Findog
04-29-2010, 11:59 AM
Wanted to discuss this now since there's a tiny chance I won't be allowed to post after the Spurs-Mavs game tonight.
Bill Simmons and Marc Stein did a podcast yesterday that is all things NBA-related:
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/player?rd=1#/podcenter/?id=5142090&########=1
Erick Dampier's expiring contract came up. So for the uninitiated, Damp has a partially-guaranteed team option for next year for $13 million. At some point it becomes fully guaranteed. Whoever is holding his rights will have the option to decline it, and instantly save themselves $13 million in cap room. If that team is in lux tax territory and declining his team option puts them under the cap, then they save even more money.
In theory, the Mavs can trade his rights to Team X for a contract of a player that runs past the 2010/11 season. Team X gets to save money if that's something that they're looking to do and unburden themselves of a long-term contract that they don't want to pay, whereas the Mavs would get talent back.
It has been theorized that since the Mavs are way over the cap and cannot offer free agents anything except the MLE, the Dampier contract, along with the contracts of Caron Butler and DeShawn Stevenson (they have 1 year left on their deals that total about $15 million), would be a useful way for the Mavs to enter the Bron/Wade/Amare/Bosh/Joe Johnson sweepstakes. So if the Mavs put together a package of Damp/Butler/Stevenson to trade to Team X, Team X would be taking back $15 million in salary cap obligations while Dallas would be taking back $28 million. Dallas could also throw in cash, draft picks and a young promising player (Roddy Beaubois) to acquire a superstar, since conventional wisdom holds that you only trade superstars for cap space, picks and young players.
My question is, how on earth do the Mavericks and Superstar Free Agent X have the leverage to force their old teams to take on the Dampier contract package? Say LeBron or Wade decide for whatever reason that they want to play in Dallas for Mark Cuban, an organization that spares no expense for winning, and would be willing to play 8 or 9 regular season games at Cowboys Stadium in front of 80,000 people. Dallas can't sign them outright to a max contract because they are way over the cap. So LeBron's agent and Mark Cuban approach Danny Ferry and say "LeBron wants to come to Dallas. We'll give you Erick Dampier's contract, Caron Butler, DeShawn Stevenson, Roddy Beaubois, three first-round picks and some cash." Why do the Cavs do that deal? LeBron can't come to Dallas without Cleveland's cooperation. If LeBron tries that, can't Ferry say "Fine. You don't want to play for us, you can go sign with the Knicks and play with that garbage supporting cast." Same with Wade/Miami, Johnson/Atlanta, etc.
Isn't it more likely that the Dampier contract isn't enough of a tool to land one of the premier FAs, and they will have to focus on players like Andre Iguodala that are already under contract with their current teams?
Bill Simmons and Marc Stein did a podcast yesterday that is all things NBA-related:
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/player?rd=1#/podcenter/?id=5142090&########=1
Erick Dampier's expiring contract came up. So for the uninitiated, Damp has a partially-guaranteed team option for next year for $13 million. At some point it becomes fully guaranteed. Whoever is holding his rights will have the option to decline it, and instantly save themselves $13 million in cap room. If that team is in lux tax territory and declining his team option puts them under the cap, then they save even more money.
In theory, the Mavs can trade his rights to Team X for a contract of a player that runs past the 2010/11 season. Team X gets to save money if that's something that they're looking to do and unburden themselves of a long-term contract that they don't want to pay, whereas the Mavs would get talent back.
It has been theorized that since the Mavs are way over the cap and cannot offer free agents anything except the MLE, the Dampier contract, along with the contracts of Caron Butler and DeShawn Stevenson (they have 1 year left on their deals that total about $15 million), would be a useful way for the Mavs to enter the Bron/Wade/Amare/Bosh/Joe Johnson sweepstakes. So if the Mavs put together a package of Damp/Butler/Stevenson to trade to Team X, Team X would be taking back $15 million in salary cap obligations while Dallas would be taking back $28 million. Dallas could also throw in cash, draft picks and a young promising player (Roddy Beaubois) to acquire a superstar, since conventional wisdom holds that you only trade superstars for cap space, picks and young players.
My question is, how on earth do the Mavericks and Superstar Free Agent X have the leverage to force their old teams to take on the Dampier contract package? Say LeBron or Wade decide for whatever reason that they want to play in Dallas for Mark Cuban, an organization that spares no expense for winning, and would be willing to play 8 or 9 regular season games at Cowboys Stadium in front of 80,000 people. Dallas can't sign them outright to a max contract because they are way over the cap. So LeBron's agent and Mark Cuban approach Danny Ferry and say "LeBron wants to come to Dallas. We'll give you Erick Dampier's contract, Caron Butler, DeShawn Stevenson, Roddy Beaubois, three first-round picks and some cash." Why do the Cavs do that deal? LeBron can't come to Dallas without Cleveland's cooperation. If LeBron tries that, can't Ferry say "Fine. You don't want to play for us, you can go sign with the Knicks and play with that garbage supporting cast." Same with Wade/Miami, Johnson/Atlanta, etc.
Isn't it more likely that the Dampier contract isn't enough of a tool to land one of the premier FAs, and they will have to focus on players like Andre Iguodala that are already under contract with their current teams?