Summer(though it may seem far away...) - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

mac222b · 01-06-2009, 08:59 PM

One thing we haven't discussed much(I know it's hard to believe something hasn't been discussed much)is the possibility of getting under the cap this offseason and making a run at a free agent this summer. The crop isn't nearly as good as '10 but if we renounce Kidd we could offer someone a max deal. Or sign and trade Kidd. If we trade J-ho for expirings and a pick we could sign 2 free agents. As Hamb mentioned in another post Danny Granger would be ideal but the Pacers would match. Any thoughts? Anybody who has a better understanding of cap and trade restrictions than i do? As far as i can tell we'll be really close, within about 2 mil., of being under this summer. Ironically it could come down to whether D.George opts out or not! Kill me

DLord · 01-06-2009, 09:19 PM

The Mavs have no realistic way of getting max salary room this summer.

Dirk, Damp, JHo, JET, and Diop total about $58M in hard commitments for 2009-10 which is pretty close to the current cap.

mac222b · 01-06-2009, 11:41 PM

Thanks for the clarification. Let me see if I've got this straight. If we wanted to sign,for example,Ben Gordon for 5yrs.50 mil. we would have to be approx 7-8 mil under the cap for the 1st year. We can't exceed the cap with any signing that isn't:a rookie,vet min,mid or bi-annual exception,our own expiring player we retain(i.e.Kidd). So we can resign Kidd(for either 1 or 3yrs), trade him before the deadline, sign and trade him after the season or renounce his rights and use the space in summer 2010. Think i've got it. He'll want a 3yr.deal but Cuban could offer a rich one year deal, sign a free agent or 2 in '10, re-sign Dirk at a discount and resign Kidd. Can we exceed the cap in re-signing Dirk and Kidd AFTER we've signed free agents or must we have room for theirs under the cap?

chumdawg · 01-06-2009, 11:52 PM

If you are going to sign a player with room under the cap, you've got to be legitimately light on committed salary. There are "cap holds" that you have to account for. The bottom line is that it is not reasonable to imagine that the Mavs could sign a free agent this summer for more than the MLE.

But having said that, it is also probably reasonable to expect that the MLE will be competitive this summer (given the landscape of the league, with several teams keeping their powder dry for the following offseason).

So your Ben Gordon at 5 for 50? The MLE is probably close enough to get it done. If that's what the team wanted to do, of course. This next off-season could prove to be very interesting indeed.

DLord · 01-07-2009, 12:26 AM

You add up the salary commitments. Then for each free agent, you have a cap hold/charge that adds to the number as well. (If you renounce the free agents, you lose the opportunity to go over the cap to sign them, but then their hold is erased.) You also have a cap hold for #1 picks and for empty roster slots below 13.

If all of that added together is below the cap, then you have cap room, But unless it's a bigger difference than the MLE you get when you are over the cap, you've gained nothing in spending room.

So the first thing in calculating cap room is to figure out your hard cap commitments, and the fact that the Mavs are already at or over the cap with only the first 5 players - which doesn't include Kidd or whatever they might get for him in a trade and also doesn't include Wright, Barea, Williams, George, or any cap holds - and the fact that they are unlikely to simply give away any of those 5 in a salary dump at the deadline means that they aren't even close enough to make this a feasible discussion item. The reality is, they'll probably be close to $70M without even adding Kidd-or-replacement.

chumdawg · 01-07-2009, 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DLord

The Mavs have no realistic way of getting max salary room this summer.

Dirk, Damp, JHo, JET, and Diop total about $58M in hard commitments for 2009-10 which is pretty close to the current cap.

I just wanted to take this moment to congratulate Cuban on his brilliant foresight in not matching the Nash contract. Remember, it was all about future cap--and roster, if you can believe that--flexibility. Good job, Cubes. God knows you wouldn't want a Nash (expiring) contract bogging you down this season.

Dumbass.

mac222b · 01-07-2009, 12:49 AM

I just meant Ben Gordon as an example because he's not a max player nor is he a mid-level(though he's closer to that). I like him well enough he's just too close to Jet's skill set. I'm just trying to get a feel for all possible angles and what creative ways we have of remaking the team. For instance we may forego using the mid-level if the right players aren't available, as it would give us another 6-7 mil in 2010. I'm thinking it's now most likely we resign Kidd. We can offer him more than other teams, other than maybe Portland who'll have like 15 mil. free. It'll be interesting to see what happens w/ players like Ben Gordon,Marion,Artest,Rasheed,Iverson etc. that aren't max players. Another reason why not trading for Artest hurt so much. Houston can offer him more than the midlevel w/ only a few teams able to match. The teams will hold all of the leverage this offseason and there will be some bargains to be had.

alby · 01-07-2009, 01:28 AM

We aren't going to be close to being under the salary cap. This is why I want us to reload. Who cares about big/long contracts now, even with Kidd's expiring this coming summer, there's no need to be cheap now. Revamp and reload.

mac222b · 01-07-2009, 03:00 AM

It's just a question of whether we can get difference makers for Stack's contract and J-Ho. And i guess you could throw our 1st rd. pick in there too, if the right player were available. If adding a 1st in a deal w/ J-Ho could net us a Redd or VC by all means do it. We could conceivably land a really good player w/ the midlevel this offseason if we can add another big time player in a trade.

jthig32 · 01-07-2009, 08:22 AM

Can't trade our first round pick this year until draft day.

bobatundi · 01-07-2009, 09:34 AM

Merely a technicality. I'm sure we can agree to draft for someone else then trade them the rights on draft day if that's what it takes to get a good deal done.

jthig32 · 01-07-2009, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobatundi

Merely a technicality. I'm sure we can agree to draft for someone else then trade them the rights on draft day if that's what it takes to get a good deal done.

If that were the case wouldn't more teams do that? Wouldn't that completely negate the rule of not trading consecutive draft picks?

SMC0007 · 01-07-2009, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac222b

Ironically it could come down to whether D.George opts out or not! Kill me

Want to get rid of George, and have him opt out? Easy... DO NOT PLAY HIM, EVER. DNPCD, he will get the message. He's not in it for the money, he wants to play.

hamb · 01-07-2009, 01:38 PM

george is in it for the money. thats the only reason he blocked the trade last year. then we gave him the same advantage when we renegotiated his contract. shoot me.

the only way we can get under the cap this year as I understand it is if we trade howard/diop for expirings, let kidd expire and resign him for 2 mil, stack is essentially an expiring contract. where does that leave us? I think it puts us in the 45-50 million range... and if the cap is in the 60million dollar range, that should give us 6-11 million to play with. I can't find any salary information for next year to confirm this though.

DLord · 01-07-2009, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Originally Posted by bobatundi "Merely a technicality. I'm sure we can agree to draft for someone else then trade them the rights on draft day if that's what it takes to get a good deal done."

If that were the case wouldn't more teams do that? Wouldn't that completely negate the rule of not trading consecutive draft picks?

Actually that's quite legal - and it's done all the time.

The rule is actually a bit misunderstood and in fact doesn't prohibit a team from trading away it's pick every year if they want to. The only thing it prohibits is the ability, at any point in time, to "owe" two consecutive future first round picks to other teams. But once you have had a chance to use that pick, it is (a) not a pick, and (b) not in the future.

Sportstudi · 01-08-2009, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Can't trade our first round pick this year until draft day.

Is our pick lottery protected?

Kidd Karma · 01-08-2009, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sportstudi

Is our pick lottery protected?

2009's 1st round is ours. 2010 belongs to the Nets and it's not protected.

hamb · 01-08-2009, 02:44 PM

nope, none of our picks are protected! yay! so when we miss the playoffs in 2010 and the nets get a top 5 picks because of a lucky bounce, be prepared to kill donnie

Sportstudi · 01-08-2009, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kidd Karma

2009's 1st round is ours. 2010 belongs to the Nets and it's not protected.

Yeah, I know the allocation. Wasn't sure about the protection though.

mac222b · 01-08-2009, 04:39 PM

actually last year's was protected so if Dirk hadn't come back and we missed the playoffs it(Anthony Randolph?) would've been ours. We should really thank Donnie for giving not 1 but 2! 1st round picks when we held all the leverage. They HAD to trade Kidd. Thorn owned him in that deal. And then not to buy one back this past extremely deep and full of talent draft? Brilliant... They actually thought Kidd=Championship w/out any ancillary moves, bless their little hearts. And are just now? figuring out this isn't the case!