Printable View
Quote:
The Pacers have reportedly made the decision to buyout the contract of point guard Jamaal Tinsley if they aren't able to trade him, according to The New York Daily News.
Tinsley has three years and more than $21 million left on his contract.
Larry Bird and David Morway are rumored to have made the decision to buy out Tinsley well before dealing for point guards T.J. Ford and Jarrett Jack.
What about Tinsley as PG Backup if Indy buyout him?
Let me be bold and speak for everyone: NO!
hell no. dude is a total headcase.
next.
i´m speaking about Tinsley at Half MLE and not more
No, no, no. I wouldn't let him serve popcorn at the AT&T. He's unemployable.
Where is the George Hill at when you need him?
I'm too lazy to cross reference, so I'll just take a straw poll: Those of you who are adamantly against Tinsley are also adamantly against Artest, yes?
No. Artest just said he's not opting out, but, were he available, I'm all about him as a Spur. I'd eat my right testicle sooner that I'd support Tinsley in silver and black. I'm guessing 90% of this board agrees with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
What is the buyout rule exactly? Can any team just buy out any player whenever they want? Once a player's bought out, does he count against the salary cap?
Not I. I would LOVE to see either Artest or J.R. Smith in a Spurs' uni (both are "head cases" in the eyes of most here) - but I would rather keep the 3 man PG rotation we currently have than to use money to acquire Tinsley.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#59Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoogarBear
59. What is a contract buy-out?
Sometimes players and teams decide to divorce each other. They do this by mutually agreeing that:
* The team will waive the player;
* If the player clears waivers, the compensation protection for lack of skill (see question number 90) will be reduced or eliminated;
* Optionally the payment schedule for the remaining salary may be shortened or lengthened.
For example, the Celtics did this with Dino Radja prior to the 1997-98 season. They mutually agreed to reduce Radja's compensation protection to 50% of its value, and then the Celtics waived him. When he cleared waivers he was paid the 50% he was owed, and he was then free to return to Europe.
But there's a twist, which needed an arbitrator's ruling during the 1999-00 season to resolve. As detailed in question number 90, on January 10 all contracts become guaranteed for the rest of the season. Compensation protection insures the player against loss of salary after being waived for lack of skill. But if he is waived after January 10, then he doesn't lose his salary, so the compensation protection does not kick in. Even though the team & player can mutually agree to reduce or eliminate the player's compensation protection, he is still owed his full salary if waived after January 10.
This was challenged by John Starks during the 1999-00 season. Starks had been traded to the Bulls, and wanted to sever ties with the team after January 10. The arbitrator ruled that in the last season of a player's contract, the team and player could choose to eliminate the contract guarantee that kicked in on January 10. Starks and the Bulls were therefore free to agree to a divorce (with no money owed to Starks) as described above.
There is one other type of buyout described in the CBA. When a contract contains an option year, a buyout amount for the option year can be written into the contract. The buyout amount may be up to 50% of the salary for the option year, and is payable with the exercise of an ETO or the non-exercise of an option.
60. How do buy-outs affect a team's salary cap?
The agreed-upon buy-out amount (see question number 59) is included in the team salary instead of the salary called for in the contract. If the player had more than one season left on his contract, then the buy-out money is distributed among those seasons in proportion to the original salary. For example, say a player had three seasons remaining on his contract, with salaries of $10 million, $11 million and $12 million. The player and team agree to a buyout of $15 million. The $15 million is therefore charged to the team salary over the three seasons. Since the original contract had $33 million left to be paid, and $10 million is 30.3% of $33 million, 30.3% of the $15 million buyout, or $4.545 million, is included in the team salary in the first season following the buyout. Likewise, 33.33% of $15 million, or $5 million, is included in the team salary in the second season, and 36.36% of $15 million, or $5.455 million, is included in the team salary in the third season.
The distribution of the buy-out money is a matter of individual negotiation. Changing the number of years in which the money is paid does not change the number of years in which the team's team salary is charged. In the above example in which the player's contract is bought out with three seasons remaining, the buyout amount is always charged to the team salary over three seasons. It does not matter if the player is actually paid in a lump sum or over 20 years (a spread provision).
Hmm. I must have missed some news reports, because I'd take Tinsley before Artest in a heartbeat, mostly because you could cut his ass loose the first time he fucks up without nearly as much trouble. That said, I'd prefer Vaughn to Tinsley so it's moot in my book, but I was curious about why some of you see a difference in one team cancer over another.
He's a cancer, but that's the least of his troubles. He's no good and he's always injured. 24/7, it seems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
we drafted a Backup PG, this position is closed
Artest has WAY more upside than Tinsley - which is why many would be willing to accept his shananigans. Tinsley will never be anything more than a backup PG - which is why he will always have a much shorter leash.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Thanks. So the Pacers can't do shit unless Tinsley agrees to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kindergarten Cop
WTF!? Hell NO!!! that is why we drafted George Hill ... he is our back-up PG... End of story!
Tinsley sucks. Pass.
why publicly announce they are willing to buy him out? by doing that wont teams just wait instead of taking on tinsleys big contract?
1 Tinsley sucks ass
2 the Spurs already have their back up point guard.
Pacers Front office is run by a bunch of Morons. Haven't been any good over there since Reggie Miller. Larry Bird is also a horrible judge of talent. He traded Stephen Jackson and Harrington for what? Troy Murphy and slow as molasses Dunleavy. If that wasn't a huge lopsided trade I don't know what qualifies.
I think the point is that they've exhausted all the trade scenarios at this point and are resigned to hoping someone's stupid enough to claim him off waivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by angelbelow
No....hell no.Quote:
Originally Posted by waly.mg
Where are the posters who used to be adamant that Tinsley > Parker?
Wish I could bump those thread . . .
There was a time that he was. That it's such a laughable idea now is more than a testament to Parker's improvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
This thread isn't closed yet?
When was that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Anyone in their right mind knows that Parker is/was/always has been better than Tinsley.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Rookie year, they had the same ppg and Tinsley had twice as many assists. Seems pretty simple to me. Don't take it personally.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Anyone who's a blind homer, perhaps.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdog
Must not have watched many games back then, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Ah, so you're going to rely on the handy dandy statbook?Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Sure, on paper he might have looked a bit nicer than Tony, but Tony's never been a huge assist guy.
He's the better overall player, and that's that. Tony can put up big assist numbers if he really had to
Yeah, twice as many assists per game doesn't speak for itself or anything. :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by timvp
I know he's the better overall player. That wasn't always so obvious. Tinsley's numbers took a nosedive and Parker's work ethic kicked in. You guys can use hindsight all you'd like, but Parker's one of the top three or four point guards in the league right now, and he wasn't his rookie year.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdog
Ricky Davis has better career stats than Manu Ginobili. Therefore Davis > Ginobili. Nice thinking :tuQuote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
I was gonna post something, but you took the cake with that one. Lol :toastQuote:
Originally Posted by timvp
So you're saying that Tinsley has better career stats than Tony Parker? Nice reach.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Better stats, better player. You said so yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Yeah, that's what I said. Your reading comprehension's strong as ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Damn, it sounds like you actually did watch him play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
O lord, you can tell it's the off-season! :rolleyes :lmao
It's really too bad that Tony Parker didn't have any good teammates his rookie year. The lack of all-star selections for the Spurs is indication of that. It's also too bad that the Pacers had a better offense than the Spurs did, which inflated Tinsley's numbers. That's why the Pacers had such a great record.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
That it could even be argued that Tinsley was ever even within sniffing distance of Parker is an indication of how far he's fallen. One might even go so far as to suggest that my original post was agreeing with your point, but the chances are you wouldn't catch it.
My dream backcourt would be Jamal Tinsley and Jamal Crawford.
On defense, all you'd have to do is wait by the FT line for the long rebounds.