Suns to Match Johnson Offer

[lancelet's cousin]

Right, I must be wrong about Bryant. I must have him confused with some other big-name player.

But anyway, certainly you're right that we can assume Johnson doesn't have one.

What about Shaq? Doesn't he have an actual no-trade clause?
At any rate, as long as it now looks like Sarver is serious about winning it all, I'm pumped on this news. I don't see it so much as paying JJ the max as much as I do paying for championship pieces. Good to see it, regardless of an athlete's actual value. It's not our money that is being spent, but it is our team.

 

[The Commish]

What about Shaq? Doesn't he have an actual no-trade clause?
At any rate, as long as it now looks like Sarver is serious about winning it all, I'm pumped on this news. I don't see it so much as paying JJ the max as much as I do paying for championship pieces. Good to see it, regardless of an athlete's actual value. It's not our money that is being spent, but it is our team.

I don't think he does. The guy has always had $30 million per year salary, which virtually makes it impossible for a team to trade for him, not to mention that any team has ever really wanted to trade the Diesel (except for last years' Lakers). So to answer, no I don't think he has a no trade clause, but he might as well have one because he's virtually untouchable anyways.

 

[Goldfield]

I know WE front loaded Q's contract to help scare off the clip's. Also Kobe's contract was front loaded.

I think it is only giving like 74% of the first year's pay up front. I remember reading it somewhere last year.

 

[hafey2]

Actually, the 10 and 5 rule, is a baseball rule. In baseball, players with 10+ years in the league and 5 years with the same team get no trade clauses. I've never heard of anything like it in basketball.

 

[elindholm]

Come to think of it, maybe it was O'Neal I was thinking of. I have a vague memory that he had a no-trade clause with the Lakers, which was part of the reason that the Lakers had such a hard time trading him (since he had to approve the team).

But I could be wrong.

 

[elindholm]

Actually, the 10 and 5 rule, is a baseball rule. In baseball, players with 10+ years in the league and 5 years with the same team get no trade clauses. I've never heard of anything like it in basketball.

Whoops, it looks like I'm completely confused then. :embarrassed:

Okay, please disregard my last several posts in this thread.

 

[Goldfield]

Actually, the 10 and 5 rule, is a baseball rule. In baseball, players with 10+ years in the league and 5 years with the same team get no trade clauses. I've never heard of anything like it in basketball.

Whoops, it looks like I'm completely confused then. :embarrassed:

Okay, please disregard my last several posts in this thread.

Ahh we allways "disregard your posts" j/k

 

[D-Dogg]

Kobe does have a no-trade in his new contract.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Actually, the 10 and 5 rule, is a baseball rule. In baseball, players with 10+ years in the league and 5 years with the same team get no trade clauses. I've never heard of anything like it in basketball.

Whoops, it looks like I'm completely confused then. :embarrassed:

Okay, please disregard my last several posts in this thread.

Eric was close. No trade clauses can be put into an NBA contract (under the old CBA) if a player has been in the league at least 8 years, and with his current team for at least 4 years. The 4 years do not have to be in order.

The example Coon gave was that Horace Grant had a no trade clause from Orlando in 2001, but had played in Seattle and LA in between his 4 seasons.


Kobe does have a no trade clause. I know Malone did as well with the Jazz. But regardless, JJ couldn't get one. Should have looked that up first.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Yes, the extra year at 14 mil should mean a lot to JJ, however the contract that Atlanta is offering (if it is max) is about 15 mil per year. The extra year at 14 mil gives JJ an extra 9 mil and saves the suns about 6 mil.

But I agree with you, that is an offer that JJ should accept from the suns.

The defer money is an excellent idea that could really help the suns and should not matter much to JJ.

When that money is deferred, when do they pay it? Starting the 7th year?


-

If Atlanta is offering 70 mil over 5 years that would be 14 per.

Joe, the reason why the Suns tack on an extra year is to get Joe to take the deferred payment. No reason for him to without it. I think contracts can be deferred for a long time, not sure though.


Front loading is nice, but Joe's contract will still average 12.5 million for years 2-5. With the huge upfront payment, who knows what it could do to our chances of adding more players later in the season. Can't imagine Sarver would take on more salary after this.

 

[George O'Brien]

Right now the Suns are still likely to use their LLE but I think they will be even more motivated to unload Jake.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Im going to interject this next post from a previous thread as i feel its relevant.....

 

[Arizona's Finest]

ok everyone wants to keep making the argument that JJ is harder to stomach at 14 million a year. and i agree, things would be much nicer if we would have signed him last year at the discounted price. but i understand why what happened took place and hindsight is twenty-twenty. But as most have been saying is that these players have all the leverage becuase as George O'brian said earlier, you can either overpay or lose your asset because you were not sure if he was worth that extra two million a year....thats just the way it is.

In reality of the pay scale, Redd in no way deserves to be making the amount of money he is being paid and ideally he is your second best player. but hes being paid like the man because it would have been a disaster on every front if Redd bolted. All the time and money (they matched an offer Dallas handed him two or three years ago) they used developing the player would have been all for naught. Losing JJ would be a little less davastating as Amare is the man on our team but that doesnt mean he is expendable. Hes young, ideal body with a big time skill set. More so than the more heralded Redd. The suns traded for him, let him play through his inconsistencys early on, and gave him his chance, when other teams (i guess only the celtics.....) were not as sold...JJ is a perfect storm of good scouting and good development by the Suns brass and to let a player of his caliber get away at this age can only be compared to T-MAC leaving Toronto...If you remember, many of the same things being said about JJ were being said about McGrady (potential, height, shooting, less athleticism, defensive player) when he bolted to Orlando. Toronto looked very bad after they spent a high pick on him and got him to develop and then Orlando was the team that reaped the benefits (and eventually Houston...) I am not saying Joe is going to be in Tmac's caliber of player for sure, but to discount that he def. will not, is also as similar a shot in the dark. We just dont know....but the tools are there and I certaintly dont want to be thinking in 3 years..."dang all amare needs is a stud two guard like they use to have with joe."
here is my point and i will put in caps so the emphasis is realized.....ITS NOT WHAT A PLAYER IS WORTH ON A STAND ALONE BASIS (COMPARED TO OTHER PLAYERS AT THEIR POSITION MAKE)THAT GETS THEM PAID. THEIR SALARY IS BASED ON THEIR VALUE TO THE TEAM.....to my point the Lakers would love to have JJ at like 5 million, but being that they have a player at that position making tons of money, they would not value joe at the 14 million that we might be willing to pay him

Another point is that everyone wants to keep saying "If you take Marion off last years team or JJ, answer honestly who was more important to the teams success." While thats a different argument, I agree that Marion was more important last year......Saying that we are not giving JJ 14 million FOR LAST YEAR. We are paying for production over the course of his contract. And i would make the case that JJ will be more important than shawn next year and if not then, then assuredly the season after. Thats an opinion i guess but thats an opinion based on following this team very closely and i would love for anyone to refute me otherwise. So while shawn was very important to last year, my money goes to the guy who will team with Amare to make the other NBA teams crazy for the next ten years...
__________________

 

[elindholm]

Front loading is nice, but Joe's contract will still average 12.5 million for years 2-5. With the huge upfront payment, who knows what it could do to our chances of adding more players later in the season. Can't imagine Sarver would take on more salary after this.

That's a good point -- it does screw them for this year. They may not even use the LLE at this stage.

But down the road, $50 million over (the final) four years isn't that terrible for Johnson. At least he won't be comically overpaid by that point, the way Bobby Simmons will be.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Front loading is nice, but Joe's contract will still average 12.5 million for years 2-5. With the huge upfront payment, who knows what it could do to our chances of adding more players later in the season. Can't imagine Sarver would take on more salary after this.

That's a good point -- it does screw them for this year. They may not even use the LLE at this stage.

But down the road, $50 million over (the final) four years isn't that terrible for Johnson. At least he won't be comically overpaid by that point, the way Bobby Simmons will be.

I am one of the few people that are fine with 70 over 5 for Joe. I genuinely think that he will be that good.

50 over 4 is pretty big, like I said 12.5 a year. I thought there was a large amount of people that thought it would be a mistake to offer him 12/year. Might be wrong though.

I think the front load is nicer down the road, but I would still prefer an extra guaranteed year and deferred payment.

 

[sunsfn]

I am missing something here.

-------------------------------------------
LAS VEGAS -- Joe Johnson's camp was informed Saturday that the Phoenix Suns intend to match Atlanta's expected five-year, $70 million offer to the restricted free agent, according to NBA front-office sources.

Word began spreading Friday at the Vegas Summer League that the Hawks have given Johnson a firm commitment that they'll sign him to a maximum offer sheet on July 22, which the league office has scheduled to be the first day free agents can sign contracts.
--------------------------------------------

The Michael Redd deal was max 90 mil for 6 years which is 15 mil per year.

It says the offer from Atlanta is 5 years at 70 mil., which is 14 mil per year.
But, it also says a maximum offer.


This must mean that Atlanta can not offer as much as the suns can for a maximum contract.
Or, the article is not right.

I have looked for the answer and can not find it.

Is there a difference in what the teams can offer? I did not think there was.

-

 

[F-Dog]

Is there a difference in what the teams can offer? I did not think there was.

Yes, there is.

The max starting salary is determined by service time--Redd has more of it than Joe J, so teams can sign Redd for a higher starting salary.

Maximum increases (by %) and the length of contract are greater for players who are re-signing. If Joe signs a max contract with a new team (like Atlanta), he gets fewer years and less money than he would signing a max contract with Phoenix.



Anyway, this is almost exactly the same position the Suns were in with Shawn Marion. Joe isn't going to be a bargain unless he makes major improvements in his game, but he'll probably earn his contract given the new financial climate.

At first, I thought it would be nicer to have Joe for six years, but right now I'm thinking that five years (or even four) would be ideal. Unlike with most 23-year-olds, the Suns would be matching this contract to make sure they have their player for next year. If they want to go in a different direction in four years, it would be nice to have Joe's contract expire along with Nash's and Marion's...instead, they'll have to wait another year to clear out the remainder of their current team (Joe and Raja).

Six years, $70m would be even nicer, of course, but it's too late for that now. The Suns gambled on the new CBA and lost.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Is there a difference in what the teams can offer? I did not think there was.

-

To expand on what FDog said,

A team resigning their own player can offer up to 6 years and 10% annual raises.

A team signing another team's FA can offer up to 5 years and 8% annual raises.


Since we are matching the contract, it is stuck based on what Atlanta can offer.

The max starting salary is determined by service time--Redd has more of it than Joe J, so teams can sign Redd for a higher starting salary.

This is true in some cases, but not in Redd's. Redd actually only has 1 more year of service than Joe. Both players are limited to a maximum of $9,000,000 or 25% of the salary cap (under the old CBA).


If the salary cap is at 50 million next season, the max starting salary either player would be able to get is 12.5 million

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

To add a little more:

Assuming a 50 million salary cap, here are how the max deals for both the Suns and Hawks would look:

Hawks

$12,500,000
$13,500,000
$14,500,000
$15,500,000
$16,500,000

Total - $72,500,000
Average - $14,500,000

Suns

$12,500,000
$13,750,000
$15,000,000
$16,250,000
$17,500,000
$18,750,000

Total - $93,750,000
Average - $15,625,000



This is why myself and others were arguing with you so much about why the Suns should not have offered the max out of the gates. The difference in the max the Suns could offer and other teams is about 20 million.

I assumed you knew that. I guess that makes sense on why you were so adamant that the Suns should have thrown the max at him.

 

[F-Dog]

This is true in some cases, but not in Redd's. Redd actually only has 1 more year of service than Joe. Both players are limited to a maximum of $9,000,000 or 25% of the salary cap (under the old CBA).

Thanks for the correction grahamcrackr.

I hadn't realized that Redd was so young.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Thanks for the correction grahamcrackr.

I hadn't realized that Redd was so young.

No biggy.


He was a second round draft pick and got a 2 year deal. He was then an RFA and Dallas signed him to a 3 year 9 million contract (flat rate) and Mil. matched.


The one thing about Redd that people forget (because he does seem older) is that he is still just 25 (turns 26 in August) and has gotten a lot better in each season. He is a workaholic so he might be able to improve his all around game more. Hopefully the big payday doesn't stunt his hunger though.

 

[sunsfn]

To add a little more:

Assuming a 50 million salary cap, here are how the max deals for both the Suns and Hawks would look:

Hawks

$12,500,000
$13,500,000
$14,500,000
$15,500,000
$16,500,000

Total - $72,500,000
Average - $14,500,000

Suns

$12,500,000
$13,750,000
$15,000,000
$16,250,000
$17,500,000
$18,750,000

Total - $93,750,000
Average - $15,625,000



This is why myself and others were arguing with you so much about why the Suns should not have offered the max out of the gates. The difference in the max the Suns could offer and other teams is about 20 million.

I assumed you knew that. I guess that makes sense on why you were so adamant that the Suns should have thrown the max at him.

Geez, I should have known that...! Thanks!

I knew about the years and the % increase in the old cba and in the new one, but kept going back to the average and thinking that the only extra salary was the last year. (not sure why)

Actually, I have been adamant that the suns should have signed him last year, and have stated that Sarver was cheap.

But, you are right because of the way I was thinking, I thought the suns should have signed him right away and would only have to pay one more year, and at the age of JJ that is no big deal. Of course I also think he is going to be an all-star in two years!

I was thinking the other day, this atlanta club must be run by fools. They are helping the suns by signing JJ to this contract. Maybe as stated before, they are doing this just to make their fans think they really are trying to get good players knowing JJ would sign with the suns anyway. Of course, they could think that Sarver is cheap like I do and have been hoping for the best.

I remember the story on Redd, 2nd round pick made good!

-

 

[Joe Mama]

I was thinking the other day, this atlanta club must be run by fools. They are helping the suns by signing JJ to this contract. Maybe as stated before, they are doing this just to make their fans think they really are trying to get good players knowing JJ would sign with the suns anyway. Of course, they could think that Sarver is cheap like I do and have been hoping for the best.

I remember the story on Redd, 2nd round pick made good!

-

I don't know if I would say Atlanta is helping. The Phoenix Suns were not going to pay over the maximum that another team could offer. If Atlanta had been willing to offer a maximum contract there's a chance that the Phoenix Suns could have bargained at JJ and his agent down to slightly less.

Atlanta might be thinking that there is a very small chance that the Phoenix Suns won't match despite what they had been saying. At worst they force another team to pay maximum dollar, and they show their fans (all five of them) that they are trying to be active in free agency.

Joe Mama

 

[George O'Brien]

Apparently the Hawks people were convinced by JJ's agent that Sarver was trying to avoid going over $50 million. I true, it would mean the Suns wouldn't match nor do a sign and trade. It is not clear why they were so convinced the Suns are bluffing, but the public statements that the Suns pretty much removes any doubt.

The only rational basis for the Hawks behavior is to convinced some other RFA to talk to them

 

[nathan]

July 10, 2005 -- LAS VEGAS — Following closely on the market-set ting heels of Ray Allen (reclaimed by the Sonics for $80M over five years), Michael Redd (re-enlisted by the Bucks at $90M over six) and Larry Hughes (recruited by the Cavaliers for $70M over five), Joe Johnson is the very next free-agent guard to strike it very rich.

Jerry Colangelo flew into town Friday from his waterfront summer home in Carmel, Calif., for the express purpose of handling the last-second negotiations. According to a source who doesn't believe what's learned in Vegas stays in Vegas they didn't go well for the Suns.

Subsequently, agent Arn Tellem notified the team's CEO his client intends to sign an offer sheet with the Hawks. Come July 22, Phoenix will have 15 days to match once the $70M, five-year arrangement is in place.

Unless the Suns' new ownership is steadfastly opposed to flirting with the luxury tax, much less being engulfed by it when Amare Stoudemire's pending max deal kicks in a year from now, how can the Suns afford not to match?

Johnson became irreplaceable the moment Quentin Richardson was dealt to the Knicks for Kurt Thomas. It's commonly assumed Raja Bell (five years, starting at $4M) is being imported from Utah as an insurance policy in case Johnson is lost, but he's known more for his defense and nastiness than his offense. No way does Bell provide Johnson's versatility.

Another reason for matching is the savings involved. By allowing the Hawks to do the paperwork, the Suns theoretically spend less (one year and two percentage points annually for roughly $15M) than had they signed Johnson themselves for the max-which, obviously, never was the game plan.

http://www.nypost.com/sports/49860.htm (registration required)