Dallas-Mavs.com Forums - View Single Post

GP · 06-28-2005, 08:11 PM

This is the dumbest bunch of crap I've ever heard. There won't be any savings at all. Just a loss of money. On one hand Cuban can keep Finley and pay him the 52 mil that he EARNS. This is not a loss. If the luxury tax kicks in all 3 years and the Mavs are over the cap for the same or more than Finely's salary then he will lose the 52 mil. If it doesn't kick in the the losses will be substantially less. Ranging from $0 to 52 mil. In any case what you are seeing is the culmination of bad contracts, stupid trades and an idiot with a lot of money.

Cuban has known about the luxury tax for years now. He certainly didn't have to make the Dampier trade. He didn't have to make the LaFrentz, Van Exel and Wahed deal. If he really wanted to save the money he could have and should have kept Walker and let his contract expire. The problem with the Mavs is not players like Finley it is having too many players like Eschmeyer, Wahed, Bradley, etc. who have outrageous contracts or are completely unproductive. Cuban has thrown his money around unwisely for years now and it has caught up to him.

I don't follow the logic that Garcia is using in his article. I think they are trying to justify a crappy move to the fan base through the media using fuzzy logic and questionable math. No way is the savings in the 80 mil range. Maybe 30 mil. Possibly 52 mil. But no more than that. Take deferred money out of the equation. That really doesn't matter at all. It is still money that will be lost for nothing. The fact is that Cuban is losing money if he pays Finley to play for someone else.

If Cuban releases Finley and pays him the 52 mil.

Cuban loses 52 mil.

If luxury tax kicks in all 3 years.

52 - 52 = net loss of zero. Great move.

Luxury tax kicks in 2 years.

52 - 35 (approximation) = 17 mil. loss for cutting Finley. NO gain.

Luxury tax kicks in for 1 year.

52 - 17 = 35 mil. loss for cutting Finley. Absolutely no gain here.

Luxury tax doesn't kick in.

52 - 0 = 52 mil. loss for Cuban.

In any way you look at it this is going to be a tremendous risk unless Cuban knows for sure the luxury tax will be in effect all 3 years.

To offset this everyone needs to realize that if the Mavs cut Finley then they absolutely cannot sign another player to replace him. Otherwise, they would be paying dollar for dollar tax on that player and they would have just cut Finley for nothing. No realized savings. No paper savings. Nothing.

The smart thing to do might be to cut Finley and then let some contracts like Van Horns to expire while buying out players like Bradley and Wahed. In that case they could get close to being under the cap (from a luxury tax standpoint) and then get more young players in the draft. Oops! They don't have any draft picks this year. What about next year? As long as they have a healthy Dirk then everything will be alright. I guess.

06-28-2005, 08:11 PM	#6
GP Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 826	RE: Potential savings if Fin is waived This is the dumbest bunch of crap I've ever heard. There won't be any savings at all. Just a loss of money. On one hand Cuban can keep Finley and pay him the 52 mil that he EARNS. This is not a loss. If the luxury tax kicks in all 3 years and the Mavs are over the cap for the same or more than Finely's salary then he will lose the 52 mil. If it doesn't kick in the the losses will be substantially less. Ranging from $0 to 52 mil. In any case what you are seeing is the culmination of bad contracts, stupid trades and an idiot with a lot of money. Cuban has known about the luxury tax for years now. He certainly didn't have to make the Dampier trade. He didn't have to make the LaFrentz, Van Exel and Wahed deal. If he really wanted to save the money he could have and should have kept Walker and let his contract expire. The problem with the Mavs is not players like Finley it is having too many players like Eschmeyer, Wahed, Bradley, etc. who have outrageous contracts or are completely unproductive. Cuban has thrown his money around unwisely for years now and it has caught up to him. I don't follow the logic that Garcia is using in his article. I think they are trying to justify a crappy move to the fan base through the media using fuzzy logic and questionable math. No way is the savings in the 80 mil range. Maybe 30 mil. Possibly 52 mil. But no more than that. Take deferred money out of the equation. That really doesn't matter at all. It is still money that will be lost for nothing. The fact is that Cuban is losing money if he pays Finley to play for someone else. If Cuban releases Finley and pays him the 52 mil. Cuban loses 52 mil. If luxury tax kicks in all 3 years. 52 - 52 = net loss of zero. Great move. Luxury tax kicks in 2 years. 52 - 35 (approximation) = 17 mil. loss for cutting Finley. NO gain. Luxury tax kicks in for 1 year. 52 - 17 = 35 mil. loss for cutting Finley. Absolutely no gain here. Luxury tax doesn't kick in. 52 - 0 = 52 mil. loss for Cuban. In any way you look at it this is going to be a tremendous risk unless Cuban knows for sure the luxury tax will be in effect all 3 years. To offset this everyone needs to realize that if the Mavs cut Finley then they absolutely cannot sign another player to replace him. Otherwise, they would be paying dollar for dollar tax on that player and they would have just cut Finley for nothing. No realized savings. No paper savings. Nothing. The smart thing to do might be to cut Finley and then let some contracts like Van Horns to expire while buying out players like Bradley and Wahed. In that case they could get close to being under the cap (from a luxury tax standpoint) and then get more young players in the draft. Oops! They don't have any draft picks this year. What about next year? As long as they have a healthy Dirk then everything will be alright. I guess.