2009 Free Agency: Part Two

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 11:14 AM PDT

I've been doing a lot of research on our 2009 cap space potential and possible free agents. Part 1 (http://www.blazersedge.com/story/2008/4/2/135343/9060) focused on who will be free agents that summer. This is the 2nd diary in my multi-part series.

PART TWO: SALARY CAP 2009 BY THE NUMBERS

I've decided to break this down by categories, to make it easier for everyone to play around with the numbers. Obviously, this assumes no trades of or for players and/or picks that will be on the books for 09/10. We can explore those scenarios as we go.

The 2009-10 salary cap is estimated to be right around $60 million

Definately on the books:
-----------------------------
Joel Przybilla    $6,857,725
Greg Oden    $5,361,240
LaMarcus Aldridge $5,844,826
Travis Outlaw    $4,000,000
Brandon Roy    $3,910,816
Sergio Rodriguez $1,892,035*
-----------------------------
TOTAL: $27,866,642

* we could decide this summer not to pick up Sergio's 4th year option, but I find that highly unlikely

Pending Medical Retirement:
-----------------------------
Darius Miles $9,000,000

Team Options:
-----------------------------
Steve Blake $4,300,000

New Rookies
-----------------------------
Rudy Fernandez    $1,150,000
2008 #13    $1,950,000
2009 #20    $1,400,000

The "Class of 2005" (see below)
-------------------------------
Martell Webster
__Cap HOld Amt $11,313,399
_Resigned (est) $6,000,000
_Renounced $ 0
Channing Frye
_Cap Hold Amt $9,491,307
_Resigned (est) $6,000,000
_Renounced $ 0
Jarret Jack
_Cap Hold Amt $6,007,869
_Resigned (est) $4,000,000
__Renounced $ 0

-------------------------------------------------------

THE "CLASS OF 2005" OPTIONS

We have until October 31, 2008 to sign none, any, or all three of these guys to contract extensions. This has the disadvantage of tying up that much salary heading into summer 2009. However, as can be seen above, the amount we sign them to for 2009-10 (my guesses above) is likely to be much less than the cap hold amount will be to extend a qualifying offer instead.
For any of the three we don't extend this offseason, we must present them a qualifying offer by June 30, 2009 in order to retain the right to match any contract offers they may receive from other teams that summer. This will result in the "cap hold amounts" listed above being applied to our cap that summer, regardless of the offer amount.
Anyone we don't extend this summer or present a Qualifying Offer to prior to summer 2009 will immediately become an unrestricted free agent on July 1, 2009, free to sign with anyone without giving us the right to match or to obtain compensation.

Thus, in order to clear maximum room, we would have to NOT give these guys a qualifying offer. However, that means we lose them and get nothing back in return. If we want to clear some space AND protect assets, then we might be better off signing that player to an extension this summer. This is especially true with Martel, whose 2009 cap number we can cut by around 50% by resigning him.

-------------------------------------------------------

SALARY CAP SCENARIOS FOR 2009:

Darius included in Cap:
------------------------------
Pick up Blake, all rookies, all 2005 QO's: $72.5 million ($12.5 over)
Pick up Blake, all rookies, all 2005 resigned: $60.7 million ($0.7 over)
Pick up Blake, all rookies, Martel resigned, Jack/Frye renounced: $51.7 million ($8.3 under)
Drop Blake, All rookies, Martel resigned, Jack/Frye renounced: $47.4 million ($12.6 under)
Pick up Blake, All rookies, all 2005 renounced: $45.7 million ($14.3 under)
Drop Blake, all rookies, all 2005 renounced: $41.3 million ($18.7 under)

Darius not included in Cap:
------------------------------
Pick up Blake, all rookies, all 2005 QO's: $63.5 million ($3.5 over)
Pick up Blake, all rookies, all 2005 resigned: $51.7 million ($8.3 under)
Pick up Blake, all rookies, Martel resigned, Jack/Frye renounced: $42.7 million ($17.3 under)
Drop Blake, All rookies, Martel resigned, Jack/Frye renounced: $38.4 million ($21.6 under)
Pick up Blake, All rookies, all 2005 renounced: $36.7 million ($23.3 under)
Drop Blake, all rookies, all 2005 renounced: $32.4 million ($27.6 under)

Numerous other combinations are possible as well.

------------------------------

SUMMER 2008 TRADE OPTION

And here's the odd thing in all of this. Suppose we want to maximize our cap space in 2009 while at the same time NOT letting the 2005 guys walk for nothing? The best answer might be making a trade THIS summer. Let's look at a guy like Devin Harris for example. His 2009 cap number is going to be around $8.1 million. Maybe Calderon would be a similar number. If we could trade our 2008 pick, Martel, and Outlaw this summer (numbers work) for Harris, then we have the following 2009 cap numbers:

Darius, Steve, Rudy/09 pick, Channing extended, Jack Renounced: $52.8 million ($7.2 under)
No Darius, Steve, Rudy/09 pick, Channing QO'd: $48.3 million ($11.7 under)
NO Darius, Steve, Rudy/09 pick, Channing extended, Jack recnounced: $43.8 million ($16.2 under)
No darius, no steve, Rudy/09 pick, Frye/Jack QO'd: $50.0 million ($10.0 under)
NO Darius, no steve, Rudy/09 pick, Frye/Jack extended: $43.5 millino ($16.5 under)
No Darius, no steve, Rudy/09 pick, Frye/Jack renounced: $34.5 millino ($25.5 under)

You would have pretty similar numbers if the trade was Outlaw and Frye instead of Outlaw and Martel. Figure you could throw Jack into the mix as well for some filler back.

------------------------------

In summary, we have a LOT of flexibility right now to get substantially below the cap next summer, either with or without Darius counting against the cap. There are a lot of tradeoffs involved and decisions to be made.

I expect this picture to clarify a LOT this summer. The potential UFA and RFA pools will become much more clear, we will know a lot more about the cap numbers many of our own guys will have that summer (Darius, 2005 guys, Rudy, draft). Additionally, any trades we make this summer will clear up the situation substantially.

It's going to be an interesting summer. KP has a LOT of decisions to make. My guess is he makes a big push for a trade centered around our 2008 pick and some or all of our class of 2005 guys in exchange for an big upgrade at PG or SF. Failing that, I see us resigning Martel.

0 recs | Comment 58 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

One comment and one question

The comment:

I think Harris will be more like $10 million. BUt that's quibbling. Nice work otherwise.

The question:

Isn't the CBA up for renewal before 2009 - 2010? For some reason I thought it's coming up soon.

by timg56 on Apr 4, 2008 11:50 AM PDT 0 recs

Harris

Harris' 08/09 salary is at 7.8 million, which would equate nicely with Outlaw (4.0) and Martel (3.7).

I haven't been able to locate year by year numbers on Harris, but given that he signed a 5-year deal for a reported $42 million, and the first year is at 7.8, if one assumes a farely consistant ramp upwards, the 09/10 number should be around the 8.1 million I listed above.

I did just double check this again, and another report source listed it at 5 years, $50 million, so you could be right. If that's the case, add about 1.7 to 2.0 million to his 2009/10 cap number

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 11:59 AM PDT up 0 recs

HERE YOU GO

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

Current salaries for all NBA teams, pretty close to updated. (Although Harris is still on Dallas's payroll).

His 09 cap number is close to 9 million.

by usmcr3049 on Apr 4, 2008 12:25 PM PDT up 0 recs

Harris deal

My proposal is either Webster or Outlaw, along with Jack for Harris. (If Frye and/or another NJ player needs to be added to make the salaries match, so be it.) If Pritch needs to throw in some of his 2nd round draft choices to sweeten the deal, no problem.

by two4larue on Apr 4, 2008 2:16 PM PDT up 0 recs

CBA

The current CBA runs through 2010-11, with a league option to extend it through 2011-12.

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 12:03 PM PDT up 0 recs

Thanks.

by timg56 on Apr 7, 2008 7:44 AM PDT up 0 recs

good post,

i think that it will be an exiting time.

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

We will probably trade someone, jack, to make room for rudy, or KP will do somthing crazy which will change eaverything.

by raging WebTed on Apr 4, 2008 12:13 PM PDT 0 recs

Rudy room

Wafer's gone, so that makes roster room for Rudy. If Darius gets the medical retirement, that gives us another spot (for our draft pick maybe?) If needed, we can always waive McRoberts as well.

However, I agree. I think Jack is almost certain to be traded, and I still think we are going to be trying to make a 2 or 3 player for 1 deal similar to one that I outline above.

I should have noted I got my salary info from your link, and CBA information from both
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
and
http://www.nbpa.com/cba_articles.php

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 12:19 PM PDT up 0 recs

Technically ...

Travis is a team option as well. He should be with Blake. But personally I think both of them are "definitely on the books." Maybe Travis moreso since he has more trade value ...

by bfan on Apr 4, 2008 12:21 PM PDT 0 recs

don't think so

I also remember it being originally reported that way, but all sources I can find show it being a straight up 3 years.

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 12:25 PM PDT up 0 recs

Thanks...

I very much appreciate not only your in-depth analysis, but also your examination of various options. Yeah, assuming that we could put a package together that New Jersey was interested in, that might be one way to go.

by The Graduate on Apr 4, 2008 12:25 PM PDT 0 recs

Also ...

I don't see James Jones anywhere. I personally believe he will be with the team long-term, signed to reasonable contract in the Outlaw ballpark: starting around 4 million per year.

by bfan on Apr 4, 2008 12:28 PM PDT 0 recs

I dunno

Jones seems to be a great character guy and he has some veteran savvy. But his knee is suspect, his shot streaky, and the rest of his game underwhelming. If you look at his career stats, they're not impressive. His 3-point percentage is good, not great, and his 2-point percentage is lower than that.

I love Jones as a three point specialist--a skill that will increase in value with Oden's arrival--but I'd prefer to have that skill packaged with toughness and lockdown defensive ability (ala Bruce Bowen & Ime Udoka). Therefore, I hope the Blazers don't sink a lot of money into resigning Jones. There's a reason that the Suns let him go.

"Ime caught the guy in mid-air with a fist and calmly continued his dispatching of oncoming people." -Gabe Muoneke

by hurryup09 on Apr 4, 2008 12:41 PM PDT up 0 recs

More than any other player besides Roy ...

Jones has been the difference between wins and losses this year for our team. That's saying something. And the good character and veteran savvy go a long way in my book.

I agree the knee is an issue. He didn't have nagging knee issue before this season that I know of, though, so hopefully it heals with some rest.

A three point specialist is exactly what this team needs with Odem, Roy, and Aldridge drawing double teams galore.

4 million a year is not a lot of money by NBA standards for what Jones contributes.

The Suns let him go because their owner doesn't like to pay the luxury tax. Methinks our owner doesn't mind it so much.

All signs point to us keeping him around if the price is right, and I think it will be ...

by bfan on Apr 4, 2008 1:44 PM PDT up 0 recs

Jones

I purposely left off Jones since he will either be an unrestricted free agent this summer (if he opts out), or summer 2009. I guess if we re-up him this summer, we'll add him back in. But I wanted to strip off as many variables as possible.

Jones is set to make $3.15 next year if he picks up his option this summer. If not, figure he's looking to sign for anywhere from $4.0 to the MLE (~$5.5). So, if we sign him thi summer, take that much more off our 2009 space.

If he picks up his option this year, then heading into summer 2009 he will either count at a $6.2 million hold (even though he will be unrestricted), or much more likely, we renounce him, freeing the $6.2, in which case we forfeit his Bird rights and can only sign him for the minimum salary exception if we are over the cap, or up to any amount under the cap that we are.

For example, let's assume he picks up his option next year. Entering summer 2009 we renounce his rights in order to make space to sign a free agent or do a sign and trade deal. After that, if we are under the cap, we can sign him for any amount up to the cap limit. After that, we can then offer contract extensions to LMA, Roy, and/or Sergio, regardless of our cap situation.

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 12:46 PM PDT up 0 recs

Could we not extend him ...

much like you suggest with Martell? 4 million or so per year would not eat up ALL of that cap space, assuming of course Jack, Frye, and maybe even Sergio might be gone, which at this point I think we have to start assuming ...

by bfan on Apr 4, 2008 1:37 PM PDT up 0 recs

Doesn't matter

It adds up. Say, hypothetically, that the ideal Free Agent is available for the right price.

Now you have $4M less to throw at him than another team all because you wanted to keep Jones.

I like JJ, but if it means lowering our chances at another high-impact player, then no thanks.

"Life is a meaningless sequence of events in between Blazer championships"

by broggerboy19 on Apr 4, 2008 1:44 PM PDT up 0 recs

Sure.

But given the scenarios, it looks quite feasible to retain James Jones AND still have plenty of cap space to get a FA. Especially if it's via sign and trade.

My point is that I don't think signing Jones comes between us and the proper FA.

by bfan on Apr 4, 2008 2:23 PM PDT up 0 recs

If we do not make any major trades

i would like to.... Drop Blake????, All rookies, Martel resigned, Jack/Frye renounced: $38.4 million ($21.6 under)

This would be perfect to pick up a big time free agent. It might even be enough to get paul/williams or whoever. ..I would only give up blake if we could get a better PG.

How long will the Fernandez contract last?

by raging WebTed on Apr 4, 2008 12:36 PM PDT 0 recs

more than enough

The Most we could offer Paul or Williams would be 25% of the salary cap (about $15 million). However, keep in mind the following:

this assumes the don't extend this summer
there is ZERO chance that their teams don't offer.

We don't need to get $15 million below to get them. We need them to A) not exend this summer and B) threaten to play out 09/10 for the qualifying offer in order to force a sign and trade in summer 2009. To do this, we don't need to be below the cap at all, although being below will help greatly in trying to match salaries.

Fernandez' contract will be standard rookie deal. 2 years guarnateed, team options for years 3 and 4.

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 12:52 PM PDT up 0 recs

meant to say

there is zero chance their teams don't MATCH our offer.

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 12:55 PM PDT up 0 recs

Not necessarily

If N.O. has to sell their team due to a non-existent fanbase, and they go into fire-sale mode...

"Life is a meaningless sequence of events in between Blazer championships"

by broggerboy19 on Apr 4, 2008 1:48 PM PDT up 0 recs

NO will find a fan base if they continue to ...

play so well. Winning breeds fans.

by bfan on Apr 4, 2008 2:21 PM PDT up 0 recs

their ticket sales

are significantly worse than ours...and we are only a .500 team

by Philthyanimal on Apr 4, 2008 4:27 PM PDT up 0 recs

Well ...

clearly winning doesn't breed fans in one season. But over time it will.

by bfan on Apr 4, 2008 8:10 PM PDT up 0 recs

ya

it only took us 13 wins to boost ticket sales. i would expect that NO is still suffering from katrina.

by Philthyanimal on Apr 4, 2008 8:16 PM PDT up 0 recs

Last I read

they were on track to meet the minimum attendence numbers in their lease deal.

by timg56 on Apr 7, 2008 7:48 AM PDT up 0 recs

cap space for trades, too

We could finish the summer of 2009 without having signed any of the FAs on the market (sort of a weak list, though Deng would be a particularly good fit, IMO). If so, that would allow us to preserve the cap space through the year, and make trades up to the trade deadline (Feb. 2010), taking back significantly more salary. Teams may be looking to clear capspace for the following summer, to try to lure LeBron away from Cleveland. We could be ideal trading partners, taking back salary plus talent.

Interesting topic. It's exciting what kind of flexibility we'll have.

by BrailleTaser on Apr 4, 2008 12:37 PM PDT 0 recs

Yes and no...

We would have that cap space throughout the year, but only if we decided not to resign LMA and Roy, thus letting them play in restricted free agency the following summer (and if KP thinks he could resign either one for less than max money, which he likely will be able to do, than that would be an unwise decision).

by The Graduate on Apr 4, 2008 12:44 PM PDT up 0 recs

actually...

Even if we extend LMA and Roy in summer 2009, their 2009/10 salary is still allocated as listed above (the extension starts the next year), so the extension would not affect our room during the 2009/10 season at all, allowing us to pursue the mid-season trade option.

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 12:48 PM PDT up 0 recs

huh...

I hadn't realized this, thanks...

by The Graduate on Apr 4, 2008 10:46 PM PDT up 0 recs

<3

Nice post.

I imagine other than the main three, anyone on the roster could be had. I think Portland will be in the trade mix until it finds a starting PG and/or SF. Personally I don't believe the team is entirely comfortable with any of the options it currently has available for those spots.

by leeroyjenkins on Apr 4, 2008 12:37 PM PDT 0 recs

Some other random comments

I hope James Jones walks. I just don't understand our infatuation with this particular player. He's extremely one-dimensional, and even that one dimension is iffy. He's a career 40% shooter - yes I know most of those are 3's - who averages 3 rebounds and less than one assist per game. Why pay James Jones to do what you're paying Martell to do? Assuming Jones can even stay healthy...
Martell's got one more year. There's no way the team makes that $5 mil qualifying offer unless he improves a hundred-fold. Frye ($4 mil)and JJ ($3 mil) are in the same boat. Maybe via trade of some sort.
Steve Francis, Raef, and Darius. Ahhhhhh, I can't wait until you and our books bid a fond farewell. With all that flexibility, the next few seasons are what we've been building for. We all knew this season was just a launching pad/evaluation period.
Everyone left is a bargain. I'll even keep Travis for $4 mil/year.

by leeroyjenkins on Apr 4, 2008 12:57 PM PDT up 0 recs

Jones is a roll player ...

Exactly what we need moving forward. He comes in and does his job and doesn't make mistakes. 4 million is a reasonable price for such contributions. Think of players like Jared Jeffries, Eduardo Najera, Speedy Claxton, Matt Carroll, Pavlovic, Marquis Daniels. These are all players who make more than Jones, considerably more in some cases, but whom I would consider less valuable. If we can keep Jones at a reasonable price--around 4 million per--then he is a valuable piece to our team.

Unless traded beforehand, the team will definitely make a qualifying offer the Martell, and probably Frye, even if only to keep their options open to a sign-and-trade. They will not simply let these players go without trying to receive some sort of compensation in return for their departure. Jack I could see them let go if they don't find a trade for him this summer, which I think they will.

by bfan on Apr 4, 2008 2:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

$15mill is the magic #

First off nice job.

Secondly, we will only need about $15mill or so to make a run at a premier PG, players that heve been in the league 6 or less years can make only 25% of the cap. figure a $60mill cap and the magic # is $15mill. The thing about it is that if we CAN be $25mill under the cap, BUT the maxplayer can only make 35% of the cap, or $21 mill. The only way that player will make that much is if he has been in the league for 10+ years, not exactly the type of player we are looking for.

I suppose if we did have $25mill of cap, we could add 2 players in FA but why? We would have to renounce or trade away players that we already have and know what we have.

Also I feel that we will use the 2008 pick, as I dont see any players that we would be able to reasonably acquire that would be better than the 13th (or better hopefully with trade). The only player I wold want is Calderon and since he is a FA he cannot be traded until after the draft. We will have one more year to get younger, with Rudy and Oden having to acclimate, before we have to lock down.

Our 2009-10-11 picks, I feel, are gone. We need to sacrifice our draft future for more help in the now. We are stacked with talent that needs to mature and a 23rd overall pick will do us no good. We could trade our 09 and 11 to move up in this draft, or to package to grab a vet PG or SF, and then move the 10 pick on draft day for some more help.

Whatever happens we are in good hands and the future is bright.

The NBA

Where Kyle Korver happens.

by SpyderRyder on Apr 4, 2008 12:48 PM PDT 0 recs

Very well done

You even answered my question to Moldorf in another diary. Namely, do we have to suffer Martell's strangling cap hold?

If the answer is no, and we can keep him for $6-8M, then it's a no-brainer in my book.

The trade options are also viable.

I just don't see how Jack or Frye fit into this equation. Even Blake's tenure is tentative if it means losing the ability to throw a max contract offer at someone KP really has his heart set on.

I say keep Blake, keep Martell, drop Frye and Jack or trade them, and pray like heck that Darius retires.

Very very good post.

"Life is a meaningless sequence of events in between Blazer championships"

by broggerboy19 on Apr 4, 2008 12:56 PM PDT 0 recs

good points

One of the main things that got me into this was the situation with the 2005 guys. That's where a lot of questions get answered.

I think it is almost certain that we either trade or extend Martel this summer. If we extend him, you'll likely here a lot of comments along the lines of "well now we are blowing our 2009 cap space" both from media and fans. However, the reality is, if we don't trade him, we are SAVING a ton of 2009 cap space.

Frye is a bit more difficult. His hold amount is nearly $10 million, so we don't want that. However, as a big who can hit the 18 footer consistently, he has value. Letting him walk seems silly. If we can extend him at a Travis-like amount to backup LMA into the future, I see this as likely (almost certain if we trade Trout).

Jack is another story. I don't see him getting extended. First, I think he's almost sure to be traded this summer. Even if not, his cap hold amount and value will be low enough to defer the decision until summer 2009.

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 1:04 PM PDT up 0 recs

VERRRRRY nice.

One obvious consequence: For our Class-Of-2005ers, since the cap hold amount is greater than their estimated extension,
anyone we'd be looking to keep should be extended during the season, and NOT tendered a qualifying offer
to let them become restricteds--that cuts our cap space, if only during that short, crucial signing time.

I also think, for roster purposes, we should trade our pick this year for a package that includes multiple down-the-road picks.
We'll need (and have space for) that draftee more in future years, when our own first-rounder wont be such a hot slot.

Also, I think this is a fairly weak draft class, especially with Curry and possibly more (Mayo? Love?) staying in.

Anyway, I'm just saying, I'd be fine if that nearly $2-mil you have earmarked for this year's pick didn't happen.
And as for the approximate #20 pick for next year, does he count against the cap before he's signed?
Isn't that the one guy we CAN sign after we've gone over a cap that he didn't affect?

So, yeah: If it were up to me, I'd keep that $3.35-mil out of our assumed payroll obligations entering the off-season.
But I do want a future first-rounder, NOT LOTTERY PROTECTED, back in that trade.

Did you really put stuff on top of the eggs? Like, for real? He put . . . HE PUT THE LIGHT BULBS ON THE BOTTOM!

by QualityPie on Apr 4, 2008 1:00 PM PDT 0 recs

agree on this year

I think we should trade way down and pick a Euro to stash or else out altogether.

As far as the 2009 pick goes, the slotted amount gets counted against us as a cap hold as soon as we draft the guy.

by douglast on Apr 4, 2008 1:08 PM PDT up 0 recs

Digdangable!

And it's against NBA rules to trade away BOTH years' picks, so we'd have to use it. Not like we need it, with our young talent stash.

Well, that's another million-plus off our available cap space; as per my below post, that lowers it to just under $15 mil.

Did you really put stuff on top of the eggs? Like, for real? He put . . . HE PUT THE LIGHT BULBS ON THE BOTTOM!

by QualityPie on Apr 4, 2008 1:32 PM PDT up 0 recs

Okay, okay, wait--here's the real nitty-gritty:

I want to take a quick look at the scenario of make-a-run-at-free-agent(s)-in-the-2009-offseason,
one where we make no big trades before then (other than one that turns this year's pick into a future pick),
and where we pick our keepers from the 2005 class and extend them during next season.

What's our payroll then? And what's the max we'll have to throw at someone if we acquire instead of trading?
With all these great numbers you've thrown up, that's now possible (THANK YOU!).

As per your figures, here's the payroll going into 2009 free agency;
I'm picking a set of "keepers", and assuming Rudy comes and Darius is gone (BIG ifs):

Definitely on the books: $27,866,642
Pick up Blake's option and have Rudy: $5,450,000 (I feel like Rudy should get more, but your numbers seem good in general)
Renounce Frye and JJ, and extend Webster: $6,000,000 (you sure? I guess it offsets the Rudy number; I like the $7-mil+ total.)

So the team would be Roy, Oden and LMA as starters; Przybilla, Rudy and Sergio in the white unit;
and Trout, Blake and Webster as players who could start but probably shouldn't.

And the total is: $39,316,642

Here's the cap from the past few years, as per InsideHoops.com:
2001-02    $42.5 million
2002-03    $40.271 million
2003-04    $43.84 million
2004-05    $43.87 million
2005-06    $49.5 million
2006-07    $53.135 million
2007-08    $55.630 million

I'd extrapolate that into the cap for 09-10 to be (VERY) roughly $60.5 mil, with increases typically being $2-3 mil each year.
So if all of the above assumed happens, we'd have [deep breath] about $16 mil to straight-up sign people with.

Wow. That's a fairly large number.

Did you really put stuff on top of the eggs? Like, for real? He put . . . HE PUT THE LIGHT BULBS ON THE BOTTOM!

by QualityPie on Apr 4, 2008 1:29 PM PDT up 0 recs

As was just pointed out, the 2010 pick DOES count.

So that's $1.4 mil less we'd have to offer.

But wait!--now it's time to see what happens if we DON'T PICK UP BLAKE'S OPTION.
This scenario is where we'd be totally committed to finding a starter-quality guard to sign;
with Blake AND JJ gone, our only point guards would be Sergio (NOT a starter, not in 09-10)
and the capability of Roy to play the point (which then means where's our starting off guard,
so we'd still count on getting a starting-quality guard on the free agent market).

Offset the 2010 pick with declining Blake's option, and the number swells by about $3 mil,
to NINETEEN MILLION DOLLARS ($19,000,000)!

But that means we HAVE TO get a starting-quality point guard (or move Roy and get a wing) with that money.

So: The big choice BEFORE the 2009 offseason, it seems to me, is whether or not to pick up Blake's option.
That sounds like a really, really small-time issue to me.

Did you really put stuff on top of the eggs? Like, for real? He put . . . HE PUT THE LIGHT BULBS ON THE BOTTOM!

by QualityPie on Apr 4, 2008 1:42 PM PDT up 0 recs

It's a non-issue

I'm 99% convinced that Blake played his way onto the championship squad this year.

He's the ideal back-up:

--Plays adequate defense
--Sky-high A/T ratio
--Very reliable and competitive
--One of the best & most consistent
3pt shooters in the entire league
--Perfect culture fit
--Fits our system like a glove

To be honest, if it weren't for an inability to guard the premier PG's and to create opportunities for his teammates, I would say we have a pretty decent shot at a dynasty with him as the starter.

I never felt we needed an All-Star PG to begin with, but I have come to doubt that Blake is adequate to take the starting role and take us to the promise land. Not when we have the options that we do in summers to come.

"Life is a meaningless sequence of events in between Blazer championships"

by broggerboy19 on Apr 4, 2008 2:00 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yes, he played himself onto it this year . . .

. . . but I feel like he kinda played himself a little off of it these last two losses.

I'm definitely just momentarily down on the dude. It's a rare, passing thing, very temporary.
But it does feel like he was the primary turnover machine behind that late-third-quarter meltdown last night.

I'm just having a bad Blake day.
I know that you're right--I've loved him all season.
Just a rare bad day . . . last night really kinda sucked . . .

Did you really put stuff on top of the eggs? Like, for real? He put . . . HE PUT THE LIGHT BULBS ON THE BOTTOM!

by QualityPie on Apr 4, 2008 2:07 PM PDT up 0 recs

The dreaded....

recency or halo effect

by WarEaglePDX on Apr 5, 2008 12:36 PM PDT up 0 recs

+1

I still think that Blake will retire a Blazer. KP loves him, and Blake loves Portland. Sounds like he may be here for a while.

The NBA

Where Kyle Korver happens.

by SpyderRyder on Apr 5, 2008 12:22 AM PDT up 0 recs

And one last shot: the variables.

Maybe Webster goes, and Frye stays.
This is a kind of roundabout thing, where Trout beats out Webster for the title of
"Best (tied with Rudy) wing not named Roy and not acquired in the 2009 offseason",
and Frye takes Trout's spot as the backup power forward.
Basically, watch Frye's development next year, when he (like LaMardridge this year)isn't asked to play as much center
as he was the previous year, and gets to play just PURE power forward, alongside a PURE center (Joel).
At the same time, watch the Martell-vs-Trout battle for that in-quotes title above.
We're probably keeping two of these three guys; my money's on Web and Trout, but I could see a Trout-and-Frye pair easily.

Also, if we do go the "Get a starting point guard" route, as much as NOT picking up Blake's option GUARANTEES that,
we might still need two backup-quality point guards on the roster behind an acquired no-kidding starter PG.
So maybe we DO keep Blake--or maybe letting Blake go and getting a stud keeps JJ around.
Or maybe it's what puts Petteri on the roster for 09-10. Or maybe it means our 2010 pick must be a point guard.

If we DON'T get a stud, our starter is DEFINITELY Blake, with at least Sergio as a backup.
But if we DO get a stud point guard, Sergio's in as a backup, but so, too, probably is any one (JUST ONE) of the rest of the lot.

Also, if Miles manages to still be around for his last guaranteed year of 2009-2010, more than half the cap space goes [poof].
We absolutely need Darius Miles to step up, and step down. Not necessarily NOW, just before the end of next season.
Retirement, NBA-declared career-ending-injury, whatever: It seems inevitable, but it BETTER BE. Dammit.

Lastly, as much as I'm totally sold on the idea of swapping our first-rounder this year for a future, unprotected one,
nobody else is even considering it (that I know of). Just know that picking, or trading for a player now,
cuts $2 mil off our offerings in 2009 AND clogs up the roster by a spot we don't really need.
If we pick someone, or trade the pick for someone who's playing now and will be on the 09-10 roster,
that "someone" had better be definitively superior to our Trout/Webster/Blake/Rudy range,
because they'd HAVE TO take one of their spots--on the roster now, and on the roster later or as a cap space gain.
Don't just do this as a default thingy: NAME THAT SOMEONE, and defend him not as an addition, but as a REPLACEMENT.

Did you really put stuff on top of the eggs? Like, for real? He put . . . HE PUT THE LIGHT BULBS ON THE BOTTOM!

by QualityPie on Apr 4, 2008 2:04 PM PDT up 0 recs

Oh yeah--James Jones.

Another variable.

Did you really put stuff on top of the eggs? Like, for real? He put . . . HE PUT THE LIGHT BULBS ON THE BOTTOM!

by QualityPie on Apr 4, 2008 2:22 PM PDT up 0 recs

Whoops! MAJOR mistake!

Despite coming up with that $60.5-mil cap figure for 09-10, I accidentally calculated our cap space
based on that last listed number of $55-mil+! So the REAL numbers are:

About TWENTY-ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($21,000,000) if we keep Blake,
and about TWENTY-FOUR MILLION DOLLARS ($24,000,000) if we decline Blake's option!

Ohhhhhh, my goodness.
Chris Paul, are you reading this?
At the very least, that is undeniably sign-TWO-studs money, maybe one at 15 mil and one at 9 mil.

Ohhhhh, sweet Jeebuz. Cheese louise. Yowza. Wow.

Did you really put stuff on top of the eggs? Like, for real? He put . . . HE PUT THE LIGHT BULBS ON THE BOTTOM!

by QualityPie on Apr 4, 2008 2:48 PM PDT up 0 recs

Best thread

This is probably one of the best or the best threads I have ever read in BE. Lots of good scenarios and replies...and best of all no bashing so far. I can't really contribute too much that hasn't been said, but I've read about a lot more possibilities than I can think of on my own.

This deserves diary of the week.

by Philthyanimal on Apr 4, 2008 4:28 PM PDT 0 recs

SECOND!

MOTION CLOSED.

"Life is a meaningless sequence of events in between Blazer championships"

by broggerboy19 on Apr 4, 2008 4:35 PM PDT up 0 recs

I don't know...

This post is very good, but I think I preferred Part 1.

by pualo on Apr 4, 2008 6:46 PM PDT up 0 recs

Beautiful post.

Agreed, even by BE high standards. This post is a beautiful thing. Congrats to all contributors for the quality of content and tone.

by ojala on Apr 4, 2008 5:48 PM PDT 0 recs

Summer Trade

I especially like your point about the "summer 2008 trade option" -- I really think that KP's got another something up his sleeve around draft time this year. My prediction is that he's looking around the league for a few above-average starting SFs who won't break the bank and will target them with some kind of package of picks and some of our young assets like Outlaw.
Take for example the wildly speculative instance that Detroit flames out again in the playoffs this year and they decide to start retooling around Amir Johnson, Stuckey, etc. and Tayshaun Prince becomes available. That's an incredibly homeristic and unlikely scenario, but that's the sort of thing I feel like KP will have his eyes out for.

by kickbrass on Apr 4, 2008 6:35 PM PDT 0 recs