Cuban left with tough decision

[kriD]

Cuban left with tough decision

By ART GARCIA
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

LAS VEGAS - Deciding on Michael Finley's future with the Mavericks has been anything but easy on Mark Cuban.

The Mavs owner has pored through scenario after scenario searching for a loophole in the new collective bargaining agreement to keep the team's longest-tenured player and captain.

Sitting in the bleachers as the Mavs summer league team practiced in a Las Vegas gym, Cuban admitted that a difficult decision is on the horizon. As for the loophole, Cuban would be better off searching for snow on the Vegas Strip.

"I've looked through more spread sheets than I can imagine," Cuban said Thursday. "You know me, I'm always looking for every angle, for every edge. I just don't know how it will play out."

The prospect of releasing Finley under the "amnesty rule" remains a strong possibility, though the probability of a trade continues to improve. Cuban added: "It's not a foregone conclusion that Fin is gone."

Finley's value appears to be increasing as the market for proven shooting guards begins to dry up. Seattle's Ray Allen and Milwaukee's Michael Redd, considered the top two available shooting guards coming into free agency, have agreed to return to their old teams.

"We're looking to fill holes, and there is no question the phone has been ringing about Mike now that Allen and Redd have come off the board," Mavs president of basketball operations Donnie Nelson said.

The Mavs have received several offers for Finley, but Nelson expects negotiations to heat up when Phoenix restricted free agent Joe Johnson makes his decision.

Washington unrestricted free agent Larry Hughes is also in play.

"We'll know more after the situation with Johnson is settled," Nelson said. "It will probably be sometime next week before that happens."

The Mavs can waive Finley as early as July 22 under the "amnesty rule," a one-time provision in the new CBA. Such a move could save the team up to $51.8 million in luxury tax payments over the next three seasons.

"It was not something I expected," Cuban said of the new rule. "It came out of left field."

Though Finley would still receive the $51.8 million left on his contract, provisions in his contract allow for approximately $30 million to be deferred. The savings over the next three years -- luxury tax and deferments -- could be in the $80 million range.

However, the Mavs would be better off financially trading Finley for expiring contracts. That would allow the team to take the last two years of Finley's contract ($35.8 million) off the books completely, allowing the Mavs the opportunity to get their payroll close to or below the luxury tax threshold.

"[Trading Finley] makes sense if it's for last-year guys," Cuban said. "We get players we can plug in, plus the luxury tax savings."

Teams with expiring contracts that could be interested in Finley include Houston, Indiana and Chicago.

Finley is scheduled to earn $15.9 million next season. Contracts of traded players have to match within 125 percent of one another.

Examples of possible trades for expiring contracts include: Houston could package Clearance Weatherspoon, Vin Baker and Charlie Ward; Indiana has Scot Pollard, Fred Jones and the contract of retired guard Reggie Miller; and Chicago has Antonio Davis.

Cleveland is in the market for a shooting guard and has the salary cap room to absorb Finley's contract, but the Cavaliers are also in talks with Johnson and Hughes.

If the Mavs did deal Finley, the "amnesty rule" could be used on Tariq Abdul-Wahad, saving up to $15 million in luxury tax. Since Abdul-Wahad's contract isn't fully guaranteed, the Mavs would pocket almost $10 million more.

[Thespiralgoeson]

"Cuban added: 'It's not a foregone conclusion that Fin is gone.'"

It's really pointless to say such a thing now, other than just for PR. If it wasn't a forgone conclusion that Finley won't be here next season, Donnie and Cuban certainly wouldn't be talking about all this so publicly. I'm still optimistic about the future, but it will nevertheless be a very sad day when Fin is waived or traded. Fin deserves nothing but the best from this organization and hope that we'll see his jersey retired very soon. A position for him in the front office would be nice as well.

[poohrichardson]

Pollard/Jones/(Reggie) seems like it would be the best trade to pull off regarding Fin.. especially if we could talk Reggie into playing the last year of his contract.. Fred Jones seems to have potential, especially given his athleticism, and Pollard could be an alright pick up for a big man off the bench for defensive purposes..

[Wiley_e]

Originally posted by: Thespiralgoeson Fin deserves nothing but the best from this organization and hope that we'll see his jersey retired very soon. A position for him in the front office would be nice as well.

Don't you think it's a little early to talk about Finley's retirement?

The guy's how old - 32? He was the ironman, remember? I don't expect him to call it a career before he is s.th. like 36 or even later, and before that his jersey surely won't be retired anywhere!

[GP]

I am not seeing any teams motivation to trade for Finley and that contract. Especially teams with expiring contracts. Why take the financial hit yourselves if Cuban is willing? Let Cuban eat the 52 mil on his contract and then sign him for pennies on the dollar. Of course, this is the NBA where a dumbass owners are a dime a dozen. All it takes is one sucker.

[Lonely PSU Mavs Fan]

Originally posted by: GP
I am not seeing any teams motivation to trade for Finley and that contract. Especially teams with expiring contracts. Why take the financial hit yourselves if Cuban is willing? Let Cuban eat the 52 mil on his contract and then sign him for pennies on the dollar. Of course, this is the NBA where a dumbass owners are a dime a dozen. All it takes is one sucker.

The only reason i could see an owner wanting to trade for Fin is if he really wanted a him and did not want to risk either Cuban not releasing him, or some other team picking him up

[Just211]

The Mavs have received several offers for Finley, but Nelson expects negotiations to heat up when Phoenix restricted free agent Joe Johnson makes his decision.

This is good news to me. I'm not a 100% sure anyone would want him with his current contract. But as long as there seems to be something out there for him, I'm relieved. Trading him is a way better option than cutting him. 1st, we get talent, 2nd, we could save more $, and 3rd, we control his destination.

[Stressboy]

The reason to trade for Finley is that after he is cut, he is still going to cost a team 30mil for 5 years at the ful MLE. Trust me that there will be 3-5 teams bidding for him. That is going to be his Free Agent price tag. So if you trade some contracts you don't that equal 15 mil and you have the possiblity of trading him in his last year, you would be stupid to use your MLE instead of trading.

The question is what will teams give us for him? This article had some of the best offers I've seen since we were not taking back any bad contracts. I guess that means if we do take back a bad contract, we could probably get a lot more talent.

Pollard/Fred Jones/Reggie is not something I would have ever thought they could get, but hell if that is ever really offered then this whole thing will have eneded better than expected.

[MavsFanFinley]

Spiral, I agree.

I don't care to hear or read Cuban's bullshit. You don't go around talking like they have done to only hang on to Finley in the end.

While I do believe teams have called and made some pitches to the Mavs for Finley, I have a hard time believing that teams are lining up to rid themselves of expiring contracts.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally posted by: Just211
The Mavs have received several offers for Finley, but Nelson expects negotiations to heat up when Phoenix restricted free agent Joe Johnson makes his decision.

This is good news to me. I'm not a 100% sure anyone would want him with his current contract. But as long as there seems to be something out there for him, I'm relieved. Trading him is a way better option than cutting him. 1st, we get talent, 2nd, we could save more $, and 3rd, we control his destination.

The way shooting guards are getting payed in the off-season, it may be a good market for a Fin trade. The Mavs rock at trades, it's free agency that always worries me.

[kg_veteran]

Tough decision? What a bunch of PR. The decision has already been made. The only reason they're talking about exploring trades is so that they can tell fans "Hey, we tried" when they cut Finley loose.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

"Cuban added: 'It's not a foregone conclusion that Fin is gone.'"

Sometimes I think that Cuban thinks we're all morons sometimes. Not only is that a ridiculous statement, but the whole article after that is how the trade market for Fin will heat up after the top tier shooting guards are signed.

[sike]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran
Tough decision? What a bunch of PR. The decision has already been made. The only reason they're talking about exploring trades is so that they can tell fans "Hey, we tried" when they cut Finley loose.

what has been said to make you so cocksure?

[kg_veteran]

I'm not saying a trade is impossible, but most of the scenarios proposed don't make sense for the other team. Also, I'm tired of the "we really don't want to get rid of Fin but we have no choice" stuff. There's always a choice.

The Indiana scenario is plausible (assuming a retired player can be traded), and there are scenarios with Philadelphia that are plausible. That's about it.

I guess if we come away with Fred Jones, Scot Pollard, and $80 million in ACTUAL savings (not $80 million in savings over the next 3 years), we should all be overjoyed. For Cuban's pocketbook, anyway.

[TomThaMavsFan]

Finley is still among the top shooting guards in the league, and while he still has some sort of value, the mavs should jump at any trade offer they get as long as they're not recieving crap contracts in return. The Pacers deal makes the most sense, but at the same time the Antonio Davis deal will solidify the back-up Center/Power Forward position either one will be a great deal for the mavs

[jthig32]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran
I'm not saying a trade is impossible, but most of the scenarios proposed don't make sense for the other team. Also, I'm tired of the "we really don't want to get rid of Fin but we have no choice" stuff. There's always a choice.

The Indiana scenario is plausible (assuming a retired player can be traded), and there are scenarios with Philadelphia that are plausible. That's about it.

I guess if we come away with Fred Jones, Scot Pollard, and $80 million in ACTUAL savings (not $80 million in savings over the next 3 years), we should all be overjoyed. For Cuban's pocketbook, anyway.

Do you not feel that relief for Cuban's pocketbook will be turned around and used to faciliate other trades, especially now that we can take back 10% more in salary?

That's what I don't understand about people complaining about this Finley thing. Regardless of what you think if Cuban, hasn't he proven that he's probably no planning on pocketing much of that savings, but rather using the flexibility to do other things for the team? I mean the guy isn't Tom Hicks, who preaches financial flexibility and then spends nothing.

[Filth]

maybe the mavs will just end up keeping fin. they can use that tax clause on bradley or tariq,.

[LRB]

Do you not feel that relief for Cuban's pocketbook will be turned around and used to faciliate other trades, especially now that we can take back 10% more in salary?

That's what I don't understand about people complaining about this Finley thing. Regardless of what you think if Cuban, hasn't he proven that he's probably no planning on pocketing much of that savings, but rather using the flexibility to do other things for the team? I mean the guy isn't Tom Hicks, who preaches financial flexibility and then spends nothing.

I can't answer for KG, but as for me I emphatically doubt that Cuban will use that money to facilitate other trades. If Fin is waved it will be 2 years in a row that we have lost a major talent with nothing in return talentwise. Really nothing in return except fattening Cuban's already overly fat pocketbook.

Cuban has spent in the past, but that is not the trend now. Every day Cuban is looking more and more like Tom Hicks. I'll believe that Cuban is a better than average spender when I see it. Still even if he spends, it's unlikely that we'll have a net gain in talent. And even if we gain in talent, we'd still be better off with Fin and Cuban can afford Fin. The money that would be saved by cutting Fin is far less %wise as compared to Cuban's income than season tickets are %wise to the average season ticketholder's income. What I don't understand is why people are so concerned about Cuban's money even valueing it over winning a championship.

[jthig32]

Originally posted by: LRB

I can't answer for KG, but as for me I emphatically doubt that Cuban will use that money to facilitate other trades. If Fin is waved it will be 2 years in a row that we have lost a major talent with nothing in return talentwise. Really nothing in return except fattening Cuban's already overly fat pocketbook.

Cuban has spent in the past, but that is not the trend now. Every day Cuban is looking more and more like Tom Hicks. I'll believe that Cuban is a better than average spender when I see it. Still even if he spends, it's unlikely that we'll have a net gain in talent. And even if we gain in talent, we'd still be better off with Fin and Cuban can afford Fin. The money that would be saved by cutting Fin is far less %wise as compared to Cuban's income than season tickets are %wise to the average season ticketholder's income. What I don't understand is why people are so concerned about Cuban's money even valueing it over winning a championship.

See, you just have some ridiculous statements in there.

Cuban isn't spending lately? What do you call Damp? The Mavs are still the second highest payroll team in basketball. You can NOT equate Cuban to Hicks. And Cuban has never done one thing to give the impression that he would create financial flexibility and then just sit on it and reap the financial benefits.

I'm not concerned with Cuban's money at all. But, he has esatlished limits for his spending on the Mavs, and any move that gives us flexibility within those limits is a move that can potentially help us.

What I dont' understand is people being so unahppy when Cuban has to limit himself somewhat, and start acting like we're the damn Clippers around here. We signed Damp, we traded for Van Horn and are paying him huge money to be a bench player. Until we are given a reason to believe otherwise, I'm willing to give Cuban the benefit of the doubt, even if I'm a little uneasy with letting Fin go for nothing.

[chumdawg]

Damp didn't add payroll. He came in trade. Salary came, and salaries went. Now maybe he added financial obligation...but maybe not. I'll be kinda surprised if Damp plays that contract out as a Maverick.

Cuban has not done one thing to give the impression that he would sit on the money? Read his blog. He said that after he blinked on the Nash deal, he thought about just putting the money in his pocket. Then he says he thought better of it and gave it to Damp. Except that, as mentioned above, he didn't give anything extra to Damp. Salary in, salaries out.

But hey, I've got concerns as a fan even if Cuban never balked at any price tag. My concern is that he is pretty awful as a basketball GM. He makes poor personnel decisions. He really should think about giving that job to someone else.

[kg_veteran]

Do you not feel that relief for Cuban's pocketbook will be turned around and used to faciliate other trades, especially now that we can take back 10% more in salary?

I just don't know. The whole point seems to be to duck under the luxury tax threshhold. If Cuban acquires those three expiring contracts from Indiana, he can let a TON of money drop off the payroll next offseason. Are you telling me he won't think about doing that? I bet he will.

I think Cuban has been more than willing to spend, but like Hicks, he spent a bunch of his money unwisely, and now he's going back and trying to correct some of those mistakes at the expense of the present.

That's what I don't understand about people complaining about this Finley thing. Regardless of what you think if Cuban, hasn't he proven that he's probably no planning on pocketing much of that savings, but rather using the flexibility to do other things for the team? I mean the guy isn't Tom Hicks, who preaches financial flexibility and then spends nothing.

Again, Cuban will spend, and I have no problem with setting limits, but if Cuban makes that Indiana trade for three expiring contracts, I'm not totally convinced he'll use that to facilitate other trades. I think it's equally possible that he will settle in and just see if the young kids can fill the gaps.


EDIT: Just FWIW, I'm a pretty optimistic guy. I don't like dumping Finley, but I see how it *might* work out okay, and I'm hopeful that Daniels and Harris can be a big part of the rotation next season. Still, I'm not going to be convinced that Cuban will spend the MLE or make a trade to take on more payroll until I actually see it. Yes, I know about Dampier, but that was then and this is now. Looking at the payroll over the next few years, I think Cuban may very well just opt to let some deals expire rather than continue to convert expiring contracts into additional payroll.


EDIT AGAIN: The latest reports are that the luxury tax will be mandatory every year. That lends more credence to the idea that Cuban would like to duck it.

[JLEEHASMUCHGAME]

Am I the only one that thinks that perhaps Cuban is being honest in saying that finley being traded or released is NOT a forgone conclusion? That perhaps, he's thought it through and he does somehow see the benefit of keeping the flying tiger's services around for years to come? Cuban is human (hey, that rhymes!). I didn't research the matter as thoroughly as some other may have, but I never really understood where people were getting the feeling that losing Fin IS in fact a forgone conclusion.

edit because filth thinks it might be true!

[kg_veteran]

Perhaps it was all the headlines saying, "Finley expected to be waived."

As I mentioned above, the LT is going to be mandatory every year. Cuban is definitely getting rid of Finley, IMO.

[JLEEHASMUCHGAME]

yeah, I've read all the articles about waiving fin, and even the articles from other teams trying to get their greasy hands on him. But to me, until something is actually done, or we do get a definitive statement from Cuban that Finley is gone, I would rather sit back and watch what happens rather than make a presumption one way or the other. Of course, considering all that has been said, I know that Finley is probably not going to be on the team next year, but when Cuban makes a remark like the one I read just now, it makes me think that there is still some hope fin could remain a Maverick.

[dirno2000]

My concern is that he is pretty awful as a basketball GM. He makes poor personnel decisions. He really should think about giving that job to someone else.

Do you think Donnie is just a figurehead? I'll bet he could find another job if he felt his input was being ignored.

Maybe a better question is, which deals to you give Don/Donnie credit for and which ones are you pinning on Cuban?

[chumdawg]

D2K, it should be obvious that I give Nellie credit for all the good ones and Cuban blame for all the bad ones.

I don't know about Donnie. I have indeed speculated on whether he might feel handcuffed (or undermined) by Cuban and seek a better environment elsewhere. But then again, I'm sure he has a pretty good gig here, all that notwithstanding.

Really there is only one deal up to this point that greatly concerns me, and of course that is the Nash deal. Donnie wanted to offer him $10MM a year for four years, Cuban wanted something closer to 8 I guess it was, and we lost him. So I pin that one on little Marky.

[kg_veteran]

You think 10MM for 4 years would have kept him here? Come on.

[echo]

I think the Pacers or Chicago deal would be great. You are taking on expiring contracts, thus eliminating two years of luxury tax on Fin's contract, and possible getting a player or two that can help out some this year, or be moved at the trade deadline. A. Davis could play backup center. I like Pollard less, but he is probably better than DJ and PPod at this point. Fred Jones has some skills and could fill a role off the bench or be good trade bait. I don't think Reggie plays anymore. I don't see any of the Houston players helping the team.

The funny thing is we still have a few people here whining about Finley. It doesn't matter if we waive or trade Finley, they are still going to cry and complain. Our owner is cheap, Finley is still a top shooting guard, he's the heart of the team, lalalalalala. If for some odd reason Finley stays and comes off the bench they will complain about AJ or Stack or Daniels. Trading him for anything less than Bron or Shaq (which ain't going to happen) is criminal in their eyes. Fact is it's time for Finley to go, and if we can get expiring contracts for him we should all be overjoyed.

[chumdawg]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran
You think 10MM for 4 years would have kept him here? Come on.

Reports say that Nash was asking for 5 and 50. So yeah, if that was the initial offer, I think a deal would have been done.

You don't?

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: echo
I think the Pacers or Chicago deal would be great. You are taking on expiring contracts, thus eliminating two years of luxury tax on Fin's contract, and possible getting a player or two that can help out some this year, or be moved at the trade deadline.

Chicago's not going to trade for Finley, IMO. Davis expires and is still a piece of their rotation for next season. Without him, their frontcourt is a bit too thin, particularly if they can't keep both Curry and Chandler.

The Pacers have to be concerned about the LT. Acquiring Finley keeps them in LT territory for the length of his contract. Are they going to pay the LT to have Finley when Dallas won't?

The funny thing is we still have a few people here whining about Finley. It doesn't matter if we waive or trade Finley, they are still going to cry and complain.

You act as if it's a completely irrational position to want the Mavs to keep Finley.

Our owner is cheap, Finley is still a top shooting guard, he's the heart of the team, lalalalalala. If for some odd reason Finley stays and comes off the bench they will complain about AJ or Stack or Daniels. Trading him for anything less than Bron or Shaq (which ain't going to happen) is criminal in their eyes. Fact is it's time for Finley to go, and if we can get expiring contracts for him we should all be overjoyed.

Talk about setting up a strawman so you can knock him down.

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: chumdawg

Reports say that Nash was asking for 5 and 50. So yeah, if that was the initial offer, I think a deal would have been done.

You don't?

Looking back at Cuban's blog, Cuban offered Steve 9mm per for 4 years with a 5th year partially guaranteed and fully guaranteed if Nash met certain games and minutes played requirements. I don't believe Cuban starting 4mm total dollars lower made a difference, one way or the other.

[echo]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran

Chicago's not going to trade for Finley, IMO. Davis expires and is still a piece of their rotation for next season. Without him, their frontcourt is a bit too thin, particularly if they can't keep both Curry and Chandler.

The Pacers have to be concerned about the LT. Acquiring Finley keeps them in LT territory for the length of his contract. Are they going to pay the LT to have Finley when Dallas won't?

You act as if it's a completely irrational position to want the Mavs to keep Finley.

Talk about setting up a strawman so you can knock him down.

I agree, I don't see Chicago making that deal. They would be thin in the front court, but if for some absurd reason it's actually been discussed then I think it's the best the Mavs can do. As for the Pacer's trade? Yep it puts them in a bad LT situation. It also guarantees they release Croshere (who has two years left). Finley is a good fit there and they do have a chance at the championship the next few years, so perhaps they are deabting Finley vs. Croshere and are willing to take the difference in LT penalties.

It's not irrational that some people here like Finley and want to keep him. I think the problem is that they are unlikely to acknowledge that Finley doesn't want to come off the bench, and that's the role AJ would prefer if he stays. They will argue he should stay and start. Perhaps he doesn't fit AJ's system as well. Perhaps AJ feels Stack and/or Daniels is better. Perhaps the Mavs brass feels Finley won't be a positive influence in that role. You have to acknowledge that he's pretty much a one dimensional player now.

Strawman? I don't dislike Finley, but I no longer see him as an important part of the team. If I was the owner paying salaries and LT I would probably try to move or release him too because Finley doesn't put us over the top. I think he's easily replaced.

[Lebanese_Fan]

"Though Finley would still receive the $51.8 million left on his contract, provisions in his contract allow for approximately $30 million to be deferred. The savings over the next three years -- luxury tax and deferments -- could be in the $80 million range."

I don't understand why 80 mill? I thought it was only 50 mill. Please clarify.

[dirno2000]

I don't understand why 80 mill? I thought it was only 50 mill. Please clarify.

The key phrase is "over the next 3 years".

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally posted by: chumdawg
D2K, it should be obvious that I give Nellie credit for all the good ones and Cuban blame for all the bad ones.

Chum, I wasn't in the room, but I'm pretty sure it was Nellie who wanted Antoine Walker.

[dude1394]

Either cubes/donnie are the folks making basketball decisions or they are not. There is one guy that I actually don't think bs's me that much and that is donnie. In the past I'm pretty sure that donnie said they went to nelson with the walker deal and he agreed. They were concerned if nelson thought he was a good enough coach to make all of the pieces mesh together.

Bottom line, I don't flip-flop between responsible parties based on the outcome. Donnie/Mark run personnel with nelson (and now AJ giving input). Donnie/Cubes pulled the walker deal imo and had all of the earmarks of cubes desire to collect fantasy player talent. Don did however over-estimate walkers ability imo and he was a terrible disruption. But to be honest the whole team was a cluster. From no center, to no sf to a coach who didn't even pretend to coach defense last year.