Break Bank and pay Billips... - Page 4 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

jthig32 · 05-17-2007, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

The problem is that YOU dont decide what "Break the Bank" means. I posted it, so my logic behind it stands. I even pointed out in my post that I should have said "Break open the Bank". But since I posted the thread, I could NOT change the title. Now last season, I feel that Cuban did NOT open the bank at all. I think he pretty much just used the MLE and got two players and traded equal money for the rest. I think that Cuban should "Break open the Bank" and spend more to get us better. Whatever that entails?

Statements like the bold I why you are so confusing. Cuban used his MLE last season.

All he has to spend in free agency is his MLE THIS season. How, exactly, is he going to "break the bank [more] open"???

Please explain.

DelNegro · 05-17-2007, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

Yeah, I agree that it is a pipe dream, but the rumor mill is pretty high here about getting Billups. I dont know if we will get him, but stranger things have happened. The thing about the potential trade is this? Billups can walk away from the Pistons and the Pistons get nothing in return. Or the Pistons can try to get something back. The issue here is that all teams know that the Pistons are in a tough spot, so I dont see teams offering too much for Billups as well.

Say Jerry Stackhouse decides he just has to be a Knick and the Knicks are willing to pay him more than the MLE. The knicks and Stackhouse come to the mavs and say "Stack's defnitiely leaving, but we'd agree to a Stackhouse for Jerome James sign and trade deal". Do you A) take Jerome James because you don't want Stack walking away for nothing, or B) let Stack walk because you've got no use for Jerome James?

Quote:

As far as the salary match, Billups does not have a salary if he opts out. Lets say that he wants to leave the Pistons and thinks the Mavs is a great spot. He could then, now I am not an expert on this, but lets say that he agrees to a 1 year deal with a player option to be traded to the Mavs. Billups could accept the MLE for one year, and let the Mavs match that or any salary to get Harris. Pistons get a good PG back, and is not locked into a big contract with Harris. I know this is a stretch, but I am just pointing out something that could/maybe happen.

You are correct that if Billups opts out he does not have a salary because he'd be a free agent. However, you can't trade free agents. The mechanism is called sign-and-trade because the Pistons would first have to sign Billups to whatever contract the Mavs wanted to pay him and then trade him. Once they sign him though he then has a salary that now needs to be matched in order for the trade to work under the rules.

Billups could take the MLE for one year, but the Mavs wouldn't have full-bird rights on him for 3 years meaning that he wouldn't be able to make more than the MLE for 3 years. Three years down the road Billups won't be able to command anything near the money that he can get right now, so he'd be forfeiting a bunch of cash to do that.

Quote:

I agree that sometimes getting nothing in return is best, but if the Pistons lose Billups then they are very short on the PG spot, and nothing is really out there in free agency in that spot. Maybe a Brevin Knight.

Chucky Atkins, Steve Blake, Mo Williams, Charlie Bell, Gary Payton. Sure, not a very exciting list, but the Pistons also have the #15 pick in the draft so maybe Mike Conley or Acie Law are there. In any event they're not necessarily stuck having to accept a bad sign&trade deal just to get a PG.

Silk Smoov · 05-17-2007, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Statements like the bold I why you are so confusing. Cuban used his MLE last season.

All he has to spend in free agency is his MLE THIS season. How, exactly, is he going to "break the bank [more] open"???

Please explain.

Alot of things could happen to spend more money, namely re-sign your current players as well. Even Stack for instance, I think Cuban SHOULD pay Stack. Hopefully Cuban does not lose Stack and decides to open the bank to keep him. I consider that breaking open the bank as well. Then, even if he take a player that is in their last year of contract, and Cuban knows that he has to pay him later, then I say go for it. Finding a way to get Billups is going have him break open the bank. Dont know how it will happen, but if we get Billups our team salary is going to increase. No matter what, I think we SHOULD go back to free spending a little more to fix our situation.

jthig32 · 05-17-2007, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

Alot of things could happen to spend more money, namely re-sign your current players as well. Even Stack for instance, I think Cuban SHOULD pay Stack. Hopefully Cuban does not lose Stack and decides to open the bank to keep him. I consider that breaking open the bank as well. Then, even if he take a player that is in their last year of contract, and Cuban knows that he has to pay him later, then I say go for it. Finding a way to get Billups is going have him break open the bank. Dont know how it will happen, but if we get Billups our team salary is going to increase. No matter what, I think we SHOULD go back to free spending a little more to fix our situation.

If we get Billups, our team salary will either increase by the amount of the MLE, which is almost certainly going to happen anyway, or it will increase by the small amount of extra salary we can take back in a trade.

That is all.

mary · 05-17-2007, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CreditXpert2003

Finding a way to get Billups is going have him break open the bank. Dont know how it will happen, but if we get Billups our team salary is going to increase.

Outside of the players and owners renegotiating the current CBA, or a sign and trade, it has zero chance of happening.

Yep.

124 posts later, and the answer is still the same.

Silk Smoov · 05-17-2007, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DelNegro

Say Jerry Stackhouse decides he just has to be a Knick and the Knicks are willing to pay him more than the MLE. The knicks and Stackhouse come to the mavs and say "Stack's defnitiely leaving, but we'd agree to a Stackhouse for Jerome James sign and trade deal". Do you A) take Jerome James because you don't want Stack walking away for nothing, or B) let Stack walk because you've got no use for Jerome James?

You are correct that if Billups opts out he does not have a salary because he'd be a free agent. However, you can't trade free agents. The mechanism is called sign-and-trade because the Pistons would first have to sign Billups to whatever contract the Mavs wanted to pay him and then trade him. Once they sign him though he then has a salary that now needs to be matched in order for the trade to work under the rules.

Billups could take the MLE for one year, but the Mavs wouldn't have full-bird rights on him for 3 years meaning that he wouldn't be able to make more than the MLE for 3 years. Three years down the road Billups won't be able to command anything near the money that he can get right now, so he'd be forfeiting a bunch of cash to do that.

Chucky Atkins, Steve Blake, Mo Williams, Charlie Bell, Gary Payton. Sure, not a very exciting list, but the Pistons also have the #15 pick in the draft so maybe Mike Conley or Acie Law are there. In any event they're not necessarily stuck having to accept a bad sign&trade deal just to get a PG.

I would let Stack go, because you are taking a monster contract back. That is why I said Harris, because the Pistons would need him, and he is NOT costly and does not pose a threat health wise as well

As far as Bird exception, from what I read, when you trade Billups, then the new team gets the Bird rights.

Take a look at this:
Larry exception
Perhaps the most well-known of the NBA's salary cap exceptions, it is so named because the Boston Celtics were the first team permitted to exceed the salary cap to re-sign one of their own players (in that case, Larry Bird). Free agents who qualify for this exception are called "qualifying veteran free agents" or "Bird Free Agents" in the CBA, and this exception falls under the auspices of the Veteran Free Agent exception. In a nutshell, the Larry Bird exception allows teams to exceed the salary cap to re-sign their own free agents, at an amount up to the maximum salary. To qualify as a Bird free agent, a player must have played three seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. This means a player can obtain "Bird rights" by playing under three one-year contracts, a single contract of at least three years, or any combination thereof. It also means that when a player is traded, his Bird rights are traded with him, and his new team can use the Bird exception to re-sign him. Bird-exception contracts can be up to six years in length.

nashtymavsfan13 · 05-17-2007, 03:24 PM

Cuban can't spend more money than the MLE and LLE due to salary cap rules. He has no choice. He can't just decide to spend more and get Billups, it's not possible given the salary cap rules. How hard is this to understand?

DelNegro · 05-17-2007, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

I would like Stack go, because you are taking a monster contract back. That is why I said Harris, because the Pistons would need him, and he is NOT costly and does not pose a threat health wise as well

As far as Bird exception, from what I read, when you trade Billups, then the new team gets the Bird rights.

Take a look at this:
Larry exception
Perhaps the most well-known of the NBA's salary cap exceptions, it is so named because the Boston Celtics were the first team permitted to exceed the salary cap to re-sign one of their own players (in that case, Larry Bird). Free agents who qualify for this exception are called "qualifying veteran free agents" or "Bird Free Agents" in the CBA, and this exception falls under the auspices of the Veteran Free Agent exception. In a nutshell, the Larry Bird exception allows teams to exceed the salary cap to re-sign their own free agents, at an amount up to the maximum salary. To qualify as a Bird free agent, a player must have played three seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. This means a player can obtain "Bird rights" by playing under three one-year contracts, a single contract of at least three years, or any combination thereof. It also means that when a player is traded, his Bird rights are traded with him, and his new team can use the Bird exception to re-sign him. Bird-exception contracts can be up to six years in length.

Yes, you get a player's Bird rights when you trade for them, but since Billups is going to be a free agent Detroit can't trade him without re-signing him first. If he's signed, then it doesn't matter if the Mavs have his Bird rights or not because he'll already be under contract.

If you're thinking that Detroit could just sign him to a small dollar, one year deal then trade him to the Mavs, then the Mavs could give him big money the next offseason, that doesn't work for two very important reasons. First, that would be an obvious attempt to circumvent the collective bargaining agreement and Kevin McHale can tell you that's not a good idea. Second, Billups would never agree to it anyways because he'd be putting himself at incredible risk because if he gets injured the only money he's guaranteed is that 1 year of small money and he'd never be able to recoup the big money that was supposed to follow in future years.

Silk Smoov · 05-17-2007, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DelNegro

Yes, you get a player's Bird rights when you trade for them, but since Billups is going to be a free agent Detroit can't trade him without re-signing him first. If he's signed, then it doesn't matter if the Mavs have his Bird rights or not because he'll already be under contract.

If you're thinking that Detroit could just sign him to a small dollar, one year deal then trade him to the Mavs, then the Mavs could give him big money the next offseason, that doesn't work for two very important reasons. First, that would be an obvious attempt to circumvent the collective bargaining agreement and Kevin McHale can tell you that's not a good idea. Second, Billups would never agree to it anyways because he'd be putting himself at incredible risk because if he gets injured the only money he's guaranteed is that 1 year of small money and he'd never be able to recoup the big money that was supposed to follow in future years.

That makes sense to me. Thanks for the feedback on this. I appreciate the input you just provided, because what you just said is not a part of the basic information that mist people know about. I just wonder what Cuban has up his sleeve that the buzz is so high about getting Billups? What do you think Cuban will do in the off-season? Are you with Nike or Jordan brand? If so, then send me a PM, because I have a feeling on who you are.

jthig32 · 05-17-2007, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

That makes sense to me. Thanks for the feedback on this. I appreciate the input you just provided, because what you just said is not a part of the basic information that mist people know about. I just wonder what Cuban has up his sleeve that the buzz is so high about getting Billups? What do you think Cuban will do in the off-season? Are you with Nike or Jordan brand? If so, then send me a PM, because I have a feeling on who you are.

??????????????????

mary · 05-17-2007, 06:10 PM

DelNegro definitely deserves some "extra credit" for getting through CEXPT's massively thick skull.

I would just like to know which part of that explanation is unknown to "mist people".

Silk Smoov · 05-17-2007, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

DelNegro definitely deserves some "extra credit" for getting through CEXPT's massively thick skull.

I would just like to know which part of that explanation is unknown to "mist people".

Strike 3 Mary..I have asked you very nicely to lay off the insults and reputation comments with your negative rep you have given me, and also putting other poster name into my posts, which make it seem like I am someone else. I am pretty sure you will be getting a message from someone soon..

Please note the changes made to the D-M.com Community Standards regarding harrassment and the reputation system (changes in bold):

Harassment -- Harassment occurs when a member insults, attacks, and denigrates another member at any time. Harassment also occurs when one member sends Reputation comments to another member after being placed on the receiving member's Ignore list. Even though we realize that sports discussions can get intense, we have zero tolerance for taking an argument about a sports topic to a personal level. For instance, the use of terms such as "idiot, moron, stupid" and other derogatory terms constitutes harassment. Harassment not only includes individuals but also can apply to insults against others teams, players and groups of Dallas-Mavs.com members. Repeated critical, condescending and/or sarcastic posts toward a forum member can also constitute harassment. The inclusion of board members usernames in ones signature constitutes harassment as well.

Such harrassment will NOT BE TOLERATED and those who violate this policy will receive warnings/strikes in accordance with our 4-Strike Policy. NO EXCEPTIONS!

mary · 05-17-2007, 06:29 PM

I thought you had me on ignore.

Another lie.

What were my reputation comments again???? Are you SURE they contained a personal insult? Care to cut and paste them?

Do you honestly think I'm going to get banned for giving you TWO WHOLE negative reps in TWO days?

Do you think you have the authority to issue WARNINGS or STRIKES?

Don't expect me to back down based on your stupid threats (its not the first time I've seen you do this).

A MOD may indeed to tell me to "layoff" - and when/if they do, I'll be happy to oblige.

But let's get one thing straight.

It is blatantly OBVIOUS, you are the former CreditXpert2003. Anyone that spends 15 minutes reading your former posts can see that. I don't expect you to accept responsibility for this. But your denials won't change the fact that you've been exposed.

Personally, I find the whole situation pretty funny.

P.S. Don't think I've forgotten your heinously bigoted remarks in the political forum.

P.S.S. Thanks again for providing us with some mindless entertainment!

bobatundi · 05-17-2007, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

That makes sense to me. Thanks for the feedback on this. I appreciate the input you just provided, because what you just said is not a part of the basic information that mist people know about. I just wonder what Cuban has up his sleeve that the buzz is so high about getting Billups? What do you think Cuban will do in the off-season? Are you with Nike or Jordan brand? If so, then send me a PM, because I have a feeling on who you are.

Exactly what buzz is there about the Mavs getting Billups other than your completely implausable assertions? I have heard nothing about about Billups to Dallas other than (a) wishful thinking, and (b) your ignorance.

As for this stuff being "not a part of the basic information that mist people know about," I agree that most people--including mist people--may not know this stuff, but most mist people who claim to be more than casual fans of the NBA are pretty well acquainted with how it works.

Also, if you are a creditXpert, then send me a PM, because I have a feeling on who you are.

untitled · 05-17-2007, 07:29 PM

Personally, I think the answer is obvious:

Silk Smoov is a graduate student in one of CreditXpert's Basketball 501 classes at Baylor.

V2M · 05-17-2007, 08:00 PM

^ He's the professor himself...

capitalcity · 05-17-2007, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobatundi

As for this stuff being "not a part of the basic information that mist people know about," I agree that most people--including mist people--may not know this stuff, but most mist people who claim to be more than casual fans of the NBA are pretty well acquainted with how it works.

Funny shit.

Mods please move this thread to the classics forum.

chumdawg · 05-17-2007, 11:25 PM

There's actually one avenue here that you guys have not fully explored yet.

Let's say that Milwaukee--or whoever else...I've just heard Milwaukee mentioned in this thread--offers Billups a max, or "near max" deal.

Let's say that Detroit would love to keep Billups, but decides that they can't afford that "near max" deal. (Just like the Mavs with Nash in '04.)

But let's say that the Pistons would be interested in a sign-and-trade. It's not necessarily the dollars that the Pistons balk at, it's the dollars for that specific single player. (Again, just like the Mavericks in '04).

So let's say the Pistons ask the Bucks if they will do a sign-and-trade, and the Bucks say no. It's take it or leave it. (Like the Suns did in '04.)

At this point the Pistons can pay the freight--which they don't want to pay--or they can watch Billups walk for nothing. Not a good situation to be in. (Like the Mavs were in back in '04.)

But then Cuban calls and says, we'll do a sign-and-trade with you.

A-ha! Now we have the groundwork for a deal. The Pistons don't want to give a max contract to one single player, but they may have interest in acquiring assets at a matching salary--several assets, which can be handled separately and perhaps parlayed to the Pistons' good.

In this scenario, the Mavs step in and replace the Bucks' "we won't sign and trade" with a "we will sign and trade." If the Mavs have enough to offer, they can conceivably make it happen.

On that basis, it's not "entirely impossible" that the Mavs could "break the bank" for Billups. They could very well end up with Billups at a max contract if they so desired and if they could offer Detroit what they wanted to make it happen.

jthig32 · 05-17-2007, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

There's actually one avenue here that you guys have not fully explored yet.

Let's say that Milwaukee--or whoever else...I've just heard Milwaukee mentioned in this thread--offers Billups a max, or "near max" deal.

Let's say that Detroit would love to keep Billups, but decides that they can't afford that "near max" deal. (Just like the Mavs with Nash in '04.)

But let's say that the Pistons would be interested in a sign-and-trade. It's not necessarily the dollars that the Pistons balk at, it's the dollars for that specific single player. (Again, just like the Mavericks in '04).

So let's say the Pistons ask the Bucks if they will do a sign-and-trade, and the Bucks say no. It's take it or leave it. (Like the Suns did in '04.)

At this point the Pistons can pay the freight--which they don't want to pay--or they can watch Billups walk for nothing. Not a good situation to be in. (Like the Mavs were in back in '04.)

But then Cuban calls and says, we'll do a sign-and-trade with you.

A-ha! Now we have the groundwork for a deal. The Pistons don't want to give a max contract to one single player, but they may have interest in acquiring assets at a matching salary--several assets, which can be handled separately and perhaps parlayed to the Pistons' good.

In this scenario, the Mavs step in and replace the Bucks' "we won't sign and trade" with a "we will sign and trade." If the Mavs have enough to offer, they can conceivably make it happen.

On that basis, it's not "entirely impossible" that the Mavs could "break the bank" for Billups. They could very well end up with Billups at a max contract if they so desired and if they could offer Detroit what they wanted to make it happen.

If you'll read up in the thread, I stated that it was not completely out of the question that we could aquire Billups by a sign and trade.

But a sign and trade is not really, "breaking the bank", as Smoove stated he thought would happen. Based on Smoove's opening post, it's obvious he thought we could just go give Billups a max contract, or something close to it. He never mentioned a trade.

That what all this is about. I don't think anyone has said it's completely impossible that the Mavs could get Billups. As I said, I laid out the possibility of a sign and trade earlier in the thread.

chumdawg · 05-17-2007, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

If you'll read up in the thread, I stated that it was not completely out of the question that we could aquire Billups by a sign and trade.

But a sign and trade is not really, "breaking the bank", as Smoove stated he thought would happen. Based on Smoove's opening post, it's obvious he thought we could just go give Billups a max contract, or something close to it. He never mentioned a trade.

That what all this is about. I don't think anyone has said it's completely impossible that the Mavs could get Billups. As I said, I laid out the possibility of a sign and trade earlier in the thread.

I noticed that you said that. That's true. But I also noticed that other people used language like "100% impossible," or something like that, that Billups could end up here.

I'll agree that it's highly unlikely that Billups ends up here. Yet, I also see how it could happen. And I also think that giving Billups a max contract would be tantamount to "breaking the bank."

mary · 05-17-2007, 11:55 PM

Quote:

I noticed that you said that. That's true. But I also noticed that other people used language like "100% impossible," or something like that, that Billups could end up here.

I think you're misinterpreting this thread a bit.

The possibility of a sign and trade was mentioned SEVERAL times in MANY different posts (# 3, 18, 50, 53, 54, 56, 60, 68, 69, 81, 82, 86, 110, 113).

# 110 was really good, because DelNegro talks about specific players that would be a possibility for S & T, and why they may be difficult to use for such purposes.

But its late, and I'm tired.

If there are posts in here that said acquiring Billups was impossible under any and all circumstances, I missed them.

Besides,....

"You still dont get it, because you just proved my point that we COULD get Billups w/o trading for him. That is my whole point."

And that's a direct quote from you-know-who.

chumdawg · 05-18-2007, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

I think you're misinterpreting this thread a bit.

The possibility of a sign and trade was mentioned SEVERAL times in MANY different posts (# 3, 18, 50, 53, 54, 56, 60, 68, 69, 81, 82, 86, 110, 113).

But its late, and I'm tired.

If there are posts in here that said acquiring Billups was impossible under any and all circumstances, I missed them.

Besides,....

"You still dont get it, because you just proved my point that we COULD get Billups w/o trading for him. That is my whole point."

And that's a direct quote from you-know-who.

I know that he started the thread with the idea that we could just throw a max money offer at Billups.

However, I also waded through a good page or two about how a sign-and-trade wasn't feasible because Detroit would have to play ball with it and so on.

If the kid is right about our having an interest in Billups, there's a way it could happen--notwithstanding that he didn't at the outset know exactly what way.

mary · 05-18-2007, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I know that he started the thread with the idea that we could just throw a max money offer at Billups.

However, I also waded through a good page or two about how a sign-and-trade wasn't feasible because Detroit would have to play ball with it and so on.

If the kid is right about our having an interest in Billups, there's a way it could happen--notwithstanding that he didn't at the outset know exactly what way.

Part of the problem is that the thread didn't just "start" out that way.

That quote was from post # 84.

Silk Smoov · 05-18-2007, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

If the Mavs decide to break the bank this off-season and keep the core intact, then I say break the bank on Billips. He brings toughness, defense, leadership, big shot taker and will post guards down low.

I think Billips is the best fit for the Mavs coming from the free agency market. If we get Billips, then I say get a true SG for Harris. Maybe trade Harris for Maggette.

Take a look at this and tell me what you think:

1. Billips-------PG
2. Howard----SG
3. Magette----SF
4. Dirk--------PF
5. Damp/Diop--Center

Now look at the bench...Terry/Stack/Diop/DJ and company.

I really like this line-up if we are not going to get rid of Dirk or Howard. I see this line-up winning it all. I see Billips being the on-floor leader that we are missing, plus his experience and toughness would be nice, plus I think Billips would be an Avery guy.

Chum,
Here is the thread starter. As you see Mary and company went from this thread. Now how can ANYONE say otherwise? It is simple Mary went about twisting words and posts from there. First calling me the creditxpert person, then it became I dont know the CBA, to I dont know that we CANT spend money and get Billups. Then, when I said, that since some wanted to make "Break the bank" mean whatever they want, then all of a sudden I was stupid for talking about the rumors that are floating around here. Next Jhig talked about how Mary was the expert and I should apologize to her because I am wrong. That is simply stupid, because my thread is NOT wrong. Then all of a sudden Mary posts that she just knows the basics when I called her on it.

Then back Mary went to name-calling, insults, word spelling checks and etc. That is when a couple of more joined in. Which was not right because I said nothing wrong, and none of us know the CBA in the sense that it all works. If we want to play with the word speller, everyone here makes mistakes with spelling words and whatnots here, even on some of the posts in this thread were wrong, but then a couple of people who were making fun, forgot that they misspelled words and phrases as well. I did not stoop to that level and mocked them back. I left it alone. Dtownfinest also talked about the buzz going on here in Dallas as well about getting Billups.

I dont know how we could get Billups, but if we do it will cost us no matter what, because there is no way that I feel that the Pistons will take long-term contracts from anyone for Billups. Reason being is that I dont think that any NBA team will offer the Superstar type of player for Billups, knowing that the Pistons are in a bad situation because Billups can opt out and Pistons get nothing in return.

The point is simple. The Mavs may go after Billups and attain him in some sort of way. There are many options out there that Cuban MAY have, I dont know them or claim to know them, but something has to be brewing with Cuban because of all the buzz here.

Silk Smoov · 05-18-2007, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

There's actually one avenue here that you guys have not fully explored yet.

Let's say that Milwaukee--or whoever else...I've just heard Milwaukee mentioned in this thread--offers Billups a max, or "near max" deal.

Let's say that Detroit would love to keep Billups, but decides that they can't afford that "near max" deal. (Just like the Mavs with Nash in '04.)

But let's say that the Pistons would be interested in a sign-and-trade. It's not necessarily the dollars that the Pistons balk at, it's the dollars for that specific single player. (Again, just like the Mavericks in '04).

So let's say the Pistons ask the Bucks if they will do a sign-and-trade, and the Bucks say no. It's take it or leave it. (Like the Suns did in '04.)

At this point the Pistons can pay the freight--which they don't want to pay--or they can watch Billups walk for nothing. Not a good situation to be in. (Like the Mavs were in back in '04.)

But then Cuban calls and says, we'll do a sign-and-trade with you.

A-ha! Now we have the groundwork for a deal. The Pistons don't want to give a max contract to one single player, but they may have interest in acquiring assets at a matching salary--several assets, which can be handled separately and perhaps parlayed to the Pistons' good.

In this scenario, the Mavs step in and replace the Bucks' "we won't sign and trade" with a "we will sign and trade." If the Mavs have enough to offer, they can conceivably make it happen.

On that basis, it's not "entirely impossible" that the Mavs could "break the bank" for Billups. They could very well end up with Billups at a max contract if they so desired and if they could offer Detroit what they wanted to make it happen.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to chumdawg again.

Silk Smoov · 05-18-2007, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I noticed that you said that. That's true. But I also noticed that other people used language like "100% impossible," or something like that, that Billups could end up here.

I'll agree that it's highly unlikely that Billups ends up here. Yet, I also see how it could happen. And I also think that giving Billups a max contract would be tantamount to "breaking the bank."

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to chumdawg again.

mary · 05-18-2007, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CreditXpert2003

Then back Mary went to name-calling, insults, word spelling checks and etc.

I haven't called you a single name.

Not one! Not in this thread, and not in your rep comments!

I didn't even poke a stick at you for not knowing how to spell "Billups" (ahem!).

I busted you on your former account.

I called you out for lying about having me on ignore.

And I did my darndest to help explain under what circumstances Chaunces Billups may or may not, end up as a Maverick.

And yes, in the 131st post of this thread, I made ONE (count with me, ONE!) joke about your spelling, in response to a comment that was completely and utterly ridiculous concerning what you perceive to be highly secretive information about the CBA.

But that's it.

I'm trying to let this thread go.

It would be easier if you would stop lying.

MavsX · 05-18-2007, 08:39 AM

i doubt the pistons would let him go

MavsX · 05-18-2007, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

There's actually one avenue here that you guys have not fully explored yet.

Let's say that Milwaukee--or whoever else...I've just heard Milwaukee mentioned in this thread--offers Billups a max, or "near max" deal.

Let's say that Detroit would love to keep Billups, but decides that they can't afford that "near max" deal. (Just like the Mavs with Nash in '04.)

But let's say that the Pistons would be interested in a sign-and-trade. It's not necessarily the dollars that the Pistons balk at, it's the dollars for that specific single player. (Again, just like the Mavericks in '04).

So let's say the Pistons ask the Bucks if they will do a sign-and-trade, and the Bucks say no. It's take it or leave it. (Like the Suns did in '04.)

At this point the Pistons can pay the freight--which they don't want to pay--or they can watch Billups walk for nothing. Not a good situation to be in. (Like the Mavs were in back in '04.)

But then Cuban calls and says, we'll do a sign-and-trade with you.

A-ha! Now we have the groundwork for a deal. The Pistons don't want to give a max contract to one single player, but they may have interest in acquiring assets at a matching salary--several assets, which can be handled separately and perhaps parlayed to the Pistons' good.

In this scenario, the Mavs step in and replace the Bucks' "we won't sign and trade" with a "we will sign and trade." If the Mavs have enough to offer, they can conceivably make it happen.

On that basis, it's not "entirely impossible" that the Mavs could "break the bank" for Billups. They could very well end up with Billups at a max contract if they so desired and if they could offer Detroit what they wanted to make it happen.

GENIUS!!!!!!

capitalcity · 05-18-2007, 08:57 AM

Give him the creditexpert litmus test:

Silk, true or false: The complex and lengthy CBA was implemented by Jew lawyer David Stern and his cadre of bloodthirsty rabbi conspirators to misinform the public about the movement of men and monies throughout the league ultimately obscuring their activities to secretly embezzle said monies and funnel them to zionist agents controlling the world's financial institutions and media outlets.

jthig32 · 05-18-2007, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

Chum,
Here is the thread starter. As you see Mary and company went from this thread. Now how can ANYONE say otherwise? It is simple Mary went about twisting words and posts from there. First calling me the creditxpert person, then it became I dont know the CBA, to I dont know that we CANT spend money and get Billups. Then, when I said, that since some wanted to make "Break the bank" mean whatever they want, then all of a sudden I was stupid for talking about the rumors that are floating around here. Next Jhig talked about how Mary was the expert and I should apologize to her because I am wrong. That is simply stupid, because my thread is NOT wrong. Then all of a sudden Mary posts that she just knows the basics when I called her on it.

Then back Mary went to name-calling, insults, word spelling checks and etc. That is when a couple of more joined in. Which was not right because I said nothing wrong, and none of us know the CBA in the sense that it all works. If we want to play with the word speller, everyone here makes mistakes with spelling words and whatnots here, even on some of the posts in this thread were wrong, but then a couple of people who were making fun, forgot that they misspelled words and phrases as well. I did not stoop to that level and mocked them back. I left it alone. Dtownfinest also talked about the buzz going on here in Dallas as well about getting Billups.

I dont know how we could get Billups, but if we do it will cost us no matter what, because there is no way that I feel that the Pistons will take long-term contracts from anyone for Billups. Reason being is that I dont think that any NBA team will offer the Superstar type of player for Billups, knowing that the Pistons are in a bad situation because Billups can opt out and Pistons get nothing in return.

The point is simple. The Mavs may go after Billups and attain him in some sort of way. There are many options out there that Cuban MAY have, I dont know them or claim to know them, but something has to be brewing with Cuban because of all the buzz here.

*sigh*

You just don't get it man. This is what we've been trying to tell you. Cuban does NOT have many options out there to get Billups. Those of us that have read a little something about the Salary Cap and follow the Mavs as closely as we do, we DO know what options he has. The rules on the Salary Cap are not greek. They are read and understood by many people, as DLord showed you in your infamous thread under your other name.

Your initial post WAS completely false. You were not discussing trade, because you outlined a roster that was using all of our current pieces, minus Harris, who you traded for Maggette (which ALSO wouldn't work with the salary cap).

All we did was have a little laugh at you and explain your error. Any other poster would have admitted the slipup, thanked us for the lesson on Salary Caps, and the thread would have ended. YOU escalated this by claiming that we didn't know what we were talking about, and sticking by your statement.

In your third paragraph, you once again show that you're not even bothering to read what we've tried to explain to you. If the Pistons are not going to take back long term, big salary for Billups, then our literal, only option is to get him for the MLE, which would not cost a lot. Your entire premise is wrong. You keep acting like there's a bunch of loopholes out there that Cuban can find to pay Billups a big contract in free agency, and it's just not true.

DelNegro · 05-18-2007, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

There's actually one avenue here that you guys have not fully explored yet.

Let's say that Milwaukee--or whoever else...I've just heard Milwaukee mentioned in this thread--offers Billups a max, or "near max" deal.

Let's say that Detroit would love to keep Billups, but decides that they can't afford that "near max" deal. (Just like the Mavs with Nash in '04.)

But let's say that the Pistons would be interested in a sign-and-trade. It's not necessarily the dollars that the Pistons balk at, it's the dollars for that specific single player. (Again, just like the Mavericks in '04).

So let's say the Pistons ask the Bucks if they will do a sign-and-trade, and the Bucks say no. It's take it or leave it. (Like the Suns did in '04.)

At this point the Pistons can pay the freight--which they don't want to pay--or they can watch Billups walk for nothing. Not a good situation to be in. (Like the Mavs were in back in '04.)

But then Cuban calls and says, we'll do a sign-and-trade with you.

A-ha! Now we have the groundwork for a deal. The Pistons don't want to give a max contract to one single player, but they may have interest in acquiring assets at a matching salary--several assets, which can be handled separately and perhaps parlayed to the Pistons' good.

In this scenario, the Mavs step in and replace the Bucks' "we won't sign and trade" with a "we will sign and trade." If the Mavs have enough to offer, they can conceivably make it happen.

On that basis, it's not "entirely impossible" that the Mavs could "break the bank" for Billups. They could very well end up with Billups at a max contract if they so desired and if they could offer Detroit what they wanted to make it happen.

It's plausible, but if Billups decides he wants to be a Buck he can just go there and that's that. The Bucks don't need the Pistons assistance in offering Billups big money like the Mavs do.

But lets assume that Billups is just using the Bucks for leverage into getting a bigger deal out of Detroit or Dallas. If Detroit balks at the price to keep Billups, they'd still have to accept taking on salary close to that amount in order to sign and trade him because both Detroit and Dallas are over the cap and need to match salaries. So if Detroit doesn't want to pay near max money to keep Billups, what player, or combination of players on the Mavs' roster is Detroit going to be okay with paying similar money too? There really isn't anyone.

Silk Smoov · 05-18-2007, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capitalcity

Give him the creditexpert litmus test:

Silk, true or false: The complex and lengthy CBA was implemented by Jew lawyer David Stern and his cadre of bloodthirsty rabbi conspirators to misinform the public about the movement of men and monies throughout the league ultimately obscuring their activities to secretly embezzle said monies and funnel them to zionist agents controlling the world's financial institutions and media outlets.

I dont have the slightest ideal on what you are talking about. Maybe you could have Mary take the test...I am going to be through with the junk, because Mary can make anyone of us who she wants. She got you at "Hello"

I dont know the ages of people here, but I am hitting 40 soon, and dont have time for mind games with Mary and a couple of others who play with words and twist and hi-jack threads for their own cause. It is plain and simple with Chum pointed out, and still I would think that some would have the decency to say that they did not know their were other options for CBA for the Mavs. I guess that would be too easy. So as to you, think about how you sound with that question above. Move forward...

jthig32 · 05-18-2007, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

...I dont know the ages of people here, but I am hitting 40 soon, and dont have time for mind games with Mary and a couple of others who play with words and twist and hi-jack threads for their own cause. It is plain and simple with Chum pointed out, and still I would think that some would have the decency to say that they did not know their were other options for CBA for the Mavs. I guess that would be too easy. So as to you, think about how you sound with that question above. Move forward...

Please detail these other options. The possiblity of a sign and trade was discussed several times in this thread, by people other than you. You did not bring up a sign and trade, you latched onto it when someone mentioned it.

There have been no options mentioned in this thread that we were not already aware of.

bobatundi · 05-18-2007, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silk Smoov

I dont know the ages of people here, but I am hitting 40 soon, and dont have time for mind games with Mary and a couple of others who play with words and twist and hi-jack threads for their own cause. It is plain and simple with Chum pointed out, and still I would think that some would have the decency to say that they did not know their were other options for CBA for the Mavs. I guess that would be too easy. So as to you, think about how you sound with that question above. Move forward...

Mary, he's onto you about the cause. Stop posting now or he may get to the bottom of the great conspiracy to keep from breaking the bank.

mary · 05-18-2007, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobatundi

Mary, he's onto you about the cause. Stop posting now or he may get to the bottom of the great conspiracy to keep from breaking the bank.

First rule about The Cause...is nobody talks about The Cause.

capitalcity · 05-18-2007, 09:49 AM

might solve a mystery... or re-write history

dalmations202 · 05-18-2007, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

There's actually one avenue here that you guys have not fully explored yet.

Let's say that Milwaukee--or whoever else...I've just heard Milwaukee mentioned in this thread--offers Billups a max, or "near max" deal.

Let's say that Detroit would love to keep Billups, but decides that they can't afford that "near max" deal. (Just like the Mavs with Nash in '04.)

But let's say that the Pistons would be interested in a sign-and-trade. It's not necessarily the dollars that the Pistons balk at, it's the dollars for that specific single player. (Again, just like the Mavericks in '04).

So let's say the Pistons ask the Bucks if they will do a sign-and-trade, and the Bucks say no. It's take it or leave it. (Like the Suns did in '04.)

At this point the Pistons can pay the freight--which they don't want to pay--or they can watch Billups walk for nothing. Not a good situation to be in. (Like the Mavs were in back in '04.)

But then Cuban calls and says, we'll do a sign-and-trade with you.

A-ha! Now we have the groundwork for a deal. The Pistons don't want to give a max contract to one single player, but they may have interest in acquiring assets at a matching salary--several assets, which can be handled separately and perhaps parlayed to the Pistons' good.

In this scenario, the Mavs step in and replace the Bucks' "we won't sign and trade" with a "we will sign and trade." If the Mavs have enough to offer, they can conceivably make it happen.

On that basis, it's not "entirely impossible" that the Mavs could "break the bank" for Billups. They could very well end up with Billups at a max contract if they so desired and if they could offer Detroit what they wanted to make it happen.

This still doesn't even come close to my definition of break the bank. Yes, under certain circumstances the Mavs could do a SNT with Detroit. But to do this the Mavs must lose players close to the contract that Billups would sign, and the trading must be done with Detroit -- ie Dumars gets to be involved. Also, let's just agree up front that Billups doesn't take the MLE, so the Mavs cannot just sign him outright.

76. Can a free agent be signed and immediately traded?

Under no circumstances can a team sign and then trade another team's free agent. But there is a rule that allows teams to re-sign their own free agents for trading purposes, called the sign-and-trade rule. Under the sign-and-trade rule, the player is re-signed and immediately traded to another team. This is done by adding a clause to the contract which stipulates that the contract is invalid if the player's rights are not traded to the specific team within 48 hours.

No other team can just SNT him only the Pistons. Any team under the Salary cap by the amount that he would sign for... ie close to max, can sign him. Not the teams under the luxury cap, the ones under the salary cap. IE their are only a few (I think 4 ) teams actually far enough under the cap at this time. These are the only teams that can sign Billups to a FA deal....those and the Pistons. The Pistons using his Bird rights can sign him to any salary they want, including going well over the luxury tax. The Pistons have the right to trade him within 48 hrs to any team, provided that the Pistons will take back within 125% of the amount of salary for the first year of the trade. If Billups signs for say 70 million over 5 years, starting at 12 million with an increase of 1mill every year, then the Pistons would have to take back 9.6m in salary for next year minimum.

Net increase in salary -- 12 - 9.6 = 2.4M Now 2.4M would more than break my bank account, but I don't think that amount is party money during his single days for Cuban.
So although he could be acquired, lets face it, it wouldn't break the bank.

Now, let's go with the odds.
Billups takes the MLE -- 1 in forget it too many 0's.
Billups signs with one of the few teams under the cap --- 1 in 200
Billups convinces Detroit to do a SNT -- 1 in 80
Billups convinces Detroit to do a SNT - Detroit decides to take back close to max salary because they can gain players/picks, Dallas is the team that offers the best players/picks/salary structure, and somehow the best team in the east and the best team in the west want to break up core players --- 1 in too many 0's.
Billups signs with the Pistons and they just pay the tax. --- 1 in 2

Possible yes -- I really think that the odds are better that we are involved in a nuclear war with Iran and their is no NBA season, than Billups ending up in Dallas next year - although I must agree it is a possibility no matter how unlikely.

Good reading for novices on the Salary cap:
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

Oh yea, I'm about 40 as well, and Silk it would have been much easier to just admit you were wrong up front than make this into a long thread about something that odds are against ever happening.

u2sarajevo · 05-18-2007, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalmations202

Good reading for novices on the Salary cap:
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

Thanks for the link. That's like a Salary Cap 501 class....

bobatundi · 05-18-2007, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capitalcity

might solve a mystery... or re-write history

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to capitalcity again.