PDA

View Full Version : Marion To Fetch Around $8M Annually?



MillerTime
03-15-2009, 02:28 AM
League insiders believe that Shawn Marion will be fortunate to earn a contract worth $8 million annually on the open market.

Marion, who will be an unrestricted free agent this summer, realizes that the current economic conditions aren't going to help drive up his value.

"We do talk about stuff like that, but is the NBA going to fold?" Marion said. "You see people in baseball and football signing these big-*** contracts and I'm pretty sure their attendance went down a little bit. Everyone is taking a hit, but at the same time it's not stopping people spending money."

Globe and Mail
http://sports.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090313.wspt-raps-pistons-13/GSStory/GlobeSportsBasketball/home
By MICHAEL GRANGE

That's a huge pay cut from $18 million. More teams will look at him for that price. I wouldn't mind not picking up Quis' option for $7 million and giving Marion a $24 million 3 year deal. He would be a nice fit in JOB's system

Having a lineup of:

Jack
Rush
Granger
Marion
Foster

Would be a very GOOD defensive team

d_c
03-15-2009, 04:13 AM
Declining Daniels' option still doesn't create anywhere near the caproom to give Marion more than a MLE offer. Don't know if you really want him any more anyways. He's been a really good player throughout his career, but his game revolves around athleticism and he's on the wrong side of 30.

rm1369
03-15-2009, 07:40 AM
He's been a really good player throughout his career, but his game revolves around athleticism and he's on the wrong side of 30.

Not to mention the fact he is a selfish prima-donna. The guy was unhappy playing with Nash on a title contender while having a huge contract. He didn't feel he got enough credit. Why in the world would the Pacers want to add that to this team? I'd easily rather have Marquis for his option year.

CableKC
03-15-2009, 10:51 AM
Hmmmm.....MillerTime.....I'm not sure, but I think that we have had this conversation before about the Pacers going after any FA that is likely command a contract that earns more then $5 mil a year.

But let's say ( in Bizarro World ) where the Pacers had some capspace....I would likely agree with rm1369.....he is frustrated with the losing in Toronto, he won't be happy with losing in Indy.

idioteque
03-15-2009, 11:34 AM
MillerTime, you'd save yourself a lot of time by studying the salary cap.

I don't know about baseball attendance, but Marion is pretty stupid if he thinks NFL attendance is down. He obviously doesn't understand the difference in the dynamics of the two leagues.

vnzla81
03-15-2009, 11:51 AM
MillerTime, you'd save yourself a lot of time by studying the salary cap.

I don't know about baseball attendance, but Marion is pretty stupid if he thinks NFL attendance is down. He obviously doesn't understand the difference in the dynamics of the two leagues.

baseball attendance was also up

SycamoreKen
03-15-2009, 11:51 AM
While this is completely off topic, I believe you will see a decline in over all NFL attendance this coming season. How can it not go down based on the high cost of tickets, even if there are just a handfull of games a year?

I can see baseball selling more tickets since theirs is the cheapest with the opportunity to see more games in the nice sunny eather.

YoSoyIndy
03-15-2009, 12:09 PM
Not to mention the fact he is a selfish prima-donna. The guy was unhappy playing with Nash on a title contender while having a huge contract. He didn't feel he got enough credit. Why in the world would the Pacers want to add that to this team? I'd easily rather have Marquis for his option year.

I completely agree about preferring Marquis over a long-term contract w/ Marion.

As you mentioned and as written in ESPN the Mag, Marion essentially prefers being the top guy on a losing team than a contributing starter on a solid playoff team. He got his wish w/ the trade to Miami.

xtacy
03-15-2009, 12:21 PM
come on guys shawn 'i can only earn this ridiculous money i make by playing with a top notch pg' marion is not worth 8 mil.

MrSparko
03-15-2009, 01:13 PM
He was an all-star before Steve Nash. Please give credit where its due even if you don't like the man.

rexnom
03-15-2009, 01:48 PM
He was an all-star before Steve Nash. Please give credit where its due even if you don't like the man.
He was also in his early-to-mid 20s before Steve Nash. As d_c mentioned, he definitely is an athleticism guy. I don't see him adjusting his game to fit his aging.

xtacy
03-15-2009, 02:27 PM
He was an all-star before Steve Nash. Please give credit where its due even if you don't like the man.

trust me what i said has nothing to do with me not liking him. there are a lot of players in this league that i don't like but are great players. marion is definately not one of them. he's just too overrated and don't deserve that kind of money.

Anthem
03-15-2009, 09:18 PM
Heh. When I saw the thread I thought "8 mil? Yeah right... more like the MLE."

Glad to know I'm not alone.

Haggard
03-15-2009, 11:56 PM
I might disagree here.

Marion is probasbly one of the most versatile defenders in the NBA today. The dude can just about guard any position on the court and does so on a consistent basis.

Marion is a lot better offensively in a run and gun system. With the Pacers looking to break as often as they do someone like Marion might do ok.

MillerTime
03-16-2009, 05:07 AM
I might disagree here.

Marion is probasbly one of the most versatile defenders in the NBA today. The dude can just about guard any position on the court and does so on a consistent basis.

Marion is a lot better offensively in a run and gun system. With the Pacers looking to break as often as they do someone like Marion might do ok.

That's what I have been thinking. Comparing him to Quis' $7 option, I wouldnt mind letting Quis go and signing Marion to a 3 year deal worth $20 million

Bball
03-16-2009, 05:29 AM
The way things are going, Marion may do better financially to just retire and pick up a gig on ESPN or TNT...

Our best shot at Marion was when we could've drafted him instead of *cough* Bender... :zip:

-Bball

count55
03-16-2009, 06:27 AM
That's what I have been thinking. Comparing him to Quis' $7 option, I wouldnt mind letting Quis go and signing Marion to a 3 year deal worth $20 million

This may seem more plausible, but it's actually only marginally more possible than picking up both Wade and James for the vet mins next summer after they're bought out by their respective teams.

CableKC
03-16-2009, 12:07 PM
That's what I have been thinking. Comparing him to Quis' $7 option, I wouldnt mind letting Quis go and signing Marion to a 3 year deal worth $20 million
MillerTime, I apologize if this post may sound rude or anything ( that is not the of this intention ).....but everytime there is some Article on the Internet that pops up that suggests that a Top-Tier FA is available.....you seem to think that the Pacers 2009-2010 SalaryCap is favorable enough ( I'm guessing due to the copious amounts of 2008-2009 Expiring Contracts that we had ) that we have the ability to sign one of them.

I have to ask....only because the topic of signing a "top-tier" FA in the 2009-2010 Offseason has often been brought up by you....but due to Luxury Tax concerns ( something that the Pacers are trying very hard to avoid )....are you aware that if TPTB chooses to resign Jack while simply letting Marquis', Rasho's, McRoberts and Graham's contracts expire that the Pacers would likely be in a position to only sign a 2009-2010 FA for a little bit more more then $3-4 mil?

I do agree with you that IF the Pacers ( much less any organization ) was in a position ( which I know that they probably can't ) to acquire a player like Marion that started around $8 mil a year ( totalling $24 mil over 3 seasons ) that he would be worth it ( at that price ). However, due to his reputation in Phoenix ( as to why he wanted out of there in the 1st place ) and obvious frustrations in Toronto ( cuz he doesn't like the "losing" situation that he is in )....I admit that there would be some hesitancy on my part in acquiring his "personality" along with his considerable talents.


This may seem more plausible, but it's actually only marginally more possible than picking up both Wade and James for the vet mins next summer after they're bought out by their respective teams.
count55, I know that it's been assumed that we would try to resign Jack....but let's say ( for the sake of argument ) that TPTB chooses not to resign Jack ( despite the need for some depth at the PG/SG rotation )....how much $$$ would we have to try to sign the needed FAs that we would need to fill up the roster?

count55
03-16-2009, 12:16 PM
count55, I know that it's been assumed that we would try to resign Jack....but let's say ( for the sake of argument ) that TPTB chooses not to resign Jack ( despite the need for some depth at the PG/SG rotation )....how much $$$ would we have to try to sign another FA?

The answer to your question is probably about $4mm-ish, no more than 5.

However, I really think we're looking a two options: we re-sign Jack at that $4mm-ish range, or we go in cost contain, let everybody walk, and fill out the roster with our picks an vet mins.

I would consider the chances of us spending any money on free agents this summer (above min-level players) to be virtually non-existent.

As bad as the financial situation is this year, it will be worse next.

I would not expect any attempts to add significant talent outside of the draft until after the next CBA is complete...say, 2012.

CableKC
03-16-2009, 12:35 PM
The answer to your question is probably about $4mm-ish, no more than 5.
Just to be clear.....does that mean that we would be about $4-5 mil below the likely 2009-2010 Salary ( not Luxury ) Cap?

If so, does that mean that we could only offer a Player a $4-5 mil contract?

or

Does that mean that we could offer a Player a larger contract that pushes us over the Salary Cap ( as in some $8-9 mil contract )?

I'm fuzzy on how the Salary Cap part works. I'm guessing that the only way that we could really offer a Player a decent sized contract that is greater then what most other teams that are over the Salary Cap ( specifically the Full MLE ) is if we are under the Salary Cap by whatever amount that exceeds the amount of the value of the Full MLE ( maybe $5-6 mil ).

count55
03-16-2009, 12:58 PM
We'll start the summer with about $11mm left under the tax and 9 players under contract. Our 1st rounder will cost between $2 & 3 mm (depending on where we pick), so we have $8 to $9mm left to sign 5 more players, total.

The team will try to stay as far below the tax threshold as possible. Keep in mind, they need to think about the following year as well.

This is where the declining cap kills us, (and I definitely expect it to decline again next year). For 2010-2011, we will most likely have about $62-63mm in contracts for only 9 players, plus another $2mm or so for the 2010 1st rounder.

The more I look at it, the more I expect us to do nothing this year. We will let ALL of our FA's walk (including both Jack and Daniels), we will not sign a FA, and we will fill out our roster with minimum, unguaranteed contracts. Unless we find some way to dump salary, I don't see any other way we can stay under the tax for the next two years.

CableKC
03-16-2009, 01:59 PM
We'll start the summer with about $11mm left under the tax and 9 players under contract. Our 1st rounder will cost between $2 & 3 mm (depending on where we pick), so we have $8 to $9mm left to sign 5 more players, total.

The team will try to stay as far below the tax threshold as possible. Keep in mind, they need to think about the following year as well.

This is where the declining cap kills us, (and I definitely expect it to decline again next year). For 2010-2011, we will most likely have about $62-63mm in contracts for only 9 players, plus another $2mm or so for the 2010 1st rounder.

The more I look at it, the more I expect us to do nothing this year. We will let ALL of our FA's walk (including both Jack and Daniels), we will not sign a FA, and we will fill out our roster with minimum, unguaranteed contracts. Unless we find some way to dump salary, I don't see any other way we can stay under the tax for the next two years.
Wait a sec....given the declining Cap now...you don't think that we can even resign Jack in the offseason?

count55
03-16-2009, 02:28 PM
Wait a sec....given the declining Cap now...you don't think that we can even resign Jack in the offseason?

The cap is declining for next season, but everybody is expecting next year to be worse (because the economic issues are expected to show up in next year's season ticket renewals). Everyone, including the Lakers & Celtics (if I've heard correctly) are reducing ticket prices next year, so the revenues will almost certainly be down from this year. Therefore, the most reasonable expectation is that the salary cap will decline again in 2010-2011.

We already have $60mm in guaranteed contracts for 2010-2011 on 8 players (Granger, Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley, Foster, Ford, Hibbert, and Rush). Add another $4mm for the 2009 & 2010 picks, and you're at $64mm with 10 players.

As I said earlier, the 2009-2010 tax threshold will be around $69mm. If that were to remain flat (which is optimistic), then that would leave only $5mm to sign 5 players. If we sign Jack (or any other player for $4mm-ish) this year, that would leave us only $1mm to sign 4 players and fill out our team...assuming the cap stayed flat.

If, as I expect, the cap were to decline, then we'd be faced with being at or over the tax with only 11 players under contract. We'd either have to do a JO type deal, where we send out one player with a large contract (Danny, Murph, Dunleavy) for several smaller contracts, or we could sell our draft pick(s), or we could just go over the tax.

If I'm crunching numbers for the Pacers this summer, I'm telling them that they can't afford to sign anyone, including Jack, unless they dump salary for the 2010-2011 season, without virtually guaranteeing a tax hit for the 2010-2011 season.

CableKC
03-16-2009, 02:45 PM
The cap is declining for next season, but everybody is expecting next year to be worse (because the economic issues are expected to show up in next year's season ticket renewals). Everyone, including the Lakers & Celtics (if I've heard correctly) are reducing ticket prices next year, so the revenues will almost certainly be down from this year. Therefore, the most reasonable expectation is that the salary cap will decline again in 2010-2011.

We already have $60mm in guaranteed contracts for 2010-2011 on 8 players (Granger, Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley, Foster, Ford, Hibbert, and Rush). Add another $4mm for the 2009 & 2010 picks, and you're at $64mm with 10 players.

As I said earlier, the 2009-2010 tax threshold will be around $69mm. If that were to remain flat (which is optimistic), then that would leave only $5mm to sign 5 players. If we sign Jack (or any other player for $4mm-ish) this year, that would leave us only $1mm to sign 4 players and fill out our team...assuming the cap stayed flat.

If, as I expect, the cap were to decline, then we'd be faced with being at or over the tax with only 11 players under contract. We'd either have to do a JO type deal, where we send out one player with a large contract (Danny, Murph, Dunleavy) for several smaller contracts, or we could sell our draft pick(s), or we could just go over the tax.

If I'm crunching numbers for the Pacers this summer, I'm telling them that they can't afford to sign anyone, including Jack, unless they dump salary for the 2010-2011 season, without virtually guaranteeing a tax hit for the 2010-2011 season.
Okay....I get it....you're looking at the "broader picture" when it comes to signing Players in the 2009-2010 season since those contracts would likely affect us beyond the 2010-2011 season ( when our options to make any real moves will be severely limited if not worse then this season ).

2 things to note here......(1) given the minimalist approach that we would likely take in making Offseason moves.....the silver lining in all of this is that it appears that our rookie's and sophomore players ( BRush, Hibbert and whoever we draft for the next 2 seasons ) should get some decent minutes simply because we won't have that much choice but to play them and (2)aAs some of you have noted....it's beginning to look like extending Foster was a mistake.

count55
03-16-2009, 02:51 PM
....it's beginning to look like extending Foster was a mistake.

Certainly, in hindsight, it was. At the time, I thought it was debatable. Reasonable people could see both sides of the issue. However, as much as they like Foster, I seriously doubt that they would have given that extension had they known how the salary cap was going to play out.

Making the same decision today, knowing what we now know, could be termed at best as imprudent, and at worst as foolish.