(Duncan Question) Lakers shouldn't expect Bryant to take pay cut

[alchemist]

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/b...10-lakers-odom

I was reading that piece and it gave examples of Garnett/Shaq and Timmy taking less money to help their situation, so I wanted to ask those of you who have followed the Spurs a little more in depth than myself.

Didn't Duncan continue to take less money his whole career so the Spurs could continue to add talent not just his last contract? This article paints Duncan as a old timer who took less money when his career was winding down.

[Mel_13]

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/b...10-lakers-odom

I was reading that piece and it gave examples of Garnett/Shaq and Timmy taking less money to help their situation, so I wanted to ask those of you who have followed the Spurs a little more in depth than myself.

Didn't Duncan continue to take less money his whole career so the Spurs could continue to add talent not just his last contract? This article paints Duncan as a old timer who took less money when his career was winding down.

Only the last two-year extension was at a reduced rate.

[lurker23]

Kind of a side note from the article...

It's funny that Odom can talk so much about how much he wants to re-sign with the Lakers and have no one notice what he says about the Lakers' luxury-tax predicament: "I don't know how the books look."

Perhaps this is just Odom's way of saying, "I don't care about the luxury tax, show me the money," but I suspect that he really doesn't know what kind of financial shape the Lakers are in with respect to the salary cap and luxury tax. Do you think most players are really this dense/clueless, or is this just one of those special Lamar Odom things? (Personally, I suspect the latter.)

[alchemist]

Only the last two-year extension was at a reduced rate.

Wasn't he taking less than the Max though most of his career, didn't Garnett make more every year than Duncan? If not than it was my mistake.

[Mel_13]

Wasn't he taking less than the Max though most of his career, didn't Garnett make more every year than Duncan? If not than it was my mistake.

CBA rules on max contracts have changed over time. Garnett was drafted in '95 and got his first big extension in '97 before the rules changed after the '99 strike/lockout. Duncan did not get his first crack at the big bucks until his rookie deal ended in 2000. He got the max possible on a 3yr deal plus a player option for a fourth year, opted out in 2003 and signed a 7yr max deal.

The changes to the rules left Garnett, as well as Shaq, making quite a bit more than other 'max' players.

[Mel_13]

Garnett made the most money in the NBA this year if I am not mistaken. But yes, Tim took a small paycut for the team. he probably could have gotten a 2 year 50 million dollar extension but instead got a 2 year 40 million extension (along those lines).

I know that is a lot of money to turn down, but if I were already rich like Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Kobe or LeBron I would take less money from the NBA team so they have money to sign help. Say the star of a team only took around 12 million a year, or 10 million a year? That is close to 10 million dollars the team can spend on another player. There are plenty of people who never make 5 million dollars in their life time and still have a nice life. Kobe (if he does not opt out) will make around 24 million dollars after making only 10% less last year I believe. I mean if I were Kobe and wanted to prove I was all about winning I would opt out and take a 20 million dollar pay cut so the team can re-sign odom and Ariza.

You are a well-respected poster, but that makes no sense. Any pay cut Kobe takes at this point simply represents a transfer of funds from his account to the Buss family. The only thing limiting the Lakers with respect to Ariza and Odom is their willingness to spend the money. They have no constraints under the CBA that would prevent them from signing both and using the MLE, if they so choose.

Duncan's situation was different in that he was able to help the team clear capspace to go after better FAs in 2010. Kobe can only help Buss improve his bottom line.

[Big P]

Duncan left about $11 mil on the table at his last contract extension.

[lurker23]

Also I don't think you can use the MLE if you are too far over the cap.

If you are over the cap, you can always use the MLE. However, if you're close to (or over) the luxury tax line, the ownership has to decide whether that player you're signing for $5.5 million is worth $11 million a year.

[Mel_13]

I was just saying what I personally would do if I were Kobe. Seriously Kobe makes so much money off the court that he could play for peanuts. Plus the whole Bynum contract screwed over the Lakers, and if the Lakers want a chance to keep both players without going too far over the cap then Kobe taking a pay cut would be their main chance. I believe without him otping out they are still around 15 million over the salary cap and they don't have Ariza's bird rights. Unless they got him in a trade, but I don't think thats right.

Also I don't think you can use the MLE if you are too far over the cap.

They have Ariza's Bird Rights and you can only use the MLE if you are over the cap. The only teams that do not have the MLE are teams with capspace in excess of the value of the MLE. You cannot use capspace and the MLE in the same season.

Kobe's pay only affects the amount of lux tax that Buss will pay. The Lakers have no limits under the rules that would keep them from signing Ariza, Odom, and using the MLE.

Any reduction in pay that Kobe would accept would go straight into Buss' pocket. As much money as Kobe has, Buss has much, much more and should not be looking to his prime money-producer to accept less so he can make more.

[Yuixafun]

They have Ariza's Bird Rights and you can only use the MLE if you are over the cap. The only teams that do not have the MLE are teams with capspace in excess of the value of the MLE. You cannot use capspace and the MLE in the same season.

Kobe's pay only affects the amount of lux tax that Buss will pay. The Lakers have no limits under the rules that would keep them from signing Ariza, Odom, and using the MLE.

Any reduction in pay that Kobe would accept would go straight into Buss' pocket. As much money as Kobe has, Buss has much, much more and should not be looking to his prime money-producer to accept less so he can make more.

Even used the apostrophe correctly. Good post.

[Blackjack]

Only the last two-year extension was at a reduced rate.

Tim also took less with his 2003 contract (8M, if memory serves) when he re-signed.

The cap allowed for the max to be around 128M, which the likes of Jermaine O'neal got every penny of, but Tim took about 120M. (It may have not helped in the acquisition of talent, but how many players do that for an owner?)

[Mel_13]

Tim also took less with his 2003 contract (8M, if memory serves) when he re-signed.

The cap allowed for the max to be around 128M, which the likes of Jermaine O'neal got every penny of, but Tim took about 120M. (It may have not helped in the acquisition of talent, but how many players do that for an owner?)

Tim's deal (122M) was for the max allowed. Jermaine's deal (126.6M) was slightly more because he had one more year of service in the NBA, thus a slightly higher 1st year salary before the annual raises kicked in.

[duncan228]

Tim also took less with his 2003 contract (8M, if memory serves) when he re-signed.

Is this correct? My memory is foggy.

I thought Duncan did get the max in '03 (7 years, 122M). He left about 11M on the table when he extended for two years in '07 (through 2012).

The salary stuff isn't my forte, I'd appreciate any help.

[Mel_13]

Is this correct? My memory is foggy.

I thought Duncan did get the max in '03 (7 years, 122M). He left about 11M on the table when he extended for two years in '07 (through 2012).

The salary stuff isn't my forte, I'd appreciate any help.

On all things Duncan, your memory is never foggy.

Duncan got the max in 2003

Duncan reportedly received a $122 million, seven-year deal -- the largest allowed under the NBA's collective bargaining agreement.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/6483572

[duncan228]

Thanks Mel_13. You answered as I asked. Appreciate it.

[Blackjack]

Tim's deal (122M) was for the max allowed. Jermaine's deal (126.6M) was slightly more because he had one more year of service in the NBA, thus a slightly higher 1st year salary before the annual raises kicked in.

I'm sure you're correct but I know that I'm remembering correctly what I heard, back in '03.(Tim leaving money on the table, while O'neal got every penny)

I'm definitely not as versed in the business-side as I am in the basketball-side, but I can assure you I was even less knowledgeable back in '03.

In fact, I'm pretty sure I acquired that "knowledge" from Don Harris or one of the other members of the stellar S.A. media. (Please excuse my past naivete)

[alchemist]

CBA rules on max contracts have changed over time. Garnett was drafted in '95 and got his first big extension in '97 before the rules changed after the '99 strike/lockout. Duncan did not get his first crack at the big bucks until his rookie deal ended in 2000. He got the max possible on a 3yr deal plus a player option for a fourth year, opted out in 2003 and signed a 7yr max deal.

The changes to the rules left Garnett, as well as Shaq, making quite a bit more than other 'max' players.

that explains it I appreciate it

[Mel_13]

I'm sure you're correct but I know that I'm remembering correctly what I heard, back in '03.(Tim leaving money on the table, while O'neal got every penny)

I'm definitely not as versed in the business-side as I am in the basketball-side, but I can assure you I was even less knowledgeable back in '03.

In fact, I'm pretty sure I acquired that "knowledge" from Don Harris or one of the other members of the stellar S.A. media. (Please excuse my past naivete)

Not surprising that local media reported TD's slightly smaller deal as the result of his team-first at ude rather than an obscure technicality.