PDA

View Full Version : Brand gets max offer from Sterling. Hell freezes over.



picnroll
07-03-2003, 10:11 AM
link (http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/clippers/la-sp-nbarep3jul03,1,7701410.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-nba-clippe)

July 3, 2003 E-mail story Print


AROUND THE NBA
Brand Considers $65-Million Clipper Offer

Brand Considers $65-Million Clipper Offer

Now the Tough Will Go Shopping

Clippers Face an Exodus


Future Could Be So Bright, and Profitable, for Clippers

From Staff and Wire Reports; Elliott Teaford

Clipper power forward Elton Brand has received a five-year contract offer at about $65 million, but he hasn't decided whether to accept or wait for a longer-term deal from the team. The salary figures are the same for the first five seasons of a so-called "max-out" seven-year deal.

Free agents are eligible to sign with new teams or re-sign with their old ones July 16. Negotiations for new contracts began Tuesday.

Guard Corey Maggette met with Denver Nugget executives for two hours Wednesday, and center Michael Olowokandi expressed interest in playing for the Nuggets and also had some nice things to say about the Miami Heat.

"We've consistently said we like our players and would like to re-sign them," Executive Vice President Andy Roeser said of Brand, Maggette, Andre Miller and Lamar Odom, the team's restricted free agents. "Our first choice is to sit down with them and make a fair deal. We respect their right to go out and see what their alternatives are, but we would be inclined to match any offers."

Olowokandi, an unrestricted free agent, told reporters in Denver and South Florida that he has not ruled out re-signing with the Clippers.

Meanwhile, talks between the Clippers and Mike Dunleavy stalled again after it appeared the two sides were close to an agreement that would fill the team's coaching vacancy.

There is no timetable for the Clippers to hire a coach, and Dunleavy also continues to talk with the Atlanta Hawks.

The Clippers fired Alvin Gentry on March 3, replacing him with assistant Dennis Johnson for the rest of the season.

Dunleavy turned down the Clippers' initial four-year offer. He was believed to be close to accepting a shorter-term deal this week but failed to receive assurances from the team that it would retain restricted free agents such as Brand and Maggette.

— Elliott Teaford

I would guess Brand will wait to see if Sterling offers Odom , maybe Maggette offers so he'll know he's actually on a team.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 10:12 AM
That's not max. Max is like $90 mil.

travis2
07-03-2003, 10:15 AM
The salary figures are the same for the first five seasons of a so-called "max-out" seven-year deal.

You missed this part...

baseline bum
07-03-2003, 10:17 AM
Max for Brand is 7 years, $101.784 million. Brand should tell Sterling to go **** himself with an AIDS-infected dildo.

picnroll
07-03-2003, 10:17 AM
Rigth you are. I guess this means Brand either plays the year out and becomes unrestricted or goes in a S&T.

CosmicCowboyXXX
07-03-2003, 10:19 AM
making an offer of any kind is very unSterlingish...

the normal Clipper MO is to wait till the free agent gets an offer to "set his value" and then go slightly over that...

interesting...

Clippers basically just took Brand off the market...

I don't see Denver, Utah, or the Spurs making a Max 6 year offer to Brand under any circumstances and they are the only ones that could do it...

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 10:20 AM
There you go. Spurs offer to give Brand the full max. Sterling claims that he can't afford him and trades him to SA. Since Brand can't be traded under if signed under that QO that might be all it takes.

Whottt
07-03-2003, 10:25 AM
Actually Sterling offered Kandi a similar deal last summer...

Brand and Kandi were both willing to stay in LA for less if Sterling kept certain players and tried to be competitive..he hasn't made inroads into doing that..he had his chance..the best gift we could get is for Kandi to announce he is gonna sign with Denver..He is Brand's boy..and once he goes the chance Brand will too becomes greater...

We need to send SJax, who is another one of Brand's boys, up to see him in LA and let him know what the score is here in SA..Let him know he is our top choice to replace the legendary David Robinson both for his character and talent..

If you treat this guy like an elite player and show him respect he will want to come here IMO. And he can do it without coming off like a disloyal asshole like other FA's might not be able to do..

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 10:54 AM
Under the restricted free agent rules, if the Spurs offer Brand the full max and Sterling doesn't match that, can we get Brand that way?

Is it the salary per season that has to be matched and the years?


Question.


:cooldevil

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 11:04 AM
AFAIK, yes.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 11:08 AM
If that is the case, all the Spurs have to do is offer Brand max money and years and Sterling should fold.

No more wondering about J. O'neal or Kidd or resorting to Olowokandi. The Spurs nab Brand.


:cooldevil

Jimcs50
07-03-2003, 11:09 AM
Brand is not worth 15 million a year IMO. Tim has made a lot less than that for the past 6 yrs.

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 11:37 AM
If you think O'Neal is worth the max, then Brand is definitely worth it as well. Don't kid yourself and don't think he won't be offered it from some other team. Utah comes to mind.

Jimcs50
07-03-2003, 11:39 AM
I do not think anyone outside Tim and Shaq are worth 15 million.

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 11:47 AM
He won't start at 15mil/year you know. Also, last time I checked the market dictates what he's worth and I think many out there would pay him the max.

20/10 and almost 3 bpg in the west definitely warrants the max. Wouldn't you say?

adidas11
07-03-2003, 12:35 PM
Very interesting development!

To answer your question, Ghost, since Brand is a restricted FA, IF Sterling decided to match a max offer from any team, Elton Brand would essentially be locked in for that same contract to the Clippers, whether he likes it or not. It's not in Brand's best interest to accept any offers from other teams if Sterling were willing to go that far.

CosmicCowboyXXX
07-03-2003, 12:46 PM
like I said earlier...Brand is now officially off the market...

Sterling offered max money for 5 years...

we could offer max money for 6 years...

it's not that big a stretch for Sterling to add one year and match our offer...then Brand would be stuck.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 12:54 PM
My question pertained to us offering an extra year.

That would force Sterling to offer one more year, right?

Hopefully, he would refuse.

:cooldevil

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 12:54 PM
Not a great development but not the worst. Brand doesn't want to stay without Kandi and Kandi is almost definitely gone. I don't think Brand signs this offer. Hopefully Sterling might be convinced to do a S&T. At worst we could wait one more year for Brand and make do with a lesser big man for that year.

Let's hope we don't have to make that decision if we land O'Neal.

picnroll
07-03-2003, 01:02 PM
How can the Spurs wait for Brand? Sign Jax that's $3-4 million. Stay under the salary cap, no MLE, so Ginobili will take up $5-6 million. I don't think there'll be enough to match other teams that will offer a max deal. I think it's either a S&T this year or hasta la vista. Agree with CosmicCowboy. Brand is probably off hte table.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 01:28 PM
A sign-and-trade for who, TwoHandJam?

Either we're going to offer that extra year and hope Sterling doesn't match, or Brand is out of the Question.


:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 01:33 PM
I think this is a good development for the Spurs. Sterling's shown he's not willing to give Brand the max (that means 7 years not 5, travis). But of course I'm the one without a clue, right?

Brand just has to demand the full max and then threaten to sign the qualifying offer and walk next year if he doesn't get dealt NOW to SA for picks.

Sterling can come up with some lame excuse like he can't afford Brand and that's it.

Another threat would be for the Spurs to sign Brand to a max offer sheet and force Sterling to match. Brand would have to be willing to go through with that and face Sterling matching and then shipping him wherever.

picnroll
07-03-2003, 01:40 PM
Offering an extra year will do nothing but waste time. Brand won't take the offer because he won't want to chance Sterling matching and then be left on an island without his buddies. It's either S&T which is about .00001 probability or adios Mr Brand time to move on.

Would Sterling float the offer if he was willing/interested in doing a S&T. Maybe for PR reasons to show he was a real owner, making a real effort but that prick agent Falk wouldn't be reasonable so now he was salvaging what he could for the franchise. Doubt it.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 01:56 PM
Not quite, picnroll.

Brand is already reportedly considering Sterling's current offer very seriously. If he accepts the Spurs offer for the full max and Sterling does match that, then Brand actually gets a better deal from the Clippers than the one he is pondering now.

A sign-and-trade involving the Spurs and Clippers makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for either team.


:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 01:58 PM
It makes plenty of sense. The Spurs get their man and don't have to face the possibility of waiting for 2 weeks during free agency and not being able to know WTF is going to happen.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:03 PM
Um, who do you propse to send to the Clippers?

Didn't think so.

:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 02:05 PM
Picks. Probably the Phoenix pick, the Memphis pick from next year, and another future first. Sterling gets those picks he loves so well. The alternative is that he gets nothing if Brand signs that qualifying offer other than one more year of Brand.

picnroll
07-03-2003, 02:09 PM
Ghost report is he's considering it with one of the stipualtions being that Sterling pony up and make acceptable contract offers to his Clipper buddies. That happens and he'll sign the contract and stay with the Clippers.

There is some leverage though. Sterling either:
1) signs Brand and his buddies
2) does a S&T for Brand
3) Brand plays out the year and walks away with Sterling getting nothing for his asset.

From a business standpoint 1) and 2) make the most sense. Will Sterling become a real owner and at least look like he's trying to build a real team?

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:11 PM
I don't see all those picks adding up to an equitable sign-and-trade.

Why would Sterling want a sign-and-trade instead of just offering the extra year?

If he lets Brand walk to the Spurs, he can re-up Odom, Maggette, Olowokandi, Piatkowski and/or A. Miller to fufill minimum salary requirements.

Brand may sign Sterling's initial offer. If the Spurs offer the full max and Brand accepts, the worst thing that can happen is that he's forced to sign a better deal with the Clippers.

I think this puts the Spurs in a tremendously clear cut position to get Brand or force Sterling to ante up.

:cooldevil

picnroll
07-03-2003, 02:19 PM
You make that offer and Sterling has two weeks. He accepts and by the time the two weeks is up guys like Brown, Malone, Payton, Howard, Mourning could well all be off the board. No FA wants to be the one without a chair when the music stops. Certainly unlikely Kidd and O'Neal are going to wait around. Doubtful the Spurs want to play Russian roulette. My bet it's S&T or nothing, probably nothing.

Admiral
07-03-2003, 02:24 PM
How long does Brand have to make a decision on the Clippers' offer?

I would like to see us offer Brand the max and force Sterling's hand, but we better be very sure about our other options first. What happens if we offer Brand the max, Sterling matches it, and then we go after Jermaine O'Neal? How would O'Neal (or any other free agent) feel?

Having Brand as our first option is fine with me. I see pluses and minuses with both Brand and O'Neal, and both would be great fits in San Antonio. Do we know how interested Brand is in us?

The sign and trade sounds like a good option if necessary, Marcus.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:25 PM
Believe me, the Spurs will be patient if it means adding Brand even if it means bypassing those second-tier big men. And I doubt all those players will sign before the Spurs make their pitch. C'mon now.


:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 02:26 PM
You find out what JO'Neal is going to do first before you move ahead with any offers for Brand.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:29 PM
Exactly, MB.

Unrestricted.


:cooldevil

scott
07-03-2003, 02:29 PM
Brand is there for the taking.

I suspect the Spurs are already in talks with Sterling regarding a possible sign and trade. In that event, there is no need to wait and see what Jermaine does.

Its arguable which is the better player/fit- and Brand comes 17% cheaper. If we have a S&T deal done for Brand- you do it on July 16.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:32 PM
scott, you're wrong.

First, you don't get caught up in that waiting period before you see what's up with J. O'neal first, like Marcus commented.

Lastly, what are the Spurs really going to S&T?

Why would they bother? Challenege Sterling to throw in the extra year.




:cooldevil :

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 02:38 PM
You can be engaged in talks simultaneously but JO'Neal's price tag will be less than Brand's, and that is including the likelihood that the Spurs would have to send back a pick to Indiana for signing JO'Neal to the 7 year deal.

Certainly talk with Sterling about what it would take to make a deal, but you definitely see what is going to happen with JO'Neal first.

scott
07-03-2003, 02:40 PM
There is no waiting on a S&T.

You talk to Donald Sterling about a S&T NOW.

If we are in contact with Sterling and Brand's Agent now- there is nothing stopping argreeing to a S&T. If we can get that done before July 16- why waste time trying to woo O'Neal.

What do we S&T? Picks and cash. Sterling like profit (his team was one of the most profitable in the league last year) and he likes picks. You intice him with the idea of not having to pay a max deal (which aids profit).

Why get into a stare down with Sterling when we don't have to? That is what your challenge to Sterling entails. If Sterling matches- we lose, end of story. This way, we can gauge Sterling's desire to resign Brand now. If he is unwilling to S&T, then we focus on Jermaine. If Jermaine tells us no, then we offer Brand the max and see what Sterling does.

NCaliSpurs
07-03-2003, 02:40 PM
What is the sweetest possible deal we could give them for Brand?

This is my sweetest possible deal.

1) Manu - sorry, but he is our best tradeable asset
2)Our first-round pick for next year
3)Phoenix first-round pick
4)Our second-round pick
5)Memphis second-round pick
6)Possibly another first-round pick (2006)
7)Cash considerations.

I would hate to do it, but if the Spurs ponied up a little, we could get Brand.
-------------------
Edited: Didn't know you couldn't offer back to back first round years.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:42 PM
Why the fvck would Sterling entertain a S&T with the Spurs now when he's got Brand considering his intial offer?



Question.


:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 02:43 PM
I agree about trying to work out a deal with Sterling being the preferable strategy instead of the offer sheet...but you have to see what JO'Neal is going to do first. JO'Neal (if he wants to be a Spur) will come at a lower price.

scott
07-03-2003, 02:44 PM
Since you cannot trade 1st rounders in back to back years, I would float this scenario first:

2004 1st Round Pick (ours)
Conditional 1st Round Pick (Phoenix's)

see what response that gets- then offer:

Above +
2006 1st Round Pick
Cash

scott
07-03-2003, 02:45 PM
Marcus- Brand will come at the lower price.

His Max is 25% of the cap, whereas Jermaine's is 30%

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:46 PM
Even Sterling is not going to settle for the Spurs picks and some cash for Brand.

Like I said, he's got 5 other free agents he can offer money to to fill out the minimum salary requirements.


Again —

Why the fvck would Sterling entertain a S&T with the Spurs now when he's got Brand considering his intial offer?



Question.




:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 02:46 PM
The Spurs will really need Brand on board to do this. He's gotta be prepared to do as Olowokandi did and sign take that qualifying offer if Sterling isn't amenable to a trade.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 02:47 PM
I meant the lower price in a trade. Spurs will have to send Indiana a pick in exchange for Indiana doing a sign and trade (so that JO'Neal would get the absolute max).

scott
07-03-2003, 02:48 PM
Brand most likely won't be so considerate of Sterling's offer when he gets offered more by a more attractive team.

You might consider a job offer that pays $100k a year... right up until you get another offer that pays $150k a year and is a better job in the meantime.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:50 PM
Don't you see that Sterling has all the leverage here?

If Brand accepts his initial offer, they get Brand.

If he accepts an offer from the Spurs, they can let Brand walk and re-sign some of their current free agents or they can offer Brand the full max and get him back.

There's no reason for Sterling to do a sign-and-trade with the Spurs, especially for their underwhelming picks.





Why the fvck would Sterling entertain a S&T with the Spurs now when he's got Brand considering his intial offer?



Question.

:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 02:54 PM
On the surface this seems similiar to the Spurs' situation in 2001 with DA. Spurs make an offer that sounds significant...but really isn't. 5 years $60 mil sounds huge to the general public...but it isn't the max. Sterling can take the posture that he's made the best offer he can and that the player received a better offer or is one greedy bastid.

The only problem is...this is Donald Sterling we are talking about. He would pass up a package of draft picks in order to squeeze one more year out of Brand before losing him with no compensation.

scott
07-03-2003, 02:55 PM
Gotcha, MB.

That arises another question, however.

How much do we value #1 picks? I'd say they are worth about $600k to us.

Assuming both players get the absolute Max ( 7 years, 12.5% raises) in a S&T- Jermaine would make a total of $22million more in absolute terms over seven years (assumed a 42million cap).

If O'Neal only costs us 1 pick, where as Elton might cost us 4 (for example)- if you set ONeal = Brand, are those 3 picks worth $22 million to us?

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 02:57 PM
It's all in Brand's hands now. If he doesn't want to play there, Sterling can do nothing about it. There is no use matching and signing a guy to a long term deal if he doesn't want to play for you.

I don't think Brand wants to stay there since Sterling doesn't want to pay Kandi and Brand specifically said he wanted him to sign Kandi as part of keeping the team in place. As bad as Kandi is, Brand doesn't want to play next to a rookie in the frontcourt next year. Who knows what other guys Sterling will let walk that Brand would want to play with but Kandi is as good as gone.

The reason Sterling might be forced into a S&T is that Brand can threaten to stay another year and then leave scott free in which case Sterling recoups nothing. Better picks than nothing.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 02:58 PM
You guys are being ignorant.

Sterling can afford to let Brand walk if he wants to. He's got four other free agents that he could pay.

Why the fvck would Sterling entertain a S&T with the Spurs now when he's got Brand considering his intial offer?



Question.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 02:59 PM
Hard to say scott. If the Spurs had that choice then I'm sure they would think about the pricetag in terms of picks and in the contract terms. The problem is that it is really going to be a hassle with Sterling. He is crazy enough to take Brand for one more year and then lose him for nothing. 4 picks might not be enough.

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 03:02 PM
You guys are being ignorant.

Sterling can afford to let Brand walk if he wants to. He's got four other free agents that he could pay.

Why the fvck would Sterling entertain a S&T with the Spurs now when he's got Brand considering his intial offer?

Because Brand only wants to stay if Sterling resigns some key FA's, Kandi being one of them and I don't think that's going to happen.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 03:03 PM
I am begging you guys to tell me why Sterling would resort to a sign-and-trade with the Spurs when he doesn't have to.

:cooldevil

picnroll
07-03-2003, 03:04 PM
The picks we're talking about are pathetic late first round picks with minimal value to the Clips. How often do you get a Parker with a late round pick? There are teams that can make much, much better offers to the Clips in a S&T. Throw in Parker? Maybe and go for Payton.

Only way it gets done is basically if Brand says I gotta be on the Spurs and nowhere else and Falk works the deal.

But this is Sterlings game and he has his stable of horses and he can't let the horses think they can dictate terms to him. He's got to keep them guessing what he will and won't do.

KoriEllis
07-03-2003, 03:06 PM
I didn't read this whole thread, but quick question...

Why does the title say "max offer"? $65M isn't close to Max, this is the same offer that Sterling extended to Olowokanid last season.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 03:08 PM
The Phoenix pick has various restrictions but is still interesting. The Memphis pick will be a high second rounder...almost a late 1st rounder without the guaranteed contract.

What's the alternative, pickroll? Nothing.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 03:12 PM
Marcus and scott have drifted into Mr. Rogers' Land of Make-Believe again.

Sterling doesn't have to play ball with the Spurs. He can wait for Brand to answer his initial offer, match any other offers or let Brand walk.


:cooldevil

travis2
07-03-2003, 03:14 PM
I didn't read this whole thread, but quick question...

Why does the title say "max offer"? $65M isn't close to Max, this is the same offer that Sterling extended to Olowokanid last season.

It's max salary over 5 years, not 7...so technically it's not the "max offer", but it's the max he can make in 5 years...

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 03:16 PM
Ghost, one more time.

1) I don't think Brand will take the offer for reasons I stated above.

2) Letting Brand walk for nothing is not a good business decision for obvious reasons.

Sterling doesn't have all the leverage.

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 03:18 PM
It's max salary over 5 years, not 7...so technically it's not the "max offer", but it's the max he can make in 5 years...

The most we can offer him is 6 right? Only thing to do is talk to his agent and guage his interest. If he wants to come at all costs, we can get him.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 03:21 PM
In Sterling's world he might think that having Brand for one year is worth passing on whatever the Spurs offer. Maybe he actually thinks it's important to have someone to sell the fans on...in his twisted mind.

picnroll
07-03-2003, 03:21 PM
What's the alternative, pickroll? Nothing.

I don't know. I'm just trying to think through it. I'd be happy to have holes poked in the logic because Brand would be my second choice. I'm just hoping O'Neal signs and simplifies things.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 03:23 PM
Well, the problem is that Sterling is one owner who would actually turn down a sign and trade just to have a player for one more season who is guaranteed to leave for nothing in return.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 03:24 PM
What are those obvious reasons, 2Hand?

You've refuted nothing.

Like I said 10 times now, Sterling can let Brand decide on his current offer, match any other offers, or let his @ss walk.

If he lets Brand walk, he can re-up any number of the 4-5 free agents he has to make minimum salary requirements.

The Spurs picks and money won't compell Sterling to do a S&T if he doesn't decide to match a full max offer.


:cooldevil

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 03:36 PM
Last time I checked, it was better to get some value for a guy you have under contract instead of just letting him walk, especially if you're into 1st round picks.

Unless of course you're insane.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 03:37 PM
What's Sterling?

NCaliSpurs
07-03-2003, 03:37 PM
What about throwing manu in addition to 4-5 picks?

With the alternative of Brand signing the QO, This isn't so bad.

We can get Brand, but he really really must want to come with us.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 03:39 PM
I don't see the Spurs giving up Ginobili.

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 03:41 PM
What's Sterling?

Touche.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 03:48 PM
I agree that the Spurs should take this approach with Brand but Sterling is just such an oddball...he's too damn hard to size up.

Of course he could demand the Spurs send back something like a boatload of picks and TP/Ginobili/Rose or whatever...just to get the Spurs to say no. Then he can say that he tried to get fair value for Brand and that he's just going to wait until next summer to try to re-sign *insert laughter here* Brand.

That's the problem with that mofo. He will do that.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 03:53 PM
Sterling can let Brand decide on his current offer, match any other offers, or let his @ss walk.

This is lost on you people.


:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 03:59 PM
He won't let Brand walk this summer.

scott
07-03-2003, 04:00 PM
We'll be alright as long as we are working the S&T possibilities now.

We run no risk in trying to get the deal done now.

If we get shot down, we turn our full interest to other top notch FAs (whomever they may be in the eyes of the Spurs). In the event that we do not sign those players, we then can play Sterlings games.

To recap- the safest and best chronological approach is the following:

1. Attempt to reach a S&T agreement for Elton Brand
2. Attempt to sign UFAs (O'Neal, Kidd, Payton)
3. Attempt to sign RFA Brand, gambling that Sterling will not match
4. Build team based on some other combination of FAs

scott
07-03-2003, 04:02 PM
Whats lost, Ghost, is your ability to understand that we risk absolutely nothing by attempting to broker a S&T deal with Sterling now. It does not affect our ability to go after other FAs. What Sterling would do is the whole point of attempting to broker the trade.

At least we know your philosophy on life now... don't try anything you think could be difficult or somewhat unlikely, no matter its potential benefits and low risk position.

Is Brand not balla enough for you?

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 04:03 PM
Ghost um that's why the Spurs would have to trade with the Clippers for Brand.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 04:08 PM
What the fvck are you two talking about?

BRAND IS CONTEMPLATING SIGNING STERLING'S CURRENT OFFER. WHY WOULD HE DEAL WITH THE SPURS NOW?!?


QUESTION.

:cooldevil

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 04:10 PM
?

Well um, because he could get 6 years at the max instead of 5, for starters.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 04:12 PM
scott, it's just plain stupid to try to broken a S&T with the Clippers for Brand at this point. First of all, Brand is contemplating Sterling's initial offer. Secondly, the Spurs would be better off offering Brand the full max themselves before dealing with Sterling. Lastly, Sterling may not want the Spurs picks at all.

Meanwhile, the Spurs could be trying to sign Jermaine O'Neal outright.

Think.


:cooldevil

scott
07-03-2003, 04:13 PM
Can you think of any more irrelevant questions to ask, Ghost.

Sterlings willingness to make a deal is the whole point of trying to work the trade.

Luckily your "it seems hard so I won't bother trying" approach doesn't seem to fly with the rest of the Spurs organization.

TwoHandJam
07-03-2003, 04:15 PM
Brand won't sign anything with Sterling unless he signs other key FA's to keep the team together.

picnroll
07-03-2003, 04:18 PM
I'm getting a headache.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 04:21 PM
This is not a serious offer. This is akin to the Spurs offer to DA a few summers back.

You only make an offer like this to get the player to say no. The question is...does Sterling want to see Brand say no to him and sign the qualifying offer....or does Sterling want Brand to say no to him and then hit the market and find a good sign and trade deal that Sterling likes?

scott
07-03-2003, 04:24 PM
scott, it's just plain stupid to try to broken a S&T with the Clippers for Brand at this point

Yes, it would be just plain stupid to try to make a riskless move to add a star caliber player. We should rely on smart moves that involve offering Jermaine O'Neal $30 million less than he could get in Indianapolis.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 04:29 PM
The thing with JO'Neal is that if he decides on SA it won't be hard to make up that $30 mil difference. Spurs will have to send back a pick like Orlando did to Toronto for McGrady in order to get the Pacers to participate in the sign and trade.

Basically, if you sell JO'Neal on becoming a Spur then it's close to a done deal. The problem with Brand is that you have to win him over, then play games with Sterling.

I could easily see Sterling haggling with the Spurs for a week and then breaking off talks with nothing.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 04:31 PM
That's what I see happening. I don't want to get caught up in a quagmire with Sterling and a restricted free agent when we can cut to the chase with O'Neal.

:cooldevil

scott
07-03-2003, 04:37 PM
There is nothing stopping you from doing both at this point. We have 13+ days to see what we can do on both. Like I said- you spend your time now on the phone with Sterling seeing what needs to be done to work a deal. If you can't work a deal- you haven't eliminated Jermaine O'Neal from the running.

Spending time trying to get Brand in a S&T now does not prevent you from getting O'Neal in a S&T later, nor does it prevent you from playing the Sterling games later.

Its also quite possible to have a S&T deal on the table and an agreement with O'Neal reached on July 16th.

Then you are in the ultimate position of being able to choose which player you want based on two factors:

1) Which player is better (overall and "fit"-wise)
2) Is what we give up getting Brand worth the $22million we save in comparison to O'Neal. Simarily, is O'Neal worth $22million more to the Spurs?

It would be the best possible position to be in.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 04:44 PM
You talk with Brand and Sterling but there is always the problem of that sabotaging your negotiations with JO'Neal.

If things are going good with JO'Neal you want him to feel that he's THE MAN. It will be impressive to him that the Spurs want him over Kidd. You can make sure that you have communicated your interest in Brand to Brand but it's kinda hard to juggle everything simultaneously. At some point you have to say...you're our guy.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 04:46 PM
scott, I think this is how the phone call will go between RC and Baylor if the Spurs tried to broker a S&T now:

RC: "Hello, Elgin. We'd like to dend you our late first round picks and some cash for Elton Brand."

Baylor: "As tempting as that sounds, Brand is actually considering our modest initial offer now. We'll let you know should he as for a full max contract."

RD: "Um, okay. Thanks for listening."


:cooldevil

scott
07-03-2003, 04:57 PM
Since O'Neal is a week away from coming to SA- we don't have that problem now.

Ghost, Elton's tune will change after you tell his agent that you want to pay him the absolute max.

I don't see the following quote ever being accurate:

Elton Brand: "Well, I'd love to make more and play next to Tim Duncan on a championship contender, but I already said I'd consider this other, lesser, offer. Sorry."

Again Ghost. If Company X offers you a job that pays 100k, of course you are going to consider it. Right up until Company Y offers you a job that pays 150k.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 05:01 PM
Fine. The Spurs offer the extra year and more money, then what?

Sterling either matches, lets Brand walk and addresses his other free agents or does your proposed S&T.

That's a long process. You can't just skip ahead to the S&T now, scott.


:cooldevil

scott
07-03-2003, 05:03 PM
Ghost, let me make this as simple as possible.

Step 1) Call Brand and his Agent. Say you want to offer the absolute Max.

Step 2) Brand's agent calls Sterling and Baylor. Says they have an offer for the Max, and that is now the going rate.

Step 3) RC calls Sterling and Baylor and inquires about a S&T.

This should take all of an afternoon.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 05:06 PM
The thing is...you can play that game with JO'Neal and Kidd effectively...but not as much with Brand.

The Spurs can be like...'we consider you and Kidd to be our top 2 free agent picks and we want you, not him, as our first option'.

Pursuing the more difficult S&T option with Brand would seem to belie this point.

In addition, what if Sterling pushes you to make a commitment NOW? Do you ditch JO'Neal?

adidas11
07-03-2003, 05:08 PM
Scott, what if Sterling decides to match San Antonio's offer for the absolute Max??? Then Brand is stuck in Clipper-land, whether he likes it or not!

Brand: "Thank you, RC. I accept your offer for the max contract."

Sterling: "Since Elton Brand is MY restricted FA, I have decided to match San Antonio's max offer for him. Now Elton Brand in contractually bound to me for duration of the offered San Antonio contract (6 years?). Thank you."

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 05:08 PM
You forgot about the part where Sterling can decide to match the Spurs offer.

These things are not decided in one afternoon, pal.

And you originally listed brokering a S&T first, which made no sense in a chronological sequence.

Instead of all that, why not just send O'Neal the same offer out of the gate?



:cooldevil

adidas11
07-03-2003, 05:11 PM
Exactly. And Sterling has upwards to two weeks to match an offer, I think. If Brand were to sign a contract with San Antonio, Sterling can sit on his ass for two weeks, leaving San Antonio tied up with Brands contract, and not able to pursue other FA's (Kidd, JO). Then, at the last minute, Sterling can step in and match the Spurs offer for Brand, leaving San Antonio with nothing.

Going after Brand THIS SUMMER would be the worst idea imaginable.

NEXT.

scott
07-03-2003, 05:16 PM
MB,

If Sterling forces us into a committment now, we make the committment, unless you see Brand as a worse option than O'Neal (which I do not).

Superstar obtained, offseason = success.

Adidas, that is the reason we do the talking now, and not after July 16. There is no offer sheet for Elton Brand to sign right now.

His agent calls up Sterling and says he has an offer for a max deal- the max is now the going rate.

Unless Sterling is going to bait Brand into signing that offer sheet by saying he wont, and then doing in at getting himself an unwilling Elton Brand for 6 years (which is possible) you will be able to find out whether or not Brand is obtainable.

You'll be able to guage whether or not Sterling will pay that much for Brand.

If you can't work a deal, you can still work a deal with O'Neal.

You can still play the game via some spin.

If things don't work out with Brand- you tell O'Neal, "you are our top guy- we weren't just exploring our options given there are no guarantees you will be a Spur." Same situation with Kidd.

The risk lies within Sterling saying he won't match a Max deal, and then matching it- screw us and Brand in the process. But if Sterling isn't going to go for a S&T now, knowing the max price is the going price, you hold off on offering Brand the max offer sheet until after you've struck out with your other FA options.

Once again, in chronological order:

1) Attempt a S&T for Brand (before July 16, a point you two clowns manage to keep ommitting)
2) Explore Other Top Tier FA Options
3) Extend Offer Sheet to Brand
4) Explore other FA options

scott
07-03-2003, 05:20 PM
You forgot about the part where Sterling can decide to match the Spurs offer.

We've made no offer to match, dumbshit.

Let me try this for you ONE MORE TIME.

You push the going rate up NOW (before July 16 before any official offers can be made).

You talk to the Clips about a S&T NOW (before July 16 before any trade like this can take place).

If you can't reach the agreement, you do not offer Brand an offer sheet (which is required for the Clips to do any matching) until your other FA options have been exhausted.

How does this not make chronological sense?

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 05:23 PM
Yet if you talk to JO'Neal and persuade him to come then that's all you need to do. I don't see how that is necessarily more difficult than going through that trouble to land Brand. Ultimately you are going to Brand first and saying 'you're our guy' and we're going to start talking to your team to work something out.

JO'Neal might be just as motivated as Brand to leave his current team...and he's less trouble to acquire.

scott
07-03-2003, 05:27 PM
The whole thing, Matthew, is that these options are not mutually exclusive.

We can go through all the trouble of working a deal for Brand while convincing J. O'Neal. Since neither are locks to be Spurs- you can explain away your interest in both of them as insurance, while still appealing to their respective egos.

If you are successful in both areas, they you are left in the enviable position of having your pick between Brand and O'Neal.

If Sterling gives the deal the green light- we've done it. But there are no binding agreements to make trades before July 16. We could still very well work our deal out with Jermaine.

By exploring both options, we only increase our odds of landing both a Superstar and a Scoring Big.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 05:27 PM
JO'Neal can commit prior to the 16th as well.

While JO'Neal is still available he should be the Spurs' top priority.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 05:33 PM
Yet does JO'Neal commit if he knows that the Spurs are aggressively pursuing Brand? I don't see that.

You have to think about what each player wants to hear. The Spurs can reasonably tell Brand...we want you but dammit we have to F around with Sterling.

With JO'Neal it is much smoother sailing should he want to be a Spur.

scott
07-03-2003, 05:33 PM
Once again, we can have committments to aquire both players. We are then left in the greatest position of all.

As the Spurs have learned in the past, no deal is done until the contract is signed. There is nothing wrong with having two committments should Jermaine O'Neal decide that $30 million sounds pretty good after all (or should Sterling change his tune).

But, taking a page from your book, getting the best player should be the top priority. If Brand = O'Neal (debatable both ways), then effort should be made to get one of them. Going after both doubles our chances at getting one.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 05:34 PM
So you lie to one of them?

-Matthew
I believe you are familiar with the rest of the info.

scott
07-03-2003, 05:36 PM
Good point on egos... but do players really expect teams to not explore other options and assume the team has no plan B should he not sign with that team?

Jermaine: "hey RC, you are telling me that I am the man, but I keep hearing these reports that you are trying to land Brand."

RC: "there are no locks that you are going to be a Spur until you tell us you are going to be a Spur, Jermaine. Until then, we have to explore all of our options. Unless, of course, you are trying to say that you are going to be a Spur."

Getting committments from both is highly unlikely (if not impossible) the more I think about. But given the difficultly in getting either- you take the one you get the committment from. If you should be lucky enough to get another committment, you have a choice. But at least you know you are getting that one superstar.

scott
07-03-2003, 05:39 PM
Is explaing to them that you have to keep trying to improve your team with other options until you have a committment from them lying to them?

I think any resonable agent and player would understand this- after all they do the exact same thing in going to various teams.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 05:46 PM
First of all scott, don't ever refer to Marcus by his Anglo-Saxon name.

Secondly, how do you porpose driving the marker up without making an offer?

Secondly, your assertation that the Spurs can drive the price up, Brand can trun down the Clips' current offer, and then the Spurs and Clips can broker a sign-and-trade all in one afternoon is prepsterous.

Listen you stunod:

Brand is considering the Clippers very real offer right now.

The Spurs can do nothing but talk sh1t right now about a deal.


Listen to me. Listen to Marcus.

You go after Jermaine O'Neal first before you f' around with a tedious sign-and-trade scenario with the Clippers.

The Spurs would offer Brand a real contract before that a S&T would be proposed anyway, hardhead.

:cooldevil

scott
07-03-2003, 05:52 PM
It's pretty simple Ghost, I'll try to help you one more time because I feel sorry for you. You're slipping, man.

Elton Brand does not have to sign anything today, or on July 16.

We tell him and his agent will offer him the max. That doesn't mean he has to sign it. That is how you raise his price. If you offer him the max, that is the price the Clips will pay.

By making it clear that is what you WILL offer, you have now made that his going price.

Why is Brand going to consider the Clippers lesser offer when he can just sign a max offer sheet and guarantee that will be his salary?

The beauty is that we can raise Brand's price for the purposes of exploring a S&T without extending the offer sheet, or waiting until other FA options are explored before extending the offer sheet.

Thankfully the Spurs don't have your lazy ass "that sounds hard so lets do something else" attitude.

kohai
07-03-2003, 05:52 PM
The Spurs would offer Brand a real contract before that a S&T would be proposed anyway, hardhead.

The minute we offer Brand a contract, Sterling has two choices: Match or let walk. At that point with Brand signed to an offer sheet, he cannot sign and trade him to us, or anyone else.

timvp
07-03-2003, 05:57 PM
Can someone answer this:

If the Spurs go after Brand next season by extending the Holting pattern, what other teams are going to be under the cap enough to try to sign him? I'm thinking that if the rest of the league is dried up, that the Spurs could get him for less than the full max.





Question.

Marcus Bryant
07-03-2003, 05:58 PM
Good question timvp. I'd be leery of passing on real talent in hand. Strange things can always happen.

Ghost Writer
07-03-2003, 05:59 PM
Elton Brand does not have to sign anything today, or on July 16.

We tell him and his agent will offer him the max. That doesn't mean he has to sign it. That is how you raise his price. If you offer him the max, that is the price the Clips will pay.


By making it clear that is what you WILL offer, you have now made that his going price.
Right. And the Clips call the agent's bluff and then what?


Why is Brand going to consider the Clippers lesser offer when he can just sign a max offer sheet and guarantee that will be his salary?
Brand is considering the lesser offer according to reports. So he signs a max offer sheet with the Spurs and either signs with us or Sterling antes up and matches it.


The beauty is that we can raise Brand's price for the purposes of exploring a S&T without extending the offer sheet, or waiting until other FA options are explored before extending the offer sheet.
So the Clippers just take the agent and the Spurs word for it, huh? No way. The Spurs have to get Brand to sign that offer sheet and then it's either the Clippers let him walk or they match the offer.


"Thankfully the Spurs don't have your lazy ass "that sounds hard so lets do something else" attitude."
Huh? You said all that could transpire in one afternoon. simpleton.




:cooldevil

grjr
07-03-2003, 06:10 PM
The minute we offer Brand a contract, Sterling has two choices: Match or let walk. At that point with Brand signed to an offer sheet, he cannot sign and trade him to us, or anyone else.

I believe he can still do a sign and trade with anyone EXCEPT the team that gives him a formal offer sheet.

jr

scott
07-03-2003, 06:36 PM
It's pretty simple Ghost... Brand and his agent just say to the Clips "your offer isn't good enough anymore."

Just because he is considering it NOW doesn't mean he'll sign it. For all you know he could be considering it the same way Derek Anderson considered the Spurs low-ball bid.

If the Clips call the agents "bluff", Brand signs the Spurs offer sheet which has been extended after the Spurs have struck out on their other top FA options.

Brand doesn't need to sign anything to raise his price... he only has to say no.

Of course, your entire arguement is based upon the idea that Sterling would rather let Brand walk than get picks and cash. With Donald Sterling, that just may be the case- but picks and cash have proven to be his best friend over the years.