ImageImageImage

Brandon Roy Update

Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks

Klomp
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,113
And1: 17,576
Joined: Jul 08, 2005
Contact:
   

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#61 » by Klomp » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:12 pm

Murphs56 wrote:
Klomp wrote:
“@DarrenWolfson: I bet I'm in the minority, but I won't knock Kahn/Bayno on wanting Roy. It was a 1-yr roll-of-the-dice. Yes, I get that it failed. #twolves”


It was a ton of money they spent on him though when they could have attempted to get Mayo or Crawford

Crawford signed a four year deal. No way we were doing that.

Mayo, sure we missed that, but his asking price was reportedly much higher at the beginning of free agency. That's why he waited two weeks before signing with anyone.
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.

Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Worm Guts
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Posts: 26,050
And1: 10,467
Joined: Dec 27, 2003
     

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#62 » by Worm Guts » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:19 pm

Plus Mayo was terrible his last couple seasons in Memphis.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 54,609
And1: 13,966
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#63 » by shrink » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:29 pm

One last CBA point:

NBA insures the top 5 salaries on each team, which includes Roy. It's doubtful he was included in the 14 they can set aside, because his deal is so small, and the contract already had protections in it. NBA insurance will pay 80% of a disabled player's salary once he's been out 41 games, and that benefit is transferable if the player is traded.

Roy's contract is obviously a negative now, because some owner will be paying off the remaining 56 games in the schedule and getting no production for it. However, instead of this being a net $3.5 mil negative, the insurance will kick in for games 51-82 .. or about $1.5 mil in cash will come back to the owner from insurance company .. or a net $2 mil. Keep in mind he's still the same cap hit, but the overall cash is only a negative $2 mil.

Therefore, as a trade asset, this means that he has value to:

1. A team who has overpaid a similar player by $2 mil or more for the rest of the year.

2. Since it's been rumored Glen Taylor is willing to spend money next year, Roy's expiring deal may help them ship out a fair or slightly overpaid, multi-year deal -- if they feel they can get more value from the additional cap space than the current player.
cupcakesnake wrote:I know a lot of people haven't seen him play, but no one is forcing you to make up an opinion and post it.
Klomp
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,113
And1: 17,576
Joined: Jul 08, 2005
Contact:
   

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#64 » by Klomp » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:34 pm

shrink will get a kick out of this:

“@JoanNiesen: IF Roy were to retire & Wolves to get career-ending injury exclusion approved (likely), his $5 mil would be removed from team salary Jan. 8.”

“@JoanNiesen: That would be contingent upon Roy playing 10 or fewer games this yr. Has played 5. Contract gone from team salary 60 days after last game.”
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.

Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 54,609
And1: 13,966
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#65 » by shrink » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:52 pm

Yeah, kind of cool, but it doesn't really help us much. Roy's exclusion would only be for this year, Taylor doesn't get out of paying the actual cash, and the $5 mil in cap space this year doesn't drag us back from under the lux, or put us far under the salary cap to do something interesting.

You can understand why POR was P.O.'d when they lost their exclusion on his larger, multi-year deal though!
cupcakesnake wrote:I know a lot of people haven't seen him play, but no one is forcing you to make up an opinion and post it.
theGreatRC
RealGM
Posts: 18,466
And1: 4,881
Joined: Oct 12, 2006
Location: California
 

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#66 » by theGreatRC » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:56 pm

Shrink, im a CBA/salary/contract noob, so i'm trying to understand what's about to happen here...

So what i'm getting from this is, his $5 million dollar salary will be off our cap? Will we have around 5mil available for another guy?

Does Taylor still have to pay his salary? If so, why? I thought a contract has to be honored by both parties and he hasn't even played 10 games.
Dysfunctional Wolves fan
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 54,609
And1: 13,966
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#67 » by shrink » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:06 pm

theGreatRC wrote:Shrink, im a CBA/salary/contract noob, so i'm trying to understand what's about to happen here...

So what i'm getting from this is, his $5 million dollar salary will be off our cap? Will we have around 5mil available for another guy?

Does Taylor still have to pay his salary? If so, why? I thought a contract has to be honored by both parties and he hasn't even played 10 games.


No prob -- it's kind of a boring area for most NBA fans, which is why I'm happy to answer questions.

Starting at the bottom - yes, Glen Taylor has to pay Roy actual money. A salary exclusion really only affects those imaginary numbers that the NBA uses to keep tabs on where teams are for parity, in regards to special abilities for low-payroll teams (under the cap), or special penalties to high payroll teams (over the lux).

Taking $5 mil off our cap won't help us that much. We are already $9 mil under the lux, so we weren't going to be penalized regardless. And because of exceptions, we were able to take our payroll to $3.25 mil over the salary cap. If the NBA granted our application for a salary exclusion, we'd be back under the cap by about $1.85 mil. We could use that money to offer a free agent more than the vet min other teams can offer, but we could get a more useful room with a $2.65 mil from a disabled player exception.

Bottom line: A salary exclusion doesn't really help us, and Roy gets paid this year no matter what happens.
cupcakesnake wrote:I know a lot of people haven't seen him play, but no one is forcing you to make up an opinion and post it.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 54,609
And1: 13,966
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#68 » by shrink » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:13 pm

I sure wish salary exclusions were a tradable thing.

I bet you right now that we could trade Roy's $5.1 mil deal for Rip Hamilton's $5.0 mil .. and CHI would give us cash to do it! Bulls owner Jerry Reinsdorf has never been over the lux, and if he could make that trade then exclude Roy, he'd save about $13 mil dollars. We'd win too, since whatever production we got from Rip this year would be more than retired Roy!

EDIT - this could be done just as easily in a three-way trade, adding a team with cap space forthe rest of the season. Roy goes to Team 3 for cap space and $3 mil cash, and CHI takes back nothing. Since Roy is only going to cost a net $2 mil after insurance, the third team makes $1 mil for moving around some numbers.
cupcakesnake wrote:I know a lot of people haven't seen him play, but no one is forcing you to make up an opinion and post it.
Cyborg21
General Manager
Posts: 8,583
And1: 368
Joined: Apr 14, 2005
Location: Broken Arrow, OK
Contact:
       

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#69 » by Cyborg21 » Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:22 pm

This team is cursed.
Image
Klomp
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,113
And1: 17,576
Joined: Jul 08, 2005
Contact:
   

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#70 » by Klomp » Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:55 am

“@Twolves_PR: Brandon Roy issues statement: "Last week while practicing, I suffered a setback in my recovery. I’ve felt better since the recent surgery, but I am not all the way better. The past two days I have been weighing all of my options as I try to continue my basketball career. I have decided to explore additional treatment options and an extensive rehabilitation plan. My goal has been, and continues to be, to return to the basketball court as healthy as possible in order to help our team."
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.

Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Adenusi
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,339
And1: 361
Joined: Mar 13, 2012
Location: MN

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#71 » by Adenusi » Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:01 am

Wow, I was expecting a retirement announcement. :noway:
Image
Klomp
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 63,113
And1: 17,576
Joined: Jul 08, 2005
Contact:
   

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#72 » by Klomp » Sun Jan 6, 2013 7:03 am

“@jwquick: Talked with Brandon Roy tonight after T-Wolves game. He says he is in a good place. I think the most important thing for Roy is if he leaves the NBA, he does it on his terms, without any questions whether he could still play”
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.

Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Narf
Head Coach
Posts: 6,550
And1: 880
Joined: Sep 05, 2009

Re: Brandon Roy Update 

Post#73 » by Narf » Sun Jan 6, 2013 4:34 pm

Being under the cap actually helps us a lot for trades. We can trade Amundson for a $4 million wing at the trade deadline, saving the other team $$$ for an easy upgrade to us. Or just trade a couple 2nd round picks for someone like CJ Miles, saving Cleveland a mil and giving more minutes to Waiters. After we use our cap space to absorb salary, we could trade Roy's insured contract for a second trade afterwards that puts us over the cap and saves some team $4 mil to drop a couple of quality bench players on us (esp if. they were expiring).

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves