How MEM signing Darius Miles affects us.

[shrink]

Here's a brief synopsis. Last year, POR told the league that Darius Miles knees were so bad that he had suffered a career-ending injury, and the front office allowed them to void the $9 mil/ year contract from their rolls. If the Blazers don't trade Raef's $13, plus the $15 they had left on Francis contract, they can get under the lux in 2009, and be THE major player. If you're a top free agent, do you want to go to MEM, OKC, or POR?

However, MEM signing Miles creates controversy. Once he plays ten games, does the league office reneg on the salary cap help, since the injury clearly wasn't "career ending?" Do the doctors' exams from the Blazer, the Grizzlies, or the league -- then or now .. change the situation? Without Miles $9, POR isn't farther under the salary cap than any other team with an MLE .. in fact, the Blazers wouldn't even get that exception! If the league puts those imaginary (Miles still gets paid, either way) numbers back on the Blazers rolls, this could end up in court.

Now, the obvious way this affects us is that it may prevent a division rival from acquiring another star player next season. I think it would make it likely they also trade LaFrentz, so that they add talent and get to maintain a higher salary and their exceptions next year.

Being kicked out of the 2009 Free Agent rush would (and I know many of you hate to hear this), clears the way for us to be the leader in 2009 free agency if we were to make the salary-cap clearing deal of Miller + Cardinal + Madsen for Szczerbiak + small deal + TPE + 1st. With that space under the cap in 2009, we could:

1. Be probably the most attractive 2009 free agent site, to get a free agent for ourselves

2. Sign a star player (I'm thinking a guy like Boozer) to a good contract (remember, few buyers), and trade that value for what we need later. It's a matter of being at the right place at the right time, like being in Best Buy last year when they opened their one box of Wii's.

3. Trade the cap space as a block to a team that wants into the 2009 free agency. This is the path I think is most likely. Pure cap space, in my opinion, seems to carry about triple the trade value of an expiring. For example, PHO traded Kurt Thomas' expiring for pure cap space and gave up two late firsts for the privilidge .. and Thomas had value both as a player AND an expiring! Camby came for cap space -- good player on a very reasonable $9-$10 mil deal. We traded a tiny amount of caps space last year, and got Carney, Booth, a 1st, and cash to cover all of Booth and half of Carney. the stuff is pure gold.

I can't name a specific team this early in the season on who we could get in trade. As the season wears on though, half the teams will begin to realize they aren't winning or making the play-offs, and even mroe may realize the way they are built, they aren't truly going to be competing with the Cavs or Lakers, so their players may come into play. But there are ALWAYS teams that want to rebuild (particularly before 2010), and maybe even more teams that have owners that want to get under the lux immediately.

Anyway, we need to keep an eye on this, not just from the perspective that it can trip up the plans of a rival, but we could actually profit from it ourselves.

[Calinks]

*Skips 90 percent of your post*

Nobody will want to come here.

/end topic

[shrink]

For those with a technical bent, or want to get more into the many details I skimmed over in my brief synopsis, you can read 8 pages from the CBA Forum here from the last time a team considered signing Miles:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=827526&start=0

[shrink]

*Skips 90 percent of your post*

Nobody will want to come here.

/end topic

Calinks, if you believe that, then you have it completely backwards.

No free agents may want to come to MIN in 2010 when they have lots of other options. However, does MIN look like such a bad place to get a paycheck from if the other choices are OKC and MEM?

Moreover, trading the cap space (or player acquired from the cap space) for another player who's already on a guaranteed contract reduces their part of the equation. As you know, once we get players here, we have more problems getting them to leave (Sprewell, Cassell, even KG) than we have problems getting them to stay (Marbury).

[casey]

Without Miles $9, POR isn't farther under the salary cap than any other team with an MLE .. in fact, the Blazers wouldn't even get that exception!

They wouldn't get the MLE? I'm not sure what you mean by that.

As you know, once we get players here, we have more problems getting them to leave (Sprewell, Cassell, even KG)

I don't understand that at all either.


Portland absolutely could still have cap room if Miles is on the cap (a big if still). There was a good post on the Blazers board showing that.

[shrink]

Without Miles $9, POR isn't farther under the salary cap than any other team with an MLE .. in fact, the Blazers wouldn't even get that exception!

They wouldn't get the MLE? I'm not sure what you mean by that.

Exceptions are exceptions to teams over the salary cap. Teams over the cap aren't supposed to keep adding to their salary, but the NBA allows exceptions like the MLE and BAE for teams no matter what total salary is. Teams don't get exceptions if they are already under the salary cap.

As you know, once we get players here, we have more problems getting them to leave (Sprewell, Cassell, even KG)

I don't understand that at all either.

The problems with Cassell and Sprewell were that they wanted to sign extensions during the season to STAY here. Garnett turned down the first BOS offer because he wanted to stay. Heck, you could say something similar about Joe Smith. Marbury's problem was that he wanted to leave MIN. I don't put Googs in the same category -- he wanted to leave Marbury, not leave MIN.

My point is that I understand that it might be hard to attract top notch free agents because of many misperceptions about Minnesota. However, once they get here, that perception seems to change, and the majority seem to like living, or raising a family in, Minnesota.

Portland absolutely could still have cap room if Miles is on the cap (a big if still). There was a good post on the Blazers board showing that.

Wow -- good post. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I was unaware that Blake and Outlaw were both on deals that were unguaranteed in 2009-10 if waived by a certain date.

Actually, I looked at the different sites I use for contract information, and storyteller is already up on this, and has recently added a new color code (dark orange), for these partially guaranteed deals. She still includes them in the totals.

http://www.storytellerscontracts.info/r ... laries.htm

.. and I'm glad you're coming farther out of the closet with your POR addiction. Maybe rev could set up an intervention? An exorcism?

[Krapinsky]

If 2009 free agents don't like what's out there, what's to stop them from resigning for a 1 year deal and waiting a year?

And Boozer? He lives in Miami. He's not going to bypass them to sign in Minnesota where we already have two PFs locked up. He'll be in Miami, Utah, or Memphis- assuming they don't draft Griffin.

[shrink]

If 2009 free agents don't like what's out there, what's to stop them from resigning for a 1 year deal and waiting a year?

Because NBA players feel safer on longer contracts.

And Boozer? He lives in Miami. He's not going to bypass them to sign in Minnesota where we already have two PFs locked up. He'll be in Miami, Utah, or Memphis- assuming they don't draft Griffin.

Marion is constantly listed as the most likely player to be traded this year. Moreover, MIA has more pressing needs (like a center) if they want to be competitive this year. Do they wait a year for Boozer? The better plan, in my opinion, is to trade Marion for comparable talent this year, then trade for Boozer (say, Blount's expiring + whoever they draft in the lottery next year), and be competitive both years, and have the talent from both. Letting Marion expire loses them talent -- he can play, and he's worth more to the team than an expiring.

[shrink]

I should also add that, like MIA, its no guarantee that POR won't try to be a contender this year, and trade Raef, Outlaw, Blake, Frye, (is Diogu still there?), rather than just let them, and their trade value, simply walk. The game plan is cap space, but POR rumors abound. Winning games in 2008-09 is not a pressure that OKC or MEM feel.

[casey]

Exceptions are exceptions to teams over the salary cap. Teams over the cap aren't supposed to keep adding to their salary, but the NBA allows exceptions like the MLE and BAE for teams no matter what total salary is. Teams don't get exceptions if they are already under the salary cap.

Every team gets the MLE. Those still under the cap will renounce it and use their cap space instead. It doesn't matter if you're $20Mil under the cap, $2Mil under the cap, or $20Mil over the cap. The only difference is that the team $20Mil under will renounce the exception.

The problems with Cassell and Sprewell were that they wanted to sign extensions during the season to STAY here. Garnett turned down the first BOS offer because he wanted to stay. Heck, you could say something similar about Joe Smith. Marbury's problem was that he wanted to leave MIN. I don't put Googs in the same category -- he wanted to leave Marbury, not leave MIN.

My point is that I understand that it might be hard to attract top notch free agents because of many misperceptions about Minnesota. However, once they get here, that perception seems to change, and the majority seem to like living, or raising a family in, Minnesota.

Cassell and Spree wanted to resign for money, not because they loved being in Minnesota. I don't necessarily disagree with your point though. I don't think it's impossible to have guys wanting to play here. The problem is with getting them here, and then creating a decent enough team where they would want to stay.

.. and I'm glad you're coming farther out of the closet with your POR addiction. Maybe rev could set up an intervention? An exorcism?

I've never tried to hide my feelings about any of my 3 favorite teams (wolves, celts, blazers). And I'd be pretty miserable without them. The Celtics because they are competing right now, the Blazers because they will be competing soon, and the Wolves because...well, I'm not sure why actually. Some team to laugh at maybe?

[Krapinsky]

If 2009 free agents don't like what's out there, what's to stop them from resigning for a 1 year deal and waiting a year?

Because NBA players feel safer on longer contracts.

I think you are to easily dismissing this notion. If there's more free agents out there then there is money, the smart thing to do would be to sign a contract with an early termination option after one year. Then to hit th market again in 2010 when it's a seller's market.

[

And Boozer? He lives in Miami. He's not going to bypass them to sign in Minnesota where we already have two PFs locked up. He'll be in Miami, Utah, or Memphis- assuming they don't draft Griffin.

Marion is constantly listed as the most likely player to be traded this year. Moreover, MIA has more pressing needs (like a center) if they want to be competitive this year. Do they wait a year for Boozer? The better plan, in my opinion, is to trade Marion for comparable talent this year, then trade for Boozer (say, Blount's expiring + whoever they draft in the lottery next year), and be competitive both years, and have the talent from both. Letting Marion expire loses them talent -- he can play, and he's worth more to the team than an expiring.

Completely disagree here.

Your option: Trade Marion for what they can get this year + trade for Boozer for Blount's expiring + lottery (assuming they don' tmake the playoffs).

How much can Marion really get back? He's an expiring so teams are not goign to give up a lot for a player that can walk at the end of the year. What they're going to give up is a worse contract, or a player at a different position that also has one year left on his deal. Not to mention Marion is only averaging like 13/9 this year. I don't see trading Marion as a plausible option at all. They could get someone like Kaman or G Wallace maybe, but why would they take on those bad contracts? Would adding either player over Marion really improve their team this year?

Utah is not going to trade Boozer for an expiring and a late first. I'm assuming they would rather save the money which they would need to resign Milsap and forego the late first. And what if Miami makes the playoff's then what? They have nothing to trade except an expiring and there stuck next year with Wade/Beasley/what ever they could get back from the Marion trade.

The better option: Let Marion expire, sign Boozer, then trade Blount plus if it's availibe.

This guarantees the better player in Boozer. Boozer/Wade/Beasley is a team that should contend. On top of that, they could still trade Blount for an upgrade at PG.

[LordBaldric]

Every team gets the MLE. Those still under the cap will renounce it and use their cap space instead. It doesn't matter if you're $20Mil under the cap, $2Mil under the cap, or $20Mil over the cap. The only difference is that the team $20Mil under will renounce the exception.

This is false. If you are far enough under the cap that adding the exceptions you could use to your real salary wouldn't put you over the the cap, then you do NOT get to use any exceptions.

[casey]

Not sure what I was thinking there. That's a good lesson to the kids, don't drink and post.

[shrink]

I don't see trading Marion as a plausible option at all.

http://nba.fanhouse.com/2008/10/27/most ... wn-marion/

http://dimemag.com/2008/12/the-heat-nee ... wn-marion/

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/s ... alk-081015

[Krapinsky]

I don't see trading Marion as a plausible option at all.

http://nba.fanhouse.com/2008/10/27/most ... wn-marion/

http://dimemag.com/2008/12/the-heat-nee ... wn-marion/

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/s ... alk-081015

Believe me I've heard the rumors. Plausible was the wrong word. It's certainly plausible, but it would be a mistake on Miami' part in my opinion. We'll have to wait and see, but I don't see him being moved.

[shrink]

I think when the Wolves play Memphis, Darius Miles may have completed his suspension and be eligible for his first game. If he plays ten, POR gets his $9 mil stuck back on their books, hurting, but not ending, their 2009 cap space, because his injury really wasn't "career-ending."

However, I just read an idea that's so nasty and perfect, that I had to share it:

MEM should offer to trade Miles to POR.

So consider this. Why wouldn't a team have signed Miles (or claimed him on waivers from Boston) and then used him to extort a pick or a player from Portland by exploiting that issue? Couldn't they play him one minute a game for 9 games, then have offered him to Portland in a trade for a #1 pick or two, or for a young helpful player? The value to the Blazers would be to have him where they could stop his further use for the remainder of this season and thereby would save big money. Miles wouldn't play, but he'd still get paid. Maybe that sort of trade angle and player usage would be considered underhanded by the competition or the union, but it sure seems like it would have been allowable by the rules and the smart thing to do. I doubt he carries the value of a #1 pick or a talented youngster otherwise either by trade or by potential game contribution, and as a minimum contract player he definitely would have been a snap to trade.

[john2jer]

I think when the Wolves play Memphis, Darius Miles may have completed his suspension and be eligible for his first game. If he plays ten, POR gets his $9 mil stuck back on their books, hurting, but not ending, their 2009 cap space, because his injury really wasn't "career-ending."

However, I just read an idea that's so nasty and perfect, that I had to share it:

MEM should offer to trade Miles to POR.

So consider this. Why wouldn't a team have signed Miles (or claimed him on waivers from Boston) and then used him to extort a pick or a player from Portland by exploiting that issue? Couldn't they play him one minute a game for 9 games, then have offered him to Portland in a trade for a #1 pick or two, or for a young helpful player? The value to the Blazers would be to have him where they could stop his further use for the remainder of this season and thereby would save big money. Miles wouldn't play, but he'd still get paid. Maybe that sort of trade angle and player usage would be considered underhanded by the competition or the union, but it sure seems like it would have been allowable by the rules and the smart thing to do. I doubt he carries the value of a #1 pick or a talented youngster otherwise either by trade or by potential game contribution, and as a minimum contract player he definitely would have been a snap to trade.

I could see the player's union stepping in if he wasn't getting played, but seriously, that's evil and funny. I like it!

[casey]

I think when the Wolves play Memphis, Darius Miles may have completed his suspension and be eligible for his first game. If he plays ten, POR gets his $9 mil stuck back on their books, hurting, but not ending, their 2009 cap space, because his injury really wasn't "career-ending."

He already played in his first game yesterday.

[john2jer]

I think when the Wolves play Memphis, Darius Miles may have completed his suspension and be eligible for his first game. If he plays ten, POR gets his $9 mil stuck back on their books, hurting, but not ending, their 2009 cap space, because his injury really wasn't "career-ending."

He already played in his first game yesterday.

2 mins? Love to hear from someone who watched the game to see if he did anything besides throw a folding chair out onto the court the last 2 minutes of the game and just sit.

[mg]

There will be some teams with serious payroll issues next offseason. Just look at the Jazz who have Boozer and Okur who can opt out in addition to Millsap who is a FA. Not that the Wolves will necessarily go after any of those players but who's to say the Jazz just don't decide to give Kirilenko away for capspace similar to Camby last summer?

We haven't even figured in the downturn in the economy and how that will effect other teams' bottom lines. Maybe a team with a top draft pick will trade away their pick if the Wolves take on a bad contract. There are a ton of possibilities if the team has cap flexibility and not tied into bad contracts with mediocre players.