From Hoopsworld's Steve Kyler: http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=13475 Holy shit. Won't pay over $9mil for Aldridge???? TEAM OPTION for fourth year for BRoy?! WTF is going on here? And why is there so much mention of going the cheap route this year, while having the willingness to pay more next year? Does the team want to be involved in the '10 FA frenzy? Can they? I am baffled at PA's frugality here. If either of these guys hits the RFA market next year, it would be extremely shameful of the organization and would not reflect on any sort of loyalty or commitment towards two players who have turned the franchise completely around.
It's not about loyalty. It's about leverage. The Blazers have it and Roy and, in particular, Aldridge, do not. Ed O.
Ed O - I have a unique question. All this talk of stalemates and contract talk has me concerned. I really like both these players - a lot. A lot. Back in my day, you didn't have internet talking heads and the fear-mongering. You had players like Paxon, Kiki, Drexler, Porter, Kersey, and Duckworth - who, in their prime, returned year after year. Yes, I know all went on to other teams, for various reasons..... (for the internet geeks who just jump at a chance to correct any little conversation, because it makes their geeky stature seem so much more valuable in their own eyes.) Is this contract crap the norm?? Are we facing the possibility of a total new face to our Blazer team? You say it's about leverage and not about loyalty - which it is. This is about business. It is, after all, a business. But, here you have two players who helped pulled our franchise from the depths of "jail-blazer" status, and could, in all likelihood be, franchise players at their respective positions. Is this all internet banter and speculation and odds are -- both will be long term Blazers, or are we facing a building/restructuring crisis where where we face the future of not being able to sign players like Roy and LA??
Some of the first colonies, like Jamestown in Virginia, in North America were built in or near the mouths of rivers. This made sense because it was close to the ocean and it provided good inland navigation opportunities... and it provided a fresh water supply for the outpost. Unfortunatley for these early colonists, the water was not as fresh as they thought. Brackish water is not as salty as seawater, but it can have negative health consequences because of the salt levels. Why do I ramble like this? Because I think we're at a "brackish water" period in terms of contracts and negotiations. The current collective bargaining agreement (buttressed by generally favorable economic conditions) allowed players and fans and teams to all expect a certain number of years at a certain salary level for different tiers of players. Of course, some guys got "overpaid" and some were "bargains", but that we can give any sort of educated opinions on which signings are good (before we see what the players actually produce) is because we have a shared expectation level. I think that the new collective bargaining agreement environment (which starts two summers from now, when the current one expires) will change the landscape incredibly. It's unclear to me HOW costs are going to be controlled, but I would imagine that lower top salaries and shorter contracts, or some sort of extension of restricted free agency to have "franchise" player(s) like in the NFL, will be implemented. In any case, there will be a change in expectations of who will get what and for how long. The difference in expectations will be like fresh water and seawater. The expectations right now are mixed. They're brackish. The Blazers are trying to hedge their bets for the new rules (both saving money AND not painting themselves into a corner) and Roy and Aldridge are trying to get everything they can before the change happens. I don't think that the Blazers are making a change any different from most teams, and I would anticipate that they will remain one of the most free-spending teams in the NBA... after the rules are established. The contracts offered to Hedo and Millsap might seem to fly in the face of my working theory here, but I would submit that in THAT case, the Blazers had less leverage and were willing to extend themselves more to add another valuable asset to the team... and, in the case of Millsap, to provide insurance in case Aldridge really wants $12m a season. Ed O.
Hey Ed, why do you think Brandon and LaMarcus have no leverage? Every other team in the league with the cap room, and there will be some, would give them the contracts they want. At worst they would give them what the Blazers are offering. It seems to me that Portland would be a lot worse off without a top 5 SG and a top 10 PF than they would be without Portland.
They have no leverage because they're both restricted free agents next summer. Sure, we could give them what they want and have them safely on our team for years to come. But there's no need to overspend to do so. If they can go out on the open market and get the money and years they want then we happily match that contract. But what team is going to do that. It's not like us with Millsap where there aren't any other quality young players. Seems like half the league is gonna be available.
It would be interesting if B-Roy came out publicly and stated that if he doesn't sign an extention this summer, he will not sign an extention and plans to test the free agent market in 2 years. Would that increase his leverage?
Well every other team in the NBA that plans on doing that also knows that the Blazers will match their offer in a heartbeat. The leverage is in the fact that if LMA or Roy go out next season and suffer a career ending injury than they get nothing. See Shaun Livingston. Basically the Blazers want a discount because they can do something for Roy and Aldridge that no other team can do.
Silly. Pay the man, imo. Maybe compromise with Roy and give him 4 years and a team option 5th for max? And give LMA 5 yrs/60 mil, imo.
I don't see how LaMarcus doesn't have leverage. Lots of teams are going to have cap space next season. Lots of teams are going to miss out on getting Bosh or Amare. Aldridge could very easily be the next best PF "available" in free agency. We offer 9 this year, and he wants a bit more. If his agent was smart, I'd say fine, we'll go to restricted free agency, and let the market set his value, adn watch as another team striking out on one of those other two offers him 14 a year. Then we're matching a much bigger deal. Dallas potentially has cap space, he could return home for a big deal. Houston will have cap space. He could return to Texas for a big deal. SA will have cap space. He could, again, be closer to home, and be the heir apparent to Duncan. I can see all 3 of those teams offering up big money, bigger than we are offering now. How good would Aldridge look in NJ, next to Lopez, with Harris and Lee in the backcourt? They can throw the max at him. Miss out on LBJ and Wade, but how good would LMA look playing C in NY in D'Antoni's offense? It'd be stupid, IMO, if you want to get him a smaller deal, to allow him to get to restricted free agency.
So after this season, both Roy and Aldridge will be RFA's. They could easily choose to sign the 1 year QO and walk the following year. The Blazers would not have the option of matching anything. This is the reason I think Roy and Aldridge absolutely have some power. I would laugh my ass off at the organization, and be pissed all to hell if their agents simply said if a contract isn't done by training camp then we are not going to re-sign with Portland period. You will have Brandon and LaMarcus' services for 2 more years and that is it. To me, that would be a huge blow to the Blazers in PR and ticket sales. How is that not havig any power? Aldridge especially has power. Next season there will be a lot of teams that will have a lot of money, and probably offer Aldridge more than 12 million per season. As for the career ending injury.....the chances of that is low. I don't think they would, but the two could also not give 100% effort, and also miss games due to really minor injuries.
That's because it's not your money and not your business. If it were, you may not just "pay the man."
Apparently it's a team option for the fourth year. A three year guaranteed deal for Roy, while Hedo was offered five? Has our front office gone mad?
No top RFA does that. It is a last resort for when the team seriously low-balls their RFA (see Ben Gordon).
No top RFA does that, just like no team haggles with a top 10 player in the league over his contract, trying to get him for less time than he wants to be there.
The NBA is looking to be closed (through strike or lockout) the summer of 2011... unless something dramatic happens, labor conflict seems pretty likely, IMO. Do you think it's at all likely that either Roy or Aldridge will play the 2010-11 season on a QO and then come back as free agents under a new collective bargaining agreement (or, if the legal landscape shifts with the upcoming Supreme Court decision, a league-imposed set of rules)? I don't. It would be foolhardy to do so. Aldridge or Roy could SAY that, but then they might have to settle for, say, three year $8m contracts. Or the Blazers might suddenly be able to franchise them like NFL teams can, and they would go from unrestricted to restricted free agents. There are too many things that can go wrong (aside from their performance slipping or them getting hurt, which are always, unhappily, possibilities) for their representatives to draw a line in the sand IMO. Ed O.
Definitely not, because as restricted free agents next offseason, both would get max contract offers, and then we'd have to match the max for both players.
