I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

[Hicks]

I want to make it clear up front, I understand you don't want to have players making a lot more than they're worth.

I understand avoiding the luxury tax.

I understand wanting to be able to sign free agents.

However what I don't see is the Pacers getting over the luxury tax, or getting under the cap to make a big FA signing.

As I see it the only thing we should hope for is to be far enough under the LT that we could use our MLE and not go into the LT.

Beyond that, I don't see the major important of losing a lot of salary.

I suppose another point could be, for example "The money Troy is making could/should go to a better player". Well, sure. But how is he keeping you from getting that player. You'd never be able to trade Troy for that guy, and if Troy was dropped off the roster (salary and all) you still wouldn't be able to SIGN that guy.

[Speed]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

I may be wrong, but I think the reason to shed salary, may be to get a player in a sign and trade, which is todays version of signing a free agent. It becomes money under the luxury tax that you have available.

A good way get something for nothing is to be under the real cap and be the 3rd team on a trade. Then you can broker the deal and get something for nothing, if that makes sense. Its impossible for the Pacers to get under the real cap right now. Portland on the other hand went .500 in the West with Oden out and an awesome core of young guys and I think are under the cap, for now.

The other thing is to have room to sign your own guys without going over. I think the main focus Bird has to think about it to make room for Danny's contract this summer.

I'm like you though, it doesn't matter to me if they drop money unless it somehow computes into a real upgrade to a player on the floor.

[NapTonius Monk]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

You have far more flexibility and more options open to you when you're not right up against the line. Which situation would you rather be in: Portland, or Indiana? Now, given, Portland is just biding time, because all of their young guys are going to come due. But they're in a much better position to do things than we are.

[SoupIsGood]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

It's not "shed salary" so much as "get rid of retarded contracts." When you've got contracts like Tinsley's, Murphy's, and JO's, you're pretty much stuck in terms of progressing as a team because you've got to wait those contracts out before you've got any kind of flexibility.

Also, shedding salary is important because we want to be able to afford Granger when he's due his cash.

We've got to either get luckier or get smarter about who we give long-term contracts to. What happened with JO is probably just bad luck--he was a real stud there for awhile. Tinsley's contract though probably could have been avoided. We keep too many of our players for too much dough, generally. Also, trading for Murph should have just been a no-no from the get-go, no matter how disruptive SJax may have been. Telling SJax to sit at home would have been better than picking up that bloated contract.

[d_c]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

You have far more flexibility and more options open to you when you're not right up against the line. Which situation would you rather be in: Portland, or Indiana? Now, given, Portland is just biding time, because all of their young guys are going to come due. But they're in a much better position to do things than we are.

Right. In general, they just have a roster that has more flexibility. They are more maneuverable. If they absolutely had to make a move, they could do it more easily.

Part of that of course is they have an owner willing to pay the luxury tax, but in general they just have a roster that's more easy to remake if you wanted to. Jack, Outlaw, Webster, Pryzbilla, Rodriguez, etc... are more easily movable than the likes of Troy, Mike, Jammal, Marquis, etc...

If you're ok with Troy being on the team and aren't worried about trading him, then the salary isn't that huge a concern. But if you want to make a trade involving him, that's when his contract becomes more problematic.

For the Pacers, being close to the luxury tax situation also eliminates the use of the MLE, as using it in full would put you over the tax.

[Kegboy]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

If we dropped Troy today, no, we wouldn't be able to sign someone to a $10M contract. However, it clears up space to sign two MLE deals over the next couple years that we wouldn't have done because of hitting up against the LT.

[RWB]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

Here's one from left field. Maybe shedding some salary will keep the Simons from wanting to sell the team?

[Kegboy]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

Here's one from left field. Maybe shedding some salary will keep the Simons from wanting to sell the team?

Of course, the flip side is Memphis. Shedding salary to make the team more attractive to a potential buyer.

[mrknowname]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

because we won't have enough room to resign guys like Williams, Granger, and Diogu to extensions if we choose to

[JayRedd]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

As others have said, it's about flexibility and manuevability.

The more room you have between your total payroll and the luxury tax threshold, the more "liquidity" you have. Without liquidity and flexibility, you have few options to make moves and you're always relying on a third party to "play ball" if you want to get anything done.

The more salary you shed, the more proactive and in control of your own destiny you can be.

Going into this season we had five contracts no team wanted a part of (JO, Murphy, Tinsley, Dunleavy, Marquis).

Now, Quis is entering his last year so that's not so bad, and Dunleavy, while still not a true beneficial asset that people are gonna covet, has pretty much played his way into at least turning his deal into a "push."

So we'll be in slightly better shape this Summer than last just because of those two factors.

But, not really because our true problems are the other three deals (JO, Tins, Murphy, who will combine for upwards of 45% of our payroll next year). If we weren't in such cap hell because of those three, we wouldn't even have to consider trading MDJ. But now, he's really our only asset aside from draft picks, Danny and Shawne. And like I said before, MDJ still isn't that great of a chip because he's established his place in this League (i.e., no more real upside for growth) and he's therefore never gonna be a great value based on his deal. Other GMs may see him as a "fair" value, but nobody's gonna be jumping out of their seat to pay Mike Dunleavy $8-$10 either at this point in his career.

If we had other means of flexibility, our fans wouldn't really see the need to actively shop the guy who was our the first or second best player on our team all year.

But we don't have any other flexibility, so many do see that need.

[Speed]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

So is Dunleavy still worth more to the Pacers than in a trade to someone else, even though he had an awesome year? I think I agree with this.

Man I wish he'd win MIP, that would probably help a little, at least.

[d_c]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

So is Dunleavy still worth more to the Pacers than in a trade to someone else, even though he had an awesome year? I think I agree with this.

Man I wish he'd win MIP, that would probably help a little, at least.

Dunleavy had a very good year. He probably won't win MIP, but I don't think an award would make teams any more interested. Same with Hedo Turkoglu (who will probably win it). Teams know what players are about and I really don't think an award changes the opinions of the people who make basketball decisions and evaluate talent.

I think his rep around the league is that a lot of coaches would love to have him, but at the same time he's a luxury item to most owners. They'd love to have him but they can usually get by with something cheaper (Portland getting by with Travis Outlaw for $3M a year for example).

[Rajah Brown]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

Speed-

Rick Bucher made a pretty decent point the other day when asked
about the MIP situation with respect to Dunleavy. His opinion is
that Duns didn't really change as a player. He's always pretty
much been the player he is now. He was just poorly used in GS
(along with being the primary scapegoat due to being drafted
at #3) and is now in a system that allows him to flourish/utilize
his skill-set.

For the record, Bucher voted for Rudy Gay.

[McKeyFan]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

(along with being the primary scapegoat due to being drafted
at #3)

I've got an unrelated question that I'll ask here in order not to start a separate thread:

What teams are at the top and bottom of owning top draft picks? I'm thinking the Ps may be in the top middle with guys like Dunleavey and Ike.

Teams that have players like Olowakandi and Kwame Brown and Darko would also be high, even thought the players themselves are no good.

Just wondering what that ranking would look like.

[Anthem]

Re: I want to know what the big deal about shedding salary is.

What teams are at the top and bottom of owning top draft picks?

http://www.realgm.com/src_future_draftpicks.php