<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Golden State, for example, offered power forward Troy Murphy to the Hawks in a sign-and-trade that would have netted Harrington something closer to the six-year, $66 million contract he was seeking. But Murphy, who averaged a double-double in his past three full seasons, has nearly $51 million left on his contract over the next five years. The Warriors, according to sources, pulled out of the Harrington Sweepstakes late last week, conceding that the versatile forward was heading back to the Pacers. Golden State ceased its pursuit when it became clear Harrington was indeed prepared to start his new deal in the $7.5 million range. If Harrington were still intent on making more than that in the first year of his forthcoming contract, Indiana couldn't use the trade exception to land him and couldn't otherwise trade for him unless the Hawks were willing to take back a package featuring Foster and a teammate or two.</div> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?id=2532200 I don't know which one is bad... 1. Mullin tried to sign Harrington, twinner who will likely to average around 16/8, for about 6 years/66 mils. 2. Harrington basically used us to get the most out from Indiana. 3. We can't even lure FAs even if we would pay nearly 10 mils more. I thought Mullin learned his lesson from the past and became somewhat financially responsible GM. And, I thought the reason we couldn't get Harrington was because Mullin understood our financial problem and he offered fair amount, something like 8.5 mils per year, which happened to be less than Indiana. But, appearently we offered Harrington around 11 mils per year? More than Murphy? To twinner SF/PF, who will most likely average 16/8 and probably will not become an All-Star? With our current financial situation? I can only hope that the article only suggest we could have offered 11 mils per year, not we actually offered 11 mils per year...
I hope so too. Can't say Mullin's job is easy, but Mullin has been an idiot of a GM when it comes to anything besides the draft. If he made trades for the sake of trading he'd be Mullsaiah.
One thing I am really scared of Mullin is that he just doesn't plan ahead and have a philosophy of "I will get an immidiate help now and worry later". That's what happened to Fisher, Foyle type of signing and how our finance has been in ruin right now. And, in 08 offseason, things can blow up in pieces. In that year, our existing 5 long term contracts will take about 58 mils. And, in that year Monta, Biedrins and Taft will be FA with no money to resign. If we ever plan to resign any of them, we need to plan ahead and dump some salaries whenever we get a chance. And currently, the ideal salary to dump is Murphy's one, because we can't afford to dump Davis and Richardson, and we can't simply find a taker on Foyle and Dunleavy. If we made that Harrington deal, chance of us dumping Harrington's contract would be much smaller than Murphy's one. Not only people prefer 6'11" PF, who can double-double, over 6'9" twinner, who can't grab more than 7 rebounds, Murphy's contract is shorter and smaller. And, either we give up on those young players or we had to dump Davis or Richardson's contract if we are lucky enough to find a taker. Because even when players like Shaq was on the market, there weren't many takers simply because of his contract size. I don't know exactly what Mullin is thinking now. He may think there will be a team that will exchange Foyle's contract for expiring contract. He may think Cohan will actually pay significant luxury tax and we can afford being a top 5 team in payroll while struggling to make PO. Or, maybe he just wants to prolong his GM career by bringing immidiate success and worry offseason two years from now later. Whatever the case maybe, we could have been in desperate situation with whole Harrington deal...
No argument there. It's like REREM's chess analogy, Mullin doesn't plan ahead and before he knows it, all his good pieces are gone, therefore his potential to make devasting moves are gone, and he's constantly having to retreat to avoid a check or checkmate. With the Warriors chess analogy, they don't have the right pieces to compete with. It's like they don't have a Queen, a rook, or a knight. Lots of pawns though, but the opponents aren't biting. Our limitations play into the hands of the opponent who knows exactly what they are doing with their full set. Meanwhile, we're having to play defensively and we're always one move behind and waiting for the other guy to make a mistake. The management just does not plan ahead and I fully agree with that, despite the hardships we've had in free agency or gaining leverage in trades or not finding the franchise player to build around in the draft. Other bad teams that have gotten better have not invested in such minor role players so heavily. Not even the Bulls or New Orleans. If we overpaid Stojakavic, that'd be something of impact compared to what we've had and it would fill a need. We've been doing a lot of crap to fill a need without trying to look further down the road such as what Fisher/Foyle/Murphy/Dunleavy will become in a year or two. The only arguably good risks were signing Jrich early and same with Baron Davis trade. Drafts were okay, but we're not getting much at the #9 to #11 position, especially not the #11 position or this year's #9. If we were interested in re-signing guys to trade them to other teams later on and get something for them rather than letting them go for nothing, then we need to be smarter about what kinds of deals they are getting and how to project their market value accurately. If agents and the players want more money for being crap, tell them tough luck, they are already making more money than most of us ever will in our lifetimes. They could get hurt early and still live comfortably for the rest of their lives.
I'd hope the Foyle,Dunleavy signing mistakes were a profound learning experiance for Mully. I still presume the way Dun got his extend pretty much says Cohen had told Mully at least SOME Lux Tax is okay (for awhile) otherwise,Mullin would have lowballed Dun,taken the chance he'd escape. In hindsight-excellent. Mullin did NOT want to play Santa to Dun and chop off Pietrus-Biedrens and future assets. He KNOWS that Foyle will expire Try being optimistic,in a few years a gallon of gas,a cheeseburger,and a pack of winstons will cost about $25,the economy will be collapsing since all the USA makes now is fast food and porn. Those $9 million paychecks,by then would be worth half their current value.. the Cap would be around $90 mill...but I won't care cause it will be all on pay-per view,and I'll have moved into a cave in Big Sur. But...that's another story...we'll keep Monta.
I agree that Cohan had to agree on taking luxury tax. We were running straight toward luxury territory in just one season after Mullin, and Cohan had to know that as well. However, I am just speaking in common sense. While Cohan will take luxury tax to some extent like till 5 mils, there hasn't been any sign that Cohan will just blow up the payroll, eat 10+ mils, and become like Cuban or NY owner. And, if we intend to resign any of our rookies without dumping any of our salaries, we must pay serious luxury tax to do so. This is what we will see in 08 offseason according to hoopshype. Davis: 17.1 mils Richardson: 12.2 mils Murphy: 10.1 mils Foyle: 9.8 mils Dunleavy: around 9 mils = Around 58.2 mils. This year's rest of players (10) contracts $ = Around 16.5 mils (74.7 mils) This year's luxury tax line = 65.4 mils. With today's scale and what we know of for 08 offseason, we are talking about nearly 10 mils luxury tax by just standing pat. This scale isn't accurate, because caproom and luxury tax may increase over years, and we may save some chump change over years by keeping only like 8 players or less. But even so, those may not be enough to cover nearly 10 mils difference. Then, how can we talk about resigning our rookies? Just signing one rookie like Monta may cost 10 mils luxury tax. The only choice for us is to dump contracts. But, it's not that easy, and we must plan two or three years ahead to do so. Because, even if we try to dump Davis or Richardson, we can't always make salary dump anytime we want due to their huge salaries. For example, even when Shaq was on the market, there wasn't many teams bidding for Shaq simply because they just can't take his salary regardless of his dominance. Trading Davis or Richardson means we are rebuilding, and we probably don't want to be in that situation. Dumping Dunleavy's contract will take a divine intervention, and while we may be able to trade Foyle's contract easier than Dunleavy one's, it still will take extremely generous owner (or offer) to reduce Foyle's 3 or 2 years contract into 2 or 1 year contract. That leaves Murphy's contract to dump, and that's why I wasn't fond of Harrington rumor. Because, we do need another major salary dump to sign any of our rookies. Foyle's contract will expire, but not fast enough to save us, because it really doesn't matter in terms of resigning any of Monta, Biedrins, Taft, Pietrus or Zarko when his contract will expire in 09 offseason. Either we get shorter contract or dump another contract. Because at this rate, an ambulance will come 5 mins after a patient's heart stopped. 08 offseason may be wild unless Mullin do some salary shedding fast. And, I seriously doubt that Mullin would have lowballed Dunleavy. After all, Mullin didn't like the idea of resigning Richardson and Murphy after 3 years, but he was eager to resign Dunelavy after 3 years. He wanted to keep Dunelavy more than Richardson or Murphy, and the way he acted on Dunleavy, it's not really surprising. Besides, no matter the situation, GM must exhause options as much as he can and try to manage financial situation at best. And, I don't know how this is all hindsight when I said we will have a financial problem ever since Mullin signed Fisher. The most depressing thing is that we may go through this problem over an over again. Let's just imagine that we somehow resigned some of our rookies in 08 season. Then, there will be Davis and Diogu resigning rooming in 09 offseason. Then POB, Richardson and who knows what's coming. Our future finance can improve if Mullin starts being more responsible to signing contract and dump some contracts. But, if Mullin keep trying to add contracts after contracts for the sake of today's improvement, like how he seems to offer around 6 years 66 mils to Harrington, our financial situation will only get worse...
I'd figure if the Lux tax line is 65 mill now- in 2 years its at least $70 mill. We won't give Zarko a big extension-if we can give him anything. At some point we may sacrafice one of the 3 young Centers,depending on how they all are developing,and the market,and a deal like that could include Dunleavy as ballast. Pietrus can get off to a real nice start-demand goes up,a lot,we get a deal for a guy who won't need extending as soon-or maybe even a Pietrus-Foyle package gets us a rookire contract player we like-and a guy with a year less than Foyle. A BIG key...we play a whole lot better-win more-players play better,those flaws we all talk about get fixed-and Mullin has a dozen calls a day looking for deals. Then we have a sellers market. That can mean we get full value-and resolve some contract stuff too. Teams WANT to WIN and teams WANT to avoid the luxtax. You can't always get what you want,but if you try sometimes,you get what you need. We got time. that's another Stones' song-Time is on My Side
I think Mullin needs to look at these in scenario planning mode <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">At some point we may sacrafice one of the 3 young Centers,depending on how they all are developing,and the market,and a deal like that could include Dunleavy as ballast.</div> What are the chances that all 3 centers develop to a point to where we'll want to keep all 3 (honestly, My guess is that only 1 will turn out to be a guy we'd want on our team) <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Pietrus can get off to a real nice start-demand goes up,a lot,we get a deal for a guy who won't need extending as soon-or maybe even a Pietrus-Foyle package gets us a rookire contract player we like-and a guy with a year less than Foyle.</div> If Pietrus starts out hot and actually looks like he's learned the offense and miraculously seems to be the guy that we always wanted then it becomes hard decision time. Here's where as much as we love him, JRich gets traded in a blockbuster deal for a KG-JO guy. Note: this is extremely far-fetched and I don't see this happening. If Pietrus starts out hot, but still struggles with the every day tasks of O and D then he gets packaged with a guy like Foyle, or maybe Murphy at the deadline. If Pietrus struggles as usual, then he gets moved for next to nothing, or just walks after his contract runs out. So what's the worst case scenario? All the guys turn out to be busts... Nope... because then, we don't re-sign anyone. How about the all need re-signing, if that's the case, the team will have significantly improved, and Mullin will have a ton of pieces to move to make the team work. I think the worst case scenario is actually if a few turn out to be just good enough to not get equal value back in trades.... And this is most likely the scenario... I don't know how to plan for that one, hopefully Mullin does.
I don't mind drafting three centers to find the anchor in the middle we need. Our big men have forever been mediocre or truly pathetic. It's something we can only remedy by having more guys who can shoot, handle the ball, and pass. But we need that anyway big man or not.
