adamcz wrote:It's hard to say what Bogut will be able to demand, but if we max him, it could be Michael Redd all over again. We've got to be smart. PP's 5/60 doesn't sound terrible - that's 12 million a year. But if we do that, I'd want it to be a flat 12 every year. If we do one of those escalating contracts that goes 9/10.5/12/13.5/15, we could be left with Bogut not living up to it, and us feeling constricted during the last years.
I would try for 5/50, and say - Andrew, you said you'd take less to play for a contender and wanted to be part of a rebuilding here, so let's do it. 10 million a year, and we'll have money left over to put talent around you.
A good point here.
Flat is definitely preferable than escalating, considering our projected payroll structure (I know that could change, but it would take a number of moves to change it drastically enough to impact the decision on Bogut's contract). In fact, we might even examine frontloading that contract and having it be a declining salary structured contract.
paulpressey25 wrote:Plus, if he really wants flexibility, he can take the 5/$60 deal and put in there some type of opt-out after three like LeBron has.
Not possible.
If he wants the ability to become a free agent after the third year of an extension, it can only be a four year extension. The earliest he could become a free agent after signing a 5 year extension would be after the 4th year of that extension.
Only in 6 year contracts can you become a free agent prior to the last two years of that deal via an ETO. ETOs can only occur after the 4th year of a contract/extension, whereas the final year of any contract can be a player option. In 6 year contracts, you can have an ETO after the 4th year AND a player option for the 6th year (as in Mo Williams' unfortunately structured contract).
LeBron James extension was only a 4 year extension and that 4th year is a player option, which is why he can become a free agent after the third year of that extension.
adamcz wrote:Come to think of it, I think my limit would be 5 years, 55 million this summer. There is no reason whatsoever to over-pay, and maybe no reason to even offer full value before the player hits RFA.
If we're just going to pay 5 years, 60 million, why not make him earn it for another year? Because of the risk that if we wait another year, we might have to pay him 5 years, 62 million? The advantages of waiting another year far outweigh that risk.
The way I see it, players should have to wait all the way until UFA if they want to get full value. The year before that (RFA), they should get 80-90% of full value, since the team is doing them a big favor by locking them up early. The year before that, they shouldn't be getting anywhere near full value. The team loses nothing by waiting another year, so why should they pay all that money so early just to appease the player?
I somewhat agree with all of that.
I do think that #1 overall picks (even lesser #1 overall picks like Bogut) fall in a different class than just a standard rotation player who is an RFA though. There is more pressure to retain an asset like that so it is harder to take the risk that you might lose him.
One of the main advantages to working out an extension is that you preempt the possibility of that player taking the QO in order to become a UFA and eventually leave (which is 2 offseasons away at the time when an extension can be negotiated). Most players do not want to take that financial risk so it usually never goes that far, but Bogut is more of an enigma than most players who could possibly demand big money, so I think it is a legitimate concern that Bogut might go that route, a concern that is bolstered by some interviews and articles.
So there's that.
Another big advantage of working out an extension is that you can possibly avoid an acrimonious situation that affects the team and player on the court. Restricted free agency is a rough business, especially if you want to play the game of trying to make them get an offer sheet that you will match. Tha can have problematic results, as many/most teams won't even bother with an offer sheet because they know you will match anything reasonable. Then you are left trying to get the player to sign a "bargain" deal and the player can become angry/frustrated with that situation. I realize that is how restricted free agency works. I frequently remind people of that
But you do need to weigh the consequences of taking such a hardliner stance, and I think you have to factor in what player you are dealing with when considering how steadfast you will be.
It is not quite the same thing to play poker like that with a Charlie Bell type of player as it would be with a Bogut type of player.
So we should try and work out an extension with Bogut. If we can't come to a mutual arrangement though, we need to figure out a good way to table those negotiations without creating animosity between the team and Bogut. We need to address that issue RIGHT AWAY at the onset of negotiations for an extension. That needs to be the first order of business. That should be a lesson learned from the Bulls negotiations with Gordon and Deng. I think the Bulls were very wise not to go further than they did monetarily in those negotiations, but I think if they had made it more of a priority, they could have kept things more civil with less acrimony.
That is the most important thing we can do when the extension negotiation window opens up for Bogut. Be real. Be respectful. Be reasonable.
Unfortunately I fear we will handle it poorly, with Herb Kohl, Ron Walter, Mike Burr, etc. getting themselves too involved. I would prefer whoever holds the title of GM to handle the negotiations, but if Kohl wants to handle the negotiations himself, then he needs to handle them HIMSELF, meaning he is the only voice speaking to Andrew and his agent regarding an extension. What will not work is Bogut and his agent negotiating with Kohl one day, Walter another day, and the GM another day. That is how many/most of our negotiations get so screwed up. ONE VOICE. If Kohl insists on handling things by committee again (ugh) than he needs to do his consultations behind the scenes and only speak/listen to Bogut as one person.