<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">San Francisco Chronicle - An ESPN.com report said the Warriors is trying to buy out the remainder of Adonal Foyle's contract, though such a move would be difficult and unlikely to create sizeable salary cap relief. Foyle has three years and about $27 million left on his deal, with a $10 million team option for the 2009-10 season.</div> Source
We'll be paying him regardless and it seems obvious he won't be contributing much under Nellie, so why not? Even if it saves the team $1 it's worth it, and if nothing else it gives us another roster spot to play with.
I saw the look on Foyle's face during the loss to the Hornets where we were getting killed on the boards. He had this look like "I could have at least rebounded the ball and maybe blocked a few of those easy layups NO scored". He could be of benefit, what we really should do is re-negotiate his deal to make it more cap friendly. I wish the NBA was like the NFL. If you dont produce you get cut and you lose your money...
What does that actually mean? Even if his contract is bought out, it still counts against the salary cap, doesn't it? If that won't give us room to sign or trade for anyone else, I'd rather keep Foyle even if he is buried at the end of the bench. At least it's an extra 6 fouls to use against Shaq or other physical bigs.
The buyout only accomplishes saving the organization money and opening up a roster spot. I think the better strategy is to convince him to opt out in 2009-10 and buy him out then. Like Ryanfish said, he could still have some value against big centers like Shaq. Nellie has no qualms about the Hack-A-Shaq technique and Foyle can foul players like no other. Plus with the slew of injuries this team keeps having to deal with, it might not be a bad idea to store Foyle on the bench. It also gives Nelson some motivating leverage to use on the younger players. If they don't what he's asking for on the court, he can put Foyle in to steal minutes from them.
<div class="quote_poster">ryanfish Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">What does that actually mean? Even if his contract is bought out, it still counts against the salary cap, doesn't it? If that won't give us room to sign or trade for anyone else, I'd rather keep Foyle even if he is buried at the end of the bench. At least it's an extra 6 fouls to use against Shaq or other physical bigs.</div> I agree with ryanfish <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> 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).</div>http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Makes me wonder if we could have pulled that luxury tax amnesty back when the new cba started...
In short term, it does benefit us. It appears that Nelson really wants to keep both Roberson and Barne. However, we are slightly over the luxury tax line, and that may cost millions if we ever try to keep both guys. In dream world, we will try to dump one guy to teams like Bobcat for 2nd rounder. But, who would agree to pay players like Zarko for 2 mils while giving up 2nd rounder? So, if we agree to eat 80% of Foyle's salary by buyout, our payroll will go down by a mil or two and ultimately under the luxury tax line. In long term, it's not necessary a good news. Foyle's contract is proably the most 'tradable' contracts without losing much, because he only has 2 years remaining after this season. However, if we buyout his contract, majority of his contract will remain for next 3 years. Therefore, if we ever plan to sign Ellis and Biedrins while not going crazy with luxury tax, we have to dump some other long term contracts, which will be a daunting task...
Kwan, maybe that is the Warriors problem. They don't think about longterm and that's why they don't have a very good plan B in case Dun or Foyle or Fish did not work out well for us. Who cares about 2nd rounders outside of Monta Ellis? We got a ton of small guards and Barnes is a journeyman player. If we waived them, to me, it would be no big deal. But if we kept Foyle and let his deal expire or used it to find some other guy to make the salaries work, I think that's even better. But, I understand with increasing salary each year including signing our own draft picks, the luxury tax is proving to be extremely tough to deal with. Did Mullin even think this through when he sat down with Cohan or did he just do it? I don't understand Mullin's logic to start overrating/overpaying vet talent when they're not former all-stars or anything. If we overpay at least overpay for guys like Sam Cassell, Antonio McDyess, Magloire or some dude who was good enough to be a huge factor on a team once. Sigh... Frustrated. Anyhoo, I almost think we should tank the season to get a 1-5. Get a top 5 pick in this year's draft that would be extremely nice. But knowing our luck we lose out by one or two spots for the player we want. Sometimes I hate the lottery, but it is a safeguard against tanking to get #1.
No, they definitely didn't think of the future. That's one of the reason why I was so baffled by Mullin's spending spree at his first year. He just didn't think of the alternative scenario that other guys might be better fit for the Warriors than Davis, Richardsion, Dunleavy, Murphy, Fisher, and Foyle. And, that's why we have so little freedom to turn this ship around. Still, I gotta give Mullin a credit for being creative, and at least trying to solve the problem ahead. Granted that it may be more damaging in the future, because we cannot trade Foyle's contract anymore. But, at least, he is trying in positive way. Will Foyle agree on buyout? That's completely different problem though. I mean, why would he agree on buyout? He definitely loves Bay Area, and by not agreeing on buyout, he can get more cash. The only things we can count on is his loyalty toward Warriors and his pride as a basketball player, but how many times those qualities won against money?
Don't know if its a smart move to buy Foyle out right now. We'd pay his salary at a reduced amount until the end of the contract length, saving the W's a few mils a year but he'll be movable by next year's all-star break (where he'll have 1.5 years remaining on the contract). The only major FA we have this offseason is Pietrus and we can match any offer he gets if necessary but I don't think Nelson is willing to pay him very much to stick around, especially since we'll have some draft picks next off season that we have to pay.
<div class="quote_poster">custodianrules2 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post"> Anyhoo, I almost think we should tank the season to get a 1-5.</div> I can't believe you said that
Well, if Foyle is interested in the buy-out, then the Warriors can be strategic about it, hold off on it, and keep it on the back burner until it is timely. I mean, if he's willing to accept a buy out right now, I 'm sure he'd still be willing around mid-season, once the Warriors have explored trade options and/or assessed their injury problems and need Foyle's 6 fouls.
If Foyle is willing to be bought out, the Warriors should consider trading him along with CASH, and get back a servicable player with an expiring contract. A potential trade partner could be a team like Denver. The Nuggets frontline is injured once again and they have Joe Smith ($6M expiring contract), that could be sent back to the Warriors for Foyle + CASH.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">If Foyle is willing to be bought out, the Warriors should consider trading him along with CASH, and get back a servicable player with an expiring contract. A potential trade partner could be a team like Denver. The Nuggets frontline is injured once again and they have Joe Smith ($6M expiring contract), that could be sent back to the Warriors for Foyle + CASH.</div> Good idea. Magloire is in the last year of his contract (8 mil), I wouldn't mind if he was brought here.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">If Foyle is willing to be bought out, the Warriors should consider trading him along with CASH, and get back a servicable player with an expiring contract. A potential trade partner could be a team like Denver. The Nuggets frontline is injured once again and they have Joe Smith ($6M expiring contract), that could be sent back to the Warriors for Foyle + CASH.</div> Nobody wants Foyle at that price and years. Denver could just sign someone on the waiver wire or trade for anyone semi decent. If Foyle were to be kept, he wouldn't be going anywhere until the final year of his contract.
<div class="quote_poster">AnimeFANatic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I can't believe you said that </div> I was only kidding. But maybe for other teams, such a surreptitious scheme is already in the works as we speak.
Kenyon Martin is officially out for the rest of the season. Maybe my Foyle to Nuggets trade scenario can gain some legs.
I wonder if the Warriors could do something like agree to buyout or pay part of Foyle's contract if he'll just go away to the Nuggets. Like a straight-up buyout but write it up with Denver so that they promise to sign him to a deal -- they get him at a cheaper price, but he still gets some $$ from GS and some cash from Denver, and still gets to be with a team...?
