Using the Larry Bird Exception To Create Expiring Contracts
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:04 pm
I was thinking about this idea today and was really wondering whether it was potentially possible. I was hoping those with more knowledge than me on the CBA could clarify if there were any kinks in this theory. As well as this, I was equally hoping intellectual basketball thinkers would comment on the viability (as an improvement to a basketball team) of this theory as well.
As a result of the Pau Gasol trade, Ray Allen trade, etc...it has become imminently clear the importance of expiring contracts. Talk around the Realgm boards is that contracts (like rasho's next year) are in fact more valuable than legitimate contracts for your average player, when using them as trade bait. I personally think its because players are far too often overpaid, but that's a conversation for another day.
My hypothesis is that perhaps signing veteran players hugely overpaid, short term salaries will actually create a market for cap-clearing teams at the trade deadline, thus helping a team to land an all star to fill their roster.
How can you do this? well as long as your team remains under the Luxury tax threshold, you potentially could use Bird-Rights on a veteran player to sign a one-year Max Contract, only to trade them near the deadline for a whining all-star on a bad team. Now, an old player, who may retire anyways, would definitely consider a one-year deal worth 16 million, just to be used as trade bait that year and be bought out.
As an example, as it was one of the best ones I could find, is Atlanta and Anthony Johnson. He is an expiring contract this year, is 35 years old in the summer and from what I gather, Atlanta owns his Bird-Rights (if any of this is wrong, just assume it's right for arguments sake). He is a veteran and can sign for whatever price a team is willing to give him (below the max). He will not make 16 million the rest of his career (and may even retire in the off-season), so wouldn't it interest him to sign a one-year deal for that amount, just to be traded and bought out later on?
Would it be beneficial for Atlanta? Well, they remain under the luxury tax, even if they resign Josh Smith to a healthy contract. Then they can go out and get a big player in the middle of his contract to fill their needs. Who will that be? Who knows? Maybe Dirk will want out of Dallas, maybe Boozer will want out of Utah, maybe Baron Davis will want out of GS. Or maybe their owners will want to dump their contracts and start over like Minnesota did with KG.
So is this scenario plausible? Could it Work for Toronto?
As a result of the Pau Gasol trade, Ray Allen trade, etc...it has become imminently clear the importance of expiring contracts. Talk around the Realgm boards is that contracts (like rasho's next year) are in fact more valuable than legitimate contracts for your average player, when using them as trade bait. I personally think its because players are far too often overpaid, but that's a conversation for another day.
My hypothesis is that perhaps signing veteran players hugely overpaid, short term salaries will actually create a market for cap-clearing teams at the trade deadline, thus helping a team to land an all star to fill their roster.
How can you do this? well as long as your team remains under the Luxury tax threshold, you potentially could use Bird-Rights on a veteran player to sign a one-year Max Contract, only to trade them near the deadline for a whining all-star on a bad team. Now, an old player, who may retire anyways, would definitely consider a one-year deal worth 16 million, just to be used as trade bait that year and be bought out.
As an example, as it was one of the best ones I could find, is Atlanta and Anthony Johnson. He is an expiring contract this year, is 35 years old in the summer and from what I gather, Atlanta owns his Bird-Rights (if any of this is wrong, just assume it's right for arguments sake). He is a veteran and can sign for whatever price a team is willing to give him (below the max). He will not make 16 million the rest of his career (and may even retire in the off-season), so wouldn't it interest him to sign a one-year deal for that amount, just to be traded and bought out later on?
Would it be beneficial for Atlanta? Well, they remain under the luxury tax, even if they resign Josh Smith to a healthy contract. Then they can go out and get a big player in the middle of his contract to fill their needs. Who will that be? Who knows? Maybe Dirk will want out of Dallas, maybe Boozer will want out of Utah, maybe Baron Davis will want out of GS. Or maybe their owners will want to dump their contracts and start over like Minnesota did with KG.
So is this scenario plausible? Could it Work for Toronto?