Salary Cap Holds (with poll)
This comes up occasionally in salary cap discussions, but in order for the Blazers to have the flexibility to do much of anything next summer, they need to resolve the cap hold issue for their number 6, 8, and 9 picks from the 2005 draft. That is, they need to either extend Webster, Frye, and Diogu, or they need to trade them before next year's free agent season, if those players' cap hold aren't going to be locking cap space during free agency.
They have until the end of this October (well, just before, when the season starts) to do so.
If they fail to extend these players and have not traded them, each player creates a "cap hold" at the end of the season valued at twice their would-be salary. This may be old news to everyone who reads this blog, but let's look at what's been happening with the top ten in the draft class in question.
- A. Bogut - extended, 5 years, $60M
- M. Williams - not extended by Cheap-lanta
- D. Williams - extended, 4 years, $70M
- C. Paul - extended, 4 years, $68M
- R. Felton - not extended (and Charlotte just drafted another PG)
- M. Webster
- C. Villanueva - not extended
- C. Frye
- I. Diogu
- A. Bynum - likely max extension derailed by knee injury
It's pretty clear that Diogu is not likely to be extended, given his newness to the team, injury history, and lack of significant NBA minutes as a result. With this team's depth, he's looking like the 11th or 12th man on the roster. The active roster is pretty sure to be:
- Brandon Roy
- LaMarcus Aldridge
- Greg Oden
- Travis Outlaw
- Martell Webster
- Steve Blake
- Channing Frye
- Rudy Fernandez
- Joel Pryzbilla
- Jerryd Bayless
- Sergio Rodriguez
- Ike Diogu
With LaFrentz inactive and Batum in the Development League much of the time. Given Webster and Frye's production, they are more akin to their peers that have not been extended (M. Williams, R. Felton, and C. Villanueva) than the ones that were. Frye only played 17 minutes a game last year - that number is likely to go down, not up, with the addition of Oden to the front-court rotation, as barring injuries Frye will be getting his minutes strictly behind Aldridge this year.
Webster's career and 2007-2008 season numbers aren't the kind that compel any kind of contract extension at this point. He has shown improvement each year, but he's far from a proven NBA starter at this point. He's going to have to show this year he can be a consistent outside threat and strong team defender to keep his starting job - the team added a lot of talent in the off-season. Even if he plays very well, he'll be hard pressed to see 28+ minutes on the court a game like he did last year.
My Conclusion: The Blazers will not extend any of these players before the season starts.
So what does this mean for free agency next year? Well, it depends on whether they move any of them. Next summer, Webster will be 22 and Frye 26. Obviously, how they play this year has a huge bearing on what the Blazers decide to do, but Webster in particular is still a young player with both athleticism and a decent jump shot. If his three point percentage improves as much this year as it did last year, I'd expect them to try and re-sign him next summer, after they extend Roy and Aldridge.
Frye may be the perfect backup for Aldridge, and a capable starter if he can't go on a given night. If he's productive in limited minutes like he was last year, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see the team sign him to a new deal either, though that would depend on what they're given to match.
It's a well-worn cliche that the GM is always looking to make the team better, while minimally disrupting what's working. If the right deal came along, the team would move any of the three. But if they have the kind of year most of us expect them to, I think it's more likely that they won't. Which means next summer's free agency may be one we mostly watch from the sidelines.
But don't fret. Looking at the list of free agents available next year, it doesn't appear we'll be missing out on much.
32 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hmm.
I think we might be selling Diogu short too early. He does fill a need at PF which Aldridge and Frye don’t really qualify for, namely that of a banger. Does that mean that he will see a big role on this team? Probably not. But he does fill a niche, and that might keep him around next year.
Of course, we’ll have to see this season what he does.
One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season
"In vino veritas." - Latin proverb
"Ich sitze hier und trinke mein gutes Wittenbergisch Bier und das Reich Gottes kommt von ganz alleine" - Martin Luther
"μηκέτι ὑδροπότει, ἀλλὰ οἴνῳ ὀλίγῳ χρῶ διὰ τὸν στόμαχον καὶ τὰς πυκνάς σου ἀσθενείας." - 1 Timothy 5:23
He's right about the free agents
Besides Turkoglu or bringing back Udoka or Abdur-Rahim, I don’t see anybody either worth spending money on or anybody fitting within our team, I think that makes this cap hold situation not THAT big of a deal at all and gives us more freedom with Roy, Lamarcus and the next summer Oden
The cap space
will probably be used in a trade with a team that wants to dump salary, perhaps to position themselves for the Lebron sweepstakes.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
That's the only option that makes any sense.
Unless, of course, the mind of Tom Penn has informed it’s owner of a way to do business with that space of which we have not even conceived.
Go, Tom Penn’s mind, go!!
One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season
"In vino veritas." - Latin proverb
"Ich sitze hier und trinke mein gutes Wittenbergisch Bier und das Reich Gottes kommt von ganz alleine" - Martin Luther
"μηκέτι ὑδροπότει, ἀλλὰ οἴνῳ ὀλίγῳ χρῶ διὰ τὸν στόμαχον καὶ τὰς πυκνάς σου ἀσθενείας." - 1 Timothy 5:23
shawn marion..........
he brings us the defensive presence we need at SF….all that lockeroom stuff is BS. He’s a hard worker and will contribute
by BroyTheTruth on Aug 21, 2008 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Ya I forgot about about shawn
Only thing I was wondering is our game too slow for him? I do expect our fastbreaks to pick up significantly from last year, but is it enough for the likes of the matrix? and would he get enough shots in our starting line up is another concern, but you do gotta LOVE his 3 defense and athleticism (and hes not afraid to use it like Marty is sometimes)!
by Trail Ducker on Aug 21, 2008 10:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Grant Hill!!
Help mentor outlaw and webby.. and be the 10th man off the bench..
"Why would we lie to ourselves dude?"
"Be excellent to each other."
"All we are is dust in the wind, dude."
"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K."
The Wisdom of Bill S Preston Esquire and Ted Theodore Logan
by GreatOden'sRaven on Aug 21, 2008 12:38 PM PDT reply actions
Either Frye or Webster may be extended
or even both of them, if the price is right. They won’t be extended for big bucks.
Webster might be extended for 3 years for around $5 million a year. That wouldn’t eat into the cap space too badly. It gives him three years to show he’s for real, and if he succeeds, he’ll get a big payday in three years.
Channing might go for similar money, as well.
If they are looking for 5 year contracts at $8-10 million a year, it won’t happen. If they are like Blake, happy with a salary that would set up most people for life, content to be a role player, but working hard to play that role better, they could make that case to KP now and probably get a contract. It partly depends on whether they want to be very, very rich and wear lots of championship rings, or very, very, very rich and go elsewhere.
Of the two, I think Channing is more likely to agree to the kind of contract that could see him extended. He might actually command more money on the open market than Martell would, kind of hard to say. Big men who can shoot and rebound are valuable, even if his interior defense needs a lot of work. But Channing really seems to like it in Portland, and I think everyone wants to be a teammate of Brandon Roy and Greg Oden.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
Extended when?
Did you mean this summer? I just don’t see that, from the Blazers end.
If you mean next summer, then sure, both are quite possible. But that’s signing a new contract instead of a qualifying offer, and is thus not what I means by extension.
But I totally agree with you regarding Channing versus Martell. $5M is less than Martell’s qualifying offer figure, so I can’t see him doing that.
Sure, this summer
If the price is right.
If KP and Nate make the assessment that we know enough that we want to keep one (or both), then you take that cap hold off the table.
A lot of fans haven’t made that keep/don’t keep decision yet, but KP might have. Or, he might have made the decision that Channing is a keeper if we can get him at $5 million a year, but not at $7 million.
I would guess there is definitely a price at which KP would extend each of these guys this summer. If Martell said he would extend for $1 million a year, KP would do it in a heartbeat. Similarly, there is a price at which the players would extend. So the only question is whether the player’s price and the team’s price are compatible. It’s possible that they are.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
Funny thing is, the top guy out of this draft class (apart from Paul and Williams) is Granger, and he wasn't in the top 10
Indiana wants to extend him, but so far nothing has happened. Give me him, or Prince, or maybe Gay (unlikely). Apart from that, I would rather keep Martell.
Odenied: Asked whether he noticed Oden favoring his right knee, Frye dismissed it entirely. "He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors."
Good post
I spent a little time recently looking at the numbers for the summer of 2009, and it has led me to that same conclusion:
None of Martell Webster, Channing Frye or Ike Diogu will be given an extension in the summer of 2008.
I think that this strategy will give the Blazers the maximum amount of flexibility. Yes, I know about the cap holds, but follow me on this:
Diogu is not going to get a qualifying offer. He’ll either be included in a trade this year as filler or he’ll be allowed to walk as an UFA. So that’s not an issue, IMO.
Webster? I don’t think the team has made a final decision about him. If he proves himself this year as a defensive player at SF and a consistent shooter, and the Blazers see him as the starting SF of the future, then they’ll give him a qualifying offer and there’s no need for cap room because the only possible ‘hole’ to fill will be starting PG, and I don’t see any potential players at that position that would necessitate having a huge amount of cap room. If he doesn’t step up, then let him walk and use the cap room to sign an improvement. If Granger isn’t extended this summer and is available next summer, he would be one candidate. Portland could also use the cap room to trade for a starting SF.
Frye? Same thing as Webster. If he proves himself, give him a qualifying offer. If not, let him walk.
Looking at the numbers, having one of either Frye or Webster on the books as a RFA next summer still leaves the team with a bucketload of cap space.
For example, if the team stands pat and makes no trades, and decides to keep both Blake and Outlaw and decides to keep their 1st round pick in 2009 and offers Frye a qualifying offer (not giving one to either Webster or Diogu and renounces them both), the Blazers look to have $13-14 million in cap room to obtain a starting SF. And unlike Philly this summer, getting cap room won’t mean that the team will then have to sign 3 or 4 minimum salary players to fill the roster, either.
Now, if a PG worth signing comes into play, then the team can easily spend $10 million on a SF like Granger, release Blake (who won’t have a place on the team if a FA PG is signed) and then have $7-8 million to go after that PG. If more money is necessary, then more cap room can be obtained by signing Frye to a new deal immediately (which should be less than his $9.5 million cap hold) and add that money to the mix as well. Or even renouncing Frye altogether if he won’t ‘play ball’ financially.
In the past, I was of the opinion that the Blazers should commit themselves this summer to Frye and/or Webster in order to maximize their cap situation. I no longer think that’s necessary. Especially now that Miles’ contract is off the books.
Oh, and BTW, I voted ‘only Frye’ will be on the roster in November of 2009.
by Storyteller on Aug 21, 2008 12:59 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
What I would do is set it up so that
if salary cap space is what we wanted, to trade those listed to a team for an expiring and a 1st round pick. Hopefully an old team such as Dal, Phx, Bos, or SAS that is making a playoff run will want one of these players and will trade a heavily protected 1st rounder asy top 25 in ’09, top 20 in ’10 and top 15 in ’11, then unprotected in ’12 when it should be a top 10 pick, just in time to grab replacements if someone does not play as well as expected.
If Webster does not come to the game he and Diogu would be a good addition to a borderline playoff team, and we would get a 1st for them and no salary back against our cap as opposed to renouncing them alltogether, getting nothing in return.
I think Frye is a keeper as you do and hope that he will agree to a moderately priced extension before the season starts.
Good idea in theory
The trouble is that the 4 teams that you mentioned (DAL, PHX, BOS, SAS) don’t have any expiring contracts to match someone like Webster or Diogu – at least not any expirings that they’d want to give up before a playoff run.
I’d look up other teams if I had more time, but you get the point.
Yeah I noticed that as well
but I would still prefer that move over just renouncing Webster straight up, which would leave us with nothing.
couple of things
first, they will all count at 300% of their 2008/09 salary, not 200% of their “upcoming salary” (whatever that is).
Secondly, there is the following conundrum:
1) If the Blazers don’t want to have their massive cap holds weighing them down to start next year’s free agency, then they have to extend at least two of the three prior to October 31. This could have either a positive or negative impact on their trade value during 2008-09, depending on the goals of the team on the other end.
2) Anyone who IS extended will likely become a BYC player, making them much more difficult to actually move in a trade deadline deal.
So, if you think you might want to trade some of these guys during the season, then to maximize your trading capabilities, you really don’t want to extend them now. However, not extending them now means you will have a big nasty cap hold to start next summer (unless you renounce their rights, making them unrestricted), which messes up your FA plans.
Rule #1 of nitpicking is to get it right.
I put in my vote for Frye and Diogu.
Sure, they both play Power Forward, but I think they compliment each other pretty well as backups. But neither will get big money. Of course, my vote and reality may be miles apart (as they usually are).
One of Two Official Blazer's Edge Poets Laureate for the 2008-2009 Season
"In vino veritas." - Latin proverb
"Ich sitze hier und trinke mein gutes Wittenbergisch Bier und das Reich Gottes kommt von ganz alleine" - Martin Luther
"μηκέτι ὑδροπότει, ἀλλὰ οἴνῳ ὀλίγῳ χρῶ διὰ τὸν στόμαχον καὶ τὰς πυκνάς σου ἀσθενείας." - 1 Timothy 5:23
Another option
We are the team to go to in 2009. Usually the big free agents are signed first in the summer followed by lesser players. Is it possible that the Blazers delay that whole process because they have cap holds from some combination of these three players. In other words, we negotiate a deal with a marquee free agent, but can’t sign him yet becasue of cap holds, we then choose to waive our rights to one of these players to clear cap space, anf finally the trade is completed. If this is possible, everybody would be forced to wait until it comes to terms with its RFA, thereby making capspace available for an UFA.
Som my question is: are my two assumptions valid?
1) once we sign one of our own RFA, then the cap hold comes off our books for that player thereby clearing capspace.
2) We can choose to waive the rights to any of our RFA during the summer making them UFA and therby releasing the cap hold by that player.
If these options are possible, then we can negotiate with any free agent before our cap spcae is fully cleared with the restriction that a contract can not become officcial until one of those two options takes place.
Answers
1) Once the Blazers sign a RFA, the amount of his new contract counts against the cap instead of the ‘cap hold’. If the new contract amount is less than the ‘cap hold’, then some cap space might be obtained.
2) ‘Cap holds’ are for both UFA and RFA. In order to get the ‘cap hold’ off of the team salary figure, the player’s Bird Rights would have to be renounced. Simply withdrawing the qualifying offer (which turns a RFA into an UFA) does not remove the ‘cap hold’.
Thanks
I need additional clarity on 2. You can’t withdraw the qualifying offer to clear cap space, but rather you must withdraw the offer and waive bird rights to remove the cap hold. I know this is just semantics but that’s why we all read Blazersedge because we do dig into the nitty gritty.
Exactly right
Withdrawing the Q.O. changes the status of a RFA to that of an UFA. But since an UFA also has a ‘cap hold’, simply withdrawing the Q.O. does not remove the ‘cap hold’.
Renouncing Bird Rights to an UFA will remove the ‘cap hold’.
So removing the ‘cap hold’ on a RFA requires 2 steps.
by Storyteller on Aug 22, 2008 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
So is there any reason
why someone would withdraw the Q.O. and not renounce Bird Rights? I guess if you were over the cap and didn’t want to pay the Q.O. but wanted to be able to re-sign someone without using your exceptions? Is that the only reason?
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
silly suggestion but ...
might frye be able to play some minutes at the 3? The SF spot seems to me to be the hole. I really like web, but I just don’t see a role for him on this team unless he blows up this year. He just seems mediocre — offense is good if he’s on, but if not, the effort drops. Defense is serviceable, but not premier enough to counter his weak offense.
Frye is on my short list of favorite Blazers. I hope he sticks. I just wonder if KP isn’t eyeing the reserve 4 spot and thinking “we need someone totally different than LMA, not LMA-lite.” I that is going to determine Frye’s future here. He’s sure earning brownie points for staying in town and working out with Greg this year — what a team-first guy.
With 67 votes so far, here's the per-player breakdown:
Webster stays (with or without Frye and/or Diogu): 36 (just over half)
Frye stays (with or without Webster and/or Diogu): 58 (about six out of seven)
Diogu stays (with or without Webster and/or Frye): 8 (roughly between one eighth and one ninth)
And “All Three Will Stay” is the only choice getting NO votes.
(And yes, I understand these are predictions, nor preferences.)
That’s quite the vote of confidence for Mister Frye.
=(_8c(|)
It's because
1. He gives the impression, more than Martell, of wanting to be here, and of being willing to be a role player. You want guys like that.
2. He’s versatile. He’s not really a backup center, but he can do it in a pinch. With his shooting, he might even be able to provide injury cover at SF. Good to have guys like that.
3. He naturally wants a good salary, but doesn’t seem overly money motivated, which makes it more likely he’ll be signed at a salary that fits team needs.
4. He’s the kind of guy that people like, and that helps team chemistry and fan relations.
And, the things underrated by people around here:
A. His shooting helps to spread the floor, and on this team, that’s even more valuable than on others. On most teams, you want your big guys to be a low post threat. On this team, the guy who guards Channing can’t double down on Greg without paying a high price.
B. He is LMA-lite. Lots of people seem to see that as a negative. I see it as a huge plus. If LMA goes out with foul trouble or injury, Channing can slot right in at that position without changing offensive sets, team chemistry, or anything. No one has to adjust their game when he slots in. That’s a positive, not a negative. Bench players who have to slot into the starting lineup because of fouls or injuries will be playing next to LMA, whose game is similar to the guy they are used to playing with, so that reduces the adjustments they have to make.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
it depends on Rudy...
if we’ll extend Martell.
It puts the lotion on the skin...or else it gets the hose!
by courtsideerrandboy on Aug 22, 2008 1:25 AM PDT reply actions
I also agree on Frye. A man who can give decent minutes at two positions and has accepted that he’s a role player, not a starter, can fit very well into the Blazers long term picture. It’s also the reason I think that Outlaw may have more value right now – than Webster. He’s already signed, and again, can give some decent minutes at both SF and PF. Further, he doesn’t seem to have the “starters” ego that would prevent him from accepting a long term role as a backup. I truly think that this is Websters year to show that he belongs. If not, then following KP’s logic with Jack, he’ll likely trade Webster who the league will accept as a solid backup at SF, for a starter, and make it work with cap space. This will improve the team – but it doesn’t necessarily mean that he’ll be looking for a premium SF, rather, it may be one who like Bayless, improves the position and fits the system.
Ike is a little bit of a mystery. Some analysts believe he’s the sleeper of the Bayless transaction. I suspect he’ll be gone, but that depends on what he’s willing to accept in terms of his role and salary. He does bring some things that Mac might like to the table, and who knows, that we might need. An old school power forward might have a fit. However, we do know that Frye seems to play healthy, whereas Diogu has had an injury bug.
We’ll simply have to watch all three for the first 40 games or so. By mid season, I suspect that Mac and KP will have made their decisions, and they could act at any time after that – either by resigning or trading the players in question.
And, they could surprise all of us. The combined stats of Outlaw/Webster at SF are as good as most teams have at that position. If the two divide the minutes and give us some versatiltiy, and if adding a “starter” won’t likely improve the stats that much, we might just keep them both at $5 to $6 mill a year, rather than pay a starter $10 mill or so, while reducing Outlaws minutes from a split of 24, to 12 – 15 if the starter plays 32 or more. You never know. It all comes down to Oden and the guards. We can now afford role players at SF – if those positions work they way we hope.
There's always the fact
that some of us think KP stole a premium PG in Bayless. Just thought I should point out that little matter is still in dispute, he may be much more than a guy who just “improves the position and fits the system”. We’ll find out.
We may have a premium SF, too. Or KP may trade one of the guys to get one. But you are right that we don’t really need much of an upgrade over what we have right now, and that Weblaw/Outster may provide all we need, and more, at that position.
I think no matter what Ike is willing to accept, he’s likely to be gone. Barring injuries, I don’t even know that he’ll get enough PT to prove himself, even if he is good enough to earn a spot on most teams. We are just so deep at his position.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo

by 






















