May 6th, Is 2005 the year of the Kwane?

[sunsfn]

There was no insider for the 5th........
----------------------------------------
Is 2005 the year of the Kwame?

By Chad Ford
NBA Insider
Send an Email to Chad Ford
Thursday, May 6
Will the real Kwame Brown please stand up?
After three years of watching and hand wringing, the Wizards would like to know who the kid they drafted with the No. 1 pick in the 2001 draft really is.
Is he the Kwame Brown who dropped 30 and 19 on the Kings' Chris Webber? The Kwame who scored 25 points and grabbed nine boards against the Pacers' Jermaine O'Neal. That's the Brown the Wizards thought they were getting when Brown told Michael Jordan that he never would regret taking him.


2004 Free agents
Or maybe Kwame is the kid who had zero points and three boards against the Jazz in 29 minutes of play. Or perhaps he's the kid who managed just three points and three boards against the Suns. If that's the Kwame the Wizards are stuck with . . . things are going to get ugly.
The problem in Washington -- and it's a big one -- is that the Wizards, three years into Brown's career, still aren't sure who their cornerstone really is. The Bulls, who drafted two high school kids in 2001, are going through the same growing pains.
How long do you wait before you give up? How much patience can a struggling franchise have? If Grunfeld trades Brown now, and he turns into Jermaine O'Neal next year . . . he loses his job. If he hangs onto Brown for another two years, only to find out that he's fool's gold . . . he loses his job.
Ah, the joys of being in charge of young, teenage millionaires.


Kwame Brown
Power Forward
Washington Wizards

Profile
2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
GM
PPG
RPG
APG
FG%
FT%
74
10.9
7.4
1.5
.489
.683
All of the pressure, ideally, shouldn't be on Kwame's shoulders, but it is. The Wizards have a stocked backcourt filled with scorers and defenders. It's the frontcourt that keeps coming up short. The Wizards need to improve it, but nothing they can do this summer will help as much as getting Brown to play up to his billing on a consistent basis.
There are no free agents out there with his upside. No one in the draft ready to come in and do what he's capable of doing. The mantle of the Wizards once rested firmly on Michael Jordan's back. Now it's on Kwame's. There's no escaping it now. If he fails, the Wizards do too. If he develops, the Wizards will be a force to be reckoned with.
Can the Wizards' front office do anything to determine his path? Here's a look at what to expect as Insider continues its summer blueprint series.
Wizards Summer Blueprint

DRAFT: The Wizards currently hold the third pick in the draft and have a 15.7 percent overall of landing No. 1. They need the help. Despite years in the lottery, the Wizards still need help in the frontcourt. A player like Emeka Okafor or Luol Deng would be another good fit in Washington.
Okafor would give the Wizards the type of blue collar work ethic in the paint that Brendan Haywood and Brown haven't been able to provide. The Wizards have drafted two small forwards the past two drafts -- Jared Jeffries and Jarvis Hayes -- but Deng is on a different level from either player.
The Wizards will also consider trading this pick. The team has plenty of young players and really needs another star in the frontcourt to anchor some pretty solid backcourt play. The team, especially if it doesn't land one of the top three picks, may try to package it along with Christian Laettner to the Bobcats. Laettner has just one year left on his deal and the Bobcats could use the extra talent. The extra cap room they would get could come in handy in free agency.

FREE AGENCY: The team has only one significant free agent, Etan Thomas. Thomas is a restricted free agent who had the best year of his career in Washington last season. He can be tough around the basket, but injuries have limited his progress throughout his career. The Wizards would like to re-sign him, but won't break the bank to do it.


Etan Thomas
Forward-Center
Washington Wizards

Profile

2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
GM
PPG
RPG
APG
FG%
FT%
79
8.9
6.7
0.9
.489
.647
As far as cap room goes, the team will be a few million under the cap once you figure in the cap hold for their first-round pick. However, if the Wizards can find a way to move a big salary off the books (along with their first-round pick) in the expansion draft (Laettner, Jerry Stackhouse and even Larry Hughes are possibilities), they could get around $10 million under the cap. That would give them plenty of room to make a run at a veteran big man to play alongside Brown.
The problem for Washington is that there aren't a lot of great ones available. Erick Dampier, Mehmet Okur, Vlade Divac, Marcus Camby and Mark Blount top the list. All could make a difference in Washington, but none is a perfect fit. Coach Eddie Jordan could also talk GM Ernie Grunfeld into making a run a Kenyon Martin this summer. The Nets have been balking at Martin's asking price, and his familiarity and devotion to Jordan could make for an interesting fit. If the Wizards really do have $10 million to work with . . . they could afford it and then use Brown as bait to land a center or small forward in return.

TRADES: Look for the Wizards to try to move Stackhouse this summer. He was injured most of the season and the Wizards were happy with how Hughes and Hayes played in his absence.


Jerry Stackhouse
Guard-Forward
Washington Wizards

Profile

2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
GM
PPG
RPG
APG
FG%
FT%
26
13.9
3.6
4.0
.399
.806
Is Stackhouse tradable? He has three years, $25 million left on his contract. That's not an unreasonable amount. If the Wizards were willing to swallow a big contract in return, they might find a taker.
Brown remains their most tradeable commodity. He showed enough flashes of greatness last season to keep teams very interested in him. While Brown still appears to lack the fire to be a go-to guy on any team, his skills at his size are undeniable. The Wizards won't give him away, but if they can get significantly better in the process, they have to consider it.
The team may also make a decision between Jeffries and Hayes. They don't need both players. Hayes is a better fit in Washington's system, meaning that Jeffries should keep his bags packed.

COACHING: Jordan is the man. He was the brains behind the Nets' free-flowing offense and eventually, with the right players, you'll see the Wizards flowing too. He just needs more time and few changes to get things in place. The Wizards are committed to him. How weird does that sound given that we are talking about the Eastern Conference here.

FRONT OFFICE: Ernie Grunfeld is one of the best GMs in the league. He spent the past year sitting back, assessing what the team had. Don't be surprised if he now rolls up his sleeves and starts making changes. The team has too many guards and too many young players. He needs to swap some of that for some veteran low-post players to surround Kwame with. Grunfeld has a knack for finding talent and he'll do something to address the issue this year.
Despite the mounting losses, the future in Washington should be bright. Brown still has the potential to be a star. Arenas too. The rest of the supporting cast are assets that can be moved for the right pieces. There's still a lot of work to be done in Washington, but a 35-win season for the Wizards next season should be possible.

 

[elindholm]

Is Stackhouse tradable? He has three years, $25 million left on his contract.

He does? That's not what hoopshype says. They have him at $40 million over the next five.

 

[George O'Brien]

Is Stackhouse tradable? He has three years, $25 million left on his contract.

He does? That's not what hoopshype says. They have him at $40 million over the next five.

Patricia's has:

Jerry Stackhouse ...... 1/22/99,6/26/03 7+2 $37 mill + $18 mill '07

 

[elindholm]

I'm familiar with Patricia Bender's name, but not her shorthand. What the <expletive deleted> are those glyphs supposed to mean?

 

[Errntknght]

>>Jerry Stackhouse ...... 1/22/99,6/26/03 7+2 $37 mill + $18 mill '07<<

It looks like a 7 year contract signed 1/22/99 for 37mill + a 2 year extension for 18mill signed 6/26/03.
A total of nine years starting with 99-00 season makes him an FA in 08, four years from now. That doesn't agree with either of the other guesses. It also doesn't sound right to me - he would have gotten an extension with three years remaining for one thing. The number at the end is when he'd be an FA, I'm guessing, so that doesn't match.

Maybe it means a total of seven years including a two year extension. That makes him an FA in two years ('06) which also doesn't agree with either guess. Hmmmm, maybe he signed the contract 1/22/99 but it didn't start until the 00-01 season. That makes him an FA in three years and he would have 18+ 1/5th of 35 = 18+7 = 25 million remaining. Aha, that agrees with somebody! He'd be an FA in '07, too!

Sheesh, Eric, isn't it obvious?

 

[George O'Brien]

Jerry Stackhouse ...... 1/22/99,6/26/03 7+2 $37 mill + $18 mill '07

Most of Patricia's stuff is easier to interpret. My read is that he signed a 7 year $37 million deal in 99.

1 99-00
2 00-01
3 01-02
4 02-03
5 03-04
6 04-05
7 05-06

This contract would have expired in 06. They then signed an exention in 03 for another 2 years which makes the expiration date 08 not '07. Of course HoppsHype has him under contract through '09. So maybe the original deal didn't start until 2000 and ran through '07 with the extension kicking in then?

It almost works except that HoopsHype has him down for $8.5 in 07-08 and $9 in 08-09 whihc is only $17.5 million and not $18 million.

What a mess.

 

[Errntknght]

Another problem with your last scenario is that Stackhouse cannot have 25 million remaining on the last three years of his original contract... that would mean he'd have collected 12 million over the first four years and the CBA doesn't allow raises like that in long term contracts. 12 mil in the first 4 years along with 25 mil in the last 3 requires about a 100% raise between 4th and 5th years.

Also, if he has 40 mil coming over five years the last two years would account for 18 mil, leaving 22 million for the last three years of his original contract. Again that means he collected only 15 million in the first four years... still too big of a jump between the 4th and 5th years.

Another reason I don't think the original contract was for seven years is that 37 mil over 7 years means the first year was around 4 mil rising to 6 & change the last year... that just doesn't sound right for Stackhouse back then. On the other hand 37 mil over 5 years sounds about right. And you don't hear of many contracts being extended when the guy has three years to go on the original.

 

[PhxGametime]

In 98-99 - Stackhouse avg. 14.4 PTS.

It is possible he signed a contract starting at $4-$4.25 mill etc. 7 year contract - and at Hoopshype this year is at $7 mill and next 2 years at $18 mill. So 3 years left at $25 mill? Hoopshype might of saw 2 year extension and added 2 extra years?

 

[elindholm]

Well, let's put it this way: have we ever seen a case before where hoopshype incorrectly had someone's contract as being too long? I don't think so. So I'll go with them for now.

 

[elindholm]

Hmm, this is getting more confusing.

Stackhouse's extension a year ago was reported here, among other places:

http://espn.go.com/nba/news/2003/0626/1573301.html

That article implies that the extension was for the two years '05-'06 and '06-'07, and worth "about" $18 million. He had two years remaining at the time of the extension but also had an immediate opt-out in hand. In terms of years, that agrees with Errntknght's second interpretation of Bender's scrawl, but the money still doesn't work.

There do seem to be numbers that sort of work, but these are entirely made up and all approximate guesses:

'03-'04: $7 million
'04-'05: $7.75 million
'05-'06: $8.5 million
'06-'07: $9.25 million

That's $32.5 million. If Bender's notation means that the total deal is now $37 million plus $18 million, that would be $55 million, leaving $22.5 million for the first three years. That can't be exactly right -- the contract would have to deflate in the middle -- but something close to it would fit most of the reports.

So I'm going with a total deal of $55 million over the seven years '00-'07, one way or another.

 

[elindholm]

Woohoo, inflating post count!

Again, this is all made up, but try it on for size (all figures in millions):

'00-'01: $6.0
'01-'02: $6.6
'02-'03: $7.2
'03-'04: $7.8
'04-'05: $8.4
'05-'06: $9.0
'06-'07: $9.6

Original deal: $36/5
Raise size: 10% of first-year salary
Amount remaining at time of last extenion: $16.2/2
Total deal: $54.6/7
Amount of last extension: $18.6/2
Amount remaining now: $27/3

Again, not quite right, but it has to be something quite close to this, I think.

So hoopshype is completely wrong in this case. Drat! They have been my most trusted source.

 

[elindholm]

So now for the big question:

If Bryant stays with Los Angeles, how about the Suns' lottery pick and Eisley for Stackhouse?

 

[PhxGametime]

I couldn't read your posts Elindholm - don't have time but maybe this could help - I believe the 7 year contract started 98-99 lockout season, that the season started maybe in Jan?

 

[Joe Mama]

So now for the big question:

If Bryant stays with Los Angeles, how about the Suns' lottery pick and Eisley for Stackhouse?

no way. Jerry Stackhouse is a career 41% shooting guard. He is turnover prone, and he missed most of last season.

Joe Mama

 

[George O'Brien]

no way. Jerry Stackhouse is a career 41% shooting guard. He is turnover prone, and he missed most of last season.

Joe Mama

In any case, Stackhouse is injury prone.