Extension in the Works for Andris Biedrins?

by Atma Brother ONE on Oct 3, 2007 11:21 AM PDT in Rumors Comment 103 comments

After playing hardball with Head Coach Don Nelson, Baron Davis, Matt Barnes, Mickael Pietrus, Sarunas Jasikevicius , and to some extent Monta Ellis this past summer, the Warriors oddly look like they're on the verge of giving young big man Andris Biedrins a big money deal [SFGate]:

The last center standing from a year ago is now the only Warrior with a chance to cash in big this season. Golden State has until Oct. 31 to sign Biedrins to a contract extension or let him become a restricted free agent next summer.

Both Warriors vice president Chris Mullin and Bill Duffy, Biedrins' agent, anticipate talks to pick up as preseason moves along, and although neither is publicly offering any numbers, all signs point toward a deal getting done.

It's a real head scratcher why after a change for more fiscal responsibility the Warriors are reportedly about to open up their pocket books for a promising young big man who has some obvious flaws in his game that he'll most likely never overcome. When was the last time you saw a raw young big man develop a jump shot, a low or high post game, morph into a great passer who you can run your offense through, or a phenomenal shot blocker and rugged defender pretty much out of nowhere? I can think of only one legit player in Jermaine O'Neal, but he's an exception to the rule, not the norm.

capt.f00ae339d43e43989c1cbc978f6f4658.warriors_basketball_media_day_cabm111.jpg
Let's wait and see if Andris' photography and hoops skills mature before giving him a big payday.
(AP Photo/Ben Margot)

More thoughts about the possibly looming contract extension for the young big man after the jump...

Remember, Biedrins is usually is the 5th option on the floor anytime he out there. He can pretty much just catch and dunk. If he gets fouled going up for a shot and gets sent to the free throw line, well make sure the kids are at home and aren't watching. Creating offense for himself and others just isn't his cup of tea right now and probably will never be. No one's going to confuse him for Vlade Divac out there with respect to passing. If there's no BD-level passer on the squad, it's remains an open question how many buckets Biedrins would be able to score nightly.

Defensively Biedrins has become a good help defender and a solid force on the glass against most teams. However throw him against a frontline with some bulk and he struggles mightily. With his slender frame (admittedly, he'll fill out with age though) it's just asking and expecting too much of him to battle against the Carlos Boozers', Amare Stoudemire's, and Tim Duncan's of the league. Plus that Greg Oden fellow is someone to worry about for the next decade plus in the West.

Don't get me wrong Biedrins had a fantastic season last year (his 2k6-2k7 GSoM Report Card is on the way), but remember the Warriors went on that crazy late season run with him on the bench and the smallest starting unit in the land with Baron, Monta, JRich, Jax, and Al with Barnes as the 6th man. He arguably wasn't as integral to last season's success as you'd think.

If there's one thing this league has shown it's that young big men with that p-word potential don't come cheap. Take a look at some of these recent highly questionable big money deals for the 6'9 and over crowd:

Tyson Chandler: - $63 million over 6 years- I'd say he's the most similar player to Biedrins in the NBA and I don't think anyone would argue he's a superstar in the making.
Samuel Dalembert: $62 million over 6 years- Huh?
Zach Randolph: $84 million over 6 years- Shouldn't someone be able to pass the ball and play defense if you're going to give them sort of payday?
Nene: $60 million over 6 years- At least his name is cool.
Chris Kaman: $50 million over 5 years- Chillin' with The Flinstones is rewarding.
Rashard Lewis: $110 million over 6 years- Not that his game is anything like Biedrins' but I just had to sneak this in... Orlando Tragic!

Think any of those teams would like a playground "do-over"?

If the Warriors give Biedrins a lucrative extension right now, they're simply repeating the same mistake they made with those laughable contract extensions for Adonal Foyle, Troy Murphy, and Mike Dunleavy from not too long ago. They're paying a player for what they think he might do or become, not what he can presently do or has proven he can do. Remember after this season he'll be a restricted free agent. Given the recent history of restricted free agents, it's very unlikely that some other team is going to pry him away next summer. The Warriors hold the cards here, not Biedrins and his agent.

Just like the Warriors did with Boom Dizzle, Mohawk Barnes, MP2, and Monta here's hoping they play those cards right and are patient. But don't get me wrong, I'm all for the good man to get paid some of Cohan's green. If the Warriors ink Biedrins to a big money deal good for him, but it's probably not good for the Warriors' cap in the long run. I wouldn't bet on him getting that much better than he already is, but what do I know? Just 2 years back I thought he wouldn't be in the league past his initial rookie deal because of what appeared to be a player with terribly low hoops IQ and very little body control. (Yes, he had that bad of a sophomore campaign.) The Dubs should just make sure that last year wasn't a fluke for Biedrins and that he's on the pace for stardom before they make a common mistake in the NBA. What's the rush?

And let's not forget the effects within the locker room a Biedrins extension might have. What kind of message does it send to the others who were hardballed this past offseason with their contract negotiations? If Biedrins gets a contract extension, why doesn't Monta and so on? It might appear like the Warriors are playing favorites and that might wreck an already fun and tightly knit locker room atmostphere. Why mess with a good thing?

Should the Warriors ink Andris Biedrins to an extension before October 31st? If so, what kind of deal do you think is reasonable for both sides?

Also check out ffgolden's diary Biedrins: To extend, or not to extend? for more discussion

0 recs | Comment 103 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

holy crap

rashard is getting that much?! He better get them at least to the playoffs. Anyway hes worth the extension, hes a solid rebounder, he can move, his hands aren't made of stone (like foyle), he can score pretty much when he wants to but he doesnt shoot that often. Hes still young and he is going to get better. Don't know exactly how much you'd want to give, for sure not as much as the guys you mentioned above

by djchuckdeez on Oct 3, 2007 11:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

hm

when have the warriors ran their offense through their a PF or C? I've been a Warriors fan for awhile now and I seriously can't remember how long its been since the warriors have had any 4 or 5 as they center piece of their team.

Right now I can't see the Warriors being able to afford to let Biedrins go just because of the way he has helped the team. When he started off he was a nobody, literally. Last season was a huge improvement and I don't see him getting any worse. I'd sooner start unloading people who are occupying positions that are easy to fill due to availability like the excessive amount of shooting guards and small forwards.

by david240z on Oct 3, 2007 11:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

omg atma

Wow, your view on Biedrins is baffling to me. You equate giving Beans an extension to the contracts Murphy and Dunleavy signed!!!! Holy smokes, brother. You've had a notoriously low outlook on Biendrins for as long as I can remember.

The market is set for big men like Biedrins--you listed them above. How could we get away w/ out paying him that money? He is ALREADY better than every big man you listed, and he has the potential to really be something special. Some would argue that in the Warriors system, he ALREADY IS something special. You even admitted that those bigs don't have nearly the upside that Beans has. Kid is 21 years old and he nearly avg. a double-double last year in his FIRST YEAR starting.

And please do not knock him for a poor Sophomore campaign. We had Mike Montgomery coaching who wouldn't play him or Monta much at all--and didn't have a system set up to his strengths. Granted, he fouled plenty, but most young bigs do (really most all rookies do, due to the refs preferential treatment). You'll see Beans getting the benefit of the doubt much more this year on foul calls, no doubt.

Saying Beans has a terrible b-ball IQ is a real head scratcher too. He always seems to be in the right place at the right time. He always knows where he is on the floor in relation to the basket, and has run the pick and roll beautifully.

Let me ask you this: If we don't sign him for the current market value, who do you think we should go after?

I have the exact opposite opinion of you on this subject. Beans should be locked up now. His value is only going to go up barring a terrible injury. There is no upside to waiting--only downside.

by myron on Oct 3, 2007 11:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

100% agree

I think the issue of supply and demand needs to be considered as well.

Atma you got it wrong here buddy, I but I appreciate your article and respect your opinion.

If War brings peace Dubz wit' it den!

by gsdubz on Oct 3, 2007 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

x 3

Count me 100% in the myron/GSDubz "non-head-scratching" camp.

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 3, 2007 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

x4

x4!!!

by djchuckdeez on Oct 3, 2007 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

divide by 4

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree as well

why does Biedrins have to develop a jumpshot, dominant post moves and become a player we can run the offense through, just to get a deal. nobody expects that from him. he has a lot of skills. he's not a franchise kevin garnett player, but he is very good and very young. also very durable.

by Proof on Oct 3, 2007 2:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

so

what do we do when we don't have baron or jackson to give him those easy shots anymore?

thats right, a worthless overpayed center who can't create his own shot. someone who relies on other strengths? ok

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Overpayed? [sic]

Um, just curious. Who was the last Warriors big man you'd consider better than AB? Even right now, when he's still a kid? The only guy I can think of is Webber, more than a decade ago, and after about four-five years (and several injuries) he was never quite the same. (And he just turned down Biedrins bucks to play in Europe even tho he's now about 100 years old.)

Who's got AB's hands (see Adonal)? Who plays as well above the basket? Who moves so swiftly to the hoop? Who defends/rebounds better? Who plays his position on D better? Who's anywhere near as fast?

This guy may never shoot the ten foot jumper, but my guess is (1) we'll start seeing a pretty fair hook shot this year, (2) the O will have opportunities to run the game thru him, because he can pass, and (3) if Wright is anything near what he looks to be, we'll see some lovely passes/tips between those two. Finally, I agree he's got a good thing going with Jax, in particular. That'll get better and better, since Jax (usually) plays very smart and he knows AB's got real talent.

We're fortunate -- very fortunate -- to have this guy. Let's enjoy him.

by johnl on Oct 4, 2007 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

i don't care how biedrins compares to the past warriors big men, thats not even a case. what i compare him to is the rest of the league. so ur saying just b/c he's been better than the past guys and we pay him alot of money?

(1) i never saw any coming of a hook shot (2) who says he can pass? option zero? lol

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 4, 2007 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

uh...

Watch some video of the EuroBasket from this past summer. He utilized a short little turnaround jumper that he hit a few times. We'll see how that translates in the NBA, but it's a good sign that he's started to develop additional offensive moves (that are in his range).

Also, in the training camp blog at warriors.com, Nellie said that he's planning to involve Biedrins in more offensive plays. Nellie ran a play for him 8 times last season, so he must have seen passing ability to trust him with more offensive plays this season.

by Caught Backcourt on Oct 4, 2007 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

no

when murphy avg'd his double-double, i bet you u wanted to give him a fat contract extension as well. only time exposes weaknesses! we gain in watching him another year so that we can see his weaknesses! he scores on dunks right now. teams could just foul him so that he misses a dunk next year and put him on the foul line. and that is just one example of exposing his weaknesses. another weakness would be too slim to guard the duncan and the boozers. another weakness would be creating his own shot. what do we do once baron is gone? or the ppl who create the easy dunks for him?

for once, lets see the rookie contract expire, before handing out that unneeded extension.

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

btw

biedrins is not that better than tyson chandler just yet

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Please

Take an extra second and organize your thoughts, then you can avoid triple (or more) posting.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

are you just being a dick? cuz you really are. wow, don't tell me u ever forgot to say something and replied to something twice.

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 4, 2007 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How 'bout

Just trying a little thought for once -- and a lot less useless, ad hominem spray.

We know you're loaded with personal venom, but it'd be nice to see a bit of analytical insight. That's really where the fun in this is.

by johnl on Oct 5, 2007 9:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

giving out big contracts

A player should always be paid according to the type of impact he can make in a game and the amount of players he can dominate in terms of performance. For example, Tim Duncan can single handedly post efffectively against any player in the league right now. Obviously he deserves a huge contract and he does have one.

On the other hand, using Tyson Chandler as precedence for a large contract is just absurd. Beans does have a better offensive game than Chandler, but can he really be any more than a 4th option at this point? Not realy.

If you're paying him on potential, I highly agree with Atma Brother. He has tons of flaws in his game that are very apparent. No jump shot, no long distance jump shot, he probably has one good post move, no passing skills, and still very foul prone on defense. At best, he is a Tyson Chandler or Samuel Dalembert with a lower defensive presence and a higher offensive game. I'd say 7 mil/year is what he really deserves at most but in the NBA where big men seem to be the buyout destined fad, he will get offers of 10mil/year easy.

Let's hope the Warriors maintain their cap flexibility they made sacrifices for (Richardson) and worked so hard to achieve.

by ballerjl on Oct 3, 2007 12:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Underselling

Biedrins is only 21, and it's fairly likely that he improves in all of the categories that you fault him in, except for long-distance shooting (which shouldn't be a factor anyway). He may develop a mid-range jumper, he'll most certainly continue to develop more post moves, his ability to stay out of foul trouble has improved each year, and I'd say he's already a fair passer--he's got good court awareness and good hands. And his defense will steadily improve along with his playing time and strength development.

by ffgolden on Oct 3, 2007 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree

i agree with atma. why hand out a contract based on potential? you want another mike dunleavy?

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

4th Option? So what.

Ranking someone according to what "option" they are on offense ignores more than half the game. In the case of most centers, it also ignores the aspect of the game where they're most likely to make a difference.

I realize that NBA GMs tend to pay players according to how much they score. with little or no mind to how efficient they are at this single skill. I realize that all-star voters tend to pay more attention to this than anything else as well. But the game is more complex than that. Rebounding, positional defense and shooting efficiency have a huge impact on the final score.

Not having a jumpshot isn't much of a negative if he shoots 60% from the floor on the shots he takes. A jump shooting center sounds great in theory, but they tend to grab fewer rebounds, tend to take more bad shots, tend to stray away from the basket where they can do more good. In theory they 'draw defenders out' but in practice, this rarely happens to such a degree as to compensate for them missing more shots when they move out away from the basket.

Comparing him to Dalembert and Chandler is probably pretty close to on the money, but presenting this as anything other than a positive isn't. Neither light up the scoreboard, but both players help their team. There is a reason that Dalembert and Chandler are near the top in net plus-minus on their teams. They impact the game without scoring. Biedrins is similar in this regard and similarly has a positive net plus-minus.

by jae on Oct 3, 2007 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

so you

would rather have troy murphy who does have an outside shot then biedrins?

dude we don't want our center trying to shoot jump shots. he is very affective in the paint and he plays within himself and is very affective. he is smart, quick, has great hands, is very young, very coachable, great sense of where to be, great rebounder, blocks a bunch of shots and changes a lot of shots.

by Proof on Oct 3, 2007 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

nope

I didn't say anything of those things. My point is he isn't a versatile player and the things he does are above average but not top tier. You guys are just used to rewarding big men with bloated contracts just like NBA GM's.

I agree you can impact the game in a number of categories, that's why I'm knocking him. Because he isn't multi-dimensional. He can't shoot a free throw, he can't shoot a jumper, he doesn't have various post moves.

I'm not saying he won't improve. I'm not saying I want Troy Murphy. God no. But if your going to give a large chunk of the cap to one player you better be sure as hell he can do many things for you because you won't be able to buy other players.

by ballerjl on Oct 3, 2007 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

versatility

Being able to say you can do many things says nothing about how good you are at those things.

Biedrins IS versatile, just not in the ways you mentioned:

He is extremely effective in the pick and roll, he DEFENDS the pick and roll very well; he rebounds offensively and defensively; he moves without the ball even when not part of the play, he blocks shots and figures to get better at that; he's flashed some passing skills; he's flashed some offensive ability in certain matchups.

There are plenty of bigmen that can't claim half that resume, and this kid is 21.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

he's flashed some passing skills.

hahahahahaha!!!

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

how does

biedrins have better offensive game than chandler? they virtually do the same thing.

oh yea, and chandler shoots at a higher fg%. i bet you didn't know that

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No shame in being compared to Tyson Chandler

Chandler had a fantastic season last year, particularly in the second half. He was an absolute fantasy beast: a rebounding and blocking machine who rarely toook bad shots. He was the second most important player on a team that nearly made the playoffs. He's a total steal at $9M per.

Biedrins is a pretty comparable player, only with a bit more quickness, better hands, a nicer touch around the rim, and loads more upside. FWIW, Chandler shot slightly better than AB from the field last season (63%-59%), but AB leads him 60% to 54% over their careers.

As a side note, Warriorsrule, instead of carpet-bombing the board with a bunch of half-formed posts, why don't you settle down and try composing all your thoughts into a coherent paragraph or two? As it is, you're only making the "don't extend" position look more ridiculous.

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 3, 2007 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

i reply to messages that need replying to

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 4, 2007 10:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Biedrins is one guy I'd want to extend.

Baron still needs to prove his longevity and Monta is not in the same boat as AB.

It's just that true centers and big men are rare in the NBA today, so someone could easily give him 80 M as a restricted free agent. Then the Warriors would be forced to match in order to keep him. We didn't trade AB for KG, so six years around $60M doesn't sound unreasonable.

Andy Beans is a lot better than Foyle, Murphy or Dunleavy so he deserves his payday. How can those paydays be compared to his? That doesn't make too much sense. Besides, AB came into his own last season and what he's only 21? That's a hard combo to beat.

by callahan on Oct 3, 2007 1:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Biedrins

Biedrins' is already worth $10M at his current production level- that is, if he merely repeats his performance for the rest of his career, $10M is roughly the right price tag.

When you put the potential to reduce his foul rate and produce even more, then $10M becomes a good deal.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 1:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

werd

Seriously though, Atma. You're right about a lot of things. But you're wrong about Biedrins. You're wayyyy to hard on that kid. I have no idea why, but you are WAY too hard on him. He's young, uber talented, and fresh. His speed can give centers around the league fits, and he will improve on defense. There's literally no reason to say he will never overcome any of his flaws. At least your opinion doesnt sway, but you bash this guy a lot.

http://westcoastbiased.blogspot.com

by coma on Oct 3, 2007 2:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

hmm

it's understandable to be cautious about what kind of money we pass out, but when you named the former warriors who got extensions that shouldn't have, Biedrins is already better than them. He is an integral part of the team. Agreed that it can't just be him down low, pairing him up with a legit power forward will be lethal. He's gonna bulk up more, and also get even more finesse. A big man who runs, defends, blocks shots, and can score? Now if you don't pay that man, then I don't know who you pay.

The Squad

by tadams1080 on Oct 3, 2007 2:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

wow

thats exactly how mullin felt. he thought to himself "so who am i going to pay?". so after murphy completed his first double-double season, mullin gives him a fat contract...we all know what happened after that...do you want the same thing to happen?

saying biedrins is better than those guys right now is completely absurd. murphy actually avg'ed a true double-double that year, unlike biedrins 9.5 double double...so arguably i can say that murphy is better.

u get the point???

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah biedrins usually is a 5th option

on the court. BUT, he is an option. he is still a scoring option in a lineup that is filled basically with people who are offensive specialists trying to outscore the other team and hustle. Baron, Jrich, Jackson, Harrington. Adonal foyle wasn't an option at all on offense thats why he didn't play. Murhpy could only shoot and get a few rebounds that were right to him. Andris is very effective offensively in the paint and he is a tremendous rebounder and a good defender on the rise. His height, quickness and soft hands are almost as rare as monta's speed, hops and finishing ability.

by Proof on Oct 3, 2007 3:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

he deserves the money

just for those soft hands alone. a big man catching nice passes and then converting in the paint?!?! redick!!!!

by sadleavy on Oct 3, 2007 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm...

I don't see how anyone could think that extending Biedrins wouldn't be fiscally responsible. In my eyes, Biedrins will play as well as he did last year, and most likely, he will play better. He improved in almost every category last year, he's young, athletic, etc. This whole 'play hardball with him' mentality is completely misguided. If we don't extend Biedrins now, he will 100% for sure be offered a deal more expensive than the $10 mil. or so per year the W's will offer him before the season starts. Not signing him would ultimately be a waste of money. Didn't we trade JRich pretty much for the sole purpose of being able to sign Andris and Monta?

Finally hoops hope in the City Of Dope?

by oaklandish on Oct 3, 2007 4:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

To extend, or not to extend?

maybe it's just me, but something's not making sense:

the thread in ffgolden's diary seems more balanced and even leaning toward waiting, not extending AB yet, while here A-brudda1 is getting skewer'd for pointing to some arguments against extending him ...

my guess is Mullin will low-ball an offer and see if AB's people bite, trading security for potential. All these guys are one injury away from the end of the career - long term contracts look good (besides, you can always ask to renegotiate!)

by hardcore on Oct 3, 2007 4:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Word

I read this entry first, and had a pretty strong reaction to it, and realize my response may have sounded a little harsh. No disrespect to Atma. You the man Atma!

Finally hoops hope in the City Of Dope?

by oaklandish on Oct 3, 2007 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

and like you guys mentioned already

NBA GMs jump on the gun as soon as a big man gets available. Hardball won't work on Biedrins because unlike Barnes and/or Pietrus, more teams would be willing to gamble on him. Unless his agent sets the bar really high, it's important to get a deal done now.

I don't see what's the big fuzz about him being the 5th option. Last time I check, we're not at all short in scoring. He's the only one on the floor who actually has an entirely different role which I think only adds to his value.

by lightz0ut on Oct 3, 2007 4:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Honestly

I have no clue what the "don't extend" camp is actually arguing for.

Atma, by bringing up Dunmurphy and Foyle, you seem to imply that the smart thing to do would be to let AB walk for nothing. Is that really what you want? And if all you want is one more year to "wait and see," why? On the off-chance that despite all AB's signs of progress (in the Eurochampionship, e.g.) he'll regress to the point where we can get him for slightly cheaper than $10M per? And what's "slightly cheaper?" $8M? Are you so attached to the remote chance that we might save a couple mil a year that you're willing to risk (1) his having a breakout year and raising his pricetag to $14-15M; or (2) letting another team swoop in and grab him?

As for the argument that other teams wouldn't want him, or that he only fits in Nellieball: good luck with that. If Marc Spears from the Boston Globe sees a potential star in the making, I think it's pretty safe to say more than a handful of NBA GMs do too.

Unless we're willing to let AB walk, we have to pay him, at market value. Thankfully, it seems clear Mulson are keenly aware of this. The deal gets done in the next couple of weeks. The cheapskates can all weep for Chris Cohan's wallet.

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 3, 2007 4:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

minor point

The most Biedrins can make is $13M (starting). It might average out to around 14-15 if you get to 5-6 years.

The point stands. Who would want to see Biedrins walk for free? That doesn't make any sense. The question then becomes extend now or later, and there's a greater risk of the price going up than down (all else, like health, being equal).

So I'd have to say Mullin should get it done for 5years $50M or thereabouts (or 6/60, whatever) now and get to planning for next offseason's finances.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

whoever

said that he's walking for free?? we can match any offer he gets!

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

you can also say that

the cheapskates are the ones who think biedrins is gonna get a 13-14 mil contract instead of a 10 mil contract. so either way, if we're saving a couple million, whats the difference??? i would much rather see biedrins work hard for that 13-14 mil to establish that is his market value. we can still match it!!

if not, we extend him now. he gets lazy. his weaknesses will be exposed (like how murphy's was), and we'll all be regretting we overpayed him at 10 mil per

!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i got your back atma
me and atma vs sleepy and oz
hahaha

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 5:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

honestly

I have no clue what the "extend" camp is actually arguing for.

we lose nothing if we wait another year. if a team offers him 13 mil, then we can match it!

i rather see biedrins establish himself as a 13 mil player this year and hand him the money.

because i am not even sure if he's a 10 mil player yet!

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

WOW

This is the first time I COMPLETELY DIASAGREE with what you wrote Atma. I was bamboozled (yes i just wrote bamboozled) by what you wrote and even thought maybe I had a distorted view on Andris since what you guys write is almost always accurate and knowledgable. But then I saw what others wrote and I couldnt agree more with those first few comments. :(

by twelve years on Oct 3, 2007 5:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

BEAUTIFUL!!!

BEAUTIFUL, JUST BEAUTIFUL, ATMA BROTHER ONE. well said. you said everything perfectly.

i can't see biedrins improving his ft%, adding any offensive moves to his repertoire (low post moves besides the putbacks and dunks), or averaging more than 2 blocks a game.

i loved how you said "we'd be repeating the same mistake of foyle, murphy, and dunleavy". thats a terffic point. i remember when murphy completed his first double-double season and everyone was already all over his nuts. and look at all the "slow-lateral movement" criticisms he gets today.

i also loved how you said "what's the rush???". we can match any offer that teams make, and i doubt anyone would try to pry him away.

and just b/c Chandler, Dalembert, Randolph, Nene, and Kaman were signed to stupid contracts doesn't mean that we have to make the same stupid mistake. we are past that! no more of that stupid fisher/foyle/murphy/dunleavy contract signing! mullin will lose all credibility from what he has established this offseason if he gives in and gives biedrins a contract right now. bottom line...we have nothing to lose! i for one, would like to see another full season of biedrins!

so...SHUT THE HELL UP O.Z. (who always thinks he's right), and all the other guys who want to resign him right now...sorry for the bluntness

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 5:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

whoa

no need to tell anyone to "shut the hell up" for posting their opinion. that's not cool.

by Fantasy Junkie on Oct 3, 2007 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

haha yea

sorry about that =D

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ahem

cough

by jrizzle on Oct 3, 2007 6:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought

the whole "salary cap flexibility" thing was done FOR Biedrins?
Anyway it's difficult to quantify "potential", most GMs in the NBA gamble on big men and not every single one of them turned out to be the next Shaq, but the players you mentioned above don't suck either (unlike the former center we had). Yes, there are a lot of flaws in his game, but unlike SFs or SGs, good centers are hard to come by. Idealy, players' salary depend on their production, but not for centers because every other GM in the NBA would jump at the chance of being able to sign a big man for his team. I believe he's going to be extended no matter what, and get Nene- and Chandler-type money.

by semarubaka on Oct 3, 2007 5:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

hey "thewarriorsrule"

was that all sarcasm or are you just that ignorant?

by twelve years on Oct 3, 2007 6:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

how do we

know that you're not ignorant. who cares its a message board to voice your opinions.

would it make u feel better if atma and fantasy delete my blunt posts?

don't take everything so offensively. its just the internet

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Problem

This is not "a message board" or "just the internet", we are a community who show respect for one another. Show people respect. Just because it's anonymous and you can't see people face to face, doesn't mean you can be rude. This site is not your outlet for being rude, there are other venues for that. Please show people respect regardless of whether or not you agree with their opinion. It's just a simple matter of having manners and class. If you don't feel you can be respectful of other people there are plenty of other message boards to go to. We appreciate you coming to our site, but we request that everyone who visits is respectful of everyone else here.

by Fantasy Junkie on Oct 3, 2007 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

you're right again fantasy junkie. i apologize. i love you man

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 4, 2007 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why now?

Why can't we wait for a year? It's been shown in the past few years that restricted free agents just do not get offers. Why will this change for Andris? Because he's a big man? Teams would have to grossly overpay him to sign his services away from the Warriors if he was a restricted free agent and I just don't see that happening.

After one breakout year, we're ready to give him a big extension? Erick Dampier had a breakout year (potential All-Star) and we all know how that turned out. "But he's not Dampier!" Is that hoping or a statement? If I remember correctly, people were pretty excited about Damp after that year and that he was finally realizing his potential. All I'm saying is, just be wary about guys who have one big year and throwing money at him.

I'm no salary expert, but let me try to break it down...

If Beans improves again, what are his rebounds going to be? Let's say a 20% increase to 12rpg making him a top 4 rebounder. Possible? Yes, but that still puts him just below what Tyson Chandler (a similar player) did last year. Now let's say he increases his scoring by 20% as well, that puts him at 12ppg which would be top 4 in scoring for centers. Then he also improves his defense and plays more than 30 minutes. Defensively with Chandler, I'll call it a wash. So that puts his numbers slightly higher than Chandler because of the points and he's a top 4 center. I'd say that's the best case scenario. Agreed?

So Chandler is making 6/63. Let's say Beans commands slightly higher because of the better ppg numbers, maybe 2 mil/year so 6/75. Is that fair or would he get more?

Is the 20% increase in production likely? It's debateable, but I don't think so. So now let's say his market value would be 12.5 mil per year in the best case scenario or 25% higher than what they are reportedly going to give him. Teams would have to probably pay around $14+ mil per year to steal him away as a restricted free agent. I don't see it happening.

For me, that's worth the wait. If he has another breakout year and improves by that much, I will be surprised and he will have proven he deserves the money. But 1 good year does not make me want to lock him up like the Clips did Kaman. If the Clips had waited a year on Kaman, you think he'd have commanded 5/50? I don't think so. All in all, I say just be patient. Let him show he can play this well consistently and if he improves then I have no problem paying him. I'd rather spend extra money on more of a sure thing than be burdened with another big contract.

by Fantasy Junkie on Oct 3, 2007 6:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

i like

how you and atma think. theres a reason why/how you guys created this message board!! =D

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

evolving strategies.

I think the strategy on how to deal with restricted free agents is evolving.

A few years ago, there wa a rash of early extensions. The Warriors weren't the only team that seemed to do that. There just weren't that many players who were allowed to become 5th year restricted free agents.

A couple years ago it seemed that teams started to wait it out a bit more and offered shorter deals to their 5th year players, more or less daring other teams to try to give offers that would be matched. That's what happened with Wilcox. Teams realized they could put forward a low ball offer and since few teams could really offer much more than an MLE to most players, players might consider anything moderately above that, even if they thoght they'd get much more on a true open market.

This year, it's gone ever further where players that the team really wants to retain and would pay quite a bit for are being left holding a one year offer sheet in hand. There's been few real serious attempts to try to lure away the restricted free agents and as such, guys like Pietrus and Varejao have been left with a take it or leave it one year deal at far below what they expected. It may be that the low ball offers were too low and the players would rather suck it up for one more year and become unrestricted free agents. It may be that even the Wilcox-type deals just didn't appear. Hard to tell, but it does seem like there's at least a trend towards a bit more financial sanity.

I don't know what next year will bring, but trying to figure out what the free agent/restricted free agent strategy will be based on what has happened ignores that strategies seem to shift over time. Relying on what has happened in even the previous year hasn't been the best predictor of how teams or players will behave.

by jae on Oct 3, 2007 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

also

that thing you wrote at the end kind of reminded me of Ricky Bobby in Talladega Nights when he said

With all due respect, Mr. Dennit, I had no idea you'd gotten experimental surgery to have your balls removed.

you cant just tell everyone to "SHUT THE HELL UP" and say sorry in the next sentence so shut the hell up. sorry

by twelve years on Oct 3, 2007 6:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

awww

poor baby

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 3, 2007 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Warning

You have been warned once in this diary already, this is your second.

You have been the subject of complaints before, and your behavior, despite halfhearted apologies on your part, is not appropriate.

This is not OptionZero abusing his power on a whim- the community members and writers, it's safe to say, all agree on this one.

Change your attitude, be productive, or at least, respectful.

Do us the barest of favors and avoid TRIPLE posting.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

you know what option zero, KISS MY ASS. i'm getting sick of your "warnings". just because we don't see eye-to-eye does that mean you have to be a total jerk.

i remember how i said powell was a better rebounder than croshere, and you said "you are wrong, just utterly wrong" with no proof of evidence whatsoever. i apologized, and you just continued to rub it in my face.

you know what, GO AHEAD AND DELETE MY ACCOUNT. i dare you. if it makes you feel better, just because i'm not some of the other guys who kiss your ass, then do it.

you will always have someone who will disagree with you...deal with it. nobody has to agree to everything you say.

bottom line is, we are all warrior fans, and we are all on the same team. i admit i blow up sometimes, but thats how i am. like jrizzle said, it is just for entertainment purposes. go smoke a blunt or have a beer, relax, and have fun...

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 4, 2007 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heh

No, you prefer to kiss Fantasy's and Atma's ass. But props for knowing who to suck up to.

If "we're all on the same team," as you say, why do you continue to spam the board with juvenile posts aimed at dividing it? "Atma and Fantasy are my friends, yayyy!" "OZ is my enemy, boooo!" You've totally lost track of the original argument, and are just trying to win the pissing match you started. Meanwhile, the quality of discourse on the board goes into the toilet.

Bottom line: no one on this board appreciates your comments -- not Fantasy, not Atma, not anyone. The one guy who said you were "funny," meant "funny-ridiculous," not "funny clever."

Calm down, quit the trolling, and try to contribute something positive to the site.

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 4, 2007 11:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

KISS MY ASS, sleepy freud. like option zero, you held a vendetta against me over a previous petty argument.

if you think i'm just trying to disagree with people instead of thoughts, then that is just sad, because that is exactly what ur trying to do with me right now. take a look in the mirror, and look at your own damn posts. it looks like ur trying to attack me, and not the post.

focus on the thoughts, not the author.

and don't try to speak for atma, fantasy, or whoever. they speak for themsevles.

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 5, 2007 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Aww, you're adorable

In all honesty, I didn't have the slightest clue who you were before you crapped all over this thread.

I'd say you're just one of the many half-wits that troll this site, but that would be an insult to half-wits.

So I'll just say ... I love you, too, man! :-)

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 5, 2007 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

apology accepted

now thats the attitude! =)

don't worry sleep freud, i will keep your comments in mind, and will definitely try to contribute something positive to this board. keep an eye out =)

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 8, 2007 12:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

not to mention that you already delete my diaries. you know, if it makes you feel oh so more powerful...do it

don't forget that you were disrespectful to me first

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 4, 2007 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rant on, son

I'm sure Atma Bro enjoys all the ballwashing you're giving him.

At the same time, your incoherent posts are losing this argument for him faster than 1,000 thoughtful posts by the grownups on this site could ever do.

Well done, double agent! Your check is already in the mail. ;-)

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 3, 2007 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i kinda

like that warriorsrule guy. hes like a train with no brakes.

entertaining as well

"SHUT THE HELL UP"! haha.

(btw, sorry if i offended anyone by thinking that one dude is funny.)

by jrizzle on Oct 3, 2007 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

also

ballwashing...funny term.

(sorry also that i posted twice in a row)

by jrizzle on Oct 3, 2007 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hello

thank you jrizzle. finally someone who understands what i'm doing :)

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 4, 2007 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

rant on son

i'm sure option zero enjoys your ball-washing

by thewarriorsrule on Oct 4, 2007 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

RFA

There IS something to lose waiting for RFA- what if someone clears enough space to offer something starting at $13M?

For a young, quality big like Biedrins, teams will make the effort to get him.

In such a case, locking him into $10M saves us the $3M per year (or more, depending on buit-in raises).

I've said the other benefits before, but given the 22 extra comments from someone, I'll repeat them so others can see them:

Financial planning. Getting the extension done now lets you structure it and then plan on how to structure your deals for next year- all a year in advance.
Roster stability. Why deal with the trouble of RFA? It can be long, drawn out, and contentious. Unlike with Baron, Pietrus, or Ellis, we don't have a backup to Biedrins. POB? Kosta? Croshere? There's no one you can get that will replace Biedrins, so getting your C position stabilized now and for the future is a big part of your foundation.
The fan base. Some people understand how the economics of basketball work- lots of fans don't. I name no names; I'm just talking generally. After a season of hardballing and minimal spending, remind the casual fan that we're committed to winning- but we're gonna be smart about it. Securing the services of one of your most valuable players (I could argue he's the most valuable).
Avoiding the aforementioned risk of increased cost. Right now he's in the Chandler/Dalembert/Kaman bracket. If he improves, he could slide into the Okafor bracket (max money). Even if he does not improve, he's worth $10M on the open market easily, ignoring potential to improve, so you aren't pulling a Murphy/Foyle/Dunleavy at all. You're paying for what you're getting- where as in other cases we were paying for what we hoped we might get later.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 6:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

well stated

by jrizzle on Oct 3, 2007 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

just curious

what teams are in a position to do that? I know, it only takes one but still - reflecting on the RFA action this summer, and how few FAs actually do move when they can make more from their original teams is the risk that great to wait?

by hardcore on Oct 3, 2007 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ask me again

Oct 31- there are some guys up for extensions and we need to see how much they get

Teams would gladly deal away guys at midseason to clear space for Biedrins though.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

more than

fair! wasn't trying to put ya on the spot - just wondering who you thought would target AB ... & do enjoy your posts though honestly have no clue where you find the time for all of 'em ...

by hardcore on Oct 3, 2007 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ok

Since you asked, i poked around a bit.
Found a couple threatening teams:

Charlotte-
I'm not too worried about them in the Baron or Ellis situations since they got a solid young PG already on the cheap in Felton, but apparently they could give Okafor a nice fat extension and still possibly offer Biedrins the max...yeah...$13M starting.

Imagine felton-jrich-wallace-okafor-biedrins w/ carrol, dudley, may off the bench + a lottery pick PG. Crud.

Toronto-
They'd need to do some work (renounce joey graham, hope that Rasho opts out or buy him out) and take a hit (let Calderon go), but they LOVE the Euros and might be able to find $10M or so to throw at Biedrins.

Biedrins + Bosh, Garbajosa and Bargnani off the bench. Yikes.

Atlanta-
They'd take a bigger hit, as I think they'd have to lose Marvin Williams, Sheldon Williams, and Josh Childress and get a steal in Josh Smith's extension. I don't see them getting into it, not with horford already.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

you forgot about

Morrison! I think he's gonna be the next Kobe.

by saintfloppy on Oct 4, 2007 2:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

everyone needs to relax

as usual. golden state warriors message board. lets have fun. DUBS ARE GONNA OWN THIS YEAR. we might actually be a top team in the NBA.

With regards to this post--decent arguments on both sides, however, i tend to agree with the extend now group.

ill make it short

Biedrins is very young, and, just based on last year, hes prolly around a 10M a year player NOW. Hes got only one place to go and thats up. Might as well do it now and get a cheaper price for him.

Atma has some nice points, being that hes not an integral part of our offense, but DEFENSE hes amazing. the only guy last year that could protect the basket. All he needs is some bulk and seasoning and hes gonna be a beast.

also agree with coma. he used to post a lot more. i owned him in this one post, i remember...but kinda forgot.

go dubs

by jrizzle on Oct 3, 2007 6:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Especially Cohan... relax & sign...

A 21-year old Latvian 7-footer is going to involve an element of risk no matter what. There's simply no way around it.

But Biedrins' hands, quickness, effort, and bball IQ (very impressive at this point in his career) make this an easy decision.

I won't dwell on the facts because they've been repeated on this thread and others, but we're talking about a legit Center here. A guy who on offense and defense will impact the majority of plays while he's in the game- be it rebounding on missed shots, altering shot attempts, drawing the attention of double teams (and/or the other team's shotblocker), playing post D, or scoring inside.

He worked on and displayed a "fade-away" (he's so tall he doesn't have to do much fading) jumper over the summer in eurobasket and while I never expect to run the offense through him, a lá Garnett, Duncan, or Shaq, he has the potential to be in the next tier of bigmen.

Hopefully extending Biedrins and not Baron won't alienate create chemistry problems now or down the road but there are way too many reasons to keep the Latvian Lefty!

by BingBluNT on Oct 3, 2007 7:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Biendrins

Is A Beast. So lock him up

I love 2 tell tha truth, but I'm such a Good Liar

by JRichIsStillAGodButBiedrinsIsABeast on Oct 3, 2007 6:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

More...

...props for locking him up now. He's twenty one years old, and he's already a top ten center in my estimation. What center out there today would you rather have than Biedrins? Oden is injured, Shaq is old. Yao, while dominant, is easily worn out and too slow for our current system. Dwight Howard, sure. But you're not getting him, and frankly, I rate Biedrins' defense over Howard's.

The big gripe with AB was his fouling, but let's be honest about it, a lot of those were B.S. fouls, just like every young big man gets squeezed by the refs in their first big year. He'll earn respect.

by Zack Vank on Oct 3, 2007 6:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Bottom line

Based on multiple sources, this deal is getting hammered out as we speak. It's done.

Atma, Fantasy, and their charming little sycophant are of course free to question the decision, after the fact. But all their concerns are surely things the front office -- who understand the risks and subtleties of the situation better than all of us -- have taken into account when making their decision.

And again: the decision has been made.

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 3, 2007 7:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

sfgate?

Are you referring to the Janny Hu article, or were there more that I haven't seen yet?

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 3, 2007 7:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Janny's column

the interview with Spears on warriorworld
a bunch of other articles earlier in the offseason

Of course, a couple of those earlier sources also mentioned an extension for Baron, so they could have been BS. But I take Janny's report -- "all signs point toward a deal getting done" -- pretty seriously, don't you? The woman generally knows of whence she speaks.

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 3, 2007 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

After all

what is said in this diary, I am happy he is not being handled by Fagen lest we have another Verajao issue.

Some sport analysts are expecting Milicic will be as good as Dre if only he can play in right environment like AB. Milicic is already receiving 7M and he is way down AB's upside. Why do you think Dre will not get more than of Darko when he is already there?

Beans will be extended because he is part of a system that fits perfectly into Nellieball.

"There's so much more that he can do and we're going to rely on him to score the basketball for us this year, too," Davis said. "He showed flashes of brilliance in the post, so we're going to want to get him some looks and just implement him more into the offensive end."

AB is one of the rising big man not only in NBA but also in the international scene. He is most effective in his comfort zone, at the edge and around the paint where he shoots around 60%. His stats in Europe was 16 pts 10 reb while with the Dubs 9.5 pts, 9.3 rebs. Mulson hired Sid the Squid as shooting coach and admitted that AB is still a project

Moncrief already has logged long hours breaking down video on his new charges, and he has seen enough to realize that his biggest challenge, center Andris Biedrins, will be an ongoing project.

"It's not an instant fix there," Moncrief said. "It's just getting his confidence up, getting his technique to where he feels comfortable, not where I feel comfortable. ... And I think at that point, over the course of three, four years, he'll show quite a bit of improvement."

Note the time frame of Moncrief's projected improvement of Beans, will they let him improved with other teams and will play against the Dubs? I don't think so.

by muritqua on Oct 3, 2007 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

OHHH, I don't know, Atma

You do realize he's only like 21, right? So , rather than last season being a fluke, isn't more likely he's actually improving? It just seems like your whole argument is based on the idea that he's going to regress. Don't forget, Atma, he's a CENTER who can run the floor in Nelly's system. That alone makes your comparisons to Adonal DunMurphy at least a little misguided.

Of course, it's entirely possible that you're dead right, and we'll all be eating crow at season's end.

by Jeremy Belvins on Oct 3, 2007 7:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Pay him...later

To me, the only players in Biedrins' situation who should get big-money extensions are players who are either: (a) established all-stars (LeBron, Wade, etc.) or (b) critical pieces of a clear championship contender (like Prince a couple years ago). Otherwise, I believe a team should take advantage of the extra year to evaluate the player and the team situation further before committing to a big contract.

The worst case scenario of extending Biedrins now is that the W's end up with a bad contract that cripples the team going forward. The worst case scenario of waiting is that the W's pay another $2-3mm per year for a player who has improved his game significantly from where it is today. Personally, I prefer the latter.

by dylantravis on Oct 3, 2007 10:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm Skeptical

Are you understating the difference between the max contract Biedrins can get and the numbers people are talking about? Or is it really only 2-3 million dollars annually?

2-3 million is still a lot, especially in the salary cap age when teams squeeze every last inch of cap space. But I'm pretty sure Andris could get a contract averaging up to 15 million per, if someone would give it to him. Why even pay him 12 or 13 when you can get him for 10?

I have fewer doubts than most that Biedrins will develop into a very good, if not great, center. I'll leave "all-star" out of any predictions I make but he doesn't need to be an all-star to justify $10 million a year.

by BingBluNT on Oct 4, 2007 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the reply

The $2-3mm is an estimated based on splitting the difference between the $10-11mm per year the Warriors are supposedly talking about and the approximate $15mm per year maximum. I just don't believe Andris is a max contract player.

I believe the chances of Andris getting hurt or playing badly are very small, but I also think the chances of someone offering him a deal much above $10mm per year as an RFA next summer are also very small (take a look at ESPN's Trade Machine and see which teams you think might be able to get that far under the salary cap; I couldn't find any obvious ones). The difference for me is that while paying Andris (with another strong year under his belt) more than $10mm per year would not be a problem for the Warriors, getting stuck with a $50mm contract if he did get injured or regressed would be a disaster. I would just wait a year and avoid that risk.

by dylantravis on Oct 4, 2007 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And suppose

They wait a year, his pricetag goes up (as it inevitably will), they sign him to 6/$72M, and then he regresses or gets injured? Your "worst case scenario" applies to any long-term signing we make. Why is this season any more pivotal or revelatory than last?

They've had AB for three years now, ample time to make an informed judgment. While we as fans have seen just one season's worth games that AB has started, and his limited PT before that, Mulson have been closely observing him in practice, in workouts, in summer leagues. Obviously, they love what they see, not just in physical makeup and on-court production, but in the psychological makeup that can often be the determining factor in NBA success.

Regression and injury can happen to a player any time. In the case of AB, neither is at remotely likely and neither can really be planned for.

A little baseball parable, just to counter the inane Foyle/Dunleavy comparisons from earlier. Last year, Josh Beckett had a miserable year (>5.00 ERA) in his first go-round in the AL for the Red Sox. His contract would have been up at the end of this year. This past offseason, the Sox easily could have hedged their bets, as you want to do with AB, and waited to see if he really had what it took to survive in the AL. Instead, they "bought low," making a judgment that from everything they'd seen, in his both his physical and emotional makeup, there was every reason to expect an improvement.

Lord knows what Beckett would get on the open market right now. 27 y.o. 20-game winner with a 98 mph heater and a filthy hook, top 2 Cy Young candidate and postseason beast (two straight CG shutouts)? Barry Zito money, at least. Instead, they have him locked up to a bargain basement 3/$30M -- less than half the price of Zito, for twice the talent.

In the end all the sturm und drang in this thread is basically over nothing. Lauridsen's line pretty much sums up this whole debate: there's little risk in waiting, but also not much to gain.

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 4, 2007 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You make some good arguments, but...

I certainly agree that injury and regression can happen at anytime and that waiting to sign AB does nothing to eliminate that risk past this year. Waiting does, however, eliminate the risk this year, and eliminating one year of risk is better than taking all the risk right away.

Your Beckett analogy ignores several important facts. Baseball does not have restricted free agency, and it does not have a salary cap. If Biedrins were going to be an unrestricted free agent next summer and every team in the NBA would be able to bid any amount for him, then I would be 100% for extending him now. But this is not the case. Very few (if any) teams are going to be able to offer Biedrins a competitive contract, and even if one does, the Warriors can match (and the other teams know it). Therefore, I don't see the price tag going up very much. And by the way, Beckett had a little more track record than Biedrins does right now. If AB had been NBA Finals MVP with another team, I would not be quibbling over his contract.

Regarding your last paragraph, I definitely agree with you and Lauridsen that the risks are small either way. I would prefer that the Warriors wait, but it is certainly not an obvious call. I think this is one where reasonable people can agree to disagree, and it's been fun to kick this one around.

by dylantravis on Oct 4, 2007 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough

The Beckett analogy was imperfect, granted -- I mostly just wanted to (a) offset the misplaced Dunmurphy analogy; and (b) sing the praises of Josh Beckett. :-) Three CG shutouts in six postseason starts is insane.

I actually find myself agreeing with a lot of your points -- maybe b/c in real life I'm a Dylan, too? Either that or the fact that you argue them well, without resorting to hyperbole or flaming.

Anyway, yes, reasonable people can disagree on this one. It's kind of a shame that one unreasonable one has spammed this thread to the point where it's almost unreadable, but I guess that's the nature of the internet. I do occasionally wish this site had an "ignore user" feature...

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 5, 2007 5:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

10 vs. max

The differences that are being bounced around are not small and could have huge. Are we talking about a contract that starts at $10 million or one that averages $10million over its course?

Raises are based on a percentage of the first year of the contract. If he gets a 6 year contract averaging $10 million (6 years totalling $60 million) , the breakdown is roughly $8million in year one, followed by 8.8, 9.7, 10.5, 11.4, and $12.2million in year six.

If he gets a contract starting at $10million, over the same time he'd get ~$10, $11, $12, $13, $14 $15mil (~$75million).

If he gets a contract starting at the max (which should be about $13.5 million--the figure is based on his time in the NBA and a percentage of the salary cap), not only is the starting point higher, but the raises are bigger. The figures will be ~13.5, 15, 16.3, 17.8, 19.2, and $20.6mil for a 6 year deal. That totals more than $102million over the life of the contract. It's fine if the cap goes up at the same rate, but if it doesn't, then it can be a huge burden.

by jae on Oct 4, 2007 3:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

average

10 has to be the average, not the starting point.

Chandler, Kaman, and Dalembert who have similar production (But probably less upside) all come in roughly around 10M. They don't figure to improve, but they've been pretty consistent in production.

10-11M AVERAGE, which mean starting at about $8.5M give or take seems right on target at this stage.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 4, 2007 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, I meant average

by dylantravis on Oct 4, 2007 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Pro v. Con"

Mostly against extending now: Atma, Fantasy, their "#1 fan", and a few other stragglers.

Mostly for extending now: the majority of this board, as well as these dudes:

Don Nelson and Chris Mullin, presumably the guys who have convinced Cohan to extend now.
Al Harrington: "Obviously, we want to get him signed now so he doesn't have to worry about that, so he can play with a clear mind ... I just can't see an organization ever getting rid of a guy like that. I'll keep my fingers crossed that it gets done, because we've got to have him."
Baron Davis: "To have someone that's 21 years old, with a bright future ahead, it's very important to reward him for what's to come in the future ... He's going to be a force to be reckoned with. He deserves everything he's going to get, and everyone on this team is happy for him."

(Quotes from from today's Geoff Lepper column.)

Of course, I'm falling into Warriorsrule's grade-schoolish trap by even framing this as a "pro v. con" fight. You can't make a fair assessment without considering all sides of an issue. As always, the level-headed Adam Lauridsen has the sensible take:

1. Does Andris get a new contract before the end of the month? I'm guessing yes. Despite Mullin's fiscal conservatism this summer, Andris' price tag will likely only go up this year with his continued development. He's hitting the age and experience level when NBA big men typically make "the leap." If a reasonable deal gets hammered out before the start of the season, it doesn't seem to be a major risk. Still, I doubt there will be problems next summer if a deal doesn't get signed. Andris falls into a contract dead-zone -- between $8-11 mil -- which is too rich for teams only working with a mid-level exception and too cheap for teams looking to splash out on an all-star level free agent. So, with few suitors likely, there's little risk in waiting, but also not much to gain.

2. Is Andris worth big money? An emphatic yes here. As I wrote earlier in the off-season, Mullin is handing out money based upon the time-tested principle of scarcity. A back-up point guard like Hudson or aging perimeter big man like Croshere? A dime a dozen. They get the veteran minimum. A young, quick, court-savvy seven-footer? You can count those on one hand. In a fit of homer-mania, I'll claim that Andris is, at this very moment, one of the ten best defensive big men in the NBA. His ability to cover ground quickly and block shots fits the Warriors' new defensive scheme perfectly. He was a rebounding machine last season when you consider boards per minute and knows how to initiate the break. I'd pay him based on those factors alone. Offensively, he's still a work in progress, but he has the raw tools to be a 13-15 point a night scorer if the team bothered to run a few plays for him. He's not Dwight Howard, but he's not Chris Kaman either. Pay the Latvian.

http://www.mercextra.com/blogs/warriors/2007/10/03/ten-training-camp-questions-and-my-best-guesses-o n-answers/

by Sleepy Freud on Oct 4, 2007 6:47 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Biedrins needs to show one more good season

Biedrins is good and good big men are hard to get but he needs to show that he can repeat last season's performance at least and show some improvement, even if just a bit.

Wouldn't want to give him more than 11 million a year for 5 years though, 12 million at most

by migya on Oct 4, 2007 8:01 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Improvement

One thing that might have been glossed over:

Biedrins doesn't really need to "improve" his rebounding or scoring or anything- he's essentially doing the same things he did before, just more of it.

His rate of rebounds, his FG%, blocks, are relatively stable. Sure, he could improve, he's certainly young enough and he definitely has the physical tools.

But by far, the biggest thing would be his decreased foul rate. The improvement here is a reflection of his increased understanding of the game and better anticipation- fewer silly fouls, fewer fouls making up for being late or out of place. Fewer fouls means more floor time, means more overall production.

So it's highly unlikely Biedrins forgets how to rebound or suddenly can't finish or can't move anymore, and any regression would be mental in the fouling department, and I'm hopeful and confident he can avoid that.

Questions? Complaints?

(AIM: JetForze; email: Jon.d.ma@gmail.com)

by OptionZero on Oct 4, 2007 9:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

There is

nothing wrong in waiting for another season in extending Beans. What I'm afraid is the wrong signal it will send to the player/s who are due for extention/s and to the potential signee/s who wants to join the team. Even Chris recognized that risk.

"When I first got here, one of my biggest goals was to make it a destination and a place not only where you got guys to stay, but people to come to," Mullin said. "There's steps you have to take to make that happen. You can't just hold a sign up and say, 'We're good guys. We really are.'

As for proving something, Biedrins was the first pick of Mullin as a GM. At 18, Beans was the youngest player ever picked in the NBA, yet Mullin had chosen him as the 11th pick in 2004 draft. The rest is well known facts. Mullin risked on him then, why not take another risk now?

by muritqua on Oct 4, 2007 9:26 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Beans

is the one guy we should extend this season. I don't see him regressing, but getting better, and it would be fiscally responsible to pay him now.

Plus, I think the Warriors want to get one of the extensions out of the way. The last thing they need is to go into next off-season having to sign Monta, Biedrins, Baron, Barnes, Pietrus, etc. Contract negotiations are hard enough when you have to deal with one or two players, but when you have to sign four of your best plaqyers all at the same time it is going to lead to people getting upset (GM not paying enough attention to them) or the GM making monetary mistakes. Get one of the extensions out of the way and it makes it much easier to make a game plan to attack the off-season with. When you already know $9 million will be going to Biedrins next year, then you know exactly how much you should be able to give to Baron and Monta before the off-season starts.

by yehyeh82 on Oct 4, 2007 9:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Wow

I miss one day and the whole internet turns on Atma. lol. Well for the record I'll toss my two cents on the dog-pile. I would definitely extend him now rather than later (or not at all). In fact until ffgolden's diary it didn't even occur to me not to extend him.

I can understand why some might want to wait because of the still fresh wounds of Mullin's past mistakes but I just don't see any real advantage in waiting (he's already proved his worth IMO). The facts have been poured over pretty well so I won't go on to much, but the part that I find funny is that when people bring up all the "overpaid" centers they basically list every center who has been signed or extended recently. That's just the market price folks. Centers, unfortunately, are expensive. In fact I would love it if someone compiled a list of Centers, their salaries and when the contract was signed so maybe I could see who all the "fairly" paid centers are.

As for Beans himself, he is the only guy on the teams that does what he does. He is our only consistent rebounder, shot blocker, interior defender (well maybe Big Al, but new slimmer Al?), pick and roll big and guy who uses hair gel while playing (all valuable assets). We also have to consider who could replace this guy. Who would be a better big man in Nelson's system? I'm sure you could count them on one hand.

by olympicmike on Oct 4, 2007 4:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Are we watching the same team?

Sorry, but this diary baffles me...Andris Biedrins is the one player that I would throw the max at if the Dubs had to in order to keep him. Signing him now makes the most fiscal sense. As stated above in countless posts, waiting a year will only drive Beans' value up or will tick him off and he will bolt for another squad. There are 29 teams that would love to pay him handsomely for his services. You don't play hardball with Beans and you don't point to the bad contracts of the past as evidence and proof to support your theory on not signing Beans. Andris Biedrins is a completely different situation than Murphy,Foyle, Fisher, and Dunleavy.

by JimBarnett2KevinGarnett on Oct 5, 2007 9:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs