pad300
03-15-2009, 04:19 PM
I have seen numerous times, particularly in the Mensah-Bonsu to sign with raptors thread the supposition that the Spurs already have 5 bigs locked in for 09/10 - Duncan, Thomas, Bonner, Oberto, and Mahinmi (the argument goes therefore we don't have room for a project big besides Mahinmi...especially with Gooden on board).
However, it is my understanding that Oberto's contract is only partially guaranteed next year - if he is cut before Aug 25, 2009, he is only owed 1.9 million rather than 3.8 million. Similarly, with Bowen's contract, he is owed 4 million, but only 2 if cut by Aug 25, 2009. I think it is clear that neither of these players could command that money on the open market - both would be lucky to get vet minimum contracts. Also, neither is playing serious minutes this season (to date). So, while we will wait on the question of either of them producing playoff heroics this spring, the question of their futures comes up.
Do the Spurs owe either Bowen or Oberto enough loyalty to pay their full contract without taking the team option on next year? Note that even if the team option was taken, and then they were brought back on minimum contracts, both money and significant capspace would be saved (Bowen 4 million in both wages and capspace vs ~2.8 million in effective* wages and capspace. Similarly Oberto is 3.8 Million vs. 2.7 Million).
Also, do the spurs look at this as an opportunity to move up their 2010 rebuild plan? Oberto and Bowen's partially guaranteed contracts are potentially very valuable trade bait for a team looking at significant financial losses, as they offer immediate, ie. prior to the completion of the 2010 season financial relief. By themselves, they could bring in salary worth up to 9.85 Million... With another expiring 2010 expiring - eg Bonner, Finley, whomever, they could bring in even more.
* 2 Million Buyout + 800K in vet min money, with the rest from the league http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
When a player has been in the NBA for three or more seasons, and is playing under a one-year, ten-day or rest-of-season contract, the league actually reimburses the team for part of his salary - any amount above the minimum salary level for a two-year veteran. For example, in 2005-06 the minimum salary for a two-year veteran is $719,373, so for a ten-year veteran, with a minimum salary of $1,138,500, the league would reimburse the team $419,127. Only the two-year minimum salary is included in the team salary, not the player's full salary. They do this so teams won't shy away from signing older veterans simply because they are more expensive when filling out their last few roster spots.
and
When determining the amount of tax a team owes, the league uses its team salary (see question number 14) on the date of their last regular season game (i.e., if a player is traded away before the end of the season, then none of his salary is taxed), with the following adjustments:
...
* For minimum salary players whose salary is partially paid by the league (see question number 11) only the amount paid by the team (the two-year minimum salary) is taxed.
However, it is my understanding that Oberto's contract is only partially guaranteed next year - if he is cut before Aug 25, 2009, he is only owed 1.9 million rather than 3.8 million. Similarly, with Bowen's contract, he is owed 4 million, but only 2 if cut by Aug 25, 2009. I think it is clear that neither of these players could command that money on the open market - both would be lucky to get vet minimum contracts. Also, neither is playing serious minutes this season (to date). So, while we will wait on the question of either of them producing playoff heroics this spring, the question of their futures comes up.
Do the Spurs owe either Bowen or Oberto enough loyalty to pay their full contract without taking the team option on next year? Note that even if the team option was taken, and then they were brought back on minimum contracts, both money and significant capspace would be saved (Bowen 4 million in both wages and capspace vs ~2.8 million in effective* wages and capspace. Similarly Oberto is 3.8 Million vs. 2.7 Million).
Also, do the spurs look at this as an opportunity to move up their 2010 rebuild plan? Oberto and Bowen's partially guaranteed contracts are potentially very valuable trade bait for a team looking at significant financial losses, as they offer immediate, ie. prior to the completion of the 2010 season financial relief. By themselves, they could bring in salary worth up to 9.85 Million... With another expiring 2010 expiring - eg Bonner, Finley, whomever, they could bring in even more.
* 2 Million Buyout + 800K in vet min money, with the rest from the league http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
When a player has been in the NBA for three or more seasons, and is playing under a one-year, ten-day or rest-of-season contract, the league actually reimburses the team for part of his salary - any amount above the minimum salary level for a two-year veteran. For example, in 2005-06 the minimum salary for a two-year veteran is $719,373, so for a ten-year veteran, with a minimum salary of $1,138,500, the league would reimburse the team $419,127. Only the two-year minimum salary is included in the team salary, not the player's full salary. They do this so teams won't shy away from signing older veterans simply because they are more expensive when filling out their last few roster spots.
and
When determining the amount of tax a team owes, the league uses its team salary (see question number 14) on the date of their last regular season game (i.e., if a player is traded away before the end of the season, then none of his salary is taxed), with the following adjustments:
...
* For minimum salary players whose salary is partially paid by the league (see question number 11) only the amount paid by the team (the two-year minimum salary) is taxed.