does not apply); if we buy him out, he no longer will--even if we still are paying him. Likewise, Derek Anderson was waived two years ago, but the Blazers paid him through this season. He did not consume a roster spot after being waived.

Free agents do not consume roster spots; this includes a team's restricted free agents and those to which the team still has Bird rights. (Such free agents still count against the cap until they are renounced or sign with someone else).

Rooks and sophomores under contract may be assigned to the NBDL. They still consume a roster spot when they are down in the NBDL.

Unused draft choices, trade exceptions, and other things which aren't players do not consume roster spots.

by EngineerScotty on Jul 3, 2007 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions

So much money for so few minutes

The only downside of the recent housecleaning is that the three highest paid Blazers for the next two years will be: Stevie Cancer, Darius the last Jailblazer and Raef. Two of the three I hope to never see in a Blazer uniform again, and poor Raef, the only Gen-Xer, is now about 6th on depth chart, maybe 7th depending on if Freeland sticks around.

To me the singlest biggest reason to ship off Zach was to free up cap space to pay max deal extensions to Roy and then Oden. If buying out Francis and/or Miles gives more flexibility to sign those two long term, pull the trigger.

As for Miles, can Tonya Harding can come out of retirment?

by drg9439 on Jul 3, 2007 5:23 PM PDT reply actions

Current salaray info is available

at http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/portland.htm .

According to that website, Francis does not have an option on next year, but that doesn't really matter. 2009 is clearly the make or break year.

Take a look at that bottom line in 2009. Sure, it doesn't include the red (team option), or green (qualifying offer - player option, but a restricted free agent if they opt out), but it's still pretty to look at.

Adding in the team options and Martell's 5 mil (which are all pretty likely) brings it to $30,644,059. Outlaw (or Udoka) will probably add another $6 mil to that. Oden and our other rookies should be another $9 mil or so so I'll round up and say $46 mil. With the extra $10-15 mil we'll have to decide if we want to resign Frye, Jarret, James, or chase some other free agent.

Now imagine that scenario without Darius' $9 mil on the books that year! Salary cap nirvana indeed! Is it possible to renegotiate a players contract to be shorter but to overall pay more money? (ie can we renegotiate Darius' contract to be worth $28 mil over the next two years instead of $26 mil over the next three?) That seems like such an obvious loop hole, but only for a free spending owner like Allen so it may have been overlooked.

by Gargen on Jul 3, 2007 9:01 PM PDT reply actions

doh

Looks like you can't renegotiate for fewer years (and the cap wouldn't allow us to do it anyway).

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#52

by Gargen on Jul 3, 2007 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Buyout Benefit

When we buyout Francis' contract, the portion we pay is averaged over the remaining years of his contract, which will include his player option. If we buy him out, the net salary cap savings will be the difference between Francis' and Randolph's salaries (years being the big factor) + the difference between Francis' contract amount and the buyout amount + 50% of the first two years of whatever contract Francis signs with da Clips.

If Francis signs a 2 year 5 million contract, and we buy him out at 25 mil, the Blazers will free up a total of:

2 x .5(5M) = 5M

33.6M - 25M = 8.6M

last 2 yrs of Randolph @ 35.3M (16 in 2009/17.3 in 2010)

So, potentially, the Blazers will have 25M come off the books in 2009 alone due to the Knicks trade (making the big assumption that Francis can be bought off at 25M).

Darius is the next big issue, but his salary comes off the books completely in 2010. Best case scenario is that Darius retires for medical reasons this season (taking his entire salary off the cap for 3 years). Worst case scenario is that Darius wants to play, and we are forced to buy him out at full price. Middle of the road is that Darius agress to a reduced buyout amount (ala Kemp).

Regardless of how the salary cap issues shake out, the Blazers will be poised to throw their money at the true stars on the team:

Roy, Aldridge, and company.

by blacknoise on Jul 4, 2007 1:35 PM PDT reply actions

not exactly...

The buyout salary cap savings does not include 50% of the contract amount that Francis would sign with a later team. Portland would simply be charged the amount they actually pay Steve, prorated over the 2 years remaining on his contract.
So if the buyout is for 25mil the savings is just the 8.6mil.

by mrwonderfull on Jul 5, 2007 12:35 AM PDT up reply actions

sold, refund

Dave, your point is well taken and I was sold on your argument for half a day, but I've flip-floped in the other direction for the following reasons.

1. There is absolutely NO CHANCE that the Blazers get off Miles contract by medical retirement any more than any of the other current players. The Blazers can not simply declare him medically unfit, and Miles can not simply "take" a medical retiremnt. The NBA has to approve with their own physcian. I believe the physcian and the NBA would evaluate this the same way they evaluate applications for a "disabled player exception.. From the NBA Salary CAP.

...

Teams sometimes have had difficulty getting the NBA to approve an injury exception. For example, Danny Manning tore an ACL toward the end of the 1997-98 season, yet the NBA did not approve the Suns for this exception. More recently, the Magic did not receive this exception in 2003 for Grant Hill.

...

Darius Miles is doing twice a day work-outs. There's no way a physcian will declare him disabled.

2. While the benefit of getting Darius Miles in shape and show caseing him to the rest of the NBA is high stakes (possible salary cap relief for each of his remaining contract years, I think the Blazer consider his possible disruption of the current players development, attitude and habbits as also being high stakes. If they keep him on the roster beyond Oct 31, I think he is on a very short leash. I think one screw up is all that it would take for him to be bought out at 100%.

If you know you are going to buy him out after one more screw up you have to ask yourself "What are the chances that Miles doesn't 'screw up' before we can show the league he's worth something like the mid-level exception"? If you think it's it will take a year of grooming him before you can find another suitor you have to wonder "Can he keep his nose clean for a year?" History is the best predictor of the future. I think you have to say that Miles can not do it for a year. On the other hand, come opening day if Miles were to be in perfect condition and just need 2 weeks or even just 2 months to show the league he can still play, the pay off is big enough that I think they take that chance. Under that scenerio, couldn't the Blazers stash one of the European players in Europe for the 2 weeks (or 2 months depending on whatever deadline the Blazers set for him) then call the European player (Freeland or Koponen) back to the team?

Personaly, I think they give him between 2 weeks to 2 months of regular season play if they think he's close enough in shape already. If he is way out of shape I think they ditch him as soon as they make that determination.

by mrwonderfull on Jul 5, 2007 12:18 AM PDT reply actions

Really though

on the "keeping the nose clean" thing Miles' problems have come on the court (indifference) or in the locker room (Cheeks) rather than off the court. His nose hasn't been that dirty. He's just never had a reputation for working that hard.

That's not to say that your argument wouldn't hold. If they did know they were going to buy him out next year for sure there probably wouldn't be much difference between that and doing it now. I'm just not sure they know they're going to buy him out. With Francis there's a strong argument to anyway (saving money). There's not really one to tip the scales one way or another with Miles if they were undecided.

--Dave

by Dave on Jul 5, 2007 1:46 AM PDT up reply actions

The retirement as I understand it

I keep seeing different interpretations of Miles's situation, so let's clarify.

First of all, I believe that Miles needed to miss at least half of last season to even be eligible for this insured retirement - or 41 games. This is what makes his situation different from any random player.

If Miles agrees to retire, these things happen:

Miles receives his full salary
Only half of the remainder of Miles's salary counts againt the salary cap. It ALL gets paid, but only half counts against the cap.

Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but I see absolutely no reason for a 350 lb. Darius Miles to attempt an NBA comeback. A guy with no passion for hoops is going to bust his ass to come back even though he gets paid the same amount of money either way? No way, I don't see it.

by leeroyjenkins on Jul 5, 2007 1:25 PM PDT reply actions

not the way I understand it.

If someone agrees to "retire". They are still owed 100% of the salary and 100% is counts against the cap.
If someone retires due to injury, and the team applies for retirement due to injury, an NBA physician will examine said person to see if he is fit or not. If the physcian agrees. Player gets 100% of the salary. 0% counts against the cap.
Under scenerio 2 above, the team could apply for a "disabled player exception". They could spend upto 100% + 100,000, on a free agent, even if the team is over the salary cap.

Again this has nothing to do with Miles 'agreeing' to retire as a disabled player. The NBA is the one who says the player is disabled. If Miles is able to perform two a day work outs, I don't see how an NBA physician certifies him as disabled.

by mrwonderfull on Jul 5, 2007 7:03 PM PDT reply actions