Predictions on the Googs trade

[JCSunsfan]

Originally posted by capologist
The only reason we’d need that kind of cap room right now is if we’re going after Kobe.

Cmon guys. BC is fashioning his rebuilding model after an old country song.

Faster horses,
Older coaches,
Younger rookies,
MO MONEY

 

[F-Dog]

Originally posted by newfan101
It's possible the Suns could make a deal with Utah without having to give up a 1st round pick.

The deal would be Googs, Casey and 3 million cash for Keon Clark.

According to my calculations, Googs remaining salary at the Feb 19th deadline with be roughly 3.7 million. Casey's will be roughly $320,000. So combined their remaining salary would be 4.2 million.

However, if Utah were to trade back Keon Clark, who hasn't played at all for them, they would forgo his remaining 1.58 million in salary. So they would only owe the difference of 2.62 million. If we gave them 3 million in cash, they would technically make $380,000 from the deal, and get a nice young Mormon kid as a prospect.

From the Suns side, the deal would put them roughly at 54,400,000, or about 1 million under the luxury tax. (according to Caps figures, which currently has them at about 62 million)

I can't see where Utah would pay hardball and demand a 1st round pick on a deal that would technically make them a profit, as well as give them a nice prospect. Unless, of course, someone else offers them something better.

Any thoughts?

How about McDyess and cash for Clark? How would Utah make out in that trade? Would they still be under the cap?


The thing about dumping Casey (aside from the fact that I still think he'll be valuable, which doesn't count) is that the Suns are already down to 4 guards. If they trade away Casey too, they'll have to pick up a guard.


I guess if DerMarr Johnson starts hanging around the facilities again, that's a pretty good sign that Casey or Howard Eisley should start packing his bags...

 

[capologist]

Nice piece of work, newfan. I’m impressed.

I’d like to keep Casey around, but depending on how they’re working the tax distributions, this might make a lot of sense.

Unfortunately, the CBA doesn’t specify how the tax proceeds are to be distributed, and all you can get from the media is ill-informed speculation. (The CBA says only, “All amounts remitted to the NBA by the Escrow Agent or NBA Teams pursuant to this Section 12 shall be the exclusive property of the NBA, and the use and/or disposition of all such amounts, including the allocation or distribution of such amounts to one or more NBA Teams, if any, shall be within the NBA’s sole discretion.”)

You sometimes see columnists operating from the assumption that the rule is that teams that are under the threshhold, no matter how slightly, get shitloads of money, and teams that are over the threshhold, no matter how slightly, get zilch. However, I really doubt that this is how it actually works. Such a rule certainly doesn’t seem to be reflected in the moves made by various teams.

I believe that the difference between being $1 under the threshhold and $1 over the threshhold is somewhere between $3 and $3.50, but if it is in fact several million dollars, that... well, it changes a lot.

 

[cly2tw]

newfan101,

great thought. But indeed it depends on whether other teams have better offers for Utah than yours. But I guess we always could sweeten the deal by adding a protected pick like the 2nd from NY or the Cavs one.


In general, I still prefer to get Portland into a Rasheed for Marion trade, with Googs going to Utah which sends Clark to Blazers. We can add CJ, Jake, picks, cash to make it work. This way, we'll have a really clean slate to start off the franchise anew. We'd have Amare, JJ, Barbosa, Vujanic, Zarko, Lampe, and the lottery pick(s) as our initial talent base, plus two not so good contracts in White and Eisley which are far less easy to trade since they last longer.

When we add Kobe to that group, with the ability to have enough cap space in 2005 (White's contract being off the book) to sign another max player, we'll be contending for the title in 2 years.

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by newfan101
It's possible the Suns could make a deal with Utah without having to give up a 1st round pick.

The deal would be Googs, Casey and 3 million cash for Keon Clark.

That would be a good deal for the Suns.
Moreover I'm almost sure that they would do it.

I can't see where Utah would pay hardball and demand a 1st round pick on a deal that would technically make them a profit, as well as give them a nice prospect. Unless, of course, someone else offers them something better.

Which is possible, I think.

Bell plays surprisingly well, Stevenson is decent and Pavlovic showed some promise even in limited PT.
So I'm not sure that Jasobsen means ANY upgrade over ANY of UTA's SG's which means that he is almost totally useless for the Jazz, IMO.

 

[capologist]

D’oh! Stevenson! How could I forget?

We were discussing in another thread what kind of suspension Kobe might face if convicted in the Colorado case, and I mentioned that I couldn’t think of any remotely related precedent.

Yes I can. Stevenson. He plead guilty to statutory rape, was sentenced to probation, and got a slap on the wrist from the NBA. (Three games.)

Forcible rape would probably merit a stronger punishment than statutory rape... so maybe five to ten games.

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by capologist


Now, for Ward, I think we still have to count any salary payable to him under the terminated contract, including salary paid to him by the Knicks prior to the trade. Ward’s salary for this season would have been $6.03M, had he remained under that contract for the entire season. He received $2.57M in salary for games played prior to the buyout. I don’t know the amount of the buyout itself, but I found one article that says we saved “about $3 million in salary and another $3 in luxury tax,” so that suggests that the buyout was probably about a half million, if that article is correct.

I figure we can safely put an upper bound of $2M on the buyout itself, which means that Ward would count about $4.6M against our cap, and a best guess of a half million, which means that Ward would count about $3.1M.

My numbers above are based on the $4.6M figure, which is why I qualify it with things like “at most.” The truth is probably closer to $3.1M, which means you can probably knock about $1.5M off of the numbers in that post.

I guess that's not that complicated.

My understanding was that no more no less than Ward's 2 mil. buy-out will count against Suns' this year's team pay-roll.

"There is one other type of buyout described in the CBA. When a contract contains an option year, a buyout amount for the option year can be written into the contract. The buyout amount may be up to 50% of the salary for the option year."

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#57

I do think that' Ward's case.

 

[newfan101]

Thanks for the kind words.

As far as Utah receiving something better, in almost every case it's going to be someone dumping an unwanted salary with more than one year remaining, something they probably wont want. The remaining deals will be attempts to get under the luxury tax this year, like the Suns. However, only a handful of teams are just far enough above the tax to warrant such a deal. And of those teams, only Boston has an expiring contract big enough to get them under the tax threshold. (Indiana has Reggie Miller, but I can't see them trading him after 17 years for tax relief)

In Bostons case, they could offer Chris Mills and either Jiri Welsh or Kendrick Perkins, as well as 3 million. That would also be a no lose deal for Utah, and it would get Boston below the tax. They also wouldn't have to trade Clark, and would get a cheap young prospect. However, outside of someone offering Utah a young guy they really like in exchange for taking a bad contract, that is the only trade competition right now. That's also assuming Boston is looking to get under the tax, and is willing to trade good young talent.

Considering how conservative they've been this past year, they may look at this deal for Googs and Casey as the easiest to take on, since they get a Sloan like player whose Mormon and makes only 1 million a year, and they make money on the deal. They also wouldn't have to take on a bad contract. I can guarantee you, outside of the Boston senario, every deal they get offered will involve a bad contract, and they may simply prefer to play it safe.

 

[Joe Mama]

Originally posted by newfan101
Thanks for the kind words.

As far as Utah receiving something better, in almost every case it's going to be someone dumping an unwanted salary with more than one year remaining, something they probably wont want. The remaining deals will be attempts to get under the luxury tax this year, like the Suns. However, only a handful of teams are just far enough above the tax to warrant such a deal. And of those teams, only Boston has an expiring contract big enough to get them under the tax threshold. (Indiana has Reggie Miller, but I can't see them trading him after 17 years for tax relief)

In Bostons case, they could offer Chris Mills and either Jiri Welsh or Kendrick Perkins, as well as 3 million. That would also be a no lose deal for Utah, and it would get Boston below the tax. They also wouldn't have to trade Clark, and would get a cheap young prospect. However, outside of someone offering Utah a young guy they really like in exchange for taking a bad contract, that is the only trade competition right now. That's also assuming Boston is looking to get under the tax, and is willing to trade good young talent.

Considering how conservative they've been this past year, they may look at this deal for Googs and Casey as the easiest to take on, since they get a Sloan like player whose Mormon and makes only 1 million a year, and they make money on the deal. They also wouldn't have to take on a bad contract. I can guarantee you, outside of the Boston senario, every deal they get offered will involve a bad contract, and they may simply prefer to play it safe.

Supposedly Jiri Welsh was a big part of the Antoine Walker deal for Boston. And he ain't really likes him, and he has played well lately.

Joe Mama

 

[Forrestham]

Reading the posts, I do the merits in trading Gugliotta if it saves money. I still feel if we are looking at improving the team, we should just bite the bullet with his contract and keep the picks. While we can debate the Marbury trade, I still feel it was for the best in the long run.
I would not want us to take on another bad contract. I would not be opposed to trading picks if it meant getting Tracy McGrady.
I do not feel we can get Kobe. We would be better picking up 2-3 good veterans for 1 year contracts and waiting until 2005