The Truth about 2010.

[NetsForce]

UPDATED: 06/27/09

CLICK FOR FULL-SIZED IMAGE:


EXCEL SPREADSHEET DOWNLOAD LINK:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/0viide

---

Analysis to come later...

[deviljets7]

I'll do further analysis when you post the spreadsheet, but how did you account for Dooling and Najera since both have only partially guaranteed contracts.

[jeff1624]

I hate to be a downer but after doing some calculations, and I'll get a spreadsheet up later...

Assuming the Nets keep their draft picks in the this and next year's draft and exercise the team options on all of their young players except for Sean Williams, and they let Josh Boone walk for nothing... The Nets are "only" sitting on roughly $12,000,000 in cap space for 2010.

While in a weaker free agency year that might be enough to nab a top-tier free agent with so many teams having cap space in 2010... It's my opinion that the Nets are unlikely to sign anyone worthwhile in 2010.

Now a sign and trade including some young players like Yi or Anderson... That has some potential... But:

*I assumed the Nets landed the 15th and 22nd pick in the 2010 draft. Which was pretty optimistic in my opinion, I also assumed that the salary cap in 2010 will be the same as it this year, while in actuality there is a good chance that it will decrease (so in other words $12,000,000 in cap room is an unlikely best-case scenario number).

Add to the fact that you didn't count CDR and if we do intend to resign him we'll probably have less than 10 mil overall..

[NetsForce]

I actually assumed that they wouldn't be waived, I kind of forgot about that but if Najera is waived he'd open up $500,000 in additional cap room that year. Dooling would open up $3.3 million in additional room, so you may be onto something there.

The thing with waiving Najera is that you'd basically be paying him $5,000,000 over 2 years not to play or be a part of the team.

I'll probably post the spreadsheet later tonight, have to write up a paper now.

[deviljets7]

I actually assumed that they wouldn't be waived, I kind of forgot about that but if Najera is waived he'd open up $500,000 in additional cap room that year. Dooling would open up $3.3 million in additional room, so you may be onto something there.

The thing with waiving Najera is that you'd basically be paying him $5,000,000 over 2 years not to play or be a part of the team.

I'll probably post the spreadsheet later tonight, have to write up a paper now.

If the savings is only 500K, we might as well keep Najera since it would cost the same amount for an undrafted rookie.

I'm curious to see your spreadsheet though. I had been working on one but lost all the data when my comp crashed

[vincecarter4pres]

The truth about 2010:

News flash, we were NEVER goingto sign anyone outside of a slightly more then MLE guy. The 2010 plan is just a smoke screen to be cheap as possible till the move to Brooklyn or the sale of the team.

[S.I.C. GM]

Nice post, NetForce.

I personally no longer care about 2010. Since Brooklyn wont be ready by then, I really dont want to pay any lower tier FA in 2010 anyway. I prefer trading for or drafting young players. Save the money for a rainy day or when we are settled in Brooklyn.

[amk482]

I agree that 2010 is a smoke screen to be cheap....That being said, assuming we dont win lottery and get Griffin, we should go after one of the many possibly available vet PFs. There is a wide variety in skill range but anyone of these guys would get us in the playoffs, assuming the young guys (Lopez, Anderson, CDR) continue the upward trends and step it up a notch. Ive given up on Yi so i didnt even include him.

-Drew Gooden (UFA)
-Boozer (UFA if he opts out)
-Milsap (RFA)
-David West (possibly in a trade)
-Camby (possibly ina trade)
-Varejo

[Preludepunk27]

I gotta agree with SIC. I really don't give a crap about 2010 anymore. The move to Brooklyn was adding all this flash and fanfare to the situation. Then we've been talking consistently about 2010 for about a year and a half now at least. I'm kind of burnt out on it. I honestly don't care who we sign that year at all. If we have the opportunity to become a playoff team again right now, I'd do it without even thinking about it. We need to do what helps the team now. I'm not saying do a S&T for the best player this summer or anything. I just want us to do the best thing for our organization that doesn't mortgage our future.

[vincecarter4pres]

I would still love to sign Brandon Bass. If you guys like David West, I see no reason you wouldn't love Bass at the MLE. I don't know if he would come that cheap, but really besides Cuban, I don't see any teams that would pay him more, figuring there are only maybe 2 or 3 other teams that could. He has a similar game to David West, but he plays better defense and goes to the post slightly more.

[kamaze]

Brandon Bass is the Moose Thorn talks about basically. He'd be great if they could snatch him.

I like him more than West despite him coming off the bench. He makes more of a impact from my viewpoint. West owes a lot of his success to Chris Paul.

[NetsForce]

I got the spreadsheets up, click the thumbnail for a full-sized jpeg image, then there's a sendspace link if anyone wants to download the actual excel spreadsheet.

For the record I'm not a big Brandon Bass fan there are times out there when I feel like he's a black hole on the level of Zach Randolph =\

[jeff1624]

I got the spreadsheets up, click the thumbnail for a full-sized jpeg image, then there's a sendspace link if anyone wants to download the actual excel spreadsheet.

For the record I'm not a big Brandon Bass fan there are times out there when I feel like he's a black hole on the level of Zach Randolph =\

I completely agree.

[lurkingobeiscity]

# A roster charge if the team has fewer than 12 players (players under contract, free agents included in team salary, players given offer sheets, and first round draft picks). The roster charge is equal to the rookie minimum salary for each player below 12. The roster charge only applies during the offseason.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

This says the NBA rookie minimum will be at 473,604

http://www.insidehoops.com/minimum-nba-salary.shtml


According to your spread sheet 49,035,951 w/out boone
43,205,623 w/out boone, swill, dooling (10 players)
add in 473,604 (rook minimum) x2 =
44,152,831

If the salary cap is 58,680,000 then a maximum contract (30% of the salary cap) for the most enticing players would be 17,604,000. The earlier moves would leave the Nets with 14,527,169 in cap space, thereby needing 3,076,831 to be able to offer a max contract. That is hardly insurmountable (losing Yi or any carter trade would do it) but it is not necessarily that simple:

The fact that the maximum salary will be 30% of the salary cap which fluctuates means that these numbers are not perfectly reliable. If the actual salary cap in that year is lower than this projection, the Nets would need to free up an additional 700,000 for every 1,000,000 that the salary cap is below the projection of 58,680,000. On the flip-side, if the cap goes up the Nets gain 300,000 for every 1,000,000 it goes up from that projection. This is the same for every team looking at a max free agent.

Also, draft picks may cost more if the Nets are lucky enough to win a lottery or two. That is hardly a bad problem to have but it is another way in which these numbers could be altered.

The advantage that the Nets may have over other teams is that they have an excellent young core in place already. They're roster will not be gutted by their work to get under the cap, and they will be perfectly set at PG and C. If Brooklyn breaks ground before free agency that would also help.

The basic point of what I'm saying is that, no the Nets cannot get a max free agent in 2010...... if no other moves are made. If they were to lets say use the Mavs pick (if they make the playoffs or even ours if we do) next year to trade away the last two years of Najera's deal, then they are all but guaranteed to have the money for a max free agent.

The Nets are not so far off from being able to offer max money. (3 to 6 mil IMO)

If there is a great guy they can get now that is a perfect fit, by all means go for it, BUT they better not sacrifice that money to add role players. (AKA if you can get David West, great. Nocioni, Brandon Bass and other such guys.... NO) There is no reason to settle for those guys when the team could spend some minor assets and have a chance at a top player. If they can't manage to nab that top player then fine, 17 mil in cap space is a huge trade asset.

[amk482]

prior post could not have been better. spend on the $ on an impatc player (West) but say no to role players like Bass - Role players are only vailable when you have legit starters surrounding them. thats why najera was an awful signing,

[deviljets7]

# A roster charge if the team has fewer than 12 players (players under contract, free agents included in team salary, players given offer sheets, and first round draft picks). The roster charge is equal to the rookie minimum salary for each player below 12. The roster charge only applies during the offseason.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

This says the NBA rookie minimum will be at 473,604

http://www.insidehoops.com/minimum-nba-salary.shtml


According to your spread sheet 49,035,951 w/out boone
43,205,623 w/out boone, swill, dooling (10 players)
add in 473,604 (rook minimum) x2 =
44,152,831

If the salary cap is 58,680,000 then a maximum contract (30% of the salary cap) for the most enticing players would be 17,604,000. The earlier moves would leave the Nets with 14,527,169 in cap space, thereby needing 3,076,831 to be able to offer a max contract. That is hardly insurmountable (losing Yi or any carter trade would do it) but it is not necessarily that simple:

The fact that the maximum salary will be 30% of the salary cap which fluctuates means that these numbers are not perfectly reliable. If the actual salary cap in that year is lower than this projection, the Nets would need to free up an additional 700,000 for every 1,000,000 that the salary cap is below the projection of 58,680,000. On the flip-side, if the cap goes up the Nets gain 300,000 for every 1,000,000 it goes up from that projection. This is the same for every team looking at a max free agent.

Also, draft picks may cost more if the Nets are lucky enough to win a lottery or two. That is hardly a bad problem to have but it is another way in which these numbers could be altered.

The advantage that the Nets may have over other teams is that they have an excellent young core in place already. They're roster will not be gutted by their work to get under the cap, and they will be perfectly set at PG and C. If Brooklyn breaks ground before free agency that would also help.

The basic point of what I'm saying is that, no the Nets cannot get a max free agent in 2010...... if no other moves are made. If they were to lets say use the Mavs pick (if they make the playoffs or even ours if we do) next year to trade away the last two years of Najera's deal, then they are all but guaranteed to have the money for a max free agent.

The Nets are not so far off from being able to offer max money. (3 to 6 mil IMO)

If there is a great guy they can get now that is a perfect fit, by all means go for it, BUT they better not sacrifice that money to add role players. (AKA if you can get David West, great. Nocioni, Brandon Bass and other such guys.... NO) There is no reason to settle for those guys when the team could spend some minor assets and have a chance at a top player. If they can't manage to nab that top player then fine, 17 mil in cap space is a huge trade asset.

Excellent post. I realize that the odds of landing a superstar free agent aren't that good, especially with the current arena mess. However, since the sacrifices needed to get that room at this point are pretty nominal, I think its still an avenue still worth pursuing.

I could be wrong, but I think with some combination of Dooling, Boone, SWill (guys who would be gone after next season anyway) or trading down in this weak draft, you can easily rid yourself of Najera and his $3 million cap hit.

Trading Carter for a slightly lesser tier wing player (such as a Jason Richardson or Richard Hamilton) is also a way you can cut a few million off the cap without significantly altering the talent on the roster.

As remote as those odds of getting a LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Amare, etc. are, there is no way you give up a rare chance at a true superstar for role players such Brandon Bass. This team is no where near good enough to justify that type of short-sighted thinking.

[deviljets7]

On that note, here are a couple of trade ideas I've had that accomplish this goal of saving 2010/11 salary without making major sacrifices to the future of the team.

NJ Trades: Keyon Dooling, Josh Boone and Eduardo Najera
Utah Trades: Matt Harpring and pick #20

Why for NJ: This deal eliminates about $2 million from the cap in 2010 and they get a pick out of the deal. With the pick maybe you can get someone like Jrue Holliday to groom as a backup point/combo guard.
Why for UTH: They turn 1 bench player into 2 productive bench players (possibly 3 if Najera is healthy), without adding salary which is huge with their current luxury tax issues.

Considering the tightness with the cap and the weakness of the draft, this is honestly a deal I'd consider doing without the pick.

This one is a lot more complex, but shaves a lot of money in 2010/11
HOU Trades: Tracy McGrady
HOU Gets: Vince Carter, Trenton Hassell and Eduardo Najera

NJ Trades: Josh Boone, Vince Carter, Trenton Hassell, Yi Jianlian and Eduardo Najera
NJ Gets: Shaquille O'Neal and Jason Richardson

PHX Trades: Shaquille O'Neal and Jason Richardson
PHX Gets: Josh Boone, Yi Jianlian and Tracy McGrady

HOU turns TMac into an elite SG they actually trust to stay healthy. NJ gets better in 09/10, adds a gate attraction in Shaq and saves around $8-9 million in 2010/11. The Suns save $6.6 million in 09/10, more than $7 million in 10/11 (assuming they keep Boone/Yi), add 2 young bigs and if TMac's healthy remain a viable team in the West.

[vincecarter4pres]

Who says Bass is a role player, but West is not?
West is the starter by default in NOH, I mean look at their roster. I am a West fan, but he is a faux Allstar. Bass plays behind a HOFer that is still in his prime, and like West has no ability to play center.
Bass would put up bigger #'s then West and have at least the same impact if was the starter in NO, I will stand by that.
I will agree that Bass can become a blackhole on offense, which is not a good thing, but again, so can and does West at times. Bass is a decent enough defender, but still better then West is mediocre at best and they are very similar rebounders, both average.

[60cent]

Comparing David West to Brandon Bass? Lol.

Bass is a promising player but he is not even close compared to West, who is an allstar and many people believe is the most underrated player in this league. Bass can post and pull up some decent shots close to the basket but nowhere near West's skills down low. If their stats are to be compared based on their defense then with the amount of games West has played over Bass, West is still better at it. West, over his young career, has averaged .8 in blocks and .7 in steals while Bass, so far, has a career average of .5 in blocks and .3 in steals. Note that the steals and blocks are not the only categories in determining a players defensive prowess but everyone would agree that those categories are huge to have, and that's why they are in the books and being recorded every game. To be honest, doesn't even make sense comparing the two because it's not fair for Bass when, right now, he is only a back up. He has a chance to get better and maybe someday, he may become an allstar, but i highly doubt it. He probably will have an Antonio McDyess type of career, with about the same shooting range and a quiet, smooth approach, they will be compared.

I'd love to have Bass, of course, but his game is limited because of his height and without his sweet mid-range shooting, he would be just a bench player, not even a role player. A better comparison on his young career would be with "big baby" Davis and to be honest, i think Davis has a better inside game. Bass' game just looks more solid, a little calmer approach and a little more confident but overall their game is not far apart, Davis can shoot outside too.

Just a little curious, what's up with the love for Bass all of a sudden? I thought Blair is not going to be a good NBA player because he is short. Blair is a better player than Bass, imo, he has a better inside game too but the guy had a serious injury back in high school so i'd probably pass on him right now. If Thorn can trade down and get more picks then i'll consider him from 20 and up.

Overall, Bass would never be able to get us to the top, he is not the answer to the Nets problems and he would actually jeopardize the budget and would put us out of contention on being a huge player in that year. I know that with all the teams desire to get into that 2010 huge FA market, most teams already focused and built their teams for that coming year. If we have the money then we have a chance, so, never say never!

BTW, with the 1st round exit and looked like this team can just all of a sudden change their plans and get younger again. Do any of you think the Spurs would trade Duncan?

[NetsForce]

1. Bass has proven he can play at NBA level, there's no guarantee Blair can.
2. I don't think the Spurs will trade Duncan. The Spurs are loyal to a fault.