Question for Steve (or anyone else)

by danobaseball on Aug 26, 2009 2:52 PM PDT Comment 10 comments

Hypothetically, lets say the Clippers negotiated a buy-out on Madsen’s contract for this up coming season. Instead of paying him the $2.8M on his contract, they negotiate a buy-out for say $2.3M, saving the Clips $1/2M. Which number would count against the salary cap, the $2.8M or the $2.3M?

Similarly, couldn't the Knicks negotiate a buy-out on the two remaining years on a contract like Curry or Jeffries, or simply pay him the two remaining years in full during the current season, cut them, eat the applicable luxury tax for this year, all to have additional cap space next summer. I understand this might cost a lot of $, but is this not a way to free cap space? In other words, pay the balance remaining on the entire contract NOW, cut him, and have tons of cap space next summer. Does that work?

Or, what if the Knicks negotiated a deal with, say Curry, to pay the entire balance of his two-year deal this year, coupled with a provision to pay him the veterans minimum next year. Does this free up cap space for next summer? Can you accelerate payment of a contract into the current year, to create cap space for next year? I understand the luxury tax scenario, but if NY wanted cap space, couldn't this happen?

1 recs | Comment 10 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

This should cover it

Question 60

by John R on Aug 26, 2009 2:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Thanks...

Exactly on point!

When we win the NBA Championship, it will be that much sweeter!

by danobaseball on Aug 26, 2009 3:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent question. Excellent answer.

John R is back with a vengeance.

by swamigusto on Aug 26, 2009 8:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Actually Eddy Curry...

… has been training heavily the last few months. I read that Donnie Walsh recently visited him meaning that they have plans to play him on some level or at least try and get him close to what he’s worth. I think the market out there for Eddy Curry is pretty much non-existent. Nobody wants all that baggage he brings. Zach Randolph brought baggage but was capable of scoring 30 and 10 on any given night. Thats why he was able to be moved. Curry is owed 21 million in the next two years and any team thats in need of a center or an Eddy Curry type player thats capable of absorbing his absurd salary, would most likely take advantage of the excess of great talent.

Example; why would I an NBA manager try and negotiate a trade for a player that averaged 1.7 pts and 1.3 rbs last year and 13.2 pts and 4.7 rbs the year before???? The only way this guy comes my way is if New York sets up a Steve Francis deal that Portland set up for him. Portland bought out Francis’s 32 million dollar contract for 30 million. Than Houston came in and signed Francis for a few million a year at a low risk deal. But there is no way Eddy Curry is signing a piece of paper that says he’s going to take a penny less than what he’s owed because he knows better than anyone what he’s worth.

by Akram47 on Aug 27, 2009 2:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I guess my "Hypothetical" was not far off...

From Hoopsworld Eric Pincus: Add Madsen: While it was originally thought the waiving of forward Mark Madsen was to make room for Sessions, it would seem they aren’t related. Pincus also reports that the Clippers saved $875,000 by agreeing to a buyout of $1,965,000 of the final season on his contract.

When we win the NBA Championship, it will be that much sweeter!

by danobaseball on Aug 27, 2009 8:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Why all the left overs?

Why is everyone so quick to want LAC to take all these other last place teams left over players? Madsen, Bassy, Smith, Sessions.

by HVYDRT007 on Aug 27, 2009 12:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Because they're upgrades

Our top players are already set, we’re just trying to fill out the roster with the best talent/ fit available. Madsen was just filler to create a deal for potentially solid backups.

by ghost_ride on Aug 27, 2009 12:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Who was/is solid?

Bassy? I give you Mike Taylor. Smith? I give you Q.Rich. Madsen? we lost money. All for what? Give up the Best player of last season (Zbo) and possibility the best in LAC history just to save Cap for a FA in 2010 that may not turn out to be as good as everyone thought or thinks it will.

by HVYDRT007 on Aug 27, 2009 12:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Bassy is not “solid” exactly…but id have to say he’s got an edge over Taylor (but i still want Taylor to be resigned anyways!)

Smith is offense (not instant, but still offense) and hustle off the bench while BG is resting…something Q.Rich couldn’t do…and they we also got Butler which makes up for the one thing Q is better than Smith at…3 point shooting

Madsen, according to recent reports we saved money because he was bought out, not waived. he wouldn’t have played anyways, he was just a throw in mainly

ZBO was the best player for us last year (not named Gordon)….but its not like there was a lot of talent (on the floor and performing) to keep against for that title. I see the big risk the clippers are taking by moving ZBO, but BG can potentially make up for it in the short run and go beyond it in the long run.
And no matter which way you look at it, LAC Brand is better than ZBO was last year so you can say EB was the best Clipper in their history….the same can be made with the likes of Danny Manning and maybe Sam Cassell.
I don’t ZBO’s productive half season on a hurt/dysfunctional team comes close to them.

I still doubt we are going to make a BIG splash next off season, but at least we have the flexibility to continue to build a team by picking up good to great role players to play along side our very promising young core

by KidJustin on Aug 27, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs