Nash: 5 year/65M or 6 years/60M?
- Thread starter Dave64
- Start date
slinslin
Welcome to Amareca
Gambo said they have 7.5M$ to spend and they are not high on Okur anyway.
They are bringing in Ginobili tomorrow because San Antonio is supposedly low-balling him because they think they can't afford to resign Parker down the line otherwise.
They are bringing in Ginobili tomorrow because San Antonio is supposedly low-balling him because they think they can't afford to resign Parker down the line otherwise.
slinslin
Welcome to Amareca
Do we even know the 16.3 is correct? The cap won't be set until July 14th or so.
According to hoopshype we should have 18M$ caproom if it is indeed set at 46M$.
According to hoopshype we should have 18M$ caproom if it is indeed set at 46M$.
capologist
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
- Posts
- 415
- Reaction score
- 65
Hmm. The media reports are inconsistent. Some say it is $65M for six years; others say it is $65M for the first five years.
I saw one report that says that the $65M figure includes the salary for the first five years and the guaranteed part of the sixth year. Specifically, this report claimed that it pays $60M over the first five years ($10M, $11M, $12M, $13M, and $14M, respectively), and then we can either buy out the sixth year for $5M, or keep him for $15M.
Dave64's observation is an interesting one. A six-year contract that starts at $8.8M and increases by $880K/yr would be worth a total of $66M over six years. That seems like an interesting coincidence, no? That seems to support the theory that the $65M is actually the six-year total.
Miscellaneous note: Unless we really need all that extra cap room this year, maybe we should give Nash a higher starting salary instead of the 10% raises. That way, his contract won't become as much of a problem later on.
I saw one report that says that the $65M figure includes the salary for the first five years and the guaranteed part of the sixth year. Specifically, this report claimed that it pays $60M over the first five years ($10M, $11M, $12M, $13M, and $14M, respectively), and then we can either buy out the sixth year for $5M, or keep him for $15M.
Dave64's observation is an interesting one. A six-year contract that starts at $8.8M and increases by $880K/yr would be worth a total of $66M over six years. That seems like an interesting coincidence, no? That seems to support the theory that the $65M is actually the six-year total.
Miscellaneous note: Unless we really need all that extra cap room this year, maybe we should give Nash a higher starting salary instead of the 10% raises. That way, his contract won't become as much of a problem later on.
elindholm
edited for content
Miscellaneous note: Unless we really need all that extra cap room this year, maybe we should give Nash a higher starting salary instead of the 10% raises. That way, his contract won't become as much of a problem later on.
I was suggesting that back before the Suns met with Nash. I thought it would make sense to offer him a "flat" contract with no raises.
I was suggesting that back before the Suns met with Nash. I thought it would make sense to offer him a "flat" contract with no raises.
slinslin
Welcome to Amareca
I don't think that makes sense. We need to get the maximum out of our cap flexibility now before JJ's extension comes up after next season.
http://boards.espn.go.com/cgi/nba/request.dll?MESSAGE&room=nba_pho&id=161346
If these numbers are correct, then we have about 8M to spend!
If these numbers are correct, then we have about 8M to spend!
JCSunsfan
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2002
- Posts
- 22,114
- Reaction score
- 6,547
Dave64 said:
Thats probably due to differences of opinion on what the cap will actually be. Numbers are due out the 10th I believe. Some think the new cap will be at 45 mill instead of 44.
If it ends up 45, it would put Nash's first year at 9.8 mil which is about right.
JCSunsfan
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2002
- Posts
- 22,114
- Reaction score
- 6,547
elindholm said:
Eric, my understanding is that the deal is 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 (10% increases each year allow the first # to be slightly under 10 million, probably 9.8, but I am too lazy to do the exact #'s) with a team option for the 6th year (buyout at 5 million). That's a total of $65 million guaranteed, even if the team buys out the 6th year.
Eric, are you really going to have such polar opinions based upon a $2 mil difference in salary?
slinslin
Welcome to Amareca
Mmmmm if we have something like 7-8M$ we could try to make a run at Rasheed.
7.5M$, 8.25M$, 9M$, 9.75M$, 10.5M$ = 5yrs/45M$ well that's probably an attractive alternative to the 4yrs/40M$ Detroit offered him.
If they gave him a partially guaranteed 6th like Nash they could probably offer 5yrs/50M$ compared to Detroits supposed offer of 4yrs/40M$.
I remember Rasheed said that 50% of the decision is made by his family. Where they want to settle down.
Think they might prefer Phoenix over Detroit?
The interessting thing would be that giving Rasheed a 5yr contract would give us cap relief in 5yrs because Marion, Rasheed and Nash will be expiring all in the same year if we buyout Nash's final year.
7.5M$, 8.25M$, 9M$, 9.75M$, 10.5M$ = 5yrs/45M$ well that's probably an attractive alternative to the 4yrs/40M$ Detroit offered him.
If they gave him a partially guaranteed 6th like Nash they could probably offer 5yrs/50M$ compared to Detroits supposed offer of 4yrs/40M$.
I remember Rasheed said that 50% of the decision is made by his family. Where they want to settle down.
Think they might prefer Phoenix over Detroit?
The interessting thing would be that giving Rasheed a 5yr contract would give us cap relief in 5yrs because Marion, Rasheed and Nash will be expiring all in the same year if we buyout Nash's final year.
Last edited:
elindholm
edited for content
Eric, my understanding is that the deal is 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 (10% increases each year allow the first # to be slightly under 10 million, probably 9.8, but I am too lazy to do the exact #'s) with a team option for the 6th year (buyout at 5 million). That's a total of $65 million guaranteed, even if the team buys out the 6th year.
Right, I know that has been reported, but so have other, contradictory sets of numbers. So at this point, I don't see how we can think that one is "more correct" than the others.
Eric, are you really going to have such polar opinions based upon a $2 mil difference in salary?
You'd better believe it. That's the difference between $5 million and $7 million for the other player they sign -- or, for that matter, a completely separate $2 million player to go along with a $5 million one.
Edit: And by the way, the raises can't compound. The maximum annual raise is 10% of the first year's salary. So 10, 11, etc. with a $5 million buyout would work exactly.
Right, I know that has been reported, but so have other, contradictory sets of numbers. So at this point, I don't see how we can think that one is "more correct" than the others.
Eric, are you really going to have such polar opinions based upon a $2 mil difference in salary?
You'd better believe it. That's the difference between $5 million and $7 million for the other player they sign -- or, for that matter, a completely separate $2 million player to go along with a $5 million one.
Edit: And by the way, the raises can't compound. The maximum annual raise is 10% of the first year's salary. So 10, 11, etc. with a $5 million buyout would work exactly.
cly2tw
Registered User
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2002
- Posts
- 5,832
- Reaction score
- 0
elindholm said:
That's exactly the point for some fans complaints. Nobody contends that Nash is not an allstar whose talent is a good fit for this team. It's about the reduced opportunities his signing entails that might be bothering. So, this additional mere 2 mil in the only year we are under cap to sign FAs can have tremendous impact. In fact, if we could trade Eisley's with Bull's pick, we'd exactly have enough to offer a max contract to Kobe! Alternatively, Shaq for Marion/Eisley/Lampe/pick(/Jake) is feasible under cap also.
Last edited:
