What happens to Tinsley now?

[count55]

I believe Jamaal is gone. I think it is possible that we would buy him out, but I think that is an absolute worst case scenario, so I posted this thread on the trade board to see if buy outs were another option.

OK, we did this last year. The Pacers are looking to dump Jamaal Tinsley. He's owed $21mm over the next three years. The Pacer board loves to kick around the idea of a buyout, but I don't think that's practical. There are also many who say we should trade him for an expiring contract, but I also don't see anybody buying into that.

Here's the deal, I'm interested to see what fans of other teams would give for Jamaal.

Here are the rules: (bear with me and pretend I'm the Pacer Owner)

- Barring a knock-your-socks-off offer, I will not package any of my useful future assets (what few I have) with Droopy. That means: no Granger, no Dunleavy, no draft picks.
- I would consider JO to be included, but recognize that the size of the contracts at that point make rational deals impractical, so don't expect it (and would prefer to deal JO separately.)
- I would consider including one of our two expiring contracts (Jeff Foster or Marquis Daniels), but would then be wanting some value.
- My primary goal is to trade Jamaal by himself, and I have no illusions about his value.

So look at your roster, check out your deadweight, and make me an offer. I'm guessing you won't be able to make one (that doesn't try to get one of the assets in the first bullet point) that I'll refuse.

I got the following offers:

Jared Jeffries for Tinsley, straight up. Same contracts, same level of craptacularity.

This is one I've mentioned before...and the sad part is, I think this could've/would've been done under Isiah or someone else, but probably not under Walsh.

Jamal Tinsley for a Grande Meal from Taco Bell and Trenton Hassell...but the Nets get to choose what you get in the Grande Meal.

This'd be great, but it doesn't work...They'd need to add about $1mm, so a guy like Ager would have to be included, and I have no idea what they think of him. That kind of deal would actually save us around $10mm, but it doesn't make a great deal of sense from the NJ side.

Dan Gadzuric

Same contract/length

If you trade JO you might need another big to eat some minutes anyways.

Same kind of deal as the JJ deal - your crap for my crap...I'd be fine with it...Gadzuric as the end of the bench big and Tinsley gone.

Cleveland Trade: Ben Wallace

Indiana Trades: Jamal Tinsley and Marquis Daniels

Cleveland does this because it gives them a true point guard to create offense and solid defense at the point guard position. Daniels is in there to make the salary work.

Indiana does this to obviously rid themselves of Tinsley. Plus when they Trade JO for TJ Ford they will have a defensive mineded board hogger in the middle. Ben Wallace may not be what he was, but he is still a very servicable big that could bring some veteran leadership to a young Indiana team.

This one could hurt a little financially, but might not be too bad on the court. It depends on exactly how washed up Wallace is. It basically takes the $7mm owed to Tinsley in 2010-2011 and accelerates it up into 2009-2010. While it doesn't have a dollar benefit, per se, it helps a little with the timing.

Brian Cardinal for Jamaal Tinsley straight up...and remember, you said you wouldn't say no :p

I'd be fine with this...it would shave off that last year of $7.3mm, but Memphis isn't going to take a worse contract back if they're supposedly pimping the #5 to anyone who'll take Cardinal.

Diaw for Tinsley + Diogu

OK...here's the exception...I was wrong...Diogu's contract is longer. He's owed $9mm per for the next four years. I want Tinsley gone, and I don't think much of Diogu, but I really don't like Diaw, and wouldn't at half the price. I'm convinced he's going to turn into a pumpkin the second he's no longer playing with Steve Nash. This is actually the one I'd say "No" to.

The 3 way option

- Tinsley to NY so they get a true PG
- Curry to CHA so they get a scoring C who can complement Emeka and move him to PF
- Mohammad to Indy a decent big and Harrington from CHA to NY as filler

I like this deal, too. It gives us a decent, if unexciting big, and shaves about $2 mm off of what we owe Tinsley. Same contract length, but just a little lighter.

Clearly, these were just fans and wasn't vaguely scientific, but I do believe that, as long as we are willing to stay neutral on finances, that we can move Tinsley. Yes, we'll still have the bad contract, but one of the biggest lightning rods (and supposedly, problems) will be gone. Also, if we buy him out, we basically kill that salary slot, preventing us from using it later as filler/expiring, even though it will still count against both the cap and the luxury tax threshold.

I don't think I'm way off base in saying TPTB are approaching this year as if Tinsley were already gone in every way except for salary. I do think they'll be rid of him by summer's end, but I don't think that they'll look at any other deal and say "If we move Tinsley..." or "If Tinsley's here". I think it's pretty much all over but the shouting.

[count55]

Clarification on what happens in a buyout - cap & tax-wise

Here's Larry Coon's answer in the FAQ:

60. How do buy-outs affect a team's salary cap?

The agreed-upon buy-out amount (see question number 59) is included in the team salary instead of the salary called for in the contract. If the player had more than one season left on his contract, then the buy-out money is distributed among those seasons in proportion to the original salary. For example, say a player had three seasons remaining on his contract, with salaries of $10 million, $11 million and $12 million. The player and team agree to a buyout of $15 million. The $15 million is therefore charged to the team salary over the three seasons. Since the original contract had $33 million left to be paid, and $10 million is 30.3% of $33 million, 30.3% of the $15 million buyout, or $4.545 million, is included in the team salary in the first season following the buyout. Likewise, 33.33% of $15 million, or $5 million, is included in the team salary in the second season, and 36.36% of $15 million, or $5.455 million, is included in the team salary in the third season.

The distribution of the buy-out money is a matter of individual negotiation. Changing the number of years in which the money is paid does not change the number of years in which the team's team salary is charged. In the above example in which the player's contract is bought out with three seasons remaining, the buyout amount is always charged to the team salary over three seasons. It does not matter if the player is actually paid in a lump sum or over 20 years (a spread provision).

Still, if Tinsley has an even competent agent, he'll hold out for the Net Discounted Cash Flow value, which would be $16-18mm. We'll get stuck with most of it, but it does now look like there would be some small-to-moderate cap/tax benefit, (but probably no cash benefit, financially speaking).

Sorry for the earlier incorrect post.

[mizzoupacers]

Tinsley is SO gone. He will never wear a Pacers uniform again, I am convinced of that after all of the comments by Bird and O'Brien this offseason.

To me, the buyout thing hinges on an assessment of how likely it is that Tinsley would further embarrass the organization by getting into further off-the-court trouble if the team simply told him to stay home and collect his paychecks. If he can stay out of trouble, then no harm done in paying him to stay home, while hoping some other team has a rash of injuries or something that makes them desperate enough to trade for Tin Man. Hey, if Rod Strickland could hang around in the NBA as long as he did, then there is probably a taker for Tinsley somewhere among the other 29 teams.

My preference would be to avoid risking further embarrassment by just trading Tinsley for any stiff who doesn't cost significantly more salary...Gadzuric, Jeffries, it's all good so far as I am concerned.

But if we can't get a trade like that this summer, then I'd probably prefer the front office roll the dice for the next six months...tell Tinsley to stay home, and hope another team comes calling during the upcoming season. Because a three-year buyout would be a pretty brutal hit, even if it allows the team a slight discount vis-a-vis the team payroll.

[fdefore]

I like the Nets deal, adding Ager would be fine by me. Would they?

I'd live with the Jeffries or Gadzuric deal. Not sure the Bucks would do that.

I like the Nazr one, but I don't see it as possible given it requires Eddy Curry and Larry Brown to be reunited.

No to the Ben Wallace and Boris Diaw deals. There is a reason Chicago and Cleveland are eager to get rid of Big Ben and it isn't just that he is washed up. I'd rather keep the Droopster than take either of those two.

[joew8302]

I like a lot of those deals. I am really not too concerned about who we get back for Tinsley, unless of course they have the same baggage as he does. I also agree that I would like to trade him by himself Ideally and not have to give up an expiring just to move him. Good work, hopefully management can pull off one of these.

[cdash]

I posted this on the trades thread a few weeks back:

Possible Tinsley deals:

Tinsley for Etan Thomas (Washington)
Tinsley for Shareef Abdur-Rahim (Sacramento)
Tinsley for Jared Jeffries (New York)
Tinsley for Dan Gadzuric (Milwaukee)
Tinsley for Tim Thomas (Clippers)

[basketballwacko2]

Cdash I'd take any of those deals or the "Jamal Tinsley for a Grande Meal from Taco Bell and Trenton Hassell...but the Nets get to choose what you get in the Grande Meal." One question for a deal with NJN can Van Horn be traded? I believe his 2 yrs are not garanteeds. Hassel and KVH and then buy out Hassell, although I generally oppose buy outs, if Hassell can play put him at the end of the bench maybe he could be filler in a future deal around the dead line.

[count55]

Cdash I'd take any of those deals or the "Jamal Tinsley for a Grande Meal from Taco Bell and Trenton Hassell...but the Nets get to choose what you get in the Grande Meal." One question for a deal with NJN can Van Horn be traded? I believe his 2 yrs are not garanteeds. Hassel and KVH and then buy out Hassell, although I generally oppose buy outs, if Hassell can play put him at the end of the bench maybe he could be filler in a future deal around the dead line.

Yes, KVH can be traded...if you'll recall, Rawle Marshall and Josh Powell both had ungaranteed contracts at the time we traded for them. It's likely that KVH's contract has a certain date by which he'd have to be released, else the season would become guaranteed. It's also possible that there might be a trade clause that would guarantee some portion of it.

However, the contract can be used for cap purposes just like a guaranteed contract.

[CableKC]

I would put my $$$ on Tinsley being bought out.

I brought this up on Pacersdigest....but if a GM actually was interested in Tinsley....he can say no to Bird...wait for his buyout ( which is very likely )...and then get him for cheap once he goes on the FA market.

[cdash]

I really, really dont think the Pacers buy him out. Its too big of a financial hit for a small market team like us. Not to mention, it doesnt really get us anywhere.

[joew8302]

I would be VERY surprised to see Tinsley bought out by Indiana. I am not saying I would be disappointed, just shocked.

[Edub]

I'm going to assume he is going to be traded...

know of any teams that could use him?

Denver
Lakers
Sac-Town


Just a few teams i think could use starting pg. ..

any ideas? trade ideas? maybe we could get another draft pick?

i wish the nuggets still had their 20th selection... would have sent tinsley + daniels for najera + filler + 20

[Indy07]

I'm sure Bird has been actively shopping him for lord knows how long. I mean if the Simons want to reach in their pockets, a buy out could be possible. Furthermore, a buy out ensures that we aren't forced to take back the medley of crap that would be returned in any Tinsley for X player swap. Regardless welcome to the bench for now Tins

[FreeRon]

We would almost have to give up Daniels's expiring contract and take back a bad contract...I seriously doubt we would get anything of value in return. At this point we're better off either trading him for a worse player with a better record and equal contract or just buying him out, which I know nobody likes but it's better than committing ourselves to a worse contract just to get rid of him.

[Wizop]

I think we'd take a worse contract in a heartbeat. we need to get butts in the seats and the means getting rid of the thugs image.

[Train7492]

I think the only way that we will get anything out of Tinsley is by sending Foster out with him. I no the contracts are not great but how about Tinsley, Foster, Williams (or) Diogu, #11 for Barbosa, Diaw, #15.

The Suns are wanting to move up a few spots in the draft, Foster gives them a good back up for O'neal, Tinsley a good back up for Nash.

The player the Pacers want I think will still be there at #15. Not the best trade cause of the contracts but least we rid ourselves of Tinsley and get back two players that would have major roles on this team.

All this would have to be done after the BYC is up so we would have to make the pick for them kind of like the Toronto deal.

[Wizop]

there's a report out that his knee is still bad and that he's out of shape. maybe we'll be able to get a Bender settlement.

[Scoot McGroot]

there's a report out that his knee is still bad and that he's out of shape. maybe we'll be able to get a Bender settlement.

Nah, he's still got years in him. He's not retiring yet.