PDA

View Full Version : Front-loaded Contract?



CooperManning
06-26-2011, 08:38 PM
I mentioned this in another thread, but it didn't get much discussion going and I want to know more about it.

Last year, the Thunder extended Nick Collison (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Nick-Collison-s-goofball-contract-extension?urn=nba-288906)by way of a front-loaded contract. He was already making ~$6.5 million last season and they gave him a ~$6.5 million signing bonus so that they could pay him less over the next four years. Here's what it looks like:

http://i.imgur.com/BZaHA.png

Presti did this so that when they have to start paying max contracts to Durant and Westbrook they'll have a solid role player in Collison whose cap hit is far less than he's actually worth.

So my question is, can the Pacers do this next season? Whoever we bring in at the 4 (one of D. West, Landry, Humphries, McRoberts, Dalembert etc.) could make a big chunk next year, then significantly less over the next 3-4 seasons. Furthermore, whoever (theoretically) signs would likely become a more attractive trade chip down the road with a cheaper contract. The only downside is losing cap space for this next season, which seems unlikely to be used anyway.

Is this a viable option?

SMosley21
06-26-2011, 08:42 PM
Sam Presti is a very smart man. I mentioned this Collison contract when they first signed it and still don't understand why this method isn't done more often.

johndozark
06-26-2011, 08:46 PM
A large signing bonus with a relatively small and declining contract over subsequent years seems too good an idea to pass up, especially for players who will never be regular starters, but who can make vital contributions.

CooperManning
06-26-2011, 08:54 PM
Is it possible that this can only be done in extensions and not outright signings?

In this article: http://es.pn/dG0t0T

Marc Stein says,


Signing bonuses in extensions are usually pro-rated through the life of the contract. Teams under the cap, though, can apply the entire signing bonus at the time the extension is signed, as long as the bonus doesn't exceed the available cap space.

We'll be under the cap of course, but we would just be signing someone and not extending them, so I'm not sure...

Young
06-26-2011, 09:08 PM
The Bulls did something like this with Kirk Hinrich.

It's a very wise move and I hope with the cap space the Pacers are set to have that they can do this with a couple of the young guys.

The system is really backwards. Most player's pay increases each season but their production/value decreases.

littlerichard54
06-26-2011, 09:24 PM
It is a good idea, but IMO should only be used on a 3 (or 4 year deal max). I know the NBA is a little different, but look at the NFL with the large signing bonuses. 2 years after getting a windfall, the whiny rich boy is complaining about wanting more money. They blow through the money up front, start to feel slighted as others are getting paid, and the nonsense begins (see Reggie Wayne, Robert Mathis). Love both of those guys, but they seem to forget the up front money.

Eleazar
06-26-2011, 09:58 PM
It is a good idea, but IMO should only be used on a 3 (or 4 year deal max). I know the NBA is a little different, but look at the NFL with the large signing bonuses. 2 years after getting a windfall, the whiny rich boy is complaining about wanting more money. They blow through the money up front, start to feel slighted as others are getting paid, and the nonsense begins (see Reggie Wayne, Robert Mathis). Love both of those guys, but they seem to forget the up front money.

Personally I don't think there should be such a thing as a signing bonus.

As far as how well it would work I think it would work much better in a league where contracts are guaranteed, and you "can't" hold out.

I think front loaded contracts in the NFL would work better if the signing bonus was actually paid out over the course of the contract instead of all up front. I think where a lot of the problem comes from. They player probably doesn't care if the money still counts against the cap they just care that they are only getting paid $1 million when they have a $7 million cap hit.

Pacersalltheway10
06-26-2011, 10:33 PM
I know its just a video game but everytime I play NBA 2k11 and I offer a front-loaded contract the free agent's interest level goes down considerably.

Strummer
06-26-2011, 10:49 PM
Sounds like a good idea to me. Plus I expect the Pacers will have to spend a significant amount of money this year just to make the minimum team salary. If they can do it with front loading then that makes a lot of sense.

Lance George
06-26-2011, 11:30 PM
I think it'd be a brilliant way to add a talent or two from this class and still have plenty of money to resign our own talent while dabbling in next year's free agent class.

ballism
06-26-2011, 11:46 PM
It was not a signing bonus, it was contract renegotiation. And extension right after that.
Can't do that with a rookie contract, or any contract shorter than 3 years.
So this is only an option for 7 years + veterans in most cases.
Can't do that with free agents. Can't do that in a sign-and-trade. Can't do that if over cap.

Basically, we can do it with Posey next year and that's it. If the new CBA even allows that.

CooperManning
06-26-2011, 11:57 PM
Welp, that answers that.

ballism
06-27-2011, 12:16 AM
Yep, I was intrigued by it too when it happened. And then realised there's a reason it's so rare. Bummer.

It can still become viable if we trade for a veteran next year and extend. Say Lamar Odom. We could get him, raise his salary to max for 2 years, and then have him at a very low salary for another 3 years.
Depends on the new CBA.

neosmndrew
06-27-2011, 12:22 AM
If you recall, when the New Jersey Devils signed that big $100 million/19 year contract with that one star (idk his name), it was originally rejected because it was so frontloaded that the player earned barely minimum in the last years. I wouldn't be surprised if the current or new CBA in the NBA had a similar provision which limited frontloading contracts to an extent.

Richard_Skull
06-27-2011, 12:59 AM
Didn't Portland try to steal a free agent (might have been restricted) by offering a huge front ended contract to somebody and made it hard for the original team to match, because i think matching had to do with first year money or something of the sort. I wanna say it was Milsapp.

ballism
06-27-2011, 01:07 AM
Didn't Portland try to steal a free agent (might have been restricted) by offering a huge front ended contract to somebody and made it hard for the original team to match, because i think matching had to do with first year money or something of the sort. I wanna say it was Milsapp.

Millsap. It was just the usual 8% increase / decrease rule though. It still screwed up Utah a bit.

Here we are talking about 13 mil to 3 mil decrease in a year, 400%+.