PDA

View Full Version : Pacers may lack needed funds



able
07-17-2005, 07:40 AM
Pacers may lack needed funds (http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050717/SPORTS04/507170425)

With James Jones, Davis also on wish list, Indiana may be outbid for Lithuanian guard.

By Mark Montieth
mark.montieth@indystar.com


Indiana Pacers president Larry Bird has proved his devotion to Sarunas Jasikevicius of Lithuania by making sojourns to Europe to scout and meet the guard.

Whether Bird has enough influence and -- more importantly -- available funds to woo the point guard, however, could be determined this week. Free agent signings and trades can be executed beginning Friday, if the new collective bargaining agreement is finalized by then.

With the premier free agent guards having reached agreements, Jasikevicius has moved closer to the forefront of desirable catches. The Pacers remain in contention but have competition from teams that might have more money to spend.

Cleveland, Portland, Houston, Dallas and Seattle are among the teams believed to have interest in the 29-year-old, who has gained rock-star fame in Europe after starring in the Olympics and leading his Tel Aviv, Israel, team to the past two Euroleague titles.

Jasikevicius' agent, Doug Neustadt, is seeking a three-year, $10 million contract. The Pacers could afford such a deal with a portion of their midlevel exception, which allows them to award a contract of about $5 million next season. They also want to re-sign free agents Dale Davis and James Jones, however, which presents the challenge of fitting three players into one hole.

"They're just waiting to get the best offer," Bird said of Jasikevicius and Neustadt. "There's not much we can do."

The Pacers' primary competition for Jasikevicius appears to be Cleveland, which is seeking a starting point guard and has $5 million-6 million left to spend on free agents. The Cavaliers have reached an agreement to re-sign center Zydrunas Ilgauskas, a fellow Lithuanian and a longtime friend of Jasikevicius. The two reportedly attended the recent Wimbledon tennis championship together.

"It's nice that he's friends with Ilgauskas, but he's not making a decision based on that," Neustadt said. "Anytime Larry Bird's interested in a player, it has to carry some weight. Sarunas is very pleased that Larry likes him as a player.

"(The Pacers) would be an interesting fit. They're on the brink of doing some things."

Davis has reported interest from teams such as Seattle, New Jersey, Cleveland and Philadelphia, but it remains unclear what salary he will command. Davis earned more than $10 million last season in the final year of a contract he signed with the Pacers in 2000, but at 36 he faces a major pay cut. Just how big remains to be seen.

"Dale has a great fondness for the Pacers, but (a new contract) has to be a fair value," his agent Chubby Wells said. "Like anything else, we're going to look at all of our options and see what teams are offering."

The Pacers' negotiating interest in Davis could be limited by the presence of four other players already on their roster who can fill the center spot: Jeff Foster, Jermaine O'Neal, Scot Pollard and David Harrison.

Bird emphasized the Pacers don't intend to let restricted free agent James Jones get away unless an improbable offer comes his way.

Jones, a second-round pick in 2003, averaged 4.9 points last season. The Pacers can match any offer he receives from another team.

"James Jones will be matched," Bird said.

Call Star reporter Mark Montieth at (317) 444-6406.

foretaz
07-17-2005, 07:56 AM
'james jones will be matched'

i respect larry alot....and i understand that all teams that have the ability to match a contract have to let it be known that they will do so to help discourage other teams from getting involved....

but is there anyone that thinks the pacers will match if someone offers jj a contract that has a starting salary of 4 or 5 million???

i doubt it...

able
07-17-2005, 08:05 AM
Some dissapointment in reading this, I was always sure they would re-sign JJ, so no nes there, unless if someone offers him outrageous money he will be back and if he gets outrageous money then good luck, he deserved it.

As for the DD commentts and the comments of his agent, enough never seems enough, now I can understand a guy aged 26 or even 29 going for the BIG money, after all it is their one big chance to strike it really rich, however at 36 one would think that playing becomes a luxury, and the choice of where to "end" your career, certainly after seeing the farewell we gave uncle Reg, would have more influence then a million more or less.
(I am pretty sure DD would be able to make up any differences in local endorsements with his popularity in Indy)
Yet the sounds are close to the same when we "lost" him first time, "it aint about where I play, it's about the money".

No idea if the "rumours" are true that others are offering more, but IMO he has to realize that with Harrison coming up and Jeff Healthy again, Polly here for the start, LB might not let him overplay his hand.

As far as saras goes, Those comments form the agent are more realistic then others, he plainly states that being friends with Z does not mean Saras will join Cleveland if the same money is on the table, in other words if it stays within something the P's can afford he will (more then likely) choose the P's, now whether it goes beyond that starting 5 mil is the big question.

I am just wondering whether this article and the info about the FA's we are trying to sign has secondary reasons, it seems somewhat out of line for this organization to "inform" us the fans in this way, so what would that be?
A. letting pp lknow we do want JJ back
B. preparing people that we might not re-sign DD
C. preparing people we might not be able to sign Saras

D. or more subtle, do "drop" the idea of DD in favour of Saras if need be

I am going for A and D, which makes B a given and C a possibility.

foretaz
07-17-2005, 08:15 AM
ill tell u the way i see this article....

i see it as a way of trying to keep the price down on all the players mentioned...

putting the idea out there that the pacers will not be party to a bidding war....

as far as jj is concerned, its the same thing, but in reverse, by saying they will match, they hope to eliminate a bidding war...by elimininating suitors..

i dont really think saras is to the point where the public would be disappointed if hes not signed....i think by and large, that most dont know enuff about him....and that even amongst the die hards, as is clearly seen on here, there is a differing opinion on him...

there is no doubt in my mind the person who will be most disappointed if we dont sign saras is bird....

i see bird trying to not overplay his hand and therefore trying to stay out of a bidding war for saras and dd...by saying no matter how much we might like ya, we cant afford ya....

FiestyFosterFanatic
07-17-2005, 09:52 AM
Dale is dissapointing me. He said when he came here, that money would not be an option when it came time to resign.

Bball
07-17-2005, 11:57 AM
I tell you what this article is doing IMHO... Giving us a summary of what is happening (at least the stuff they feel comfortable talking about). Not a super-secret message to be decoded. Not a veiled message to the other teams. Just some info in midsummer.

-Bball

Shack80
07-17-2005, 12:15 PM
I think I got to agree with Bball. I know we all want our favirite bal palyers to suck it up fo rthe team, but realy money talks, we are human and we all want lots of it. Dale is human, and hell who can blame a guy in his last years from trying to take all he can get. I would love to see him be a stand up guy and say I am going to show loyalty to the pacers, but hell we let him go years ago because of money.

PacerMan
07-17-2005, 12:22 PM
David Harrison comes back healthy and eager and DD becomes an afterthought. A nice guy to have at the end of the bench and in the locker room, but an afterthought on the floor. 10 minutes a game. I like him and his strength but he's not going to play much so we sure as heck aren't going to "open market" his paycheck.
Glad they are going to match on JJ, I think this kid brings more than the "trade value" that many here seem to think. He seems "clutch", has the best jumper on a team desperate for shooters, and is a surprisingly good shot blocker in the paint. I think if Granger pans out we could easily move Jax and give Freddie (going to bust out), Granger,JJ and Artest those 2 and 3 spot minutes.
As to the pg, guess it would nice to have him if Larry thinks he's for real, but we are fine without him too.

sixthman
07-17-2005, 12:35 PM
What I fear is happening is that the P's are not willing to go deeper into luxury tax territory to make this team better and they don't have the balls to say so.

I don't think Austin Croshere will be on this team either when the season starts. He'll be a luxury tax amnesty headline, along with Michael Finley, Allen Houston and Brian Grant, etc.

foretaz
07-17-2005, 12:39 PM
What I fear is happening is that the P's are not willing to go deeper into luxury tax territory to make this team better and they don't have the balls to say so.

I don't think Austin Croshere will be on this team either when the season starts. He'll be a luxury tax amnesty headline, along with Michael Finley, Allen Houston and Brian Grant, etc.

and with brian grant possibly available, and him having a friend in JO...it might be possible to land grant....portland might have the best chance...but if grant is a possibility, then dale might be a bit more expendable if the money isnt right....

FiestyFosterFanatic
07-17-2005, 12:44 PM
I think I got to agree with Bball. I know we all want our favirite bal palyers to suck it up fo rthe team, but realy money talks, we are human and we all want lots of it. Dale is human, and hell who can blame a guy in his last years from trying to take all he can get. I would love to see him be a stand up guy and say I am going to show loyalty to the pacers, but hell we let him go years ago because of money.

We gave him money, the most we could give him, and he still *****ed about not having enough, that's why we traded him. It's not like we offered him some low number.

sixthman
07-17-2005, 02:35 PM
and with brian grant possibly available, and him having a friend in JO...it might be possible to land grant....portland might have the best chance...but if grant is a possibility, then dale might be a bit more expendable if the money isnt right....

Teams are now again spooked by the luxury tax, including the Pacers, and that is the new reality. We are deep into luxury tax territory, like few other teams, and any honest commentary about the Pacers needs to include that factor.

Because of the apparent certainty that there will be a luxury tax, signing a player for three million, does not cost us three million, it costs six million.

You are offering a decent rationale for not re-signing Dale Davis and James Jones, if the bidding for those two gets above minimum levels. But who is to say how much signing Brian Grant will cost? Fact is, if that bidding gets a little expensive, which it probably will, I'm afraid the Pacers would bow out of that bidding too.

I doubt we add any new salary to this roster, unless the new player is signed at the minimum, or an absolute steal.

For there to be a significant addition to the Pacers roster this off-season via free agency, it looks to me the Pacers will need to find a way to shed some salary, beyond the one-time luxury tax amnesty opportunity.

Pacerized
07-17-2005, 02:42 PM
.

For there to be a significant addition to the Pacers roster this off-season via free agency, it looks to me the Pacers will need to find a way to shed some salary, beyond the one-time luxury tax amnesty opportunity.


I've seen a couple of post on us being into the tax area already, but I haven't been able to find anything online to show our 05/06 projected payroll, or what the tax threshold would be. It would seem that we shouldn't be much over if any at this point. We weren't over it last year, and the only difference would be in the year to year salary increases the players get. If we dump Cro with the amnesty waiver, I would think that would more then cover the gap, and we should be able to safely use our MLE, and vet exception this year without being over the tax threshold.

foretaz
07-17-2005, 02:47 PM
Teams are now again spooked by the luxury tax, including the Pacers, and that is the new reality. We are deep into luxury tax territory, like few other teams, and any honest commentary about the Pacers needs to include that factor.

Because of the apparent certainty that there will be a luxury tax, signing a player for three million, does not cost us three million, it costs six million.

You are offering a decent rationale for not re-signing Dale Davis and James Jones, if the bidding for those two gets above minimum levels. But who is to say how much signing Brian Grant will cost? Fact is, if that bidding gets a little expensive, which it probably will, I'm afraid the Pacers would bow out of that bidding too.

I doubt we add any new salary to this roster, unless the new player is signed at the minimum, or an absolute steal.

For there to be a significant addition to the Pacers roster this off-season via free agency, it looks to me the Pacers will need to find a way to shed some salary, beyond the one-time luxury tax amnesty opportunity.

until we get the details regarding the compensation of the players that are released by the amnesty waiver, we really dont know....however, if its similar to the regular waivers program then where the player wants to play might be a far bigger concern than how much money is paid....its quite possible there will be a set (vet min) salary for these players, in which case it will be all about where that player wants to play(somewhat like what dale did last year) and therefore the pacers would probably be on a short list for brian...

all that being said, this is a ton of speculation....as there are still numerous questions regarding the interworkings of the amnesty clause as well as not knowing who will be released....some of these answers will come very soon, while others might last into october....

foretaz
07-17-2005, 02:49 PM
I've seen a couple of post on us being into the tax area already, but I haven't been able to find anything online to show our 05/06 projected payroll, or what the tax threshold would be. It would seem that we shouldn't be much over if any at this point. We weren't over it last year, and the only difference would be in the year to year salary increases the players get. If we dump Cro with the amnesty waiver, I would think that would more then cover the gap, and we should be able to safely use our MLE, and vet exception this year without being over the tax threshold.


we were way over last year, and will be way over this year without some drastic measures...and waiving croshere under the amnesty rule wont be enuff...

able
07-17-2005, 03:00 PM
I've seen a couple of post on us being into the tax area already, but I haven't been able to find anything online to show our 05/06 projected payroll, or what the tax threshold would be. It would seem that we shouldn't be much over if any at this point. We weren't over it last year, and the only difference would be in the year to year salary increases the players get. If we dump Cro with the amnesty waiver, I would think that would more then cover the gap, and we should be able to safely use our MLE, and vet exception this year without being over the tax threshold.

There's enough threads around here that state different, including some very specific of min.

ATM we are at 75 million that is before we are re-signing JJ and DD or adding anyone.

as the LT is porjected to be at 63 million we are even over the cliff, by some margin and we're not done.

We will drop Cro just for that reason.

Los Angeles
07-17-2005, 03:07 PM
Here's a rough look at what we're spending this year:

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/indiana.htm

Keep in mind that hoopshype is only right a % of the time, not always.

Note that both Bender and Croshere will make more than Ron Artest this year. Also note that FOUR of or top SIX earners are Cro, Bender, Pollard and the retired Reggie. Tinsley was extended, but how much he'll be raking it in for years to come remains a mystery.

And frankly, I don't know why JO makes as much as Shaquille in his prime. Take 5 mil a year from his contract, and that would match his extreme talent and dedication more closely. Everytime I see his fadeaways fall outside the rim, I question his deal.

Bball
07-17-2005, 03:13 PM
Somebody do some math.... Would we have been better off paying Reggie his extra 3 Mil per year the past two seasons rather than backdooring it to him with the 6 mil that he will get and count toward the cap/tax this coming season?

-Bball

Evan_The_Dude
07-17-2005, 03:54 PM
I wouldn't look too far into what DD's agent is saying. Remember agents are salespeople whom are trying to get the best deal they can for their client. It's still up to Dale to either take what's on the table or play elsewhere. After going through what he did in the years he was gone from Indy (referencing playing time), I doubt he'd want to play for another team again.

sixthman
07-17-2005, 04:01 PM
Depending on how things go, Dale could have playing time problems in Indiana this coming season, too. I doubt this year would be like last year for him.

Pacerized
07-17-2005, 04:01 PM
There's enough threads around here that state different, including some very specific of min.

ATM we are at 75 million that is before we are re-signing JJ and DD or adding anyone.

as the LT is porjected to be at 63 million we are even over the cliff, by some margin and we're not done.

We will drop Cro just for that reason.


Do you know of a site where 05/06 salaries are listed. All I could find on Real Gm shows the players salary ratio, and has Cro at 24.1%. I'm not sure what he makes, but he is the second highest paid player on the team. If dumping Cro's salary wouldn't put us under the LT, I would think it would get us very close.

able
07-17-2005, 04:08 PM
Dumping Cro would get us "near" the LT "cliff" nowhere near the 63 mio LT
Consider we will have "most likely" before dumping Cro's salary an 80 million paroll and the LT will be around 63 mio.

hoopshype (see fundamentals above in the bar) is your best bet

Outsider
07-17-2005, 04:19 PM
I remember reading somewhere that there may no longer be a cliff provision. All of the money collected will be evenly distributed among all of the teams (not just to the ones under). The article stated that this may actually allow some of the teams over the luxury tax level spend a little more. They would go say 5M over and pay 5M but would get back 3.5M back as their part of the payment. So it only really cost them 1.5M.

Obviously if you are paying 20M into the luxury tax pool the payment of 3.5M isn't going to be that much of a difference.

Outsider

Pacerized
07-17-2005, 07:41 PM
Thanks: vapacersfan.

So, if these #'s are correct, and the projected lt threshold is 63 mil, then dumping Cro would get to exactly that point, and anything we spend using our exceptions would put us back over the threshold. The good news would be that the next year we'd loose Reggie's salary, which would propably keep us safe for 06/07. We could still look at a small trade this year (say Pollard) to keep us under the threshold, or maybe they could live with going over by 5 -6 mil for one year using the 2 exceptions.

Anthem
07-17-2005, 10:56 PM
Dale can go.