Should the Warriors waive Foyle or Fisher?

Don't sign Dun and keep Pietrus and Zarko at SF. I believe either of them should start in Dunleavy's place anyway.

 

I think fansince75 has pointed out a real issue with this amnesty option. If my interpretation is correct, it means the Warriors could waive Foyle or Fisher even though they aren't over the luxury tax, there just wouldn't be a point.

Ford says the rule is this:

Each team will be given a one-time option this summer to waive one player from its roster and receive luxury tax relief. The team will still have to pay the player and his salary will still count against the cap, but the team won't have to pay a luxury tax on his salary.

The way I read this, each team can use the option, even if they aren't over the luxury tax. But it really only makes sense for the teams that are over the luxury tax line to do it, because the salary will still count against the cap. That's probably why some articles have said the rule only applies to teams over the luxury tax line.

A team can cut a player if it's under the luxury tax line, but since his salary still counts against the cap, the team would risk going over the luxury tax line if they signed another player to a contract extension (like say Dunleavy). So there's no point for the Warriors to waive Foyle or Fisher.

Once again, it seems I was guilty of just not reading the rules close enough before I started this thread.

 

Oh bummer, I had the rationale that the rule would apply to the salary cap or at least be an option when we start venturing near the luxury tax line two years from now or when we start thinking about re-signing some of our players.

Well too bad there's nothing for us that helps us a couple years from now. Those 4 offseason contract signings were pretty taxing.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">Once again, it seems I was guilty of just not reading the rules close enough before I started this thread.</div>

Hey wt. I read this forum much more often than I post, and you alway have intelligent and thoughtful posts. It's easy to mess up with the CBA, it's complicated, and the available info is contradictory.

The lux tax threshold is particularly wacky. It's calculated after all personel moves have been made, and only kicks in if total salaries are above a certain percentage of basketball income (please don't ask for details, I don't understand it).

How crazy is this? Teams don't know if there will be a tax, or what the threshold will be until after they have signed their players...

So there may be a tax this year, or there may not (it appears very likely there will be). It could be 54 mil. It could be some other amount entirely. But I digress...

CR2 brought up one interesting point: The W's have quite a few contracts that will be growing faster than the threshold. If they give reasonable contracts to, say, Pietrus and Dunleavy, they could be deep into the lux tax two years from now.

This projects WAY into the future, and that's always risky, but I suppose dumping Fisher now, for his lux tax down the road, should be considered...it's just too much math for me to do right now.

But what if Brevin Knight would take 12 mil for 3 years (until Monta is ready) to play for his old coach...Fish is clutch, though.

I think Cohan should just get his checkbook out, he's punished us long enough!

 

I think the Warriors will eventually have to deal with the problems they created for themselves when they signed Foyle and Fisher. But the better option is probably going to be packaging one of the young prospects or a future pick to move them out the door.

That way the team will be rid of a bad contract for luxury tax purposes as well as salary cap purposes.

 

Well fisher is an awsome shooter but now the warriors have Baron Davis and also the warriors don"t have canters so i say leave foyle but fisher is better imo

 

This trade solves all your problems.

The Warriors Trade: SF Mike Dunleavy, PG Baron Davis, Future 1st Round Selection
The LALakers Trade: F Lamar Odom & C Chris Mihm


PG: Derek Fisher
SG: Jason Richardson
SF: Lamar Odom
PF: Ike Diogu
C: Troy Murphy/Chris Mihm


Anyone like that idea? Odom can help the rebounding and defense with his size at The 3, and if we cross our fingers and hope Big Ike D develops into an Elton Brand type player, The Warriors may be contending soon.

 

Uh. First, I won't trade Odom and Mihm for Davis alone. Second, that's like saying... Lakers have a problem at center and PF, so we will trade Kobe for big Z and Gooden. Yeah, it does solve some problems we have. But it basically creates gigiantic new problem...

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting King James X3:</div><div class="quote_post">This trade solves all your problems.

The Warriors Trade: SF Mike Dunleavy, PG Baron Davis, Future 1st Round Selection
The LALakers Trade: F Lamar Odom & C Chris Mihm


PG: Derek Fisher
SG: Jason Richardson
SF: Lamar Odom
PF: Ike Diogu
C: Troy Murphy/Chris Mihm


Anyone like that idea? Odom can help the rebounding and defense with his size at The 3, and if we cross our fingers and hope Big Ike D develops into an Elton Brand type player, The Warriors may be contending soon.</div>
One small problem: the Warriors go back to sucking. Why would the Warriors trade Baron (who is better than Odom) and Dunleavy (who is better than Mihm)? Why would they throw in a future first rounder as well?

There's no way the Warriors trade the guy who is mainly responsible for last season's resurgence. Bad trade, I wouldn't even consider it if the Lakers were the one's throwing in the first rounder. Basically there's no one on the Lakers not named Kobe I'd trade Baron for.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting King James X3:</div><div class="quote_post">This trade solves all your problems.

The Warriors Trade: SF Mike Dunleavy, PG Baron Davis, Future 1st Round Selection
The LALakers Trade: F Lamar Odom & C Chris Mihm


PG: Derek Fisher
SG: Jason Richardson
SF: Lamar Odom
PF: Ike Diogu
C: Troy Murphy/Chris Mihm


Anyone like that idea? Odom can help the rebounding and defense with his size at The 3, and if we cross our fingers and hope Big Ike D develops into an Elton Brand type player, The Warriors may be contending soon.</div> Yeah, I'm sure we're going to trade our franchise point guard away, give away a future first round in the process and miss the playoffs for 12 straight years and every year after. That is a really horrible trade for the Warriors and I hope you're kidding for suggesting it. The whole reason the Warriors are doing as well as they did late season is because of the acquisition of Baron.

God forbid if that ever happens, otherwise we'll have to bring out the lube. And luckily the suggestion is so far off it will be the least likely thing to happen. BTW No offense, dude, I'm just trying to communicate disgust over the trade

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting fansince75:</div><div class="quote_post">Hey wt. I read this forum much more often than I post, and you alway have intelligent and thoughtful posts. It's easy to mess up with the CBA, it's complicated, and the available info is contradictory.

The lux tax threshold is particularly wacky. It's calculated after all personel moves have been made, and only kicks in if total salaries are above a certain percentage of basketball income (please don't ask for details, I don't understand it).

How crazy is this? Teams don't know if there will be a tax, or what the threshold will be until after they have signed their players...

So there may be a tax this year, or there may not (it appears very likely there will be). It could be 54 mil. It could be some other amount entirely. But I digress...

CR2 brought up one interesting point: The W's have quite a few contracts that will be growing faster than the threshold. If they give reasonable contracts to, say, Pietrus and Dunleavy, they could be deep into the lux tax two years from now.

This projects WAY into the future, and that's always risky, but I suppose dumping Fisher now, for his lux tax down the road, should be considered...it's just too much math for me to do right now.

But what if Brevin Knight would take 12 mil for 3 years (until Monta is ready) to play for his old coach...Fish is clutch, though.

I think Cohan should just get his checkbook out, he's punished us long enough!</div>

Yeah, you pretty much nailed it. Luxury tax is very hard to prepare, because we just don't know where the line is drawn. That's why you see people trying to dump salary as much as possible in frenzy. It used to hover around 10 mils above caproom, but with new CBA, where players take more %, I have no idea where luxury tax will be drawn.

Yes. We will be in serious caproom problem in a year or two.

I don't think it's too much of Cohan's fault for all luxury tax frenzy in future, because no team in NBA (except few exceptions) have max contract at PG, 12 mils per year at SG, 8+ mils at SF (that's what I assume what Dun will get), 10 mils at PF, 8 mils at C, 6 mils backup, and hoping to add more contracts for an 'average' owner. I mean, Cohan is showing his best support when he hired Mullin. And, worst part is that no contract ends anytime soon, so we have to live with horrible side effect of growing contracts. If Mullin indeed signs Dunleavy with big contract, I seriously doubt that we can retain Pietrus in future.

However, I really don't think Mullin will trade Fisher for future relief, because not only this is an important stretch for us, nobody really wants Fisher with his gigantic contract to begin with...

 

you know what this reminds me of? That scene in Airplane where the woman passenger starts freaking out and Leslie Nielson shakes her and yells "Get ahold of yourself!" then slaps her. Then the stewardess comes up and does the same thing, but hits her. Then the screen pans to a line of passengers waiting to yell the same thing at this poor passenger and beat her.

Sorry King James X3, it isn't that we're piling on you, I'm sure custodian didn't read Kwan's or my comments before he posted. It just that the trade idea is overwhelmingly lopsided

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting wtwalker77:</div><div class="quote_post">you know what this reminds me of? That scene in Airplane where the woman passenger starts freaking out and Leslie Nielson shakes her and yells "Get ahold of yourself!" then slaps her. Then the stewardess comes up and does the same thing, but hits her. Then the screen pans to a line of passengers waiting to yell the same thing at this poor passenger and beat her.

Sorry King James X3, it isn't that we're piling on you, I'm sure custodian didn't read Kwan's or my comments before he posted. It just that the trade idea is overwhelmingly lopsided</div>
Yeah I posted without reading the prior comments first. Sorry I got a little belligerent sounding or came off as baiting, King James X3. I just get a little sensitive about these things and go too far.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">Interesting trade, but the Lakers are desperate for size, and Odom is still their best rebounder. With PJax back, Baron Davis doesn't fit the team anymore.

I think the Warriors have to pull the trigger on Foyle or Fisher and Mullin is going to have to admit a mistake now or in the near future. Keeping both players means Mullin must admit Dunleavy was a mistake, because they simply cannot afford him. If they decide to keep Dunleavy then they likely lose Pietrus or Biedrins.

I would choose Fisher as the player to waive if I were Mullin. He's a year older than Foyle, and his contract lasts a year longer than Foyle. A big man is more valuable than a guard, especially one willing to give you effort every night on defense.

One outside the box thought is Fisher or Foyle could actually be valuable because of this rule. Trading either player to a team who will be in the luxury tax threshold 2 or 3 years down the line.

For example a team like the Nets or Suns or 76ers (especially if they bring back Dalember, Korver, and Green). These teams have money tied up in their core players for a lot of years. Or another team in need of future cap relief. If the Warriors can't benefit from it, maybe another team can and the Warriors could get an ugly contract in return, but with less years on it?

Nets have money tied up in Kidd, Carter, and Jefferson for the next 6 years. Those 3 combined eat up the majority of the cap alone. Being able to deduct Fisher's 5Million or Foyle's 8Million would benefit them and allow them to spend more on their bench without the risk of paying the luxury tax.

Fisher for Marc Jackson?</div>
Interesting idea. I think there's just a lot of confusion right now over this rule right now. Hopefully Ford or someone else will clear it up in the next week or two.

I don't know if you can waive a player now and then add another player down the road and not have the new player's salary count against the luxury tax line (in effect, increasing that team's luxury tax line to the baseline luxury tax line + the waived player's salary).

This isn't exactly what you're suggesting, but the permutations of the amnesty rule are really unclear right now.

 

The amnesty rule is probably difficult to figure out since the CBA agreement was only ratified last Thursday wasn't it (just before July 1)? I'm sure these writers have to study and do the research and ask questions before they release anything super concrete or they'll embarass themselves.

There just has to be some way to avoid the eventual burden of the luxury tax because we can see who makes the team really successful and we wouldn't want to lose any of those guys knowing we already have the majority of the team's salary committed to 5 players, two of them who will be role players older than 30 with contracts ending when they're like 34 or 35.

I'm almost for not signing Dunleavy because of the huge qualifying offer... I think he's good at what he does in being the glue guy, but like Kwan said earlier, 6 mil a year may be too much for him and it would be economical to fill in Pietrus/Zarko at the 2/3 spot (Richardson as forward) as Pietrus gives us things we don't have in a shooting guard and Zarko gives us an incredible mismatch at small forward and can be Dunleavy's successor for a more reasonable price. Then hopefully, if Diogu is the type of guy that doesn't cause a lot of complaints like Murphy, Troy could be packaged with Foyle's upcoming player option in 2009/2010 by the time Troy Murphy's BYC status ends. Hopefully, Diogu won't put a ripple in Troy Murphy's value like when we sat Fortson and ruined his trade value.

Fisher, on the other hand... I hope Houston or Cleveland or somebody wants him. Maybe since Damon Jones had those playoff struggles, they'd want a shooter who they know can be big in the playoffs. If we wait until Fisher gets really old, we'll be stuck with him for good and I'm sure other teams see that as well. Let's hope he retires and leaves the money on the table by the time we're due for luxury tax probably in 2008-2009.

 

I can't imagine that eating a $30 mil contract-and still having it count against the cap...along with the salary of the new replacement,is gonna fly.

There are a number of bigs around who had similar minutes to Foyle-Dalembert,Kwame,S Hunter,Mark Blount,Jerome James...and I looked up the stats on this group. Basically Foyle does as well as any with the exception of Dalembert who has an edge in both scoring and boards. Foyle leads all these by plenty in blocks. James did real well in the playoffs,,but the season was far less impressive. Several of these guys will get new contracts this year and it should be interesting to see how they compare to Foyles deal.

The W's 4+5 jobs will be covered by Murph,Ike,Biedrens,Foyle and Zarko. Taft could be a minor factor. That group has a variety of strengths,weaknesses,but we basically have 5 getting significant roles,and all able to give some positive production. We will be using our depth a lot,due to the tempo,assuming the style the team had success with will be our thing from the start this year.

I expect a fairly even split of minutes at C between Murphy,Foyle,Biedrens. Murphy will still play PF,but Diogu will get plenty of minutes. Zarko and Dunleavy figure to Play a little 4,more at the 3. As the season proceeds,there will be adjustments.

I still think there can be a Dunleavy swap before the trade deadline. That we did not get a ready PG in the draft means that trading Fish is not likely unless a PG comes back in the deal

 

There seems to still be some confusion on the 'houston rule'. There is NO salary cap relief, there IS luxury tax relief. To get that relief, the team must cut the player, but still pay him.

Maybe an example will help:

Dallas will probably use it on Finley. They owe him $51 m over the next three years. They are over the cap, so not only do they pay Finley his salary, in essence, they pay an equal amount in luxury tax. So, over the next three years, Finley will cost, in effect, $102 m.

He's been injured, and he's not the player he was once, so Dallas cuts him using the 'houston rule'. They still pay him his $51 m over the next three years, his salary still counts against the cap, but Dallas does not have to pay the luxury tax on his salary, saving $51 m.

The downside, he'll probably sign with Phx for the min, and help knock Dallas out of the playoffs, all the while, Dallas is paying him $51 m to play for Phx.

It is really a value decision: is the value of saving money on the luxury tax greater than the value of a specific player to your team. You will pay their salary, regardless, so that doesn't play into the decision.

Another way to think of it, you can keep a player and pay double his salary (salary plus tax), or you can cut him and pay his salary (but no luxury tax) but he will play for another team.

Finley is easy because he's very expensive, Dallas is definitely going to be over the threshold, he isn't a great player any more, and they have players that can replace him.

F and F are more difficult. We may not be over the threshold, they are important players to the team, and we can't easily replace them.

I just thought of this...We cut Foyle and he signs with Phx for the minimum. We give them a championship type team. Or Fisher goes back to LA to play for Jackson for the minimum, and they beat us out for the eighth spot. We are paying to make our competition better. An additional cost to waiving the players.

 

It would be a tough decision for Mullin to make.

Clearly, Mullin overestimated our 04 club to be a PO bound. Because that club won 37 games despite being injured heavily, by being healthy, brining "better" coach and get rid of "cancer", this team would make PO in 04-05 season. That's why he fought hard to get Fisher to be Horry type of guy in PO. As a matter of fact, he was willing to overbid Houston, who still had no natural PG in this date, to bring him here. And... you know what happened in first half. However, it would be tough to dump Fisher at this point as well, because we will challenge PO spot this season, and if we do so, Fisher still is projected to be a Horry type of guy in PO. So, unless Fisher proves to be not-so-Horry like type of guy in PO, I don't think Mullin will pull the plug on Fisher, unless we really get desperate on salary issue (and it probably would be too late as well).

Same goes with Foyle. Yes, Foyle does get 8 mils per year, which sounds ridiculous. However, average center gets 8 mils per year, so unlike Fisher's 6 mils per year for back up PG, it's not totally ridiculous salary for center. Also, we do rely on his shot blocking presence heavily, so unless Biedrins or Diogu can provide what Foyle can do so, we would be very reluctant to dump Foyle, even if right deal for us to dump Foyle's salry comes.

Murphy is another tough decision to make. After all 16/10 is 16/10, and since our team is near the bottom of rebounding, you just can't afford to lose 10 rebs per game. Besides, it would be an absolute bargain sale to dump Murphy's 6 years, 60 mils contract, probably far less than what we got from Jamison trade, and that's if that's even possible in first place.

So, while they are overpaid and we need to organize our salary fast, they are contributing in rather big ways. So, if you want to gain short term success, you just don't want to trade any of those guys. However, by doing so without preparing for coming Tsunami, we may get swept away by rather big way in the future...