PDA

View Full Version : I always thought the 2010 Strategy was Russian Roulette



count55
03-10-2009, 09:13 AM
Granted, it's Sam Smith, but this doesn't particularly surprise me. If the maxes are going down, and the caps are going down, then this gives the player's current team a huge advantage, moneywise.

Sam Smith
Chicago Tribune
http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/smith_090309.html


The latest victim of the faltering economy: NBA free agency 2010.

Because of the changing economic landscape with the salary cap expected to decline substantially after this season and the possibility, raised at the All-Star game by union chief Billy Hunter and NBA commissioner David Stern, that the Collective Bargaining Agreement could be re-opened, some agents are starting to consider urging their big name clients to seek a contract extension this summer rather than opting for free agency in such uncertain times.

The growing likelihood now, say a growing number of NBA observers, is the big time free agents slated for 2010 are more likely to re-sign with their teams this summer than risk waiting and perhaps facing potentially massively reduced contract amounts and contract lengths.

...


In fact, it makes almost no sense now for the big time free agents of 2010 like LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh to wait for 2010 and not extend after this season.

Consider this scenario, which is certainly possible: The players' association sees a looming lockout. I've heard some owners say they'd lose less money in a lockout than they are losing now, especially if season ticket renewals and sponsorships decline, which is expected. So the players want to make a new deal. The owners want a reduced ceiling on maximum contracts and shorter terms.

So now James or Wade goes to 2010, and instead of being able to add on five or six years to their deals which conclude after the 2010-11 season, they now are limited to, say, three years contracts with a lower maximum. Instead of the $17 million they'll now make in 2010-11 and be able to build up by 10 percent a year after that for six years it's a lower total and fewer years.

You'd say if they have any idea of the world around them, they'll jump at extensions this summer.

My take on the "2010" Strategy was that it might work for one, or maybe two teams, specifically the Knicks, but it seemed to be a pipe dream for everyone else.

naptownmenace
03-10-2009, 09:29 AM
This is terrible news, if true, for Knicks fans.

Not that I care. I don't want Lebron to leave Cleveland.

ReginaldWayne
03-10-2009, 12:11 PM
Im just curious, Can a team offer a guy like Lebron more money than the Cavs can? Is it just a max contract, so no one can offer more than the other? Or can they?

Will Galen
03-10-2009, 12:15 PM
Im just curious, Can a team offer a guy like Lebron more money than the Cavs can? Is it just a max contract, so no one can offer more than the other? Or can they?

The Cavs can offer more money because they can offer 10 1/2 % raises per year of contract (not compounded). vs 8% from other teams.

vnzla81
03-10-2009, 12:16 PM
Im just curious, Can a team offer a guy like Lebron more money than the Cavs can? Is it just a max contract, so no one can offer more than the other? Or can they?

I think the only difference is that the Cavs can offer an extra year making his contract for six and whatever money

CableKC
03-10-2009, 01:03 PM
LOL....I only hope this is true......teams like the Knicks or the Nets hoping for Lebron, Bosh or Amare to turn their fortunes around could end up dining on false hope.

2minutes twowa
03-10-2009, 01:12 PM
Salary is just one piece of the financial pie for Lebron. The amount of money he would lose salary wise by not resigning with Cleveland, could easily be made up and surpassed by the ad revenue he would recieve in NYC. The Knicks are one of the few teams that seem to be able to spend money no matter what the economic climate. Teams like the Knicks, Mavs and Lakers might benefit from the financial hardship of other teams because of their deep pockets.

Pacersfan46
03-10-2009, 01:18 PM
The Cavs can offer more money because they can offer 10 1/2 % raises per year of contract (not compounded). vs 8% from other teams.

I think the only difference is that the Cavs can offer an extra year making his contract for six and whatever money

Both are correct. Extra year, and higher raises from the team that they are currently on. The NBA's way of trying to keep the best players in place, instead of moving every couple years.

The difference between that 6th year in a contract and the 1st year of a new one can be pretty large too. So you can give away quite a bit of money accepting a 5 year contract with a new team.

-- Steve --

wintermute
03-10-2009, 01:47 PM
if there's a chance that the salary cap goes down even more in summer of 2010 than what we're expecting in 2009, then yes those would-be free agents should extend with their current teams instead. this would lock their max salaries to the cap value of 2009 rather than 2010's.

but i don't really think there would be a renegotiation of the current cba before it expires after the 2010-11 season, which was hinted at in the article. so i don't think potential free agents have to worry about the rules changing before 2011 anyway.

BillS
03-10-2009, 02:06 PM
The amount of money he would lose salary wise by not resigning with Cleveland, could easily be made up and surpassed by the ad revenue he would recieve in NYC.

He'll get <i>more</i> advertising money? What, he'll stop playing basketball and film commercials full-time?

That statement might be the case for someone lower on the hype scale, but LBJ already gets ad exposure at near-Jordan levels.

MrSparko
03-10-2009, 03:06 PM
So does this make stars heading to Europe even more possible? Obviously Europe is hurting just as much, but I mean all it requires is one uber rich owner without a salary cap...

count55
03-10-2009, 03:43 PM
So does this make stars heading to Europe even more possible? Obviously Europe is hurting just as much, but I mean all it requires is one uber rich owner without a salary cap...

Probably not, as the Euro has been declining against the dollar, but it would probably make it less likely for big stars in Europe to come this way, particularly if the Rookie Salary scale declines.

However, there are probably people more qualified to speak on this than I.

switch
03-10-2009, 04:10 PM
So does this make stars heading to Europe even more possible? Obviously Europe is hurting just as much, but I mean all it requires is one uber rich owner without a salary cap...

I thinking about this possibility too.

I would guess that we won't see many players like Childress (of a similar skill level) go since Europe's economy is hurting just like ours. You never know what somebody without a salary cap might pay for superestars like LeBron or Wade though. This may be the only opportunity for European franchis owners to steal a few of the world's greates bball players from the NBA.

2minutes twowa
03-10-2009, 04:10 PM
He'll get <i>more</i> advertising money? What, he'll stop playing basketball and film commercials full-time?

That statement might be the case for someone lower on the hype scale, but LBJ already gets ad exposure at near-Jordan levels.

Living in NYC would give him even more opportunities. Late night and morning talk shows, time square billboards. Lebron is already huge, true, but wearing a New York Knicks jersey would definitely make him even bigger.