Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33

Thread: Bruno's latest blog entry

  1. #1
    Parachromis HC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Hartford City
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,804
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Bruno's latest blog entry

    Seems to clear up a few things. Interesting read here.

    http://my.nba.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5700020715
    "No one else can see the preservation of the martyr in me" -- Corey Taylor

  2. #2
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruno
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The Pacers will also be in a much more favorable payroll situation next year they could actually be under the cap -- and would like to keep it that way. In that scenario, they could use up their cap space to sign an outside free agent, and then go over the cap to extend Granger. If they extend Granger first, whatever cap space they might've had would vanish.
    But Granger's cap hold is going to be almost $10mm, so the capspace is almost certainly gone already.

  3. #3
    Parachromis HC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Hartford City
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,804
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    But Granger's cap hold is going to be almost $10mm, so the capspace is almost certainly gone already.
    Yes, but they can't go over the cap to sign a free agent. As long as it is for a player already on the team, Bird could presumeably go over the cap to resign him.
    "No one else can see the preservation of the martyr in me" -- Corey Taylor

  4. #4
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by Conrad
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    On one of his regular visits with Dan Patrick, Reggin Miller told an interesting tale about when he learned not to talk trash to Michael Jordan. During a preseason game in which Reggie was playing well, Chuck Person put the idea in his head. Reggie couldn't help himself and, even though it was a preseason game, Jordan told Coach Doug Collins to leave him in long enough to rack up 30 points and it didn't take that long. There was another lesson learned: when it comes to trash talk, Person is the wrong mentor.
    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
    It's my opinion, relax! Vince Neil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    143

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    As for Tinsley, well, I met with Larry Bird earlier this week and here's what he had to say: "Jamaal will not be on our team this year."
    Well I guess that settle's it...................................

  6. #6
    Banned Jonathan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,833

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Good for Mike Green & Pete Campbell for continuing their playing careers. Bird is right about Tinsley he is a very good player and wil benefit whomever he is traded to.

  7. #7
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,627

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince Neil View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well I guess that settle's it...................................
    To me......I do not doubt that Tinsley will be gone....one way or another......I'm just questioning how they will move him without buying him out ( which they say they will not do ).

    The matter of how it's going to be done is what leaves me dumbfounded.......I am not as confident in how they will move Tinsley as they are.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by HCPacerIN View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yes, but they can't go over the cap to sign a free agent. As long as it is for a player already on the team, Bird could presumeably go over the cap to resign him.
    Hence, the reason to hold off on giving him a new contract now. Either way, Granger stays. It's just a matter of how much financial flexibility the Pacers will have when it matters - next season.

  9. #9
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,627

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    But Granger's cap hold is going to be almost $10mm, so the capspace is almost certainly gone already.
    I was trying to figure out that very statement from Bruno.

    Is he saying that if we extend Granger now.....that his 2009-2010 salary will push us over the SalaryCap limit ( hence a possible reason not to extend him now ) without giving us a chance to sign any 2009 FAs?

    Whereas if we don't resign him now.....thus being under the Salarycap...we can then sign some FA and then try to sign Granger as a FA even if we are over the Salarycap?

    I'm totally guessing here....but if extending a player now would likely push us over the Salarycap next offseason before any FA are signed......for any team that doesn't have copious amounts of Salarycap space ( which would likely be the majority of teams nowadays ), wouldn't this be a deterrant for teams to extend players contracts earlier as opposed to waiting til they become RFA?

    If so...I would think ( for the benefit of the Players Associations that want to get extensions now instead of hoping for getting a payout later as a RFA ) that there would be some CBA rules to prevent this from happening. I would think that if a player was extended this season, that their starting contract would only count after any FAs are signed ( assuming that they go over the SalaryCap ).

    To me...something doesn't make sense regarding his statement. I wouldn't think that extending Granger now would affect our ability to remain under the Salarycap next season...thus affecting our ability to pursue any FAs.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  10. #10
    Administrator Roaming Gnome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indy's Wild Wild West Side: 8 sec-check...Club Rio-check...Cloud 9-check
    Age
    40
    Posts
    5,935

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Nice to know that Bruno still tours the message boards. When he says, "the Pacers have been under a bit of scrutiny lately for what they have not." only leads me to believe this because no one other then us on a few different boards even care to notice.

    One thing that I found disturbing was Larry Bird's overlooking Europe as a player in the Restricted Free Agent market. Bird thru Bruno just rolled out, "Why not, wait" "He'd be a restricted free agent, meaning the Pacers would be able to match any offer for him." Before, I was patient with this thinking everyone was just jumping the gun due to "negotiation", but if that is any hint of their plan with Danny, it is hard to over look Europe has the possibility of being a factor.
    Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 09-10-2008 at 02:16 PM.
    ...Still "flying casual"
    @roaminggnome74

  11. #11
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,528

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    "Given Bird's ability to stir up some serious trade value for Jermaine O'Neal, and given his quiet confidence about moving Tinsley, you have to believe he knows something he just isn't ready to discuss."

    Does this mean there is a pretty much completed deal in place for JT?


    Bird does go on to say that they are still talking to teams, though, so I'm not really sure, but this sounds like Bruno's not so subtle way of telling us that something is done, but it just isn't in stone or it involves pieces that can't be moved yet or the teams involved are trying to make it a bigger deal.

    Pure conjecture on my part, but still.

  12. #12
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,031

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Theoretically (if Sham Sports is to be believed) the Pacers would have $51.5 million on the books after this season, including the cap holds for Granger and Jack, who would both be restricted free agents. Assuming a moderate increase in the cap from this year to next, it would likely be around $60 million. This would give us about $8 million to sign free agents. Owning the Bird years on Granger and Jack would allow us to exceed the salary cap to resign those two players. If we resigned Granger now, his cap number for next year would jump from about $3.2 million (the qualifying offer we'd have to make to ensure his RFA status according to Shamsports) to $10 million or whatever we signed him for. This would mean that we'd have no cap space to sign any FA's. It's a gamble because we're letting Danny become a RFA and giving some other team that wants him a chance to make a huge offer that we'd have to match.
    Last edited by OakMoses; 09-10-2008 at 02:22 PM.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  13. #13
    Parachromis HC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Hartford City
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,804
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I was trying to figure out that very statement from Bruno.

    Is he saying that if we extend Granger now.....that his 2009-2010 salary will push us over the SalaryCap limit ( hence a possible reason not to extend him now ) without giving us a chance to sign any 2009 FAs?

    Whereas if we don't resign him now.....thus being under the Salarycap...we can then sign some FA and then try to sign Granger as a FA even if we are over the Salarycap?

    I'm totally guessing here....but if extending a player now would likely push us over the Salarycap next offseason before any FA are signed......for any team that doesn't have copious amounts of Salarycap space ( which would likely be the majority of teams nowadays ), wouldn't this be a deterrant for teams to extend players contracts earlier as opposed to waiting til they become RFA?

    If so...I would think ( for the benefit of the Players Associations that want to get extensions now instead of hoping for getting a payout later as a RFA ) that there would be some CBA rules to prevent this from happening. I would think that if a player was extended this season, that their starting contract would only count after any FAs are signed ( assuming that they go over the SalaryCap ).

    To me...something doesn't make sense regarding his statement. I wouldn't think that extending Granger now would affect our ability to remain under the Salarycap next season...thus affecting our ability to pursue any FAs.
    Myself, as well as nuffsaid, already addressed this issue.
    "No one else can see the preservation of the martyr in me" -- Corey Taylor

  14. #14
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,031

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    "Given Bird's ability to stir up some serious trade value for Jermaine O'Neal, and given his quiet confidence about moving Tinsley, you have to believe he knows something he just isn't ready to discuss."

    Does this mean there is a pretty much completed deal in place for JT?

    Bird does go on to say that they are still talking to teams, though, so I'm not really sure, but this sounds like Bruno's not so subtle way of telling us that something is done, but it just isn't in stone or it involves pieces that can't be moved yet or the teams involved are trying to make it a bigger deal.

    Pure conjecture on my part, but still.
    It could possibly mean "I've got an offer that I don't mind taking, but I'm trying to see if I can scare up something a little better before I go through with it."
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  15. #15
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,528

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    The other thing about the Granger, and I know you all just don't want to say it, but if he gets injured this next season and you extend him now. That's a franchise altering thing. Look at Shaun Livingston now.

  16. #16
    Administrator Roaming Gnome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indy's Wild Wild West Side: 8 sec-check...Club Rio-check...Cloud 9-check
    Age
    40
    Posts
    5,935

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by mellifluous View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It could possibly mean "I've got an offer that I don't mind taking, but I'm trying to see if I can scare up something a little better before I go through with it."
    Yeah, I've mentioned and thought in the past that maybe Larry has a "deal in his pocket" if he can't get something better then what he has in hand. By the way they've been talking, it's hard to fathom mngmt. not having something ready to roll when they wanted to.
    ...Still "flying casual"
    @roaminggnome74

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brown County, Indiana
    Posts
    3,744

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    To me......I do not doubt that Tinsley will be gone....one way or another......I'm just questioning how they will move him without buying him out ( which they say they will not do ).

    The matter of how it's going to be done is what leaves me dumbfounded.......I am not as confident in how they will move Tinsley as they are.
    When Tinsley is traded, it would not surprise me to see "...and cash considerations from the Pacers." included in the trade announcement. In other words, the Pacers would sent an amount of cash to the other team as incentive.

  18. #18
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,627

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by HCPacerIN View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Myself, as well as nuffsaid, already addressed this issue.
    Sorry...I'm still confused here.....which could be a result of how I am interpreting what is being stated.

    I understand that as a RFA next offseason...that we can resign Granger to any contract...even if we are over the Salarycap AT THE TIME of the signing. What I don't understand is IF we give him an extension now....whether his 2009-2010 Salary would count towards the Salarycap once the 2009 FA period starts.

    I thought ( like you ) that giving Granger an extension ( much like signing him as a RFA ) would not affect whether our ability to sign a FA or not....but based off of Bruno's statement....it seems to contradict that.

    When I read Bruno's statement:

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruno
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The Pacers will also be in a much more favorable payroll situation next year – they could actually be under the cap -- and would like to keep it that way. In that scenario, they could use up their cap space to sign an outside free agent, and then go over the cap to extend Granger. If they extend Granger first, whatever cap space they might've had would vanish.
    like this:

    If we extend Granger now, his 2009-2010 contract immediately counts towards the 2009 Salarycap ( as Bruno puts it...."our cap space would vanish" ) when the FA period starts.....likely pushing us over the Salarycap threshold.....thus defining whether we will be below or above the Salarycap limit at the start of the 2009 FA period and therefore affect whether we can sign a FA or not.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  19. #19
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    OK...Here's how I understand the Pacers cap situation for next summer (sources are Shamsports and Larry Coon's CBA FAQ).

    Guaranteed Salaries: $41,778

    Includes guaranteed contracts of Murphy, Dunleavy, Ford, Tinsley (or his replacement), Rush, and Hibbert, as well as Player Option for Travis Diener

    Cap Holds: $39,255

    Rasho $12,600 (150% of this year's salary)
    Foster $8,250 (150%)
    Baston $3,409 (150%)
    Granger $6,989 (300%)
    Jack $6,008 (300%)
    Graham $1,074 (130%)
    McBob $925 (130%)

    Cap holds count against the cap for FA signing purposes, but don't count against the tax or anything else. Therefore, the Pacers "Cap Number" entering next summer's FA period would be $81,033.

    Here's Coon's explanation of why:

    31. Why do free agents continue to count against a team's cap?

    It closes another loophole. Teams otherwise would be able to sign other teams' free agents using their cap room, and then turn their attention to their own free agents using the Bird exceptions. This rule restricts their ability to do that. It doesn't close this loophole completely -- for example, in 2005 Michael Redd's free agent amount was $6 million, even though the Bucks intended to re-sign him for the maximum salary. By waiting to sign Redd last, the Bucks were able to take advantage of the difference by signing Bobby Simmons. Had they signed Redd first, they would have had no cap room to sign Simmons.
    However, they can (and we expect that they will) reduce that cap number by renouncing the rights to some of these players. (If they renounce the rights to the players, they could only re-sign them (a) if they had cap room or (b) to a minimum contract. They could "sign-and-trade" the player using the Bird rights, but they could not use the Bird rights any longer to just sign him.)

    It seems obvious that they'd almost certainly renounce Rasho, Baston, Graham, and McBob, reducing their cap hold by $18,008. However, that still leaves $21,247 in cap holds related to Jeff Foster, Danny Granger, and Jarrett Jack.

    Therefore, assuming that, they'd have a "cap number" of $63,025 with 7 players under contract, and retaining the rights to the three I mentioned. The cap (at 5% growth) would probably be somewhere around $61-62 mm. (These numbers, BTW, completely ignore the holds for our 1st rounder, which would probably be about $2mm, and our MLE, which would be about $6mm).

    So, how do they maximize their capspace for next summer, and what would that figure be?

    By my calculations, the lowest "Cap Number" the Pacers could have would be about $50,000, leaving them $11 to $12mm below the cap. However, to do that, they'd have to renounce the rights to everyone except Danny.

    If they were to renounce everyone except Danny and JJ, they'd be at around $56mm, but then the MLE cap hold would kick in and probably put their "cap number" over the cap.

    They could re-sign JJ sooner (extension this summer or new contract early next summer) and probably save $1-2mm, which would likely negate the MLE caphold and leave them at $7-8mm under the cap. Let's say they did that...after signing Danny and a $7mm FA, they'd probably look like this:

    Guaranteed: $41,778 (7 Players)
    Danny: $ 9,000 (Conservatively 6/68, 1 player)
    FA: $ 7,000 (1 player)
    JJ: $ 4,500 (Conservatively, 1 player)
    1st Rounder: $ 1,600 (1 player)

    Total $63,878 on 11 players, roughly $11mm left under the tax to sign the last four. I guess it's do-able, but who are we going to get for $7-$8mm? If we let everybody go, who's the $11mm prize that's gonna sign with the Pacers? What if somebody offers Danny a higher contract?

    It seems like an awful big crap shoot to me.

    I have the suspicion that the Pacers are actually just being "cautious". I kinda think they wanna see one more year before they pony up for Danny. The idea of "maximizing cap space" is kind of convoluted, and not as productive as some might believe. Honestly, unless we want to completely gut our team next summer (which we might), we aren't going to have any real cap space.

    I guess that's an OK strategy, but I'm not overly comfortable with it.
    Last edited by count55; 09-10-2008 at 05:04 PM.

  20. #20
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Sorry...I'm still confused here.....which could be a result of how I am interpreting what is being stated.

    I understand that as a RFA next offseason...that we can resign Granger to any contract...even if we are over the Salarycap AT THE TIME of the signing. What I don't understand is IF we give him an extension now....whether his 2009-2010 Salary would count towards the Salarycap once the 2009 FA period starts.

    I thought ( like you ) that giving Granger an extension ( much like signing him as a RFA ) would not affect whether our ability to sign a FA or not....but based off of Bruno's statement....it seems to contradict that.

    When I read Bruno's statement:



    like this:

    If we extend Granger now, his 2009-2010 contract immediately counts towards the 2009 Salarycap ( as Bruno puts it...."our cap space would vanish" ) when the FA period starts.....likely pushing us over the Salarycap threshold.....thus defining whether we will be below or above the Salarycap limit at the start of the 2009 FA period and therefore affect whether we can sign a FA or not.
    Cable, as of today, Danny counts for $7.0mm against the 2009 FA "Cap Space". This is the amount of his cap hold as a Free Agent.

    Regardless of what we do, he counts for about $2.4mm against the 2008-2009 salary cap. This is the amount of his rookie contract for this year.

    If we were to sign Danny to an extension this summer, then his 2009 FA "Cap Hit" would be the amount of the first year of his extension, his 2009-2010 salary. Let's say we gave him 5 year extension, starting at $9mm and growing at 10.5% (max raise). He would be on our cap at $9mm for 2009.

    The mistake I think Bruno (and others) are making is the belief that Danny will count as $0 against the cap for 2009 until we re-sign him. However, to close the loophole that would allow teams to sign a whole bunch of FA's, then go way over the cap signing their own players, the league CBA puts cap holds for a team's FA's, as explained in my post below. For a guy coming off his rookie contract (4th year), it's 300% of his last year's salary.

    The only way Danny would count as $0 against our cap would be if we were to renounce his Bird rights. I don't think anyone...well, anyone with any intelligence...would believe that to be a prudent or desirable course of action.

    A note on Shamsports: The amount in Red in the 2009 column for Danny and JJ is the "qualifying offer". This IS NOT a cap hold. It is the one-year amount that would have to be offered to those players in order for the Pacers to retain right to match. If the Pacers did not offer at least that, they'd effectively renounce their rights making the players UNrestricted Free Agents.

  21. #21
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,886
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Count, is your real name David Morway?

  22. #22
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,627

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Cable, as of today, Danny counts for $7.0mm against the 2009 FA "Cap Space". This is the amount of his cap hold as a Free Agent.

    Regardless of what we do, he counts for about $2.4mm against the 2008-2009 salary cap. This is the amount of his rookie contract for this year.

    If we were to sign Danny to an extension this summer, then his 2009 FA "Cap Hit" would be the amount of the first year of his extension, his 2009-2010 salary. Let's say we gave him 5 year extension, starting at $9mm and growing at 10.5% (max raise). He would be on our cap at $9mm for 2009.

    The mistake I think Bruno (and others) are making is the belief that Danny will count as $0 against the cap for 2009 until we re-sign him. However, to close the loophole that would allow teams to sign a whole bunch of FA's, then go way over the cap signing their own players, the league CBA puts cap holds for a team's FA's, as explained in my post below. For a guy coming off his rookie contract (4th year), it's 300% of his last year's salary.

    The only way Danny would count as $0 against our cap would be if we were to renounce his Bird rights. I don't think anyone...well, anyone with any intelligence...would believe that to be a prudent or desirable course of action.

    A note on Shamsports: The amount in Red in the 2009 column for Danny and JJ is the "qualifying offer". This IS NOT a cap hold. It is the one-year amount that would have to be offered to those players in order for the Pacers to retain right to match. If the Pacers did not offer at least that, they'd effectively renounce their rights making the players UNrestricted Free Agents.
    Thanks for the clarification. That's what I have been trying to figure out.

    IF we extend him now and he ( for example ) will count as $9 mil in 2009-2010...does that mean that at the start of the 2009 FA period...our Salarycap will be set at $50 mil instead of $41 mil ( assuming that we renounce Granger and let him become a RFA )?

    If that is the case.....that makes a huge difference. I know that in the end....regardless of whether we extend Granger or resign him as a RFA....that there will be so much $$$ that TPTB are going to want to spend....it's just a matter of how we spend the $$$ and how we acquire the players that we have.

    I know that for RFAs like Granger and Jack that we have the right to match any offer they get.....but what about our UFAs like Foster, Rasho, Baston and McRoberts?

    I know that in the end...that it's entirely up to the UFA to choose where he goes....but I wasn't sure if the CBA gives the team that currently owns his contract any advantages to resign that player over other teams.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  23. #23
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,618

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    I saw this on the mobile today but it's too much of a pain in the butt for a long response like this would take.

    And I knew Count would be all over it.

    Not only do you keep potential resignings on the cap till you pass on them or sign them, you also keep your MLE, MinE and TE(s) on the books as holds till you officially renounce them (or Bird rights - go beyond what other teams can offer).

    So for most teams in the park of the cap already there is more financial leverage available by just staying over the cap.

    If you aren't WAY under the cap then just don't bother discussing it. This idea that the Pacers are almost in the FA market is 100% wrong. They aren't.

    What they are is broken into enough moderately reasonable deals and expirings to be back in the dealing market over the next few years. Nothing they have done so far has really targeted getting into the FA market, and that's just as well because nearly all the worst contracts in the NBA stem from the overpriced FA market.

  24. #24
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    The only thing I know about the upcoming season is that Count is far-and-away the favorite for the PD Forum MVP award.

    Thank you for the explanation.
    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


  25. #25
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Bruno's latest blog entry

    Quote Originally Posted by pacergod2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Count, is your real name David Morway?
    I wish.

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thanks for the clarification. That's what I have been trying to figure out.

    IF we extend him now and he ( for example ) will count as $9 mil in 2009-2010...does that mean that at the start of the 2009 FA period...our Salarycap will be set at $50 mil instead of $41 mil ( assuming that we renounce Granger and let him become a RFA )?

    If that is the case.....that makes a huge difference. I know that in the end....regardless of whether we extend Granger or resign him as a RFA....that there will be so much $$$ that TPTB are going to want to spend....it's just a matter of how we spend the $$$ and how we acquire the players that we have.
    Yes, if we extend him now, we'll be at $50mm. However, even if we don't, but we retain his rights, we'll still be at $48mm with his cap hold.

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I know that for RFAs like Granger and Jack that we have the right to match any offer they get.....but what about our UFAs like Foster, Rasho, Baston and McRoberts?

    I know that in the end...that it's entirely up to the UFA to choose where he goes....but I wasn't sure if the CBA gives the team that currently owns his contract any advantages to resign that player over other teams.
    The advantage that we have on those guys on other teams is that we can offer a 6-year contract, while other teams can offer only a 5-year deal, max.

    The key advantage over most teams, though, is the Bird rights...the ability to go over the cap to sign them. We lose that advantage, however, if we renounce their rights.
    Last edited by count55; 09-10-2008 at 06:24 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. duke dynamite's Blog, It's Here!
    By duke dynamite in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 10-10-2008, 04:27 AM
  2. OT - Blog: 24 hunches that pull no punches
    By indyblue47 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-20-2008, 01:12 AM
  3. Conrad Brunner's blog
    By Unclebuck in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-06-2008, 05:43 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-26-2007, 01:41 PM
  5. OT: "The rims are broken" - Gilbert Arenas Blog (NBA.com)
    By avoidingtheclowns in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-08-2007, 01:22 AM

Posting Permissions

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