I don't know that he is really that much overpaid, I think his contract is about right. He's getting a little more than Kaman and I think that's about right. If the contract is front-loaded or even balanced then I think it is a great deal. I'd gladly pay 11M for what he should become in 2-3 years.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ryan @ Jul 28 2008, 12:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know that he is really that much overpaid, I think his contract is about right. He's getting a little more than Kaman and I think that's about right. If the contract is front-loaded or even balanced then I think it is a great deal. I'd gladly pay 11M for what he should become in 2-3 years.</div> I'd rather slightly overpay for a big who's already in the system, then grossly overpay for a guy who you're not too sure that will fit. I think Mully overpaid all of the free agents, but not to the point that they are untradeable in the future.
Slightly off-topic, but it's interesting that the Warriors were the first to commit to their own guys, well aside from the Bucks extending Bogut. Smith, Iggy, Okafor, and Deng are all still out there with no leverage aside from Europe or threatening to sign one year contracts and leave as unrestricted FA's. Well, I guess you could probably take Iggy off that list, since he's going to get resigned and the delay is just Philly trying to squeeze the cap, but the rest of them, news hasn't been as great. The signings also put those teams in a harder situation, because all of the free agents will be "me-too's." If Ellis and Biedrins are worth at least $10 million a year, those guys are going to want at least that much. That's bad news for both the Cats and the Hawks, who were hoping to sign their FA's to a bit less than $10 million per year, but now may be forced to up their offers.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ryan @ Jul 28 2008, 12:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know that he is really that much overpaid, I think his contract is about right. He's getting a little more than Kaman and I think that's about right. If the contract is front-loaded or even balanced then I think it is a great deal. I'd gladly pay 11M for what he should become in 2-3 years.</div> Interesting note; both Monta and Biedrins' contracts are flat rate salaries. Monta is making 11 million a year, every year for all 6 years. Biedrins is making 10.5 every year. There are no raises. It's a good move because we have the money to spend right now and down the line in years 4, 5, and 6 (if they don't opt out) it'll end up saving us a nice chunk of change. Looking over some of Biedrins' stats more closely, it looks like he was kind of screwed by Nellie insisting on keeping him out for long stretches or taking him out of the starting lineup. Here were his stats as a starter last season; 10.9 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 1.2 bpg, 62% FGs in 29 mpg. Only 2 mpg increases but 11/10.5 are very solid numbers. And check out what happened in April for Beans; 14.1 ppg, 13.9 rpg, 1.6 bpg, 63% FGs, 69% FTs in 32 mpg. Maybe Baron and Jackson's huge fade in April was to Biedrin's benefit? His FGAs went up a lot that month, as did his mpg obviously. Another interesting note; Biedrins was 3rd in the league in rebounds per 40 minutes behind Dwight and Camby. He lead the league in rebounds per game in April. He was the 10th ranked player in rebound rating according to 82games.com. Hopefully Nellie does get him up to 30-35 mpg this season.
Apparently now Fitz is saying on his radio show that Beans deal is 6 years 54 mil guaranteed, maximum of 63 mils if he fulfills the incentives. I wouldn't make too much out of it because Fitz is a tool and seems to have no actual insider information, just reads things off the internet (in this case from Kawakami perhaps) and claims they're true.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Run BJM @ Jul 28 2008, 02:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Looking over some of Biedrins' stats more closely, it looks like he was kind of screwed by Nellie insisting on keeping him out for long stretches or taking him out of the starting lineup.</div> Well, getting a fat new contract is not exactly getting him screwed. lol
Yahoo! Sports mini-article about the Biedrins signing. Puts it in good perspective just how young he still is.
He's not overpaid, he's getting the market value. Who cares? Its not like its going to break the bank, what's important is the W's retained their two best players, players who they got great value for while they were on their rookie contracts. There are no max contracts. The W's are in good shape talent and $$ wise for the future. You've got to resign Biedrins, he's the only real frontline player available and he's shown great improvement. That's the right investment there.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (philsmith75 @ Jul 28 2008, 06:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He's not overpaid, he's getting the market value. Who cares? Its not like its going to break the bank, what's important is the W's retained their two best players, players who they got great value for while they were on their rookie contracts. There are no max contracts. The W's are in good shape talent and $$ wise for the future. You've got to resign Biedrins, he's the only real frontline player available and he's shown great improvement. That's the right investment there.</div> It really is nice to not have to worry about the C position for the next 5-6 years. I mean how many fans do you hear who are happy with who their team has at C? Most teams either have a good PF playing C and would like to get someone in there to move said player to their natural spot or else they have a highly flawed specialist player who they want to upgrade. We've got a legit C with great numbers who's also smart, great on the pick and roll, has a great motor, and he just turned 22. He may be the least complained-about Warrior and its certainly nice to have that position set up for the future.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Run BJM @ Jul 28 2008, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (philsmith75 @ Jul 28 2008, 06:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He's not overpaid, he's getting the market value. Who cares? Its not like its going to break the bank, what's important is the W's retained their two best players, players who they got great value for while they were on their rookie contracts. There are no max contracts. The W's are in good shape talent and $ wise for the future. You've got to resign Biedrins, he's the only real frontline player available and he's shown great improvement. That's the right investment there.</div> It really is nice to not have to worry about the C position for the next 5-6 years. I mean how many fans do you hear who are happy with who their team has at C? Most teams either have a good PF playing C and would like to get someone in there to move said player to their natural spot or else they have a highly flawed specialist player who they want to upgrade. We've got a legit C with great numbers who's also smart, great on the pick and roll, has a great motor, and he just turned 22. He may be the least complained-about Warrior and its certainly nice to have that position set up for the future. </div> Yup, both you and phil are right. The haters who are saying the Warriors overpaid obviously don't understand that we've seen Beans play and improve night in and night out. I find it funny when fans of other teams complain about how much money we're paying certain players. If we step back and look at the financial situation, we're not over the cap, we've got some expiring contracts coming up in a couple years (Harrington and Jackson) and we haven't given anyone a max contract. Yeah, we tried to give max contracts to Elton Brand and Arenas and both fell through and I think that's a blessing in disguise. We're in good shape to develop a good core of young guys and we have a lot of depth for the coming years. Mullin and Co. have done a great job with what they were given.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kensaku @ Jul 28 2008, 07:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yup, both you and phil are right. The haters who are saying the Warriors overpaid obviously don't understand that we've seen Beans play and improve night in and night out. I find it funny when fans of other teams or just non-Warrior fans complain about how much money we're paying certain players. If we step back and look at the financial situation, we're not over the cap, we've got some expiring contracts coming up in a couple years (Harrington and Jackson) and we haven't given anyone a max contract. Yeah, we tried to give max contracts to Elton Brand and Arenas and both fell through and I think that's a blessing in disguise. We're in good shape to develop a good core of young guys and we have a lot of depth for the coming years. Mullin and Co. have done a great job with what they were given.</div> I agree with you that our overall financial situation is in pretty damn good shape. This offseason itself wasn't that good IMO. We'll have to wait and see how the team does because it could be pretty good but it could also be a 10-12 seed. The only real blemish was the Maggette deal IMO- I like getting Maggette but I feel we did overpay him. That being said I'd say hes in the class of a J-Rich, Michael Redd, Richard Jefferson, Peja Stojakovic, Rashard Lewis, Rip Hamilton and hes paid significantly less than most of those guys while also being more efficient. Again, we'll have to wait and see if hes really worth the contract but right now I really question that signing. We doled out a lot of money this offseason and it may set us up for just an average team in 08-09 but I like the future cap situation. Like you said, we have no max players suffocating our financial flexibility. Several guys getting 7-11 million a year but all are tradeable. Monta and Andris are on flat-rate deals and Turiaf is frontloaded. I have no problem paying the extra cash up front for this season because our roster is set and we're in transition, I'd much rather save the money later when Jax/Al are gone, the young guys are up for extensions and we can sign some players. Right now we have an awkward team assembled. Lots of young players, a small core of productive veterans. We could end up competing for a playoff spot or we could end up being terrible and developing the young players. Lots of depth and great coaching. If the latter happens that will make this offseason look pretty bad but it gives us a lot of flexibility for the future.
Its official, the deal is 6 years worth a guaranteed 54 million per Marc Stein, potentially 63 million if all incentives are achieved (unlikely). 9 mils a year is a pretty damn good deal to me and if he makes anything more than that hes damn well earning it. Likely incentives are leading the league (or being top 3/5?) in rebounding or blocks, being an all-star, all NBA defensive team, etc. Maybe even reaching the conference finals/finals or leading the league in FG%? Who knows but I'd say if he does achieve those incentives he'd be worth the extra couple mil that he would make. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>OAKLAND, Calif. -- The Golden State Warriors officially re-signed center Andris Biedrins to a six-year contract Monday worth a guaranteed $54 million and potentially topping $62 million with incentives. Andris Biedrins Biedrins ESPN.com reported Sunday night that the restricted free agent and the Warriors had reached a verbal agreement, enabling Golden State to realize its top offseason priority -- re-signing Biedrins and fellow restricted free agent Monta Ellis. NBA front-office sources said Monday night that Biedrins' deal will pay $9 million annually for each of the next six seasons, with a player option included for Biedrins to return to free agency in the summer of 2013 after the fifth year.</div> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3508668
It was a good signing at 11 mil, it's a steal at 9. He could have easily gotten more than that elsewhere.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Run BJM @ Jul 28 2008, 10:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Its official, the deal is 6 years worth a guaranteed 54 million per Marc Stein, potentially 63 million if all incentives are achieved (unlikely). 9 mils a year is a pretty damn good deal to me and if he makes anything more than that hes damn well earning it. Likely incentives are leading the league (or being top 3/5?) in rebounding or blocks, being an all-star, all NBA defensive team, etc. Maybe even reaching the conference finals/finals or leading the league in FG%? Who knows but I'd say if he does achieve those incentives he'd be worth the extra couple mil that he would make.</div> I don't like incentives. That reminds me of Troy Murphy fighting with Adonal Foyle for meaningless defensive rebounds so he could preserve his double-double status. I don't think Beans is that type of guy, but it's kind of a weird message to send your player: "Okay, you'll get more millions of dollars if you can pad your stats." Why would management want to encourage a player to focus on their stats? I can understand (and in fact encourage) team success, like "okay guys, you will all get an extra million if the team gets 50 wins" or "okay, if you play all 82 games you'll get an extra million" or "if your team reaches the post-season, you'll get an extra 3 million" or something. Also, incentives for becoming an all-star are fine. But incentives such as getting a certain number of rebounds or scoring a certain amount of points -- I can understand that you want your player to produce, but there are better ways to encourage it, IMO. It just seems to send the wrong message to the rest of the team, in a way. I dunno.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AlleyOop @ Jul 28 2008, 10:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't like incentives. That reminds me of Troy Murphy fighting with Adonal Foyle for meaningless defensive rebounds so he could preserve his double-double status. I don't think Beans is that type of guy, but it's kind of a weird message to send your player: "Okay, you'll get more millions of dollars if you can pad your stats." Why would management want to encourage a player to focus on their stats? I can understand (and in fact encourage) team success, like "okay guys, you will all get an extra million if the team gets 50 wins" or "okay, if you play all 82 games you'll get an extra million" or "if your team reaches the post-season, you'll get an extra 3 million" or something. Also, incentives for becoming an all-star are fine. But incentives such as getting a certain number of rebounds or scoring a certain amount of points -- I can understand that you want your player to produce, but there are better ways to encourage it, IMO. It just seems to send the wrong message to the rest of the team, in a way. I dunno.</div> Well, I think they see something more in Beans. Bean game is all above the rim. That's where we want him, and that's where he should be setting his goals. I am ok with it.
Great signing then. It's not too often that 22 years old with a potential actually gets a market value. Just 3 years ago, Mullin handed out... Richardson - 12 mils per Murphy - 10 mils per Dunleavy - 9 mils per Foyle - 8.5 mils per Fisher - 6 mils per And now... Monta - 11 mils per Maggette - 10 mils per Biedrins - 9 mils per Turiaf - 4 mils per Azubuike - 3 mils per That's a good learning curve. I am not saying I feel more hopeful with this group than last year's group with Davis. As a matter of fact, I think our current group's potential is 6th seed at best in tough West, and we are probably looking at lottory in 2009. We filled Davis' salary slot with Maggette and Turiaf, and considering what Davis meant to this club, that's quite depressing. But then, we cannot freeze the time and make Davis to play like last year for forever. So, this would be our future sooner or later. Considering all inevitable factors, I think Mullin did an OK job. And, he clearly learned from his past mistakes. He did not grossly overpaid young talent for their potential and he learned to manage caps for long time. I was impressed to learned that both Monta and Biedrins' salaries are evenly distributed, and Turiaf's salary is actually frontloaded. Since $1 today is worth more than $1 tomorrow, I think Mullin used this to make their salaries smaller. Really, I don't know why other teams use this to manage their salary structure. By explaining inflation factors and all those, teams can pay smaller amount to players, manage future caps better, and make them more attractable in trading market. I am not terribly optimistic with our current rosters, which are set for at least next few years. But, many of them should be relatively attractive and trade-ready. And, Mullin has been very lucky so far. So who knows how this roster will turn out in next 3 years?
This years team would crush that other roster. No contest. The money is better spent this time. Foyle is a freaking joke. Murphy? Are you kidding me?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Return of the Raider @ Jul 28 2008, 11:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This years team would crush that other roster. No contest. The money is better spent this time. Foyle is a freaking joke. Murphy? Are you kidding me?</div> I think he's comparing this year's team with Turiaf/Mags vs. last year's team with Baron Davis. Murphy & Foyle were several years ago.
