Q&A on Cutting Michael Finley <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">? Would the player the Mavericks elect to waive have to be Finley? Not necessarily. But for teams over the luxury-tax threshold, it makes sense to remove a player who has multiple years remaining at a large salary. Finley is due nearly $51.8 million over the next three years. Keith Van Horn could also be a possibility. He earns $15,694,250 next season, the last on his contract. It makes no sense to use the option on a player such as Tariq Abdul-Wahad because his contract is only partially guaranteed for the next two seasons and insurance is picking up most of it because of Abdul-Wahad's knee injuries. ? What does Finley think of all this? Neither he nor his agent, Chicago-based Henry Thomas, returned phone calls. ? What kind of public-relations hit would the Mavericks take? It certainly wouldn't be any worse than the Steve Nash fiasco last summer. This deal makes sense not only from a financial standpoint, but it also could have some basketball benefits as well. Finley is 32 and clearly is on the downside of what has been a rock-solid career. If he were waived, it would open up more playing time for Jerry Stackhouse and Marquis Daniels, who are closer fits to coach Avery Johnson's style of having a shooting guard who can slash to the basket. ? What is the luxury tax and how much will it cost Cuban? Last season, the tax kicked in when a team's payroll exceeded $61 million. It cost Cuban more than $20 million. That money, along with money from other teams over the threshold, is distributed evenly among teams under the tax threshold. Nobody knows what the tax threshold will be in the future. But the Mavericks will be over it, regardless. By releasing Finley (they'd still have to pay his salary), he would be removed from any luxury-tax responsibility and the Mavericks possibly could get under the threshold. ? How does this exception work? Any team over the luxury-tax threshold can waive one player, who then would be eliminated from their luxury-tax rolls. It's a one-shot opportunity, and it must be exercised between the date the new CBA is signed and the beginning of the 2005-06 season. ? What does this do for the Mavericks' future dealings? Bear in mind that they are probably headed toward giving Josh Howard a large contract in two years. But they also have several players (Van Horn, Stackhouse, Jason Terry) who have big contracts that end in the next two years. That will reduce the Mavericks' salary cap number and give Cuban and Johnson more flexibility in bringing in the kind of players they want to put around Dirk Nowitzki and Howard. </div> Source
