Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

  1. #1
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    this one time waive is going to be interesting.....because the players more than likely to be waived are high priced players that, at one time or another, warranted a rather large contract...

    in a case like michael finley, hes got 3 years left....meaning if dallas waives him he could be had for next to nothing if im understanding things correctly....which means there might be some serious competition for a player like this....im still not totally clear how the compensation will work....if the player is picked up for vet min with dallas paying the balance or what....im very curious as to how exactly this plays out....

    can u imagine getting finley for next to nothing? granted hes not the same player he used to be....but he would be quite an addition to the bench for the vet minimum if thats the way it plays out....im assuming a guy like that would probably want to go to a place where he could contend for a title....which, somewhat sadly, means the rich get richer.....i could see finley going to phoenix for example....seems houston could end up in detroit...should be very interesting to see how this plays out and who ends up being waived....

    another interesting angle that i wonder about....could we for instance, trade like croshere and bender to new york for penny?....then waive penny under this new rule....it seems theres a number of ways this thing could play out....

    and zeke has to be thanking his lucky stars....

    this is just one more thing to keep an eye on....im not sure how much it will actually be used....houston and finley seem like prime candidates for it....but i really am anxious to see how much it gets used and if it does on players like croshere, etc.....

  2. #2
    Member rabid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    2,469

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    And Mutumbo...

  3. #3
    How are you here? Kegboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northside Bias
    Posts
    12,966

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Finley would go for much higher than the vet min. Much higher.

    People don't seem to realize yet, with the new salary cap, we're gonna see some stupid, stupid, stupid money thrown around this summer. Contracts that make Adonal Foyle look like a bargin.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  4. #4
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    45
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    I'd give Finley big bucks for a deal that isn't any longer than three years.

    For Finley, it isn't the dollars, its the long-term risk.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  5. #5
    How are you here? Kegboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northside Bias
    Posts
    12,966

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay@Section204
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'd give Finley big bucks for a deal that isn't any longer than three years.

    For Finley, it isn't the dollars, its the long-term risk.
    Yeah, but I bet someone would give him a Steve Nash-esque contract.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brown County, Indiana
    Posts
    3,764

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    I thought this one-time waiver was for players deemed to be "permanently injured". Is that not correct? If it is correct, then how could a "permanently injured" player be signed by another team? Seems there would be a rule about that.

    Maybe I'm just remembering the changes incorrectly, or sort of combining two of the new provisions.

  7. #7
    How are you here? Kegboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northside Bias
    Posts
    12,966

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom White
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I thought this one-time waiver was for players deemed to be "permanently injured". Is that not correct? If it is correct, then how could a "permanently injured" player be signed by another team? Seems there would be a rule about that.

    Maybe I'm just remembering the changes incorrectly, or sort of combining two of the new provisions.
    Yes, there are two, separate provisions. One for the permanently injured (call it the Todd MacCulloch rule), and the other for a one-time freebie (call it the WHAT THE **** WERE WE THINKING SIGNING AUSTIN FREAKIN' CROSHERE TO A SEVEN-YEAR DEAL rule.)
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,630

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.


  9. #9
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    unless im badly mistaken, i think some of u may have the wrong idea....

    its not for permanently injured guys...

    and motumbo is a free agent....

    however in finleys case, in houstons case, in anyone's case that the team chooses to use this one time possibility with....

    that player STILL GETS PAID HIS FULL CONTRACT....

    in other words....dallas still has to pay him the remainder of his contract....it just doesnt count towards the cap as far as the luxury tax is concerned...

    for instance....houston makes almost 20 million a year...since the knicks are in luxury tax land they have to pay a dollar for dollar....meaning his contract would cost the knicks 40 million a year

    so they can release...THEY STILL HAVE TO PAY HIM the 20 million a year for the remainder of his contract, but they dont have to pay the luxury tax, in this case the 20 million a year....so theres quite an incentive for any team in luxury tax land....

    meaning these guys would not be free agents from the standpoint theyre looking for a contract...they ve got one....theyre basically in a position, if i understand correctly, of just picking whre they would like to play....and im not even sure what determines what the team would pay them-thats why i mentioned the vet min....i dont believe they could have the old contract then get a second one on top of that....i would think they might get the vet min for years served from their new team and their old team would be responsible for the balance for the duration of their contract....

    its a very very intriquing situation....and im very interested to see how this all plays out....

    there are some very interesting decisions to be made...and the repercussions of the decisions will be just as interesting.....

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,660

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Foretaz -

    I think there would be some twists to the team paying the full amount over a single year.

    For example, let's say a player is on the final year of his contract and it pays him $10M. The team waiving him would be responsible for the full $10M, provided the player is not picked up by another team. If the player's vet minimum is $1M, the new team could sign him for $1M and the original team would still be responsible for $9M.

    For a player that has more than a single year remaining on his contract, I'm not sure it would work the same way after the first year. I would think that the new team is responsible for the additional years of the contract, although this may have something to do with whether or not the player has cleared waivers.

    One way or another, the player will get the full amount of his contract. I just don't know who will be paying it after the "current"/first year.

    Anyone know exactly how this works according to the new CBA?

  11. #11
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    45
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by foretaz
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    -snip-in anyone's case that the team chooses to use this one time possibility with....

    that player STILL GETS PAID HIS FULL CONTRACT....

    in other words....dallas still has to pay him the remainder of his contract....it just doesnt count towards the cap as far as the luxury tax is concerned...
    I would be very, very surprised if any team - even the teams owned by Cablevision, Cuban, and P. Allen, did this. I can't think of any owners that will pay a guy $x million per year for multiple years to play on someone else's team.

    If you're still going to pay the guy's salary, you might as well keep him on your roster.

    These are still real businesses, run by brilliant businessmen, and the annual profits these teams turn out is not really large enough to absorb a multi-million dollar, multi-year hit expense for a player on somebody else's roster.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  12. #12
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by beast23
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Foretaz -

    I think there would be some twists to the team paying the full amount over a single year.

    For example, let's say a player is on the final year of his contract and it pays him $10M. The team waiving him would be responsible for the full $10M, provided the player is not picked up by another team. If the player's vet minimum is $1M, the new team could sign him for $1M and the original team would still be responsible for $9M.

    For a player that has more than a single year remaining on his contract, I'm not sure it would work the same way after the first year. I would think that the new team is responsible for the additional years of the contract, although this may have something to do with whether or not the player has cleared waivers.

    One way or another, the player will get the full amount of his contract. I just don't know who will be paying it after the "current"/first year.

    Anyone know exactly how this works according to the new CBA?
    im very curious to know the details as well....because they make it very clear that the team has to pay the duration of the contract and that they get no cap relief from the release....only luxury cap relief....so finleys contract stays on the books and must be paid for all 3 years...and in that 3 years he cannot return to dallas....

    i dont know for a fact...but the only real way you could keep this somewhat fair is to say that whereever the player plays, the new team is responsible for the vet min for years served....otherwise youre gonna have a player on two different salary cap structures...and u cant do that....that initial number has to stay on the initial team....

    like i said....its a very interesting situation....the thought processes that gms and owners are gonna go thru could be very interesting...id love to be privvy to them....

    think about guys like webber and kidd even....guys who are gonna cost teams around 40 million a year and wont be producing much towards the latter end of their contracts....i bet theres more serious consideration given to these guys than we would ever imagine-though ultimately probably nothing is done....

    but if a guy like austin ends up costing u 36 million over the next 2 years and u have a chance to pay him 18-with the likelihood of him playing not being very likely....then u have to really stop and consider what makes the most sense....or, like i said...trade him for a guy that another team might be inclined to do the same thing with....like penny, except the knicks can only do it once....

    like i said....there are all sorts of options and angles...and its very very intriquing to me

  13. #13
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay@Section204
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I would be very, very surprised if any team - even the teams owned by Cablevision, Cuban, and P. Allen, did this. I can't think of any owners that will pay a guy $x million per year for multiple years to play on someone else's team.

    If you're still going to pay the guy's salary, you might as well keep him on your roster.

    These are still real businesses, run by brilliant businessmen, and the annual profits these teams turn out is not really large enough to absorb a multi-million dollar, multi-year hit expense for a player on somebody else's roster.
    ur missing the point jay....its because of this very reason that they will do it....and its just these types of owners that will do it....

    bottom line is this.....allan houston can cost them 40 million over the next 2 years or 80 million....because of luxury tax implications....if the consensus is the guy isnt going to help us, and probably wont help anyone else to significantly....which are u gonna choose?????

  14. #14

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay@Section204
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I would be very, very surprised if any team - even the teams owned by Cablevision, Cuban, and P. Allen, did this. I can't think of any owners that will pay a guy $x million per year for multiple years to play on someone else's team.

    If you're still going to pay the guy's salary, you might as well keep him on your roster.

    These are still real businesses, run by brilliant businessmen, and the annual profits these teams turn out is not really large enough to absorb a multi-million dollar, multi-year hit expense for a player on somebody else's roster.
    is is better to be stuck paying 15M a year for Finley to play for someone else, or 30M (salary plus dollar for dollar luxury tax) a year for him to play on your team?

    This is a tough Basketball/Business decision, that is for sure....

    Outsider

  15. #15
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    45
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    I'm not missing any point. This is still a dollars-and-sense decision because Allen Houston (when healthy) and Finley (for at least another couple of seasons) are going to help somebody.

    I can see teams using the 'injured player' provisions. But I don't see them paying a guy who is a quality player with a bad contract just to let somebody else take advantage of that quality player's service with a more reasonsable contract. Those three, in particular, are willing to pay to stockpile talent.

    I just can't imagine them continuing to pay but allowing somebody else use a talent they've previously identified (and locked into a contract that was simply too "long", not too "high") as a valuable player.

    Just because I wouldn't make a trade for Houston or Finley when considering their contracts doesn't mean I wouldn't like to have them on my team, especially in a sixth-man type of role.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  16. #16
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay@Section204
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm not missing any point. This is still a dollars-and-sense decision because Allen Houston (when healthy) and Finley (for at least another couple of seasons) are going to help somebody.

    I can see teams using the 'injured player' provisions. But I don't see them paying a guy who is a quality player with a bad contract just to let somebody else take advantage of that quality player's service with a more reasonsable contract. Those three, in particular, are willing to pay to stockpile talent.

    I just can't imagine them continuing to pay but allowing somebody else use a talent they've previously identified (and locked into a contract that was simply too "long", not too "high") as a valuable player.

    Just because I wouldn't make a trade for Houston or Finley when considering their contracts doesn't mean I wouldn't like to have them on my team, especially in a sixth-man type of role.
    lol....80 million over 2 years is a lot to pay for a 6th man at best...if they dont think he can play, then they dont care if he plays for the opposition...

    and frankly....using this option on houston is a no brainer....it will happen and the knicks wont even think twice....

    its the finleys, the webbers, the kidds, etc. that people will have to agonize over....

    as outsider said....this business + basketball decision making process is very interesting stuff.....and theyve just thrown them all a curve ball....

    if im philly and nj im pissed...that i have to use it now versus two years from now....this is ideally suited for a player having 2 or 3 years left....kidd and webber would be prime candidates in 2 years....wonder if teams will ask to keep the mulligan if they dont exercise it this year....

  17. #17

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    I wonder if Toronto will exercise the option on Jalen Rose...

    I know I would.

  18. #18
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by MSA2CF
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I wonder if Toronto will exercise the option on Jalen Rose...

    I know I would.


    theres some very interesting decisions to be made....and in the end it probably wont be utilized a ton....but it sure would be cool to be a fly on the wall to listen to some of the discussions....

    austin, for instance, is a prime example....a very strong argument could be made to exercise it on him....he probably will play very limited minutes this year barring unforseen circumstances.....

    but could u imagine releasing him and then him playing for detroit?? lol....i just think its something very interesting.....its like theres gonna be a few enigmas that take place and it will wild to see how they play out...

  19. #19
    Expect Delays blanket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,810

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    I might be oversimplifying things here, but it seems like this new provision will work just like waiving a player currently does -- you continue to pay the rest of his contract every year for its remainder, and the team that waived him cannot resign him for the duration of that contract -- it's just that the amount of that waived contract will not count toward any luxury tax for that team. So such a player could be picked up off waivers and paid his full contract by another team (ain't gonna happen in this situation), or once he clears waivers then teams will bid for his services -- offering him a new, additional contract. If anyone can post Larry Coon's info on waived players, I think that will be the gist of how this will be handled.
    "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
    -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

  20. #20
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    45
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Michael Finley, Allan Houston, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by blanket
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I might be oversimplifying things here, but it seems like this new provision will work just like waiving a player currently does -- you continue to pay the rest of his contract every year for its remainder, and the team that waived him cannot resign him for the duration of that contract -- it's just that the amount of that waived contract will not count toward any luxury tax for that team. So such a player could be picked up off waivers and paid his full contract by another team (ain't gonna happen in this situation), or once he clears waivers then teams will bid for his services -- offering him a new, additional contract. If anyone can post Larry Coon's info on waived players, I think that will be the gist of how this will be handled.
    Yeah, that's why the players probably agreed to it. The individual players that might see this happen will actually get a pay raise.

    And people will remember that some of these guys can still play, but their teams were foolish enough to give them seven-year max contracts (with max raises) or other over-paid contracts under the old system.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •