Toine: "wasted year"

Post #21 » by **TheFranchise21** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 7:15 am

If he wasn't fat, he'd get more PT. Maybe he should shut up and stop stuffing his face with McDonald's.

andyhop · Post #22 » by **andyhop** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 7:52 am

He's just the latest guy to whine that he wants a buy out because he is desperate to play , but obviously he isn't that desperate that he is prepared to give up the money to make it happen.

Someone needs to tell him and people like him to STFU you had a choice of the playing time or the money and have made your decision so live with it.

MartyConlonJr · Post #23 » by **MartyConlonJr** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 3:57 pm

I believe this might be useful to some of you. When Toine was with Miami we discussed how we could buy him out and I believe the problem was he has those team option years after next year, and if you buy out a contract it is evenly distributed over the remaining years, so for Minnesota to pay him the remaining 9.3 million, it would be over 3 years at around 3.1 million per year.

Now that may help you out of the luxury tax this year, but it doesn't help you in FA next year once you add your draft pick salary in and probably extend Telfair, and it puts an extra 3 million on each of the next 2 seasons when you are well under the cap and could be players in FA.

Also there's the obvious advantage you lose of the large expiring contract as well. So for Minnesota, you lose the expiring, get salary relief in the short term when you can't use it, but have problems later on when you may want the cap room.

For Toine, I'm guessing he would be getting his salary in 3 payments over 3 years, so he doesn't get access to the money immediately (can't make interest on it, invest etc) so would probably be playing hardball on the buyout amount as a result.

That's my understanding anyway, so I can see how difficult a buyout would be if I'm correct.

kandiking · Post #24 » by **kandiking** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 4:34 pm

just a tidbit on toine the city pages said he has over 1000 suits.

chrbal · Post #25 » by **chrbal** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 4:58 pm

Guy has made a ton of money and if I remember correctly he didn't have that much of a problem when he was first traded to the Wolves.

Let him whine, trade him for something.

casey · Post #26 » by **casey** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 7:21 pm

MartyConlonJr wrote:I believe this might be useful to some of you. When Toine was with Miami we discussed how we could buy him out and I believe the problem was he has those team option years after next year, and if you buy out a contract it is evenly distributed over the remaining years, so for Minnesota to pay him the remaining 9.3 million, it would be over 3 years at around 3.1 million per year.

It's not a team option. It's just unguaranteed, and the buyout wouldn't be spread out over those seasons.

MartyConlonJr wrote:For Toine, I'm guessing he would be getting his salary in 3 payments over 3 years, so he doesn't get access to the money immediately (can't make interest on it, invest etc) so would probably be playing hardball on the buyout amount as a result.

You can negotiate how the payments are made, it doesn't necessarily have to be the same as how the contract is structure.

chrbal wrote:Guy has made a ton of money and if I remember correctly he didn't have that much of a problem when he was first traded to the Wolves.

Let him whine, trade him for something.

So why aren't we giving him credit for having such a good attitude despite how he actually felt about the situation? I think we all expected him to be a huge cancer here, but he hasn't been.

Post #27 » by **Worm Guts** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 7:38 pm

casey wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

So why aren't we giving him credit for having such a good attitude despite how he actually felt about the situation? I think we all expected him to be a huge cancer here, but he hasn't been.

We're supposed to give him credit for not being a cancer? That's a pretty low standard.

casey · Post #28 » by **casey** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 8:22 pm

Worm Guts wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

We're supposed to give him credit for not being a cancer? That's a pretty low standard.

Yes we should give him credit. Sure it's a low standard, but this is Antoine Walker we're talking about, of course we're going to have low standards for him.

big3_8_19_21 · Post #29 » by **big3_8_19_21** » Sun Mar 9, 2008 8:26 pm

The most you can give him is a lack of discredit.

chrbal · Post #30 » by **chrbal** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 5:33 pm

casey wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

So why aren't we giving him credit for having such a good attitude despite how he actually felt about the situation? I think we all expected him to be a huge cancer here, but he hasn't been.

Thats true, I just kind of have always seen him as another Derrick Coleman-type. Great talent, no common sense. Kind of suprised he hasn't become a Knick yet.

MN Die Hard · Post #31 » by **MN Die Hard** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:09 pm

casey wrote:The buyout offer probably was ridiculous.

What is ridiculous is Walker and all the rest of the spoiled veterans who want to go play somewhere else AND are unwilling to give up a significant portion of their salaries.

I have no problems with somone like that wanting to play for a winning team (although I only think it makes sense for expiring contracts). And I actually appreciate that he's not 100% bashing the organization, and he still appears suportive of the young players.

But when they try to have it both ways (get paid most or all of their contract AND freedom to sign elsewhere) I say enough's enough. As another poster said - STFU because you clearly have made your decision: you want to sign elsewhere but obviously not enough that you'll give up a chunk of salary to do it.

casey · Post #32 » by **casey** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:20 pm

chrbal wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Thats true, I just kind of have always seen him as another Derrick Coleman-type. Great talent, no common sense. Kind of suprised he hasn't become a Knick yet.

Yeah, I really don't have a whole lot good to say about Walker, other than that he has handled this situation a lot better than I expected.

MN Die Hard wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

What is ridiculous is Walker and all the rest of the spoiled veterans who want to go play somewhere else AND are unwilling to give up a significant portion of their salaries.

I have no problems with somone like that wanting to play for a winning team (although I only think it makes sense for expiring contracts). And I actually appreciate that he's not 100% bashing the organization, and he still appears suportive of the young players.

But when they try to have it both ways (get paid most or all of their contract AND freedom to sign elsewhere) I say enough's enough. As another poster said - STFU because you clearly have made your decision: you want to sign elsewhere but obviously not enough that you'll give up a chunk of salary to do it.

In the majority of these situations players only give up a small portion of their salary.

dunkonu21 · Post #33 » by **dunkonu21** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:28 pm

Wolves are handling this situation very well. Walker has two choices save us from a big chunk of your contract or become a valuable expiring contract for us. Walker might have a point that this was a wasted season for him, but it wasn't wasted for the Wolves. If he wouldn't have been so lazy in Miami he wouldn't be in this situation so he has himself to blame.

MN Die Hard · Post #34 » by **MN Die Hard** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:32 pm

casey wrote:In the majority of these situations players only give up a small portion of their salary.

I know, and I think it's ridiculous. They get the best of both worlds....they get most of their salary, they go to another team that pays them, AND they get to choose their new team. Like I said I can live with that for an expiring contract who will be gone in 1-2 months anyway, but in this case MN is right to make a lowball offer. Why buy out a full season when the guy will have trade value this summer or next year? What gets under my skin is when guys cry about not getting a buyout after they refuse to give up a significant portion of their salary. Its a two-way street.

funkatron101 · Post #35 » by **funkatron101** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:41 pm

Hell, I think if a player wants out bad enough, the contract should be torn up.

Ok bud, you're out, see if anyone else is going to pay you anything!

To bad the union has to ruin that.

MN Die Hard · Post #36 » by **MN Die Hard** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:46 pm

funkatron101 wrote:Hell, I think if a player wants out bad enough, the contract should be torn up.

Ok bud, you're out, see if anyone else is going to pay you anything!

To bad the union has to ruin that.

Totally agree, 100%. Then we'll see how important it really is for them to play, and how important it really is to collect a paycheck.

casey · Post #37 » by **casey** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:14 pm

MN Die Hard wrote:I know, and I think it's ridiculous. They get the best of both worlds....they get most of their salary, they go to another team that pays them, AND they get to choose their new team.

Is it not the best of both worlds for the team too? They get rid of a player who can only do them harm, and they save some money doing it.

MN Die Hard wrote:Why buy out a full season when the guy will have trade value this summer or next year?

Because we're the type of team that is trading for guys like Walker, not trading away them. You can say he has trade value, but I can't see Taylor taking on more salary so I doubt he gets traded. I don't blame the Wolves for wanting a little more back since he's still got another year left, just as I don't blame Walker for not being cool with that. Though I would expect him to be bought out this summer. He's had a good attitude for one season, I think it's unlikely that will be the case for 2 seasons.

MN Die Hard · Post #38 » by **MN Die Hard** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:16 am

casey wrote:Is it not the best of both worlds for the team too? They get rid of a player who can only do them harm, and they save some money doing it.

I guess this might hold some water in certain situations. But most times the buyout is a favor to the player, not to the team. And if a player sticking around would cause the team harm if he's not bought out, then he's entirely unprofessional and doesnt deserve the courtesy of a buyout anyway. I would equate this to rewarding a young child who throws a temper tantrum because he doesnt get what he wants.

And I still say the player should be expected to give up a lot more salary, especially if the team is buying out a full season. In Toine's case, if he's here a full season he expects to be paid $9 million. On the other hand, if it was a regular job and he wanted to quit and walk away, he'd be paid nothing, right? I'd be fine with that. Yet, he wants to quit, walk away, AND take his $9 million with him. I mean, wouldnt logic suggest that when the ends of the spectrum are $0 and $9 million, the compromise would be $4.5 million? And I think THAT'S freaking generout for a guy who wants to walk away and still be paid. Instead these guys walk away with buyouts for like $7 million or $8 million from $9 million contracts.

casey wrote:Because we're the type of team that is trading for guys like Walker, not trading away them. You can say he has trade value, but I can't see Taylor taking on more salary so I doubt he gets traded. I don't blame the Wolves for wanting a little more back since he's still got another year left, just as I don't blame Walker for not being cool with that. Though I would expect him to be bought out this summer. He's had a good attitude for one season, I think it's unlikely that will be the case for 2 seasons.

You're probably right, they most likely would just let his contract expire. But why not keep your options open? They can always buy him out later. But what if a sweetheart deal comes along this summer and we need expirings? Might as well hold on to him for now...there still is the potential for him to be used as a valuable trading chip.

Post #39 » by **Worm Guts** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:39 pm

casey wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Because we're the type of team that is trading for guys like Walker, not trading away them. You can say he has trade value, but I can't see Taylor taking on more salary so I doubt he gets traded. I don't blame the Wolves for wanting a little more back since he's still got another year left, just as I don't blame Walker for not being cool with that. Though I would expect him to be bought out this summer. He's had a good attitude for one season, I think it's unlikely that will be the case for 2 seasons.

Why not? Depending on the situation I can see the Wolves taking on more salary. You seem to have this perception of Taylor as cheap but the Wolves have never been under the salary cap since he's owned the team, and they've been over the luxury cap multiple times.
As far as Walker goes, he's probably the worst player NBA per dollar. He shouldn't bitch about getting paid 9 million dollars when he shouldn't even be in the league.

casey · Post #40 » by **casey** » Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:40 pm

MN Die Hard wrote:I guess this might hold some water in certain situations. But most times the buyout is a favor to the player, not to the team. And if a player sticking around would cause the team harm if he's not bought out, then he's entirely unprofessional and doesnt deserve the courtesy of a buyout anyway. I would equate this to rewarding a young child who throws a temper tantrum because he doesnt get what he wants.

You keep looking at it from the players perspective. Look at it from the team's perspective. Why would you not buy out a player in that situation? If he isn't helping your team now and isn't going to help the team in the future, why not save a couple million and buy him out?

MN Die Hard wrote:In Toine's case, if he's here a full season he expects to be paid $9 million.

Don't look at it as Walker expecting to be paid $9Mil, look at it as the Wolves having to pay him $9Mil. If you have to pay $9Mil, and you can instead pay $7Mil without really losing anything, how can you complain? Sure it would be nice for the team if it was split right in half, but what do you think is gonna happen if that's what a team demands? They're gonna end up paying the full $9Mil. What's gonna happen if the player demands all $9Mil? They're gonna end up getting all $9Mil but won't be able to play for a couple months on the team of their choosing. The team has a lot more to lose in that situation, and that's why players get so much.

MN Die Hard wrote:You're probably right, they most likely would just let his contract expire. But why not keep your options open? They can always buy him out later. But what if a sweetheart deal comes along this summer and we need expirings? Might as well hold on to him for now...there still is the potential for him to be used as a valuable trading chip.

I'm not saying we should've bought him out right now. I'm saying that there's no way he would accept a really low offer right now, and eventually he'll be bought out because I think it's highly unlikely that we would trade him unless it's for a player with a similar contract.

Worm Guts wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Why not? Depending on the situation I can see the Wolves taking on more salary. You seem to have this perception of Taylor as cheap but the Wolves have never been under the salary cap since he's owned the team, and they've been over the luxury cap multiple times.

I have that perception because it's reality. It doesn't mean as much as you make it seem to say that we've never been under the salary cap. Though I think the past is part of the reason why he wouldn't do it. At times he has spent money, and it turned out horribly.