Expiring Contracts

evildallas · Post #1 » by **evildallas** » Thu May 22, 2008 3:08 am

Expiring Contracts have become one of the biggest assets in the NBA of late for use in acquiring players from teams that realize they need to start over. Some of the players that have changed hands with a large expiring contract as part of the deal include Kevin Garnett, Pau Gasol, Jason Kidd, and Mike Bibby. Because I was curious who we might be bidding against, I put together a list of expiring contracts for this year.

Some notes: I left off a few because of certain extensions (Paul, Deron Williams, Bogut) or certain non-guaranteed year pickups (Nash). Players that are unlikely to resign or unlikely to be wanted back are the most likely to move. You can let a contract expire and come off the cap, but if that doesn't get under the cap itself the player might be hard to replace.

Atlanta 24.6M

Charlotte 6.7M

Chicago 7.1M

Drew Gooden 7.1M

Cleveland 34.6M

Dallas 30.3M

Denver 25.8M

Detroit 15.6M

Golden St. 17.8M

Baron Davis 17.8M

Houston 6M

Bobby Jackson 6M

Indiana 10.7M

LA Clippers 25.1

LA Lakers 22.8M

Memphis 8.3M

Miami 17.8M

Shawn Marion 17.8M

Milwaukee 8.9M

Minnesota 2.6M

Rashad McCants 2.6M

New Jersey 6.2M

Stromile Swift 6.2M

NY Knicks 32.2M

Philadelphia 13.6M

Portland 33.4M

Sacremento 15.2M

Seattle 14.6M

Toronto 21.5M

Utah 10.5M

LHughes/JSmooth · Post #2 » by **LHughes/JSmooth** » Thu May 22, 2008 5:12 am

I believe Smush Parker is a Clipper not apart of the Heat anymore. I think I watched a game at the end of the season with him as a Clipper. Don't ask why I brung that up, just saw you had him under the Heat's contracts, and remembered that.

evildallas · Post #3 » by **evildallas** » Thu May 22, 2008 5:42 am

Thanks, I wondered about Smush myself, but most of the released players were indicated with an asterisk on the site. I'll remove him.

saloonyk8 · Post #4 » by **saloonyk8** » Thu May 22, 2008 6:48 pm

I think the $20M expirings like Kidd, AI, and Marbury are going to be very tough to move. Although I could see Jermaine O'Neal in a Knick uniform...

Cleveland has some great expirings and ownership willing to spend money, but they lack one key ingredient and that's a young player to package with the expiring.

That's where I think the Hawks are in a great situation, a Marvin/Bibby combination is as appealing as any offer these teams can make. They key is to get the right guy and wait for the right team to decide it needs to blow up.

evildallas · Post #5 » by **evildallas** » Thu May 22, 2008 6:51 pm

I expect Kidd to get a 1 year extension in Dallas. I don't see Mark Cuban tossing in the towel on his big move. Also, the lack of an extension was what prompted Kidd to demand a trade in NJ, so I don't think he'll be content to play out his deal quietly.

Marbury is interesting in that he could fetch something in the short term, but if Walsh is serious about being a player in free agency in 2 years then he needs to let him expire.

JoshB914 · Post #6 » by **JoshB914** » Thu May 22, 2008 6:52 pm

If the Cavs don't turn those expirings into a decent running mate for Lebron they should fire Danny Ferry on the spot.

evildallas · Post #7 » by **evildallas** » Thu May 22, 2008 7:04 pm

JoshB914 wrote:If the Cavs don't turn those expirings into a decent running mate for Lebron they should fire Danny Ferry on the spot.

Yep, I see them as the major competition for any deal. Even if you subtract Eric Snow (expected to retire) they have as much ammo as we do.

I could see them pitching for Michael Redd to become their 2 guard or maybe even getting involved with TJ Ford.

conleyorbust · Post #8 » by **conleyorbust** » Thu May 22, 2008 7:25 pm

evildallas wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yep, I see them as the major competition for any deal. Even if you subtract Eric Snow (expected to retire) they have as much ammo as we do.

I could see them pitching for Michael Redd to become their 2 guard or maybe even getting involved with TJ Ford.

What would they be offering on top of the money? Andy V, Gibson, and the 19? Thats probably as good as anything we'd be willing to offer.

D21 · Post #9 » by **D21** » Thu May 22, 2008 8:42 pm

I we spend a big part of our MLE on Andersen this summer, and if we want to be in position to use next year MLE to add another player without being too far in luxury tax zone (in this case, I think owners would prefer not using MLE than going in tax zone), we have to keep Bibby or trade him (with or without other players) for someone who can be re-sign for less than the actual salary, exactly like him.

IMO, it's an important point, I could be wrong but I see Bibby like that, hoping he can show how he can run this team being healthy, and wanting to stay for less than $10M/yr.

If his extension is around $10M, it frees up to $5M, and if Speedy returns next year but is unable to play and decide to retire, his last year at $5M is also off the book, which gives a total of $10M allowing the owners to use 09'MLE.

So trading Bibby has to be for a player being in the same case. As an example, saying we have a chance to trade Bibby+Zaza for Iverson (it's only an example) and a chance to see Iverson not wanting more than $15M/yr for an extension, it's OK because we also get that $5M relief.

Another point: I did not look at the 09' F.A. list but even with both Joshes being extended, if Claxton can retire and not count against the cap for 2009/10 (not sure about that if he plays some games at the start of the season, if someone can confirm

), with Bibby expiring, we could have enough space to sign a good player:
Joe 15M, Al 4.3M, Acie 2.2M, Smith starting at 11M and Childress at 6M, only Marvin cap hold is a problem with 13M (Marvin cap hold = max salary).

Maybe add 4M for Andersen, it gives 42.5M without Marvin, and almost 55.5M with him... so if management are sure about wanting to keep him, they would have better to sign his extension this summer to reduce his number for next summer.
If he's sign for a starting salary of 8M, we could be at 50.5M , with a salary cap at about 60.5M (53.1M in 06/07, 55.6M in 07/08, maybe 58M in 08/09 and 60.5M in 09/10).

If MLE and BAE are renounced, it gives about $9M to spend on a player.
But with 60M and only 8 players, (and the need of Zaza signed elsewhere), this scenario has small chances to happen.
More likely we could be at more than 55M with some other players, and able to use the MLE, and if Claxton can 't retire, it could be better to keep him and use him in 2009/10 as an expiring contract to get another player.

Back to Dallas' list, I see one guy that I would like to see in ATL if we trade Marvin (or Childress): Maggette.
He can get FTs like Marvin, actually more than him, and he can shoot 3's, a thing Marvin can't at this moment. Opponent defense would be more in trouble with Magette than Marvin.

killbuckner · Post #10 » by **killbuckner** » Thu May 22, 2008 8:44 pm

D21- marvin will count as a max salary. So 13 million as opposed to 18 million. But thats still a killer.

D21 · Post #11 » by **D21** » Thu May 22, 2008 9:04 pm

killbuckner wrote:D21- marvin will count as a max salary. So 13 million as opposed to 18 million. But thats still a killer.

Thanks, I forgot it can't be higher than the max.
I use the 250% of last salary because of Marvin last year being higher than the average salary (opposed to the 300% for boith Joshes, last years being under average) but forgot this rule

I will edit the previous post (done).