PDA

View Full Version : couple of mike wells' articles on tinsley, trading



wintermute
07-16-2008, 08:51 AM
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080716/SPORTS04/807160411/1062/SPORTS04



Pacers aren't done with trade market
Team hopes to gain power forward, deal Tinsley before next season

By Mike Wells

The Indiana Pacers began introducing new players Tuesday.

Team president Larry Bird said he isn't finished remaking the roster, however.

Bird said he hopes to trade for or sign a power forward and is confident he can trade point guard Jamaal Tinsley.

"As we made deals, we knew we were probably going to have an area that we needed to still address, and right now it's a power forward that can score down low," Bird said after Roy Hibbert and Brandon Rush -- two of the seven players the team acquired through trade -- were introduced. "Hopefully we're not done this summer."

The Pacers have 16 players under contract -- one over the maximum allowed during the season. Team officials said they can fill the hole at power forward through a trade because the Pacers have expiring contracts and a $2.7 million trade exception to offer teams. The Pacers also have their mid-level exception, which is about $5.9 million, to spend on a free agent. Bird said he will probably use only part of the exception if the Pacers use it at all.

"There's different ways we can take care of our needs," general manager David Morway said. "I think at this point, we're looking at the trade market at the moment."

The Pacers tried to solve both issues in one deal by offering Tinsley to Miami for power forward Udonis Haslem, but the Heat are reluctant to give up Haslem.

"We're talking to some teams, but it depends on if they are going to make the decision or not," Bird said. "We'll see where it goes."

Pacers officials said they expect to be able to trade Tinsley because 10 or 12 teams need a point guard. How soon that happens might depend on whether the Memphis Grizzlies trade one of their three young point guards -- Mike Conley Jr., Kyle Lowry or Javaris Crittenton.

Teams looking for a point guard might prefer to acquire one of the young Grizzlies.

Bird said Tinsley has lost weight and has passed physical tests by team trainers.

"It was obvious after the trades they made that they are trying to reshape the team, and we understand that," Tinsley's agent, Raymond Brothers, said. "We have a lot of respect for Larry Bird and David Morway because they have treated (Tinsley) well. David continues to check on him on a weekly basis."

Call Star reporter Mike Wells at (317) 444-6053.

Unclebuck
07-16-2008, 08:53 AM
If Bird could have pulled off the JT for Haslem trade, I would have never criticized Bird ever again for as long as I lived.

wintermute
07-16-2008, 08:56 AM
http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsider/archives/2008/07/not_going_over.html



Not going over the luxury tax
Posted by Mike Wells

I had a chance to catch up with Pacers Larry Bird about a couple things after the press conference Tuesday afternoon.

Bird said he doesn't expect the Pacers to go over the $71.150 million luxury tax.

The Pacers are in the midst of trying to trade point guard Jamaal Tinsley and acquire a power forward while also watching their money.

"We're up around $69 million right now and we don't want to go over the tax," Bird said. "You always like to save some money, but the thing is, our owners are not going to save money and not have a productive team out there, especially when we did the deals we did this summer. I think it's being able to move some pieces to get the type of player we want at (power forward)."

What the Pacers have in their favor is that there are several teams that need a point guard. Miami, Golden State and Cleveland are teams that come to mind right away. It's just a matter if those teams are willing to take on the remaining three years of Tinsley's contract and his injury problems.

Bird and general manager David Morway are actively working the phones trying to make a deal, but Bird said they aren't willing to give up any of their core players.

"We're not going to compromise some of our good players or our future," he said. "I can't say our roster is set because there are some things we're trying to do. "


all i can say is, bird and morway both seem very confident they can move tinsley.

and i don't think any pf we can acquire with the pieces we're offering will be very good. haslem isn't too bad though, but i guess the heat aren't that desperate yet.

DGPR
07-16-2008, 09:03 AM
I would welcome a Tinsley for Haslem trade. And then Riley would be welcomed into his new home in the insane asylum.

MillerTime
07-16-2008, 09:04 AM
http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsider/archives/2008/07/not_going_over.html



all i can say is, bird and morway both seem very confident they can move tinsley.

and i don't think any pf we can acquire with the pieces we're offering will be very good. haslem isn't too bad though, but i guess the heat aren't that desperate yet.

I think Crit from the Grizzz will go to Miami. Theyre seriously considering a trade for him. But if we can package a deal for Haslem, that would be amazing:

Ford/Jack
Dunleavy/Rush
Granger/Williams
Haslem/Rasho
Murphy/Hibbert

looks good

Doddage
07-16-2008, 09:25 AM
Holy crap yeah, Tinsley for Haslem would be great. Do it, LB

MillerTime
07-16-2008, 09:33 AM
Holy crap yeah, Tinsley for Haslem would be great. Do it, LB

Tinsley + 2nd rounder for Haslem...

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=1024~2184&teams=14~11&te=&cash=

they make the same about of money but Haslem has one year less on his contract

Anthem
07-16-2008, 09:33 AM
Bird said Tinsley has lost weight and has passed physical tests by team trainers.
Ok, this could be a flat-out lie... but I doubt it.

So... to everyone who gave me crap about not believing Tinsley had gained 40 pounds and was done with basketball... your thoughts?

Anthem
07-16-2008, 09:34 AM
Holy crap yeah, Tinsley for Haslem would be great. Do it, LB
The problem isn't that Bird won't do it. The problem is that Miami won't.

MagicRat
07-16-2008, 09:39 AM
Ok, this could be a flat-out lie... but I doubt it.

So... to everyone who gave me crap about not believing Tinsley had gained 40 pounds and was done with basketball... your thoughts?

Now he's only up 38 lbs.......:fatbanana

rexnom
07-16-2008, 09:40 AM
Even if they have no offers and trading prospects are dim, at least they're sticking to trading JT vs. buying him out, which is great if they ever hope to actually trade him.

That sounds redundant, but it makes a world of difference.

MillerTime
07-16-2008, 09:53 AM
Ok, this could be a flat-out lie... but I doubt it.

So... to everyone who gave me crap about not believing Tinsley had gained 40 pounds and was done with basketball... your thoughts?

i think those were just speculations. For sure he didnt gain and lose 40 pounds already. I dont know who said that Tinsley gained 40 lbs but the only place I read it was here. If Bird says he passed physicals then i guess its true, hes the most crediable source.

Bottom line, Tinsley isnt going to be a Pacers this season. If this means a trade or a buyout....hes gone

Speed
07-16-2008, 09:53 AM
2.7 trade exception, helpful.

Mid level exception helpful.

expiring contracts helpful.

He does have the makings of a trade there, so its not inconceiveable. I'd rather use Marquis expiring contract, if any, at this moment.

You could also us Maceos contract as expiring with the 2.7 exception and take on a player for around 5 million.

If they really can move Tinsley they'd still be under the luxury, or if they buy him out, I still think they would be JUST under it.

I've changed my mind on moving Foster, I want him to retire a Pacer. He is everything you want as a Pacer.

What low post type player can you get? I really can't think of any off the top of my head.

Doddage
07-16-2008, 09:54 AM
The problem isn't that Bird won't do it. The problem is that Miami won't.
Oh, I know... but Bird needs to be aggressive with it. If that means advertising Tins to be a point God, he's gotta do it.

Hicks
07-16-2008, 09:57 AM
Ok, this could be a flat-out lie... but I doubt it.

So... to everyone who gave me crap about not believing Tinsley had gained 40 pounds and was done with basketball... your thoughts?

He gained wait from April until _____, and is now getting rid of it.

Also, no one said 40 pounds, and if they did, they're lying. It was supposedly 25lbs.

idioteque
07-16-2008, 10:11 AM
I used to really hate Bird and thought he was an idiot. Now I'm really not so sure at all and after DW retired I was ready to give him a clean slate.

He finally traded JO which was something that needed to happen for oh, just about DW's last three years with the team. And Bird was able to pull it off right at the start of his first offseason in control when JO's value was lower than it was any time during DW's tenure. I also thought that the Rush trade was probably a great deal for our team as well. It was something very aggressive that Donnie would not have done.

I am not a big fan of Udonis Haslem but if Bird traded Tinsley for Haslem, then I'd have full confidence in him as our President.

Tom White
07-16-2008, 10:26 AM
You could also us Maceos contract as expiring with the 2.7 exception and take on a player for around 5 million.



If I remember correctly (from the days of the Peja/Harrington deals) you cannot combine as exception with a player.

Naptown_Seth
07-16-2008, 10:31 AM
"It was obvious after the trades they made that they are trying to reshape the team, and we understand that," Tinsley's agent, Raymond Brothers, said. "We have a lot of respect for Larry Bird and David Morway because they have treated (Tinsley) well. David continues to check on him on a weekly basis."

Whosawhat?? Brother(s), you just blew my mind.
;)



Bird said Tinsley has lost weight and has passed physical tests by team trainers.
In other words, Bird CONFIRMS the Tinsley weight rumors. What's he losing weight for if he didn't put any on? And if it's being mentioned then I'd say it was more than just regular summer weight but rather an issue Bird thought needed to be addressed when discussing Tinsley's value.

For example, you don't read "Bird said Tinsley has been working on his 3pt shot" or "Bird said Tinsley has gained some muscle" or "Bird said Tinsley has been working on agility drills". What freaking player needs to lose weight and pass physical tests just to be tradable?

Justin Tyme
07-16-2008, 10:50 AM
If I remember correctly (from the days of the Peja/Harrington deals) you cannot combine as exception with a player.

That's been my understanding as well.

MagicRat
07-16-2008, 11:06 AM
What freaking player needs to lose weight and pass physical tests just to be tradable?

Players coming off of a knee injury? :eek:

Justin Tyme
07-16-2008, 11:08 AM
I'm encouraged to read Bird is STILL looking for a POWER FORWARD. Hopefully, he will find one, b/c Williams, Baston, or McDud aren't the type of PF the Pacers need to go along with Murphy/Foster.

Pacers
07-16-2008, 11:16 AM
Is the MLE a tradeable asset?

rexnom
07-16-2008, 11:19 AM
I'm encouraged to read Bird is STILL looking for a POWER FORWARD. Hopefully, he will find one, b/c Williams, Baston, or McDud aren't the type of PF the Pacers need to go along with Murphy/Foster.
Yeah, it's encouraging to hear Bird say this. I mean, we have PFs. We have 3 guys that are primarily PFs (McBob, Murphy and Baston) and three guys that can swing to the 4 (Danny, Shawne and Jeff). Obviously we have quantity. We lack quality...and Bird recognizes that, something that we've been saying this organization needs to recognize.

Naptown_Seth
07-16-2008, 11:26 AM
40 and done with basketball is not the same as Wells/JMV talking about him putting on 25, maybe 30 with no confirmation as to why he gained that or any weight.

The "why" was always speculation and plenty of us saying the weight part was real WERE NOT giving reasons for why. Ultimately who cares why, putting on a bunch of weight would affect his value regardless of the reason.

If he put on 25 and has lost 10 then not one thing said so far by anyone reasonable is out of place. Bird's telling the truth and the hints of his true weight gain also remain true.


Players coming off of a knee injury? :eek:
Physical test yes, but you lose weight because you gained weight. And it gets mentioned because it's significant enough to affect his perceived value.

If we are saying he put on weight because of the knee injury then I'm NOT disagreeing. That sure could be why.

The argument Anthem has going is that Tinsley didn't gain a bunch of weight because Bird said he has lost weight. Frankly I think that logic has a flaw.

naptownmenace
07-16-2008, 11:31 AM
Players coming off of a knee injury? :eek:

Yeah but we "know" that doesn't apply with Tinsley.


Also, if we could get Haslem for JT, I'd crown Bird GM of the year. I'd even make the crown with my bare hands and place it on his head.

:king:

imawhat
07-16-2008, 11:34 AM
Is the MLE a tradeable asset?

I think the trade exception we used to get Al for Peja was the MLE. Maybe I'm wrong?


He gained wait from April until _____, and is now getting rid of it.

Also, no one said 40 pounds, and if they did, they're lying. It was supposedly 25lbs.

40 lbs isn't out of the question at all. He easily gained 20-25 lbs from training camp to the end of the season, so if he gained 20 after April, that's 40+ lbs. Maybe 50.

Hicks
07-16-2008, 11:38 AM
So JO gained a weight with his knee injuries? Oh wait.....

Naptown_Seth
07-16-2008, 11:42 AM
I also thought that the Rush trade was probably a great deal for our team as well. It was something very aggressive that Donnie would not have done.
Because a future AS Center loved by fans traded for the #5 pick in the draft is conservative. Because an already and future AS PF traded for an unproven PF who sat on the bench for 4 years out of HS was playing it close to the vest.

Come on. I just don't get where things like Rose-Best for Artest-Miller, Detlef (also a Pacer AS) for McKey and a host of other trades have labeled Donnie as conservative. Dude traded Jax away and then brought him back in the same freaking season.

Hicks
07-16-2008, 12:01 PM
The MLE was not involved in the Peja trade. The MLE is what allows teams over the salary cap to sign a free agent. A trade exception is something totally different. If you get one of those, you "use" it to acquire someone without giving a player back in return. Once that happens, poof, it's gone. It's not something the team that sent you a player can turn around and use for themselves.

Pacers
07-16-2008, 12:18 PM
IIRC, a trade exception was sent to Golden State with Jason Richardson last season, so it can be packaged with a player.

And you can also trade a trade exception.

I'm still wondering, though, if you can trade your MLE, giving a team ~10M to sign free agents with.

MyFavMartin
07-16-2008, 12:21 PM
FA Front court players that might fit the Pacers: Juwan Howard, Lorenzen Wright, Kurt Thomas, Francisco Elson, PJ Brown

travmil
07-16-2008, 12:22 PM
IIRC, a trade exception was sent to Golden State with Jason Richardson last season, so it can be packaged with a player.

And you can also trade a trade exception.

I'm still wondering, though, if you can trade your MLE, giving a team ~10M to sign free agents with.

You can't trade your MLE. Although I think it would be an entertaining brand of leaguewide chaos if you could.

MyFavMartin
07-16-2008, 12:23 PM
Front court players that would need some development: Paul Davis, James Augustine, Ryan Hollins

Speed
07-16-2008, 12:24 PM
FA Front court players that might fit the Pacers: Juwan Howard, Lorenzen Wright, Kurt Thomas, Francisco Elson, PJ Brown

Less than Meh.

Speed
07-16-2008, 12:28 PM
Front court players that would need some development: Paul Davis, James Augustine, Ryan Hollins

To call back to the Landry thread. I don't know them, so I obviously don't like them!

I mean we have two ends of the spectrum, undevelop maybe talents and has been or never was not that good at all talents.

I just wonder what Bird/Morway have in mind.

They list the Cavs, Heat, and Golden State. So you think Side Show Bob (not really a low post offensive game though), Haslem, and Al. So who knows.

Pacers
07-16-2008, 12:32 PM
Who is Side Show Bob (on the Cavs, I know the character <__<)

Speed
07-16-2008, 12:35 PM
Who is Side Show Bob (on the Cavs, I know the character <__<)

Think Power forward and one of the most likely players to get punched in the face for being a spaz or injure a teammate in practice? Think Jokim Noah without the pot.

CableKC
07-16-2008, 12:42 PM
Not to nitpik Bird's comments or even see things that aren't there.......but unless it was a direct comment to dissuade the "rumors" of his weight....why bring up that Tinsley has lost weight if there isn't any real concern about it beforehand?

I understand why Bird commented that Tinsley has passed the team physicals.....but to specifically mention that he has lost weight seems odd to me.

If Bird wanted to comment about Tinsley's weight rumors....then why didn't he ( in his straight-forward way ) simply say that those rumors were false...instead of giving a "he's lost weight" comment?

Speed
07-16-2008, 12:44 PM
http://sidesalad.net/archives/SideShowBobJpg.jpg http://www.cavshistory.com/images/players/Anderson_Varejao.jpg

CableKC
07-16-2008, 12:46 PM
Who is Side Show Bob (on the Cavs, I know the character <__<)
Not that we can afford him....but he's referring to Anderson Varejeo.

Pacers
07-16-2008, 12:48 PM
Thanks. I don't know anything about him. Though it does look like he has a trade restriction on him that allows him to veto any trade involving him for a year. He would match Tinsley's salary, though.

Also, Baston (as well as any of the other guys that we traded for) can't be traded for two months if he's combined with other players. That may play a factor in the near future.

RWB
07-16-2008, 12:52 PM
Because a future AS Center loved by fans traded for the #5 pick in the draft is conservative. Because an already and future AS PF traded for an unproven PF who sat on the bench for 4 years out of HS was playing it close to the vest.

Come on. I just don't get where things like Rose-Best for Artest-Miller, Detlef (also a Pacer AS) for McKey and a host of other trades have labeled Donnie as conservative. Dude traded Jax away and then brought him back in the same freaking season.

Oh I don't believe Donnie was as frozen as we make him out to be sometimes. However Detlef had no intention in returning to Indy after his final year and forced Donnie's hand. Shoot before his final season was up he had already started to build a new home in Seattle and let Donnie know he would like to be elsewhere. Tony let it be pretty clear if the Pacers didn't start him he would like his services shopped. And then of course Dale was absolutely p!ssed at the Ps over his contract situation and let Donnie know. Actually it seems Donnie had no problem trading players whose loyalty he thought went bad and may have actually held a grudge.

I do give Donnie credit for trading Chuck as he was well liked. Herb Williams for Det on the other hand did not have much risk. Not saying it wasn't a good trade as it certainly was, however Herb was not exactly causing people to panic knowing he was going bye bye.

Edit: One thing I'll never forgive Donald for......the hiring of Dick Versace.

count55
07-16-2008, 02:13 PM
IIRC, a trade exception was sent to Golden State with Jason Richardson last season, so it can be packaged with a player.

And you can also trade a trade exception.

I'm still wondering, though, if you can trade your MLE, giving a team ~10M to sign free agents with.

No, GS got a trade exception for Jason Richardson.

You cannot combine a trade exception with any player.

You can trade a trade exception, which is what the Pacers did to get Harrington. They trade the TE they got from the Peja deal for Harrington. Then, in a separate but coincidental deal, traded a 1st round pick for John Edwards.


What is not allowed is using two different exceptions for the same player. Here is something that is not allowed: A team has a $5 million player and a $1 million Traded Player exception from a previous trade, and wants to add the Traded Player exception to the 125% plus $100,000 margin from their $5 million player ($6,350,000), in order to trade for a player making $7,000,000. This cannot be done.



You cannot trade the MLE, or any other non-TE.

The TE is actually not an asset per se, but a delayed part of a trade. Generally (but not always), when you make a deal that sends out more salary than you take in, you get a Traded Player Exception, which you have 1 year to use. This is meant to "complete" the trade, non-simultaneously, bringing the salaries into balance. Many teams allow it to expire and simply take the cap savings, though they have become larger in recent years. The Peja deal was the largest, though I think that the GS/Richardson deal and the Maggette deals have eclipsed that one.

eldubious
07-16-2008, 10:40 PM
They list the Cavs, Heat, and Golden State. So you think Side Show Bob (not really a low post offensive game though), Haslem, and Al. So who knows.

I was thinking the same thing. I'd also add Sacramento to the list too, Abdur-Rahim for Tinsley would work. The Pacers seem confident that they can trade Tinsley, so something is on the table.

PacerGuy
07-16-2008, 10:55 PM
I believe Den just got a TE for Camby. Maybe we can we trade Tin's there for part of their TE. They get a PG & still keep some cap room, & we are freed of Tin's!

CableKC
07-16-2008, 11:13 PM
I believe Den just got a TE for Camby. Maybe we can we trade Tin's there for part of their TE. They get a PG & still keep some cap room, & we are freed of Tin's!
The Nuggets moved Camby cuz they were over the Luxury Tax limit....which they are barely at despite moving him for nothing.

They won't add any other player of significance until next year during the 2009-2010 season....right before the TE expires.

Bball
07-16-2008, 11:18 PM
"It was obvious after the trades they made that they are trying to reshape the team, and we understand that," Tinsley's agent, Raymond Brothers, said. "We have a lot of respect for Larry Bird and David Morway because they have treated (Tinsley) well. David continues to check on him on a weekly basis."

Check on him on a weekly basis?

-Bball

Kuq_e_Zi91
07-16-2008, 11:40 PM
I assume he means check in on him. Meaning, how he's doing and to continue talks..hopefully of trades.

Cobol Sam
07-17-2008, 08:49 AM
Check on him on a weekly basis?

-Bball

They have him chained up in Conseco somewhere to be sure he can't get arrested before they manage to trade him (if they manage to trade him). If you got a player chained up in the locker room you got to be checking on him at least once a week. You know?

Justin Tyme
07-17-2008, 09:22 AM
I was thinking the same thing. I'd also add Sacramento to the list too, Abdur-Rahim for Tinsley would work. The Pacers seem confident that they can trade Tinsley, so something is on the table.


Abdur-Rahim is comtemplating retiring due to his injury. He can't hardly workout 3 times a week with the injury. His body is telling him one thing, but his mind hasn't come to grips with having to retire.

My guess is the Kings would NOT trade him for Tinjury, and would wait to take a medical on Rahim. If he doesn't get a medical, he will be an expiring next season. Why take on Tinjury and his salary for 3 years? That's 1 year and 8 mil more.

Naptown_Seth
07-17-2008, 06:43 PM
No, GS got a trade exception for Jason Richardson.

You cannot combine a trade exception with any player.

You can trade a trade exception, which is what the Pacers did to get Harrington. They trade the TE they got from the Peja deal for Harrington. Then, in a separate but coincidental deal, traded a 1st round pick for John Edwards.



You cannot trade the MLE, or any other non-TE.

The TE is actually not an asset per se, but a delayed part of a trade. Generally (but not always), when you make a deal that sends out more salary than you take in, you get a Traded Player Exception, which you have 1 year to use. This is meant to "complete" the trade, non-simultaneously, bringing the salaries into balance. Many teams allow it to expire and simply take the cap savings, though they have become larger in recent years. The Peja deal was the largest, though I think that the GS/Richardson deal and the Maggette deals have eclipsed that one.
Oh Count, how I love you. :buddies: Seriously.

This part is not quite right though

You can trade a trade exception, which is what the Pacers did to get Harrington.



Trade Exception - The "exception" means that you are over the cap and should not be able to take on salary, but in the case of a trade the NBA gives you an exception. They let you fill the salary hole you just sent out with the players you traded away.

This falls under 2 options, up to the team.

1) You get to take on MORE salary, 25% of what you sent + 100K, but you must take it in return right at that moment.

2) You can wait and "finish" the trade later, even with other teams (like any multi-team trade), but if you choose this option you LOSE the benefit of going 25% over your hole.

So it's take more money now or get to finish the deal later.

The Trade Exception amount is the size of the hole you have left, not something you send. You make a deal that requires you to add on up to that much more salary and part/all of that hole is used up.

Typically if you've done that the other team just created a similar hole. Thus the appearance to some that the TE was "traded". It wasn't.

In the case of Peja New Orleans was under the cap already and were not using a TE hole to absorb Peja's contract. By going SnT and adding in a non-salaried player in exchange for Peja the TE hole was created. N.O. COULD NOT HAVE DONE THIS if they were over the cap and without a TE space big enough.


MLE's are also "holes" left in the cap. You shouldn't be able to add more salary by signing someone if you are over the cap, but the NBA makes an EXCEPTION to that restriction to let you fill out your roster.

Teams not over the cap DO NOT HAVE exceptions, not TEs or MLEs or MinLEs. There is no reason to have an exception to the cap rule if you aren't over it.

count55
07-17-2008, 07:58 PM
Oh Count, how I love you. :buddies: Seriously.

This part is not quite right though




Trade Exception - The "exception" means that you are over the cap and should not be able to take on salary, but in the case of a trade the NBA gives you an exception. They let you fill the salary hole you just sent out with the players you traded away.

You are correct, sir. It would have been more appropriate to say "you can use a Trade Exception in a trade." This would've more accurately reflect the "consumption" of the exception.

My turn


MLE's are also "holes" left in the cap. You shouldn't be able to add more salary by signing someone if you are over the cap, but the NBA makes an EXCEPTION to that restriction to let you fill out your roster.

Teams not over the cap DO NOT HAVE exceptions, not TEs or MLEs or MinLEs. There is no reason to have an exception to the cap rule if you aren't over it.

This is not quite true either. The only way a team loses it's exceptions is that if it so far under the cap that the combination of the salaries, plus MLE, LLE, and any TE's are still below the cap. Then, poof, they're gone.


If a team is below the cap, then their Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and/or Traded Player exceptions are added to their team salary, and the league treats the team as though they are over the cap. This is to prevent a loophole, in a manner similar to free agent amounts (see question numbers 29, 30, 31, 32). A team can't act like they're under the cap and sign free agents using cap room, and then use their Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and/or Traded Player exceptions. Consequently, the exceptions are added to their team salary (putting the team over the cap) if the team is under the cap and adding the exceptions puts them over the cap. If a team is already over the cap, then the exceptions are not added to their team salary. There would be no point in doing so, since there is no cap room for signing free agents.
So it is not true that being under the cap necessarily means a team has room to sign free agents. For example, assume the cap is $49.5 million, and a team has $43 million committed to salaries. They also have a Mid-Level exception for $5 million and a Traded Player exception for $5.5 million. Even though their salaries put them $6.5 million under the cap, their exceptions are added to their salaries, putting them at $53.5 million, or $4 million over the cap. So they actually have no cap room to sign free agents, and must instead use their exceptions.

...

The Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and Traded Player exceptions may be lost entirely, or the team may never receive them to begin with. This happens when their team salary is so low that when the exceptions are added to the team salary, the sum is still below the salary cap. If the team salary is below this level when the exception arises, then the team doesn't get the exception. If the team salary ever drops below this level during the year, then any exceptions they had are lost.

I'm assuming a team below the cap can have a TE if they made a deal while they were over the cap, then fell below the cap sometime within the one year period that the TE is valid.

Regarding the MLE & LLE, I'm not sure how long you might lose them. For example, the Pacers may enter next offseason with only $43mm in salaries (if they don't sign Danny or Jack to an extension or deal any of the expirings.) This would mean that adding the MLE & LLE would not reach the cap level and they'd be lost. However, I'm not sure how cap holds factor into this. They would have maybe as much as $18mm in capholds on Danny and Jack would make us keep the exceptions. I'm also not sure if we enter July, lose them, then sign Danny & Jack and are close to the cap, do we get them back?

rexnom
07-17-2008, 11:00 PM
Wait. Why do TE's even exist?

Eindar
07-17-2008, 11:29 PM
They have him chained up in Conseco somewhere to be sure he can't get arrested before they manage to trade him (if they manage to trade him). If you got a player chained up in the locker room you got to be checking on him at least once a week. You know?

I'd love to see Bird, Morway or Jim in a Green Mile guard outfit with Tinsley in one of the jail cells :)

CableKC
07-17-2008, 11:46 PM
I'd love to see Bird, Morway or Jim in a Green Mile guard outfit with Tinsley in one of the jail cells :)
Uhh.....MagicRat or Duke...that's your queue.....we need some Photoshop magic here....

Graham Mernatsi
07-17-2008, 11:49 PM
that's your queue...
That's their waiting line, especially of persons or vehicles?

Oh, you meant cue (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cue).

:arrgh:

count55
07-18-2008, 12:22 AM
That's their waiting line, especially of persons or vehicles?

Oh, you meant cue (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cue).

:arrgh:

Isn't it also a braided ponytail?

D23
07-18-2008, 03:19 PM
I'd love to see Bird, Morway or Jim in a Green Mile guard outfit with Tinsley in one of the jail cells :)

Ask and you shall receive :D Man... Tinsley really DID put on the pounds after last season!

http://mypage.iu.edu/%7Eadwsmith/cheeseburgermile.jpg

OnlyPacersLeft
07-18-2008, 04:39 PM
jamaal can do no right....he could come out and dish 15 asissts and get 3 steals and score 25 pts and we would still hate him if we lost the game. And lets say we lose the game by 1 pt and he missed the final shot. Tinsley gets a bad rap and i still don't understand it. It makes me wonder why the fans booed stephen jackson aswell

D23
07-18-2008, 05:39 PM
With Jamaal it was more of a progression than anything else. I was in the "Give Jamaal another chance" boat last summer when he had the opportunity to start fresh with a new coach. But, that honeymoon only lasted half a season.

I don't think anyone would doubt Jamaal has/had the talent to hang 25/15/3 on any given night, and every blue moon when he produced one of those games I'd cheer for him to keep it up. But then he'd disappear into obscurity for sometimes a period of several games. He's like the co-worker who shows up late or calls in sick 3-4 times a week and always has an excuse - at some point you have to begin to wonder how much bad luck one person could possibly have, or if it's all just a measure of how much they really want the job. Often times you have to just cut your losses and move on.

speakout4
07-18-2008, 07:50 PM
With Jamaal it was more of a progression than anything else. I was in the "Give Jamaal another chance" boat last summer when he had the opportunity to start fresh with a new coach. But, that honeymoon only lasted half a season.

I don't think anyone would doubt Jamaal has/had the talent to hang 25/15/3 on any given night, and every blue moon when he produced one of those games I'd cheer for him to keep it up. But then he'd disappear into obscurity for sometimes a period of several games. He's like the co-worker who shows up late or calls in sick 3-4 times a week and always has an excuse - at some point you have to begin to wonder how much bad luck one person could possibly have, or if it's all just a measure of how much they really want the job. Often times you have to just cut your losses and move on.

You're right he just didn't want the job.

Justin Tyme
07-18-2008, 09:00 PM
You're right he just didn't want the job.


His BB career became irrelevant when his life outside BB became more important to him. My believe is his life outside BB became far more important when he realized his income was guaranteed no matter how he produced on the court. How sad when he wasted the God given talent he has been given.

This is why I absolutely hate GUARANTEED CONTRACTS! They aren't fair to BB or ownership. JMOAA

QuickRelease
07-27-2008, 09:20 PM
Sorry to rehash an old thread. I was wondering, with the comments LB made, how realistic is it to deactivate a player in the NBA? Larry stated he doesn't believe in buyouts, and I don't know who would be willing to take Tinsley on. I don't think the Player's Union would sit idle and allow a healthy player to be deactivated. I'm also not sure what would constitute a contract termination due to player conduct. After all that has been said from management and coaches, what do we see as the worst case scenario if it becomes impossible to move Jamaal? I'm certain he wouldn't simply suck it up when his coach stated across public airwaves that he'd walk to Kokomo if he were still on the roster.

Roaming Gnome
07-27-2008, 10:57 PM
In the NBA, there is no such thing as "deactivating" a player. The closest thing was the ***OLD*** inactive, or injury reserve list.

If Tinsley is here, he is eligible to play every night unless suspended by the league (no pay) or suspended by the team (paid).

Eindar
07-27-2008, 11:36 PM
Ask and you shall receive :D Man... Tinsley really DID put on the pounds after last season!

http://mypage.iu.edu/%7Eadwsmith/cheeseburgermile.jpg

lol, I totally missed this the first time around, and want to give you credit for it. Looks good! :)

Cherokee
07-28-2008, 12:18 AM
In the NBA, there is no such thing as "deactivating" a player. The closest thing was the ***OLD*** inactive, or injury reserve list.

If Tinsley is here, he is eligible to play every night unless suspended by the league (no pay) or suspended by the team (paid).

Can't the team just tell him to stay home? I thought they did that with someone in the last year or so. That way he is still their 15th player, even though he is not with the team.

Putnam
07-28-2008, 08:18 AM
jamaal can do no right....he could come out and dish 15 asissts and get 3 steals and score 25 pts and we would still hate him if we lost the game. And lets say we lose the game by 1 pt and he missed the final shot. Tinsley gets a bad rap and i still don't understand it. l


Winning the game is the point, isn't it? Players' personal statistics absolutely ought to be divided according to what they do in team wins, and what they do in team losses.

Lots of players have scored 25 points in games their team lost. And often enough, their team lost BECAUSE the player scored 25 points (at too high a cost to total team efficiency).

There is a famous thread in PD's archive in which ChicagoJ argues that Anthony Johnson was the goat of game 6 (2006) against New Jersey because he scored 40. I never agreed with J on that one, but the larger point is certainly true. So, yeah, Tinsley could score 25 points and I'd still "hate him if we lost the game."




EDIT: Tinsley's top scoring performance in his career was March 13, 2007 against Minnesota. He went 13-26 and scored 37 points.

Pacers lost.

I hate him.


.

indygeezer
07-28-2008, 08:44 AM
So there could be some sunsihine to keeping JT. If you buy him out he still counts against the cap, but I believe you can fill his roster spot (that will cost you the league minimum) but if you keep him and pay his salary anyway then you can just tell him to stay home and don't bother us...he fills a roster spot and you don't have to pay someone else to sit on the end of the bench. Thus you can save a few hundred thou a year.

Hey I tried.

Justin Tyme
07-28-2008, 09:07 AM
I hate having to buy out Tinsley, but from a possible PR nightmare it's the best thing to do if he can't be traded in the very near future. It really boils down to "can the Pacers afford another PR nightmare" from Tinsley? If he's bought out, any problem Tinsley and his friends would be involved in won't affect the Pacers like it would if he's still a member of the team. The Pacers can say "that's why he's not a Pacer any longer."

B/c of Tinsley's propensity to be a PR nightmare, I can't see how keeping Tinsley is a viable option. Everyday he's a Pacer is another day he can create a PR nightmare! I said the samething about Shawne and he created another PR problem. As I said, I hate buying out Tinsley, but the Pacers need to separate themselves as quickly and as far away from Tinsley as possible. JMOAA

Justin Tyme
07-28-2008, 09:09 AM
Can't the team just tell him to stay home? I thought they did that with someone in the last year or so. That way he is still their 15th player, even though he is not with the team.

You are correct. It was Starbury.

Anthem
07-28-2008, 09:38 AM
You are correct. It was Starbury.
But he still got paid.

Putnam
07-28-2008, 10:07 AM
I hate having to buy out Tinsley, but from a possible PR nightmare it's the best thing to do if he can't be traded in the very near future. It really boils down to "can the Pacers afford another PR nightmare" from Tinsley? If he's bought out, any problem Tinsley and his friends would be involved in won't affect the Pacers like it would if he's still a member of the team. The Pacers can say "that's why he's not a Pacer any longer."

B/c of Tinsley's propensity to be a PR nightmare, I can't see how keeping Tinsley is a viable option. Everyday he's a Pacer is another day he can create a PR nightmare! I said the samething about Shawne and he created another PR problem. As I said, I hate buying out Tinsley, but the Pacers need to separate themselves as quickly and as far away from Tinsley as possible. JMOAA


Has anyone else noticed what's different about the Tinsley situation?

In the past, we've had many discussions (and TPTB have had to make real decisions) balancing a player's ability to contribute on-court talent against the possibility of the player damaging the team with misconduct off-court or in the locker room. We HAD to move Artest and Jackson for off-court reasons, though there were strong arguments that moving them mde the team weaker.

That is no longer the issue with Tinsley.

Looking at it from the PR side, we're better off with Jamaal gone. Looking at it from the basketball side, we're better off with Jamaal gone. We've got two other point guards ahead of him in the depth chart now.

It will be hard to move Tinsley, but at least we needn't worry whether moving him is the right thing to do.

Tom White
07-28-2008, 11:06 AM
You are correct. It was Starbury.

Also, it seems I remember Memphis telling a player to just stay home when they went to the playoffs. I don't remember who it was, however.

count55
07-28-2008, 11:21 AM
Also, it seems I remember Memphis telling a player to just stay home when they went to the playoffs. I don't remember who it was, however.

Bonzi, I think

Justin Tyme
07-28-2008, 12:05 PM
But he still got paid.


Indeed he did, and STILL IS!

Anthem
07-28-2008, 04:47 PM
Indeed he did, and STILL IS!
And we'd be paying Jamaal until forever if we bought him out.

I'd rather hold him and trade him.

Justin Tyme
07-28-2008, 05:37 PM
And we'd be paying Jamaal until forever if we bought him out.

I'd rather hold him and trade him.

I'm not in favor of the buyout per se. It's one of the few things I believe Bird and I have ever agreed on, but I'm scared $%^&#$%& that Tinsley will cause another major PR nightmare for the Pacers. The Pacers just can't afford one. I truly believe if it happened it would be devastating to the future of the Pacers franchise. Without a doubt I wish some team would trade for Tinsley and soon, it's the best scenario for everyone. If a trade isn't possible, can the Pacers truly chance a PR nightmare from Tinsley? My feeling is no. Even though I've always contended the Simons wouldn't do a buyout of Tinsley, it's something they have to seriously consider. JMOAA

joew8302
07-28-2008, 05:41 PM
I'm not in favor of the buyout per se. It's one of the few things I believe Bird and I have ever agreed on, but I'm scared $%^&#$%& that Tinsley will cause another major PR nightmare for the Pacers. The Pacers just can't afford one. I truly believe if it happened it would be devastating to the future of the Pacers franchise. Without a doubt I wish some team would trade for Tinsley and soon, it's the best scenario for everyone. If a trade isn't possible, can the Pacers truly chance a PR nightmare from Tinsley? My feeling is no. Even though I've always contended the Simons wouldn't do a buyout of Tinsley, it's something they have to seriously consider. JMOAA

What type of PR disaster do you believe Tinsley will cause? I really don't see a scenario where we buy Tinsley out. Worst case scenario we hold on to him and pay him to stay away from the team.

Justin Tyme
07-28-2008, 06:23 PM
What type of PR disaster do you believe Tinsley will cause? I really don't see a scenario where we buy Tinsley out. Worst case scenario we hold on to him and pay him to stay away from the team.


Clubs, fights, guns, etc.

Staying away means he's still a Pacer. Any type of a problem then becomes a PR nightmare for the Pacers.

CableKC
07-28-2008, 07:32 PM
Clubs, fights, guns, etc.

Staying away means he's still a Pacer. Any type of a problem then becomes a PR nightmare for the Pacers.
If a trade could have happened with Tinsley already...it would have happened. Bird has tried to move Tinsley and is either getting ( A ) rebuffed on his "I'll trade my bad apples for your bad apples" trade offer, ( B ) a counter-offer that forces the Pacers to give up something that they don't want to give up ( like losing Draft Picks or Foster/Rasho ) or worse.... ( C ) getting a counter-offer that not only forces the Pacers to give up something that they don't want to while taking on a contract that is even worse then Tinsley's contract.

My guess is the latter.....option ( C )....team are intereted in Tinsley only if we give up more then we want to while taking back an even worse contract.