ESPN take on FA class of 09

[CableKC]

count55, assuming that we don't renounce the rights to Granger, Jack AND Foster.....who much do you think we have left to spend?

Unlike you....I'm a Worst-Case scenario type of guy.....can you run the #s for me assuming that we sign Granger starting at $13 mil, Jack starting at $4.5 mil and Foster at $6.5 mil?

I'm trying to figure out how much we will have to spend for FA next season.

Looking at the list on ESPN....realistically looking at who we can afford with the MLE ( or less )....I like the following rotational PF ( not in any particular order ):

Channing Frye - RFA
Jason Maxiell - RFA
Leon Powe - RFA

I'm not even going to bother with the higher profile PF UFAs like Gooden ( the best PF on the 2009 FA market that I think would fit ) or Wilcox.....but I'm guessing that Frye is the best Big Men that we can probably afford that the Blazers probably won't match......although I really hope that we make a run at either Maxiell or ( especially ) Powe.....both of who will probably be matched by the Pistons and Celtics.

[Scoot McGroot]

Cable, we'd be over the salary cap, and thus able to only use the MLE.

Count55,

Appreciate your dillagence, I just remember from the Mike Wells article( I think it was him) that Bird was saying something about it being advantages to wait and sign Danny. I was trying to find the article, but can not locate it

I believe the advantage he was talking about was that then you could pretty much price Granger in the market when all of the other comparable young players received their extensions as well this offseason. Smith, Deng, Iggy, etc. have all been extended and we've seen that Danny will likely be somewhere in that 5 year $50-70 million range.

[count55]

Bruno posted the article I think you're talking about, but I believe he was missing the cap hold idea. Bruno (Conrad Brunner, Pacers.com), in the past, has posted column that had ideas that did not work under the CBA. He also made comments in the past about how to use Trade Exceptions that were incorrect. I know Kravitz has made similar mistakes, but I can't recall any specifics on Wells one way or the other.

The CBA has a great deal of legal-ese in it, and there are a whole lot of exceptions and rules designed to close loop holes. Larry Coon's CBA FAQ is very helpful, but it's still complicated. Even though I've read it about a dozen times, I will always go back and double check when something specific comes up. It is very easy to have a very slight mis-interpretation make all the difference in the world.

As to not signing Danny, I think that they (the Simons) are possibly a gunshy about the commitment to anyone at this point. They've been burned on the max contracts of Jalen Rose and Jermaine O'Neal, and others (Bender, Tinsley, Artest, Jackson) blow up in their faces to some degree. They may want to see one more year from Danny before they commit to him. (Also, while it may be a bit over-conspiratorial, it could be less about the club's commitment to Danny and more about the Simon's not being entirely sure about their long-term commitment to ownership.)

[count55]

count55, assuming that we don't renounce the rights to Granger, Jack AND Foster.....who much do you think we have left to spend?

Unlike you....I'm a Worst-Case scenario type of guy.....can you run the #s for me assuming that we sign Granger starting at $13 mil, Jack starting at $4.5 mil and Foster at $6.5 mil?

The short answer is that, in your scenario, the Pacers will be over the cap, and, though they would technically have room to sign someone to a full MLE, they would probably not be willing to use the full MLE because it would put them to close to the tax threshold in the current year (and potentially over the tax in 2010 & 2011).

The Long Answer:

Starting Payroll: $41.2mm

Add
Danny: $13
Jack: $4.5
Jeff: $6.5
1st Round Pick: $2.0

Total Additions $26.0mm

Total Payroll, 11 Players (7 under contract, Danny, Jeff, Jack ,1st rder) = $67.2mm

This year's cap is $58.7mm, so, we can estimate next year's at about $62.0mm, which would match up with the 5+% growth we've seen over the last couple of season. Therefore, we'd be over the cap by about $5mm, leaving us only with Exceptions (MLE, LLE) to sign FA's.

The important number to the Pacers will almost always be the luxury tax threshold. Unless we believe that a title shot is imminent, we should expect the Pacers to treat that as if it were a "hard cap", and that they won't go over it. With a $62mm cap figure, I'd put the tax threshold at roughly $75mm. This would give the Pacers just under $8mm of room under the tax to fill out their roster. Since the MLE will likely be somewhere between $6 & $6.5mm, they could sign someone at the full MLE, then the last three slots would probably need to be league mins. Of course, this scenario would probably put them in the likely position of going over the tax threshold in 2010 and/or 2011, which is not a desirable position to be in.

If, as in your case, we re-signed those three guys at those starting salaries, I would NOT expect us to use our full MLE, though it would be available to us. I think ownership would want to keep a significant cushion under the threshhold, so we may only be willing to use $2 or $3 mil of the MLE.

Honestly, unless Danny makes a huge leap this year, or the contract is flat or declining, I do not expect to see the Pacers sign Danny to a contract starting at $13mm. If another team makes an offer starting at $13mm and getting raises above that, then I believe the Pacers will NOT match. Keep in mind, that you cannot match an offer sheet on a RFA, then trade the player, nor can you take compensation for NOT matching an offer sheet.

Jack's starting compensation seems a little high, but realistic here, but Jeff's is only realistic if the contract is frontloaded. Or, more to the point, I only give Jeff $6.5mm in the first year if he's making considerably less in the second and third year.

I see no way that the Pacers invest $24mm in those three guys next year. If Danny's worth the $13 start, they'll let Foster, Jack, or both walk.

[CableKC]

$13 mil for a young player like Granger is IMHO not only the going ( but admittedly higher ) market rate for a Player of his caliber and age....which is comprable to what other GFs like Iggy, Deng and Smith received......but I really have to assume that a deep pocketed team like the Blazers ( who is in the market for a starting quality GF next offseason, has copious amounts of Capspace with an Owner that is not afraid of paying top $$$ and has shown clear interest in Granger himself last season ) are going to be making a serious push for him. My hope is that we don't pay what the Sixers paid for Iggy and that we will pay him something comprable to what Josh Smith and Deng got....but honestly....I don't mind paying the market price for Granger.

But as I mentioned before...I'm a worst-case scenario type of guy........I really think that the Blazers will make a serious run for Granger while other teams will be interested in a Big Man like Foster.

I will be happy with a primary core of:

PG : Ford - Jack - Diener
SG : Dunleavy - Rush
SF : Granger - Shawne ( assuming that he is here )
PF : Murphy - Foster
C : Hibbert

Reserves : Whoever we trade Tinsley for, 2009-2010 Draft Pick

at a price of $67.2 mil for the next 2-3 years. At that point...I hope that we can get at least 2-3 players rather cheap as 13th to 15th rotational players.

Another question for you count55......what's the MAX that a team can frontload a contract offer for Granger?

My concern is the idea about fronloading contracts. Can a team make a Contract offer to Granger similiar to what the Warriors did for Ronny Turiaf ( where they frontloaded the contract so that it would make it more difficult for the Lakers to match since it would have pushed them over the Luxury Tax )?

For example, can a team like the Blazers ( that is under the Salary cap ) make a $65 mil contract offer to Granger where the starting Salary in 2009-2010 is ( using an extreme example ) $17 mil with a yearly salary that is declining in the remaining years?

Based off of what I have read before regarding Frontloading contracts, I thought that ( depending on the team's salary situation ) it can be done in some cases and not in others.

[Scoot McGroot]

Any front-loading has to be done under the cap space available in the first year. Also, there is a maximum salary that Danny could make in his 1st year of his new contract that I believe is somewhere in the upper $15 million range. Portland also may not have as much cap space as they'd like. If they keep Outlaw and Blake (which it seems like they would), then they'll only have around $20 million in cap space. However, factor in that if Darius Miles plays for the Celtics this year, his $9 million salary will be re-applied to the books for Portland, cutting them down to around $11 million in cap space. Then, if they even HOPE to keep Frye, Webster, or Diogu, they're going to have cap holds that will total around $19 million, thus leaving them over the cap and only holding the MLE to play with.


If Miles can't play this year, and the Blazers waive Travis Outlaw and Steve Blake, and renounce their rights to Martell Webster, Channing Frye, and Ike Diogu, then they could make a maximum salary offer to Danny Granger of $15 million or so in the first year. Kind of an Andrei Kirilenko salary.


However, that would then leave Portland with around $70 million locked up in 9 guys currently under contract (or draft picks) for the 2010/11 season, and possibly $80 million if Miles' contract is back on the books. Fill out the roster, and they're paying over $100 million in all likelihood after all luxury tax is computed. I'm sure they'd LOVE to have Granger, but after Paul Allen's past excursions with the luxury tax, I'm not sure he'd do it again.

[CableKC]

So, you're basically saying that they can frontload a $15mil contract offer to him that decreases in value per season IF they are under the Salary Cap.

It would seem that as long as the Celtics play Miles for 10 games...then we are good.

[Scoot McGroot]

No. I'm saying the ABSOLUTE MOST they could offer him in the first year is exactly $15 million, the maximum per year salary for Danny Granger in his new deal. It's not like they could offer him $20 million in the first year and then go down to $15 million, as he can only legally be paid $15 million in the first year, not $20 million.

[MillerTime101]

Getting back to the potential FA's, could Brandon Bass be had for the MLE? I think he would be a great fit and probably cheaper then Lee. Carl Landry and Chris Wilcox could be good fits too depending on how they progress this year, along with what should be a draft pick in the same range of last year hopefully next year we will have a better situation at the 4.