Answering a few Questions on Millsap -- UPDATED, FORGOT SOMETHING
by jscot on Jul 11, 2009 4:45 AM PDT
Email
PrintThere's been a lot of discussion in various threads, but a few questions keep coming up, so I'll try to answer them here. Some have been answered, but the questions keep coming up anyway.
NOTE: POINT 5.D) HAS BEEN UPDATED
1. Are we just getting Millsap as a trade asset?
No. If Utah doesn't match, Millsap is not tradeable until Dec. 15. However, he is probably not tradeable until next summer, because he will be a Base Year Compensation player. For a deal to be made using a BYC player, you almost always have to include someone who has cap space, and hardly anyone does. If Millsap starts the season as a Blazer, he almost certainly finishes the season as a Blazer.
CORRECTION: As per comments below, this was wrong. He cannot be traded until Dec. 15, but because we are not over the cap Millsap would NOT be BYC.
I apologize for the error. I still doubt he would be traded mid-season, but that is more based on my assessment of the way KP works than on hard fact.
2. Are we getting Millsap to enable us to trade someone else?
This is theoretically possible, as it would make a trade of Joel or LMA more palateable. Any such trade would have to bring back a major upgrade at some position to justify the loss of those players. Any trade involving LMA probably has to happen before he is extended because then, I believe, poison pill provisions come into play due to a new contract already in place with a much higher salary than his current one. Since it is unlikely that Utah lets Millsap come here, it is even less likely that any trade like this is in the works.
3. Will Utah match?
I put the chances at about 90%, personally. The only reason they would not is liquidity concerns, probably -- coming up with the signing bonus on short notice when they weren't expecting to need $5+ million or more.
4. Why didn't we offer 5 years and an additional $10 million to make it harder for Utah?
This has been asked repeatedly. I know of three possible answers (there may be more). The first is one that others have suggested -- it will make negotiations with other players more difficult if we readily give a backup a five year contract at that level. Paul Allen is wanting to shed the "spend anything to win" image -- it will not help the team if everyone thinks that. He is willing to spend, but perhaps not so unlimited as people like to think.
The second reason we didn't offer Millsap five years is that Utah will almost certainly match the offer, however we structure it. They will not let their PF of the future walk just so they can keep Boozer, who is going to leave next year anyway. The amount of the contract is actually pretty good for a player of Millsap's quality, we're talking about $8.5 million per year over four years for a potential all-star. And by paying a signing bonus, that increases his appeal to other teams in trades -- the annual cost is less than the cap hit.
So why not tie Utah up for a fifth year, if they are going to match anyway? Because Millsap will be at his peak when those four years are up, he'll be 28. If he is an all-star at 28, which would you rather have, to have him locked up for another year at $10 million, or have him be UFA? I would rather have him locked up.
A fifth year would help Utah, if they match, and not hurt them that much now, which is when it matters. If the purpose is to structure a deal that is totally unappetizing to the Jazz, a fifth year would have been detrimental. If you asked them if they would rather match this offer, or one with a fifth year at a reasonable cost, they would probably prefer the one with the fifth year.
The third possible answer is that Millsap wanted four years, not five, because he expects his next contract to be a lot larger.
5. What is the benefit of doing this if Utah is almost certainly going to match?
A) Utah could have signed Millsap for $5-6 million a year for three or four years. This limits their flexibility by putting him on a higher salary.
B) Utah would have been happy to have Boozer opt out. Now, they will have strong incentive to trade him in a salary dump, because their luxury tax payments will be exorbitant, and they have to pay that signing bonus as well. They need a real salary dump. Trading Boozer for expiring contracts will not help with their luxury tax for this year. Boozer himself is an expiring contract. They should be able to find teams willing to take Carlos, both because he produces and because he is an expiring contract. A team that wants an expiring contract to be a player in free agency next summer might take Boozer in a three team deal, sending out a non-expiring contract to a team that has cap space.
C) To get rid of Boozer and help their cap situation, they need one of two things: A trading partner (directly or as a third or fourth team in the deal) that has cap space or players with non-guaranteed (or partially non-guaranteed) contracts.
D) There are probably only three teams (Portland, OKC, Sacramento) who have cap space available to take a salary dump, and it is doubtful whether OKC and Sac want to do so. There are a handful of other teams that could send players with non-guaranteed contracts to Utah, but probably not enough to really help with their problem. UPDATE: Other teams that could help Utah in a salary dump would be teams with a large trade exception. Denver has one of these until the start of the season. I'm not sure who else, if anyone, does (Orlando?). Denver probably doesn't want to add a big chunk of salary. Orlando might for the right player.
So in all probability, Utah will match, and try to off-load Boozer in a salary dump. If they succeed, the chances are high that we will be the facilitators, giving up our cap space for some player we want. If we are not facilitators, then who will be? Either OKC or Sacramento, apparently, who would give up cap space for a player they want.
Suppose Boozer goes to OKC directly (I don't see this, but I could see them taking someone else in a three team deal). But for purposes of discussion, they facilitate, Utah's problem is solved -- and OKC's cap space is gone. Who will facilitate the next salary dump? Does anyone really think that there won't be another salary dump, given the current economic conditions, before our cap space is gone?
Every salary dump that goes down strengthens our hand, as the number of teams with cap space goes down. KP has just increased the chances we are going to benefit from a lopsided trade, by putting a division rival in a position where they almost have to do a salary dump. If we don't benefit from this one, we'll benefit from the next. And as douglast mentioned in several threads, once the season starts, the Euro cap holds go away until next summer, which means we'll have even more cap space to facilitate a trade.
One more point
Utah expected Boozer to opt out, and if they match our offer to Millsap, they would probably be happy if they could rewind the clock and get him to opt out. They probably would take almost nothing just to dump him. The comments about Utah rejecting an alleged three team deal with Chicago because they wanted a particular player are probably mistaken.
Six months ago, Utah thought Boozer was going to be gone for nothing. Anything they get for him without running up salary obligations is a bonus. KP is not going to be looking to facilitate a deal that gives up much talent in exchange for our cap space. He's looking for a lot more out of it than a Hinrich/Blake trade. We've gone to some trouble to put Utah in a mess, and we aren't likely to help them out of it without getting more for our cap space than that.
171 comments
|
49 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So much logic and clarity it's blowing my mind.
Thank you.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 11, 2009 5:00 AM PDT reply actions
Impeccable logic.
For a human.
I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
by haildablazer on Jul 11, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 6 recs
A Rec for you both
If we offered the max we could, it would mean dumping our loose Euros, Freeland and K-Finn. So we offered what was comfortable.
If we had maxed our offer, the Jazz would probably meet it anyway. But they might be less inclined to do Portland any favors.
Our offer is respectable to the player, hurts a Division rival, and if the Jazz don’t re-sign Millsap, KP should shake loose a quality player somewhere else.
It’s like KP is saying, make a deal with me now, or deal with me later.
Where is your evidence
that I’m human?
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Yes, indeed
That is the question. Cover, misdirection, or tip off?
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
By making an offer to Millsap (and not giving up Bayless to the Bulls), the Blazers get into a kind of can't lose situation
The Blazers will force the Jazz to either let Millsap walk to us at a fairly good price slightly above market value and then be required to re-sign Boozer, or swallow the poison pill AND pay Boozer, or to accept a worse player from Chicago in Tim instead of Tyrus Thomas to get the Hinrich trade done and keep Millsap, or trade Boozer to a team that gives them some crappy expiring deal (not many of those left) and swallow the poison pill.
Even if we don’t win by getting the player we want (Millsap, Hinrich), at least it hurts a division rival. That’s also a use of cap space – without actually using it.
If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar
I fell over laughing when I heard the rumor that the Bulls want Bayless as part of the deal. Right. We blow our cap space on Hinrich’s semi-bloated contract (a contract that is hurting their ability to be a player in the summer of LeBron), and in exchange we give up a potential superstar who has a bargain basement contract.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exOxUAntx8I&feature=channel_page
by The Cactus Leaguer on Jul 11, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Bayless, a potential superstar!
I’m falling over laughing. Hopefully a functional NBA player or perhaps even a star, but a superstar?! That’s a little much.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Also: COMCAST SUCKS!
by TwoDeep on Jul 11, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'll keep this comment
to use against you when Rex is dominating the league in four years.
:-D
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Jul 11, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
not going to happen, imho
rex is not a star, not a pg at all and will always struggle against bigger players. can’t tell you how quickly i would pull the trigger on bayless for hinrich…
by blazersunited on Jul 11, 2009 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions
u had me until....
you said he would struggle against bigger players…hes 6’3" and almost 200 pounds…there are not many point guards bigger than him…certainly none that are more cut than him…
Superstar? Really?
We’re not talking Roy 2.0 here. If he develops, he has the potential to be a good player with maybe an All Star appearance during a championship run. That’s still good, that’s what I want to happen. But it isn’t domination station.
It would be might delight if you are able to do that jamon.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
Also: COMCAST SUCKS!
OK then, even if he is merely a “hopeful functional NBA player or perhaps a star” as you say… he has a $1m/yr contract versus Hinrich at $9m/yr. That is a “falling over laughing” trade proposal by the Bulls considering they would also be picking up Carlos Boozer who is a combination of a valuable player and an expiring contract.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exOxUAntx8I&feature=channel_page
by The Cactus Leaguer on Jul 11, 2009 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Bayless is more like $2M than $1M, as I recall...
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
Oh $2m, well that changes everything, doesn’t it? Time to dump his lazy arse and his bloated contract.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exOxUAntx8I&feature=channel_page
by The Cactus Leaguer on Jul 11, 2009 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed. Trading Bayless for Hinrich would be worse than trading O'neal for Davis.
He has all the potential to become a more explosive version of Jason Terry.
Good point.
IMO, anything we do puts us in a win win situation. Even if we did nothing we are in a win win situation. TWe don’t need to spend that salary cap. We could look at saving Paul 10 million. That is where it is nice to be flexable. We will improve no matter what we do..
hg
What is an example
of trading Boozer in a “real salary dump”? I’m confused by that — what kind of trade will save the Jazz money this year?
The Michael Ruffin of BlazersEdge, cuz Amlmart said so.
Trade him to a team with salary cap space for either players with much smaller contracts, non-guaranteed contracts and/or a draft pick. For example… they could trade him to us for Blake/Outlaw and then cut them and make out pretty good this year. Assuming we wanted Boozer.
by danielfarrell on Jul 11, 2009 5:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Remember last year
when Denver traded Camby to the Clips for a conditional second rounder?
Salary dump, nothing more.
Here’s another. Detroit needs a big man, right?
Boozer to Detroit.
Prince to Portland.
Cap space from Portland to Utah.
That’s a salary dump. Won’t quite work, because Prince’s salary is probably more than our cap space, so we might have to send Travis to Utah. Utah’s salary obligation drops by about $9 million, plus they get a player who will drive Jerry Sloan stark raving mad. Detroit gets a legit big man, if only for a year, but they rent a player for a year and have an expiring contract which might be useful to them by mid-season.
We’ve used our cap space to turn Travis into Tayshaun. It’s a win for Utah (they don’t have to eventually fire Sloan because he’s gone insane, AND they’ve saved luxury tax), and a win for Detroit because they’ve freed up some roster congestion (too many wings) and gained a big man, at least for a year.
Detroit only gets the big man for a year, so it may not be quite enough to satisfy them. We might have to toss in our first round pick (which would probably be about #28 next year if we had Prince).
I’m not saying that will happen, or even that it is the best thing to happen. But I can live with it if it does, for sure.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 11, 2009 6:15 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
How does it work?
if OKC gets Boozer straight up for a salary dump? Can they turn around and do the Detriot trade with us? Utah then doesn’t have to hold their nose and take a player back from us. Maybe Utah didn’t want to co-operate with us, but OKC does. Does this work?
I think so
I’m not sure, but I think OKC would have to wait two months, there is some kind of provision like that. But why would OKC do it? They would basically be getting rid of their cap space, then getting it back for the privilege of letting us get Prince and Detroit getting Boozer.
I suppose if they got draft picks thrown in by everyone, or something. Hard for me to see them doing that.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
So if you're trading to a team that's under the cap
or involved in a multi-way trade with one, then you don’t need to take back salary that matches the 125% + 100,000 rule? I know this is elementary for some, so bear with me.
The Michael Ruffin of BlazersEdge, cuz Amlmart said so.
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 11, 2009 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions
See, it's never that you're required to take back any amount of salary in a trade.
It’s just that the team you’re trading with is probably required to send it out. But if they have the cap space, they’re not required to.
Keep in mind that everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazers Edge.
I like the part about
Trout causing Sloan to go insane. Not that he would of course….
Pretty much the only team left who can make that happen and would take Boozer is OKC
With Atkins (mostly unguaranteed) and/or maybe Collison coming back to Utah, and the rest of Boozer’s contract absorbed with cap space.
If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar
If OKC get's Boozer even for one year
With the way they finished last season they could definately make some noise this year
by PHXBlazerFan on Jul 11, 2009 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah
But it isn’t their style. They are building for the future. They are actually better off going into the lottery then winning a max of 48 games and getting destroyed in the first round, and then having Boozer walk away.
Develop the young players, draft another good one, build for the future.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Damien Wilkins
would be a better choice for Utah than Collison, salary-wise (3,300,000 expiring)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
If Utah matches, what sort of restrictions are there on the Blazers making another offer to Millsap (if it is possible to make an even uglier offer from Utah’s perspective)?
The cowards never started
The weak died along the way
Only the strong survived
They were the Trailblazers
None
If Utah matches, Millsap becomes their player to exactly the same conditions like the offer the Blazers made (years, salary, bonuses).
If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar
So if Millsap signs and Utah matches...
he is no longer a UFA or he still is? Can the Blazers turn around next week and make another offer?
The cowards never started
The weak died along the way
Only the strong survived
They were the Trailblazers
I mean Restricted...
The cowards never started
The weak died along the way
Only the strong survived
They were the Trailblazers
He isn't a FA at all if that happens
He’s simply a player under contract to Utah.
When he signed that offer sheet with Portland, he agreed to play under those terms for Portland, or the exact same terms for Utah if they match, or the exact same terms for another team if he is traded by one of those teams. Millsap is off the market as a free agent, now.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Great Post ...
great analysis that extends far beyond the immediate to show how this deal might affect potential movement during the season … whether or not the deal goes though. this rationale makes even more sense when we look at the fact that we’re dealing with a division rival. this deal looks by better and feels better (thanks to your clear description of the options) than i saw with the Hedon’t deal.
patience my son ...
Does anybody else think this offseason is more interesting than most?
For all the teeth gnashing and sackcloth rending, this has been very captivating. I had no idea how much strategy could come into play during the summer. Like anything else in life, improvements are easy when you are starting at zero. Getting over the hump takes a little bit more. It should be tougher than it has been.
We all watch the game because of the excitement caused by the unknown. Suspense. You win some, you lose some. Winning every time is boring.
Why shouldn’t we enjoy the offseason maneuvers just as much?
The cowards never started
The weak died along the way
Only the strong survived
They were the Trailblazers
by lukeyhere on Jul 11, 2009 8:33 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
A couple of days ago, I would've agreed with you
I really enjoy the uncertainty and watching it all play out. But I’ll have to admit, I’m currently suffering from freakout burnout, and I clicked on jscot’s post just because I knew it would be a cool refreshing drink of water on a 105° day.
Exactly
I’m burned out from this free agent talk and angst. Let’s get to Summer League already!
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
I likey your attitude, lukeyhere
I will admit it’s tough for me right now not to stress out.
I don’t like big rides, either.
Winning every time is boring.
Gimme some of that L*ker fan ennui, I can handle it
I’ve been “enjoying” the Blazer’s offseason roster-building almost as much as I’ve had fun watching the team’s on court fortunes for the past 35+ years. I can tell you, this has been the most nerve-wracking offseason in my memory, and it really started back before February. It’s like when you know that a hurricane’s coming, and there’s nothing you can do to get out of the way of it’s path. I don’t think there are many knowledgeable fans who won’t admit that the decisions being made right now by the Blazer’s brass are going to strongly affect the future of the ballclub for the next 5 years
And while that’s always been the case, every off-season, this year the pressure has been “racheted up” due to the “perfect storm” of cap-space being available for a limited time during a relatively underwhelming FA class and the world economy “being what it is”
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
We can't use the word underwhelming
in 2010. It’s a new rule I read somewhere. Good comment.
Nicely done, sir.
A bit of reason is very welcome in a heavy sea of emotion.
So many fans are riled up at team management, and Quick and Canzano have certainly stoked fan anxiety. Clownzano has just been over the top the last two days. He is either extremely stupid, or more likely, extremely manipulative. He manipulates fans who lack a detailed understanding of the cap and the tax and the ways that affects the teams strategy in the current situation. It seems to be all about ratings and drawing more attention to himself. He has this huge platform and then refuses to use it to educate fans about what is really going on. Sorry for the OT rant.
I love jscot’s analysis. As always, spot on.
by upper left corner on Jul 11, 2009 8:47 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Great job jscot!
A great explanation for the many Bedgers with questions.
I especially liked your analysis of the 4 year deal instead of the 5. That was the only part that had me perplexed.
Well done, rec.
ditto
the name jscot is now engraved upon my brain as “good poster. read his posts.” or something of the like.
That's step one
Step two is to engrave on your brain “Future ruler of the world”. Step three? “Beloved leader whose word is my command.”
Small steps for man, giant leaps for mankind. The world waits…..
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
There might be
some more steps between those stages…
Excellent post.
One question on Base Year Compensation
There have been rumors that Millsap would NOT be BYC, because he’s being signed with free cap space. So you can confirm that’s not true?
Doublechecking this myself, from Larry Coon's FAQ:
BYC defines the salary that’s used to compare players for compliance under the Traded Player exception (see question number 68 for more information about the Traded Player exception). Usually the salary used for comparison is the player’s actual salary. But under either of the following circumstances, a different salary is used when comparing salaries for trading purposes:
- The team is over the salary cap, used the Larry Bird or Early Bird exception to re-sign the player, and the player received a raise greater than 20% (unless it’s the minimum salary).
- The team is over the salary cap, it extended the player’s rookie scale contract, and the player received a raise greater than 20%.
If either of the above apply, then the player is considered a base year player. A player remains a base year player for six months, or until June 30, whichever comes later. When trading a base year player, the salary used for comparison is the player’s previous salary, or 50% of the first-year salary in his new contract, whichever is greater.
If either of the above apply, then the player is considered a base year player.
Neither of these seem to apply to the Blazers and Millsap. They would apply to him it Utah re-signs him, it sounds like.
by Timmay! on Jul 11, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Correct
If Millsap’s offer sheet is not matched by Utah and he becomes a Blazer, he will NOT be BYC.
by Storyteller on Jul 11, 2009 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Which is the other beautiful part of this signing
After December the Blazer will have 4 quality bigs, all on fair to below-market contracts, all solid tradeable assets. We can keep ’em all or choose 1 to move for the right player.
Except that Utah will match, so let’s hope the 3-way deal works out.
KP's quote today from NBA.com broadcast
KP on Millsap: He’s looking to get a tough guy and another guy who can bring it from the bench because you need four quality bigs.
There is no big man logjam or future trade requirement. Sounds to me like Nate and KP are planning to keep ’em all and play LMA-Millsap-C together during parts of most every game
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
That is really funny.
Yes, everyone needs four bigs. Just take a look at the last five championship teams.
LA: Gasol(40.5), Odom(32), Bynum (17.4)
Boston: Garnett(38), Perkins(25), Powe(11.5)
San Antonio: Duncan(36), Oberto(20), Elson(11.5)
Miami: Shaq(33), Haslem(29.5), Mourning (10.8)
Detroit: B.Wallace(40.2), R.Wallace(35), Okur(11.5)
I guess they can say whatever they want knowing Utah is going to match. There’s no way they need, want, or keep four premier bigs. Misdirection within misdirection.
by Nick Van Excellent on Jul 12, 2009 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions
Jscot you should update the post with this
Keep in mind that everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazers Edge.
Good catch
Thanks for the correction, I’ve modified the post.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
There is one more option Jscot (and I in my comment above) didn't mention: Utah could also do a sign & trade in matching the offer during those 7 days
It wouldn’t have to be with us, but it could be. It’s a bit theoretical in nature, but this option was mentioned by Hollinger in his insider piece on this and the Mavs acquisition of Marion plus the Hedo acquisition by the Raptors.
If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar
True
That would lend itself to the third-party trade scenario…
I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
by haildablazer on Jul 11, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes, but...
it would have to either be with someone who has cap space or is sending salary back, so the same complications apply as if they were trading Boozer.
And really, I don’t see them doing that, because Millsap is their PF of the future. It is Boozer they want to unload, and Millsap they want to keep.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
They could get a player for him in return instead of losing him for nothing was Hollinger's point
Or even unload an additional player like the Raptors did.
If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar
Agreed
But to do that, they either need to A) take equal salary back, which eliminates the whole point, if they are taking equal salary back they might as well keep Millsap or B) find a team with cap space (or a trade exception, I guess) to absorb some of the salary.
If it is B) we are in the same position as Boozer — either we facilitate or it removes one of the teams that is able to facilitate.
I forgot about trade exceptions in the original post. I know Denver has a big one, but I doubt Utah wants to help them out any more than they want to help us. Do you know who else has big exceptions?
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Miami ca. 4 million. Orlando will get a big one of ca. 7-8 million for Hedo. Denver 9.8 million from AI. Portland $2.9 million. No other team has bigger ones.
If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar
None of these are big enough to absorb Boozer
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Jul 12, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
No, but Denver could combine the trade exception with a player, I think
and send back about $3 million in salary.
That would do it, they don’t have to clear every penny, just enough to get some major savings.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
TEs can never be combined with anything in a deal. It has to be a straight one-for-one, TE for player.
draft the stache
by Cablinasian on Jul 12, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
OK, thanks
Nevertheless, try this.
Denver’s exception would absorb Hinrich. So Chicago could send Hinrich to Denver, get Boozer, and send $1 million of filler back to Utah, and everyone is happy.
Not saying that would happen, but something like that could.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
That particular scenario does work. I’m thankful that the teams with big TEs are already far, far into the luxury tax. Denver’s starting lineup goes over the tax by themselves.
draft the stache
by Cablinasian on Jul 12, 2009 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, like I said
I don’t see Denver doing anything like this unless it brought them Lebron, Kobe, Howard, or CP3.
Perhaps Orlando can afford something like that a little more, I’m not sure.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
I think Orlando’s is even smaller, 7 million, and they just signed Bass. That would take serious financial maneuvering AND a desire to have 30+ million wrapped up in Lewis, Bass, and Boozer.
draft the stache
by Cablinasian on Jul 12, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I can't see them taking Boozer
But I could see them taking another player they want for $7 million as the third team in a deal. See my comment below on how a $6 million trade exception could be used to facilitate things to get a decent player for them AND help Utah out of it’s mess.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Well done
Thanks, most of these were questions I’d been asking myself.
I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
Understand.
This insightful, informative and soothing post by Dave Deckard is very damaging.
Damaging to the efforts of America’s #1 Sports Columnist/Top-Notch Mid-Market Sports-Radio Talk Show Host to foment discontent among less-informed or just confused Blazer fans.
All of this cynical manipulation for the sake of ratings and self-aggrandizement.
By responsibly informing Blazer Nation, Dave has foiled these bald-faced machinations.
Can you say, “Cut Canzano off at the knees?”
You bet.
And America’s #1 Sports Columnist is going to have difficulty calling out Kevin Pritchard in his next Oregonian column.
Because the brilliance of KP and Tom Penn’s plan is well understand by Dave Deckard — and now, by the readers of Blazers Edge.
For it’s not pizza and bodies of water that will make the Blazers title contenders.
It’s savvy manipulation of the salary cap, the luxury tax and the economic situation.
Not manipulation of fans.
And that makes all the difference in a child’s heart.
by Calzone on Jul 11, 2009 10:12 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I think that the best way to get that guy out of here is to simply ignore him. Saying how much you hate him (and no I can’t stand him either) simply adds fuel to the fantasy that we read and listen to him like libs who tune in to Rush.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exOxUAntx8I&feature=channel_page
by The Cactus Leaguer on Jul 11, 2009 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions
I'd like to make a correction.
Since it was on the main page I thought Dave wrote it. I just now noticed that this fine post was in fact written by jscot. Apologies, jscot, and good work.
Well, now, that's interesting
I’m not sure why you are apologizing to me. If anyone is insulted, it’s Dave Deckard.
But we can’t expect Canz (oops) Calzone to worry about getting facts straight, can we?
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Understand.
America’s #1 Sports Columnist is not infallible.
And neither is “Calzone.”
But credit needs to be given where credit is due.
Jscot has put a dent in the teflon armor of America’s #1 Sports Columnist.
And while the dent will be repaired in time for Canzano to go on his highly-rated drive-time sports-talk radio show and hammer on KP anew, make no mistake.
There’s a wound. And it will leave a small scar.
America’s #1 Sports Columnist is not infallible.
This statement alone is enough to convince me that Clazone and Canzano are not one and the same
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Calzone, not Clazone
I am not happy with this keyboard
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Understand.
America’s #1 Sports Columnist has been known to make mistakes. But only of the typographical variety.
Everything else is unassailable.
Like when A#1SC claimed that Brandon Roy said there was a “50-50 chance” he was coming back to the Blazers?
You bet it’s true.
Stick with the bald-faced truth, and the bald-faced truth will set you free.
Wouldn't it be cool to get NJ involved
Send Boozer & Blake to NJ
Outlaw to Utah
Harris to Portland
NJ would only have $20 mil in salaries next season.
We’d have Harris AND still be $6 under the cap.
Patty Mills - PG of the future. Book it.
Although we'd probably have to take back Tony Battie to make it work.
Patty Mills - PG of the future. Book it.
by Blazerholic on Jul 11, 2009 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions
fine by me
he is a good locker room guy and a serviceable player on a one year contract.
We might have to sub Bayless for Blake to keep NJ interested, but that seems worthwhile. A Blake/Harris pg combo would be as cool as the other side of the pillow.
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
I will talk about DeJuan Blair no more forever
Not sure the Nets would want Boozer
but you never know
I put a “4-way Devin Harris trade” in the fanshots earlier today. Boozer to the Bulls, etc
(I don’t think Blake is going anywhere, even if it’s for Harris)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Nothing new
The girls always whistle when I walk by. I never understood why, though.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
I really need to quit the snark
but the British sense of humor just keeps coming out in me.
What I should have said is, “Thanks a lot, Ben.”
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Some folks can snark, some can't.
You can. It helps that your a foreigner. Foriegner + snark = it works.
"The match in Los Angeles is a good opportunity to begin to demonstrate that we want to make war." Rudy Fernández (translated)
Being a foreigner
is all a matter of perspective, Yankee.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Snark is good. It keeps Bedge alive.
draft the stache
by Cablinasian on Jul 11, 2009 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I'd rec it twice if I could....
Oh wait, I have to screen names, I will do just that. Excellent work scoty…
The Bedger formally known as ????????
Is there a possability that
Utah signs Milsap and then trades Boozer for perhaps Rip Hamilton? It won’t save them any money but it would screw us big time. Then the Blazers get nothing and the Jazz get Millsap and Hamilton
Utah would be the one screwed in that deal
we would be right where we are now ……….one of the last teams standing with cap space (with a 54 win team)
"He wanted to come to a winner, Mrs. Turk wanted to go shopping….."
- Upper Left Corner
by 92wastheyear on Jul 11, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
yeah
we wouldn’t be screwed – I for one don’t mind heading into next season with the same roster. But I would hate for Utah to get better on the court.
for offensive
purposes this trade make a lot of sense, but it they seems to be looking for cap relief now and Hamilton is a bit on the old side and has a long contract.
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
I will talk about DeJuan Blair no more forever
Precisely
It might make Utah better but it would cost them a huge amount of money, and not just this year. That would turn Boozer’s expiring contract into a long term big contract (Hamilton’s), which would mean they would be paying heavy luxury tax not just this year, but for at least two more years.
I don’t see them doing it. They need to cut salary this year if possible, not add salary for years to come.
And I don’t know that Detroit does that, either. Hamilton is a good long term player for them, Boozer is rent-a-player for a year. It would damage their long term prospects.
Prince is different because he’s only under contract for two years, so Boozer for one year vs. Prince for two years isn’t that much of an issue. And they have other wings, including Hamilton.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Except one of Boozer's demands
has been that he at least talk extension with whoeer he gets traded to. There’s no reason he has to be a rental
Does he have a no-trade clause?
If not, his demands in the situation are just hot air.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
He's looking for a lot more out of it than a Hinrich/Blake trade
I sure hope you’re right. This is KP’s final opportunity to make a “Gasol/Billups” kind of screaming deal. Anything short of Devin Harris is going to be a huge buzz kill, after all of the RLEC build-up
(at least to me)
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Prince is taller than Harris
not short of him.
No guarantees on what KP will get, but I guarantee he wants more than Hinrich/Blake. That is only a marginal upgrade, it isn’t a “this will make you champions” move.
Prince or Harris would be the kind of thing, even if it costs us a player or two that we value, that could put us right in the thick of it next year. I actually would prefer Prince, because A) I’m a Bayless believer, and think his future is very bright and B) Prince has much more extensive playoff/championship experience.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
I think everyone overrates Prince
What basis is their for the conventional wisdom that Prince is still an elite defender/role player? I think he would upgrade the Blazers offense and provide general gutsy play, but he’s quietly a little over the hill on D.
My girlfriend is from the Detriot area, so I watched a lot of Pistons games last year. Not once do I remember thinking, “man, Prince really made his presence felt on D there.” I do remember thinking the opposite – “man, Tayshaun’s slipping hard.”
And the numbers say the Pistons were better on D without Prince on the court. Here’s the dirty little secret about him: the Pistons were 4.5 points per 100 possessions better on D last year when Prince was NOT on the court. That’s pretty similar to the number Trout has consistently put up over the past couple years.
I know Lebron isn’t a fair test case for an elite defender, but there are a TON of guys who D him up better than Prince. And not necessarily elite guys either. I’m talking Pietrus, Pierce – hell, even Hinrich.
I just don’t see Tayshaun helping much on teh defensive end. I think Hinrich is a little younger, has less wear and tear, and would do much more than Prince to upgrade the D.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
by KP Corleone on Jul 11, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Good point
I think KP and Nate want a “bigger” player than Prince, if their pursuit of Hedo and now Millsap is any indication. Tayshun can’t play the 4 and that’s where the real need is (besides PG)
Batum duplicates TP’s skillset and will quickly close whatever gap there is between the two, experience-wise. If I was thinking about adding another SF to Portland’s roster, I’d look at Shane Battier before Prince
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Nice post
it’s always good to get an countervailing argument with stats and everything. Rec.
The Michael Ruffin of BlazersEdge, cuz Amlmart said so.
by BlazersOrBust on Jul 12, 2009 7:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Likewise
I always found the man love for either Prince or Battier baffling considering we have a younger version of these two in Batum. Prince and Battier are very limited on offense too. Its not like they are playmakers. With one or two more seasons, Batum will either match or exceed Prince or Battier.
I think that is very possible
But I wouldn’t mind using our cap space to rent Prince for a couple years while Nic learns and develops.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
He Developers Faster
Batum will develop faster if he ACTUALLY PLAYS meaningful minutes, not sitting on the bench.
With a two man rotation
of Prince starting and playing 30 mpg, and Batum 18 mpg, he would develop.
I’m not saying this should happen, I’m saying if it did, I think it would make us better over the next two years without hurting our long term future.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Great post
We now have CBEC ™ (Carlos Boozer Expiring contract) to work with.
"Knowledge will get you from A to B. Creativity will get you anywhere." Einstein
by Garden of ODEN on Jul 11, 2009 11:50 AM PDT reply actions
One more possiblity.
Could it be possible the blazers made the millsap offer as leverage for LMA’s contract extension? There could be a two fold purpose to the offer.
Make that threefold...
It would also help to set the price for LMAs contract, esp after the Bargnani signing.
Great post as always
I was a little confused by the end:
KP is not going to be looking to facilitate a deal that gives up much talent in exchange for our cap space. He’s looking for a lot more out of it than a Hinrich/Blake trade. We’ve gone to some trouble to put Utah in a mess, and we aren’t likely to help them out of it without getting more for our cap space than that.
You think KP wouldn’t take a Hinrich/Blake trade for Portland’s cap space?
Isn’t that exactly what he’s been trying to do? Portland wants to do a three-team deal with Chicago and Utah, getting back Hinrich and giving up Outlaw, Blake, or both. Boozer to Chicago, Tyrus Thomas to Utah.
Chicago demanded Bayless instead. KP won’t include him. Chicago said, absent Bayless, they’d do the deal with Tim Thomas instead of Tyrus.
Do you think all the Boozer/Hinrich talk is hot air? I think KP would be thrilled to get Hinrich back for Portland’s cap space, and that’s what he’s been trying (and is still trying) to do.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
if we spend all our cap turning Blake into Hinrich
that means we settled for plan J or M. We didn’t spend 3 years trying to build up cap space to have that be the pinnacle result. If this is the outcome, it means our first 8 or 9 plans all failed and we had to settle on something far less than we were hoping for.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
Precisely
First, I don’t know how much of the Boozer/Hinrich talk is coming out of Portland’s camp and how much is coming from elsewhere, or is simply Internet chatter.
But I’ll say this — Hinrich’s salary is fairly close to our available cap space. So KP would have hoped to acquire a player of that quality for NOTHING as a free agent.
To turn that cap space into a trade that loses us a quality player (Blake) on a low contract who could be packaged with other assets to get us an upgrade at SF or backup PF doesn’t sound like a great deal to me. It sounds like a good deal, one for which I might settle, but not what I would be wanting.
Look at it this way. Utah is getting saved from salary cap hell and they want to dictate the player they get back? Really? Let them sweat through paying Millsap’s signing bonus and losing money for a couple months, then.
Chicago is going to get picky about a trade that nets them Boozer for a year and then cap space in exchange for Hinrich? Really? Let them sweat and see if they can find another deal that will A) guarantee them a decent playoff seed and B) leave them with cap space next summer.
If we’re doing that deal, I’m looking to have it be very simple. Boozer to Chicago, Hinrich to Portland, cap space to Utah. If the salaries don’t quite work, plug in any cap filler you need to. But don’t give up any real assets for Hinrich except the cap space, unless we’re getting something more back as well.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
by jscot on Jul 11, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
If the salaries don’t quite work, plug in any cap filler you need to
The difference between Boozer’s salary and Hinrich’s is 2.7+ mil, (12.3 – 9.5)
the closest match on Utah’s roster is Ronnie Brewer 2.7+
combining Kosta Koufos and Kyrylo Fesenko’s salaries doesn’t get it done
CJ Miles is next “up” at 3.7 mil
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Not quite the right perspective
It is Chicago that would need to shed salary to make it work. They are taking in 12.3 and only dumping 9.5. To make it work, they need to dump 9.86 million, then they are within the 125% threshold. Toss in Anthony Roberson, Linton Johnson, or DeMarcus Nelson and it is done.
For us, it’s a little harder, because we need to throw in about $1.6 million to fit Kirk under the cap, and we don’t have anyone that cheap that we want to lose. Maybe sign Shav, Raef, or Ruffin (whoever Utah prefers) to a 1.6 million dollar one year contract, and do a sign and trade?
The net result is that Utah has to take back about $2.5 million in useless salary for Boozer, but they unload $10 million of the burden.
If we really want to help Utah save face, we can throw in a draft pick, or the rights to one of the Euros, or something.
For getting Hinrich, I’d rather lose our first rounder next year, which is going to be worth even less than this year’s, and use Blake and/or Travis in a trade to upgrade our backup 4 spot.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
It could be better than hoping for the miraculous hypothetical desperate team looking to unload a star at the deadline though
Every GM worth his negotiation skills would know that really the Blazers are just as desperate to get something done then. They have been waiting for at least a year if not longer now for the right opportunity building up. Apparently it didn’t come yet. And the “homerun deal” might never come. What is better, continuing to swing big and miss or try to hit something that advances them to first or second base.
If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar
This is why being a GM is hard
If someone is looking to dump Devin Harris in February for nothing and you settled for Hinrich/Blake, you would hate yourself.
But if you make the perfect the enemy of the good, you’ll never be good.
One advantage to waiting is we see how the guys develop. What if Bayless becomes what a lot of us think he will be, and does so early? What if we wait, and Jerryd is the starter, defending opposing PGs and knocking down 3s, driving the lane and drawing fouls and dishing to the open man? Then Hinrich becomes totally superfluous — lock up Blake as your backup PG and try to upgrade somewhere else.
But there’s no way to know that right now. One advantage to waiting is you know more about the progress of your young players.
Everyone around here wishes they were the GM so they could make these decisions. I’m glad I don’t have to, because it is almost impossible to know what is best.
But I do think if I get Hinrich, I’m looking to get him for almost nothing except the cap space. Either that, or send Blake and Outlaw for him, and preserve the space.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Chess game
I think teams are wary of dealing with us. Fallout from the Darius Miles business, KPs golden boy reputation, and Paul Allen’s deep pockets. Perhaps there is some resentment in the league.
So, KP has to create necessity for other teams to work with. He has a tough hand to play right now, with our unwillingness to part with any of our good prospects on top of everything else.
Looks like he’s playing it about as well as he can. We have to wait until our cap space is absolutely needed, and a player we want is available.
Good stuff Jscot!
+1
I’d like to hear a few lopsided trade candidates? Hinrich and Harris hae been discussed in this post. I think CP3 will foreer be a pipe dream.
Logical teams are ones in financial trouble with a highly paid superstar or 2, or a team with current playoff aspirations who sees the wheels come off early next season. Some teams could see a combination of the two. Off the top of my head: Indiana, Phoenix, Charlotte, LAC, GSW. Any players you guys think would be aailable?
I read an article the other day about team finances.
New Jersey was in one of the worst shapes on the list, which is likely why the Harris availabilty gets thrown out every few days or so. Washington might fit the bill if they get hurt or underperfrom the first few months
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
Agreed
The problem is that their only untouchable player is the only player we (and most of the league) are hot for. The Wizards were desperately trying to slash payroll at the deadline, but the one player they refused to trade fir cost-cutting measures was Caron Butler.
it looks like Wash isnt going to be dumping salary. They took on contracts in exchange for expirings as they think they can make a go at the ECF this year.. I dont think they are an option until at least next year
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 12, 2009 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions
So they say now
If they reach January at .500, who knows?
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
I've also mentioned Prince
Not for the reasons you’ve given, but because Detroit could use Boozer.
I don’t think a highly paid superstar is likely, more like a really high quality starter on a salary around $8-10 million.
You look at teams that could want/need to dump salary, and who/what they have that can be appealing to other teams. It could be a draft pick. This has been mentioned several times (I mentioned it when Washington was looking to dump salary). You could take on someone’s bad contract for a player who is worthless (one you might even just buy out) AND their high lottery pick.
Then, you either use the lottery pick to stockpile more talent, or package it with a player to acquire another player you really want.
Any team in trouble is a candidate for a salary dump. It might not be a highly paid player, it might be two players making $5 million that they are stuck with for three more years.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
From ESPN.com:
The Pistons have been widely mentioned as a trade suitor for Boozer, but it remains to be seen if they will formally enter the bidding. Sources with knowledge of Detroit’s thinking insisted again Friday that the Pistons were not interested in trading for Boozer, largely because they think Tayshaun Prince and the newly signed Charlie Villanueva will complement each other better than Boozer and Villanueva would, especially on defense. Yet it remains possible that Pistons’ inability to sign Orlando-bound Brandon Bass will lead them to re-consider.
Interesting indeed
They are right that Villaneuva and Prince complement each other better than Boozer — but Boozer should improve their rebounding enough to more than compensate for that, IMO.
I think that trade would be a win for Detroit.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Another problem is that Stuckey is not good running pick and rolls, which is the bread and butter for Boozer to get his points
If you want to trade our spare parts for Devin Harris, I have three quarters I would like to trade for your dollar
Speaking of KP's golden aura fading...
In the last year or so, Dumars has thrown his onto the ground, stomped on it, poured gasoline on it, and set it on fire. (Impressive, considering that an aura isn’t even a tangible object.)
Basically, he’s turned three of his best four players (Chauncey, McDyess and Sheed) into Ben Gordon and Charlie V. I know they were old, and you might not have beaten Lebron with them, but… um… ouch. Meanwhile, he inexplicably extended Rip’s deal. Makes no sense whatsoever.
Detroit won’t be back in the ECF for ten years, as a result of this supposed rebuilding (more like demolition) job, IMO.
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
yeah for all the talk about the Billups trade "making sense" for Detroit
because of the cap-space they were getting this summer
Ben Gordon and Charlie V…is that it?
Billups and Denver got the better of that deal, no wonder Warkentein won exec of the year
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
wonderful post, and thanks for sticking around to comment/clarify
your further comments as interesting as the post itelf
"its tough to play with one eye, unless you're a pirate." Delonte West
"una canasta a Pau en la cara" Rudy
excellent post
answered several of my questions….rec
I have my P.h.D in unreliable hyperbole.
by Eat Politicians on Jul 11, 2009 7:30 PM PDT reply actions
hmm
Utah expected Boozer to opt out, and if they match our offer to Millsap, they would probably be happy if they could rewind the clock and get him to opt out. They probably would take almost nothing just to dump him. The comments about Utah rejecting an alleged three team deal with Chicago because they wanted a particular player are probably mistaken.
Six months ago, Utah thought Boozer was going to be gone for nothing. Anything they get for him without running up salary obligations is a bonus.
This is the most important point. You’re right, we Jazz fans thought Boozer was just going to take his leave, and we were just fine with that. Now that that is not the case, we don’t have a choice; we HAVE to take something in exchange, or it isn’t a trade. (Would that we could trade him for nothing. Or at least nothing salary-wise, like the Camby trade last year. Alas, that is not an option.)
As you say, the key part is that anything the Jazz get has to mitigate salary obligations. That was why the (possibly fictional) Chicago trade was/would have been nixed — Tim Thomas would only have saved the Jazz $6M in place of Boozer. And he’s basically a stiff. Even Tyrus Thomas would only have saved Utah $8M, although his usefulness as a player would have made up for that a little.
Basically, the Jazz now want to absolutely minimize the contract value they get in return for Boozer. The smaller the contract, the less relevant the talent level of the player. The bigger the contract, the greater the talent will have to be. Otherwise, the Jazz will match, and simply force Boozer to play out the contract anyway. Lest we forget, Boozer is a 20/10 guy, an Olympian, in a contract year, and has a lot to prove to teams in the 2010 market because of his injuries.
Of course, the problem with that now is that the whole world knows Boozer is being shopped, that he doesn’t figure into the Jazz’s plans, and he doesn’t want to be here. How that affects his on-court performance is anyone’s guess.
Bah. I’ve thought way too much about this in the last few days. Curse ye Blazers and ye crafty ways. :)
Uh, do you think you could draw me like a ninja?
What about a swap where we send you a pick and Outlaw.. 3.6mil
you send boozer to Chi
they send us Hinrich and DeMarcus Nelson..
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 12, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions
One quibble
I don’t think Paul Millsap is realistically “a potential all-star.” Some BE’ers might be shocked to hear me say that, as I’ve been insisting on the Blazers’ need for a “Maxsap” (Millsap/ Maxiell type) for over two years now.
But just because I love Paul Millsap’s game and think he’s exactly the type of player the Blazers need to add doesn’t mean I think he has serious all-star potential. All-stars almost always put up impressive scoring numbers, and that’s not what Millsap’s game is about. This is a tough, high-energy, nose-for the ball, versatile forward who can energize your bench and make things miserable for the other team.
With Paul Millsap on the Blazers, we fans wouldn’t have to cover our eyes anymore and watch our bench forwards get out-hustled and out-muscled. We’d get to watch our guy to that to the OTHER teams.
The Jazz have gotten away with paying this guy peanuts for a couple years while he’s carried their team. I don’t think Millsap will ever be an all-star, and I doubt he’ll become a Blazer. But at least the Jazz will have to pay him what he’s worth now, and that helps the Blazers indirectly. In the meanwhile, I’ll impatiently wait for KP to land us a Maxsap of our very own.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
My comment was based on his numbers while starting
when Boozer was out (averaged a double double, strong rebounding, good defense, legit scoring threat). That, and the fact he is still young with room to grow.
So I said potential all star, but I wouldn’t say probable all star. Add a couple rpg and 2-3 ppg to his numbers during that time and he’d be a sure thing. Whether he could maintain that level for a whole season is an open question, of course, and whether he could bump it yet another level is another. But I do think it is a realistic possibility.
He’s got the desire and the work ethic.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Well, I wouldn't bet my life it ain't going to happen
As you said, PM is still young and has room to grow.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
Just a to late question
If Millsap really wanted out, could he have chosen to stay for one more year than be an unrestricted FA. That would keep his salary low for 1 more year, but he would have enough to squeak by LOL.
If my question is true, that makes me believe that most of what was written is mostly his agent.
He doesn’t care who he plays for; he has taken good care of the next four years. Either way he is a winner.
hg
Sort of
Yes, he could have chosen to take the qualifying offer and be unrestricted. But that would be a very bad move for him.
The risk is getting injured, and you never get a big contract.
A first round pick earns enough in four years that, if he isn’t a fool, he’s going to be wealthy for the rest of his life even if he takes the Q.O. for his fifth year. If he really wants out, he can do that, and he has enough money to be very comfortable and help out his family a lot.
But Millsap has only had three years at a much lower salary. If he played one more year and got hurt, he is taking a really big risk. He would have been very foolish not to sign a good deal, he has now leveraged his talent into a payday that will set him and his family up for life.
But that doesn’t mean he doesn’t care who he plays for. He might care a lot, but you do what you need to do.
But you are right that either way he is now a winner.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
also with the cap the way it is next year, getting paid now is a better idea than getting paid THEN..
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 12, 2009 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Good point, probably true
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
Denver's TE
just covers Boozer’s salary under the 125%+100K rule.
Orlando’s TE will have to be ~9,790,625 (the size of Denver’s) or greater to play a role. However, with the acquisition of Bass, it would seem a bit unlikely that Orlando would want to put that much cash into the PF position. Of course if they did, they’d have a starting lineup of:
Nelson
Carter
Lewis
Boozer
Howard
And a bench of Peitrus, Bass, Anderson, Reddick, and Johnson. That’s a killer starting lineup, except this isn’t NBA Live and there is only one ball…
Denver has Nene, Martin, Birdman, at the PF/C and just dropped a defensively questionable bigman for the trade exception they have. I don’t think they’d use it on another.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
EDIT: What do I know?
Amar’e to Nuggets?
The current proposed trade would be:
Nuggets Get
Amar’e Stoudemire
Suns Get
Kenyon Martin
Linas Kleiza
Future Draft Pick
Cash Considerations
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Jul 12, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t think the TEs are held to the 125% + $100,000 rule. I think it’s the value of the TE + $100,000.
draft the stache
by Cablinasian on Jul 12, 2009 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
I think you are mistaken
Let’s say Orlando has a $6 million exception. It could play a role here.
Utah sends Boozer to Team A. Team A sends Player B, who has a $6 million dollar contract, to Orlando, and Player C (who has a $4 million dollar contract) to Utah.
Team A has just brought in Boozer’s $12 million and shipped out $10 million, which works under the 125% rule. Orlando has brought in $6 million, which their exception allowed. Utah has just dumped $8 million of salary.
So even a smaller exception can be helpful, if a third team is involved. If Utah can get rid of even half of Boozer’s contract, they would probably jump at it, especially if they could get any kind of decent player in return.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
that works in theory, but the only teams that have big exceptions are Orlando and Denver. Both of these teams appear to be done adding salary, as Denver couldn’t even afford to keep Dahntay Jones and Orlando just signed Bass and is looking at signing players for the vet minimum.
I suppose it could happen, but it’s unlikely.
draft the stache
by Cablinasian on Jul 12, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions
OK, I think you are right
Let’s talk Miami, then. According to Norsk, they’ve got a $4 million TE.
Just change the numbers above, and swap out Orlando for Miami. Team A would have to send a $4 million dollar contract to Miami, and then ahve to send back $6 million to Utah.
I still think Utah jumps at that if the player they are getting is any good. That is $12 million in savings, counting tax, and that is probably enough to remove any doubts they have about matching Millsap.
When I rule the world, everyone will know how to use Excel.
That’s a much more likely scenario, but there are a lot of moving parts.
They match Millsap whether they get Boozer moved or not.
draft the stache
lets hope not
either get a trade in gear or let him go..
CMON UTAH..
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jul 12, 2009 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
