The Cap Situation

by Fantasy Junkie on Jun 26, 2007 5:44 PM PDT in Links Comment 19 comments

The Warriors' salary cap situation has been an interesting discussion here on GSoM. Any proposed trade on here always has to go through the inevitable, "do the salaries match up?" question. And each of those trades always takes into account the player being traded and their impact on the cap. It's a way of measuring a player's worth. Is his cap number too big to keep around or so small that you just can't get rid of him at that bargain? Well NBADraft.net decided to break down the Warriors salary cap situation and offer their opinion on the good, the bad, and the future. Here are some of the highlights:

The Good: A good place to start would be Monta Ellis, who owns what might be the highest value contract in the entire league... Another breakout performer was center Andris Biedrins. Andris is due to make only $2.6 million next year and seeing how teams overpay for size, he is due to make a heck of a lot more.

The Bad: Baron Davis and Jason Richardson were injury victims this season with Baron missing 19 games and Richardson missing 31. Unfortunately for the Warriors, they are the two highest paid players on the team.

The Future: Matt Barnes came out of nowhere to become a key reserve and Mickael Pietrus really improved his game. Both are now free agents and with the team already well above the salary cap, it's unlikely that they will be able to keep either player. They also have extensions coming up for Biedrins and Ellis, which could be why Golden State is shopping Jason Richardson. Getting rid of his big contract would make it easier to keep the rest of the team together, though they would be losing one of their best scorers.

The Warriors' cap received an overall grade of a C. Just imagine how bad it would be if Troy Murphy and Mike Dunleavy were still on the team. In fact, check out the grade the Pacers got. Anyways, the Warriors cap has greatly improved in the span of 6 months and we can now look forward to the day Adonal's dollars come off the cap.

I wish the Warriors were in a better situation cap-wise because it handicaps their ability not only resign their own free agents but also go out and sign the top free agents on the market. As a fan, I couldn't care less whether or not the franchise has to pay the luxury tax. By all means, go over the salary cap if it means we're going to win more games and advance further in the playoffs. It's not my money and I want my team to be the best it can be. The only reason I do care about the cap is because it limits the team's ability to do business with other teams. With too many overpaid players, the Warriors can't make a trade and are essentially stuck with a player until the contract is in an expiring year (e.g. Adonal Foyle). I'm all in favor of having a healthy cap, but not at the risk of missing the playoffs.

Outside of Adonal Foyle, who is the most overpaid Warrior? JRich? Baron? Al Harrington? Project O'Bryant?

Hoopshype: Warrior salaries

0 recs | Comment 19 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

what was mully thinking

when he signed foyle to that contract, his contract is killing them right now. He did manage to escape the dunmurphy debacle but nobody is going to take foyle off our hands.

by houseofprime2 on Jun 26, 2007 5:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The Horrendous

Man, just imagine how much better of a position this team would be in right now, if Foyle wasn't inked to that absolutely silly deal?

As for the remaining contracts on the books- I'm cool with all of them including BD's big money deal and JR's hefty sum. As long as JRich bounces back next season from the injuries I'm not worried about the cap hit from his contract at all.

Get rid of Foyle's contract and this team is fine cap wise- although that's easier said than done of course.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jun 26, 2007 6:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I remember last year...

When the Dubs were trying to buy out Foyle's contract but he politely said no thanks. I can't really blame him, but at the same time, you'd think a guy who never gets on the floor (and never will) would just take the offer and move on, especially a guy like Foyle who's got so much going on outside of basketball. Mully needs to sit Foyle down and explain to him that he's absolutely killing the franchise. Maybe he can sweeten the buyout offer this time around by offering him a seat on the Oakland City Council...

by Epicurious Cowboy on Jun 26, 2007 6:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

buyout conversation.

"You're killing the franchise. Please take less money than we contractually owe you so the franchise will be better off. Wouldn't you rather the team was in better shape? Mind you, you will no longer be part of this team at that point, so there's really not much incentive vis a vis you playing on a winner here, but it's for the franchise. And no, since we'll still be over the cap even after buying you out, we won't actually be able to shop for new players, but it's more that we'll be able to afford to keep the ones we have. See, can't you see how important it is for you to give up the money that we promised to pay you so we can give more money to Monta and Andris and Matt and maybe Mickael? Don't you see the value in that? Don't you want to leave with less money so you can not be part of that?"

by jae on Jun 27, 2007 9:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

no one except foyle

is overpaid.

Injuries are a big part of sports so you can't really fault BD and J-Rich, per se, for missing games although I'm not sure why Richardson didn't get his surgery much earlier so he'd be ready for the season. Like everyone else, I think we need a decent back-up point guard so BD doesn't have to play over 40 minutes every game to keep us competitive, thereby sacrificing his kness and body.

I do not think we can fault P.O.B for not fitting into Nellie's system and losing heart. Everyone seems to agree most "bigs" take a while to develop. In addition, non-athletic bigs do not find love in Nelly or his system. Again, blame Mully for O'Bryant, Ike, and so on. Don't blame the players.

I think an interesting question is what will we have to pay Monta and or AB the season following this coming year assuming they are on the team. That is when cap hell will really kick in unless we move J-Rich or Harrington or even BD next year if it looks like he's going to walk after this coming season if he doesn't get the extension he is suggesting. This seems to be what is happening with KG as he enters his last contract year before his option kicks in.

I can see why Fantacy Junkie got his name if he begins to think Cohan is going to pay luxury tax dollars by being over the cap. We should live so long.

by commish on Jun 26, 2007 7:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

BD and The Future (ie monta & ab)

Where has Baron publicly asked for a 20-million a year deal?

People keep bringing this up but I never saw it. As the NBAdraft.net article said, he's barely earning his current paycheck because he's either hurt or playing fewer minutes to prevent injury. I love the guy to death, but unless he's certain he can repeat his Dallas magic every year in the future for 75 games, he's not worth more than 15 mil.

I think that's what he'll agree to: finally on the west coast playing for a playoff contender. He's too smart to mess with that.

I love it how people come onto GSoM and give their two cents about who the warriors should go after, and then casually mention Biedrins' and Monta's extensions as and after thought. Am I missing something? THIS IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT THE WARRIORS FRONT OFFICE HAS FACED OR WILL FACE FOR AT LEAST FIVE YEARS. not the "yi movement". not who can we get for jrich (who by the way doesn't need to be traded, read below). Its bringing back Monta and his latvian friend.

Speaking of which, and addressing commish's question: I think Monta and Biedrins will make 15 million in their first year combined. By year 3 that number will rise to 20. I'm sure Mullin's spent hours calculating this and I hope he gets Biedrins or Monta to agree to an extension now (that would kick in after the season) or else these two players could both be making 10 million a year next year and one will not be in blue and gold.

Regardin creating cap space: JRich doesn't need to be traded. But if he is not, then Al Harrington must go. If Monta and Biedrins are brought back for 15 million combined (that number would increase but for a couple years they'd make 15 million) and Baron signs for 15 million then thats 30 million in contracts (per year). Add JRich for about 13 million and Jackson for 7 and you get 50 million dollars.

The warriors would need to add 10 more players for about 20 million (assuming the luxury cap increases to 70 soon) which is doable. Think about it: the 5 players that would spend most of their time on the bench combine for about 3 million. You bring in a PF for 6 mil and another "big" (as least a Nellie-sized big) for 4 million. A couple "dime-a-dozen" swingmen who are in the rotation make 2-3 million each as does an insurance PG for BD.

Monta, Baron, JRich, Jackson, Biedrins, and a couple more frontcourt players can all fit under the cap if Harrington is unloaded and the warriors fill their roster out with 2nd rounders/journeyman. Yes, we wouldn't have Dallas or San Antonio-like depth but we'd have a very effective 8-9 man rotation, provided Baron, Monta, and Biedrins can be had for the contracts I projected.

JRich is better at defense (not by much), rebounding (especially for his position), and creating his own shot than TMNT. yes, Harrington can play the 5 and makes 3 million less but if someone has to go its him, not the true warrior.

by BingBluNT on Jun 26, 2007 10:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

YES, thank you.

Best blog Ive read. Your reasoning makes perfect sense. Ive been saying more than once on here that we dont need to get rid of Jason. Its Harrington. Hes the one that needs to be unloaded in order for us to be able to re-sign our young nucleus. I agree completely. Harrington is very skilled with size, but the mans love for his jumpshot has completely jaded his game. He goes through slumps and then loses confidence and mucks it all up. That is why Nelly inserted his loafer up Al's rear end and benched him during the playoffs.

I would LOVE to see the Warriors make a deal involving him, our 18 and O'Bryant if necessary, To a team with cap room, for a top 10-12 pick. Then I would TRY to do what people have suggested, sit down and have a heart to heart with Foyle. IF he refuses Mullin once again, then we should offer him, Sarunas, and our next years first round pick for Theo Ratliff, who comes off the books after next season. Besides, if we have a good draft, then we will be stocked in the youth/talent department, and wont need a pick for just the next year. We'd probably have a low one anyways.

I appreciate your observations and your ability to see how valuable Monta and Andris really are, and how well they fit in with our long-term, NellieBall scheme. You are one of the much more smarter fans, that I have seen on this website so far. I want to drink gasoline and floss my teeth with rusty barb-wire when I hear people come on here and talk about trading J-Rich and keeping Harrington. Or that Monta has no upside and is a dime-a-dozen gaurd. SICK OF IT. Good to see you coming out. There truly are Warrior fans...and there are unfortunately "Warrior fans"

This is my team There are many like it But this one is mine. My team, without me is useless. Without my team, I am useless

by BlueNgoldBlood on Jun 26, 2007 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

At this point, buying out Foyle

would likely barely save $2 mill a yr.

Boston would rather have Theo's contract come off the books & gain the cap space to try & sign a star FA in '08-'09 than pick up 2 bench warmers & a late pick.

Most of the teams picking in the top 10-12 range are REBUILDING. They don't want an overpaid tweener and rebuilding teams typically don't want to move down in the draft.

Besides, Al would play SF on most of these teams. Josh Smith, Paul Pierce, Gerald Wallace, Deng, Artest, AI, w/ the options of Brewer, Jeff Green, Julian Wright, & Al Thornton - but for some unknown reason, they'd rather have Al who makes/will make more money than all except Pierce.

by the evil monkey on Jun 27, 2007 12:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dudes

State your case. If it's persuasive, people will be persuaded. You don't make your argument any more persuasive by using all caps, dissing other posters, and congratulating yourselves about how much more smartererer and truerer of a fan you are than anyone else.

As has been said before, no one wants to trade JRich. The reasons you give for JRich's value being greater than Harrington's are totally valid. They're also, as Jason points out, the precise reasons JRich is more valuable as a trading chip.

In the end, neither is Top 40 NBA player, and neither plays a position that's hard to replace. Obviously, we shouldn't give either of them away, but if you're Mullin it's your job to listen to offers. If something comes along that you think will improve the team -- on court and in terms of financial flexibility -- you pull the trigger. That's all anyone's trying to do when they put on their amateur GM hats.

In any case, if you want to take issue with something, address it to a specific poster about a specific post, so they can defend themselves. Otherwise, you're just beating on a straw man.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 27, 2007 5:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

what im trying to say...

I am tired of people coming on here and just writing. Not really knowing what they're talking about, no basketball knowledge, just putting in their two cents. The reason I talk about true fans vs. fake fans, is because I was there at those games, after run tmc and up until last year. I was there at all those games rooting for my horrible team, and it made me SICK TO MY STOMACH when the Lakers, or Bulls, or ANY good team would come to the arena, and drown out the Warrior fan's cheers with their own every time the opposing team scored. Not alot of people embraced the Warriors back then.
Thats what a fan is, Jason, supporting your team ESPECIALLY through the hard times. But now you have all these so called fans coming out of the wood-works and saying what should be done with players who have stayed faithful to the organization just as some real Warrior fans have, who refused to give up on them.

IT BURNS ME. That is why I am so quick to dish out criticism. If it offends you, then I apologize. But it doesnt take away from me feeling like those people in Oakland rooting for the other team should have been lined up in the parking lot, and shot. I feel like they're just coming back now, in sheep's clothing. I dont know whether to be happy or sad, because its suddenly turned into this new Bay Area "fad" or "movement".

This is my team There are many like it But this one is mine. My team, without me is useless. Without my team, I am useless

by BlueNgoldBlood on Jun 27, 2007 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Aha

Good to know you're rational about it, then. ;-P

Most of the people on this site are not the Bulls/Lakers fans you want to see lined up and shot. We all love this team and want to see us get better. Some of us think getting better shouldn't preclude trading JRich; others, like you, think it should. Neither group is inherently smarter or truer.

Again, the point is, unless you address a specific post or a specific point, your comments sound a bit like the inane rantings of a madman.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 27, 2007 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ya

your right Sleepy, some people have different opinions and are entitled to them, and I can respect that. I just believe that alot of people on here show no loyalty towards players who deserve it, and that alone really works on me. AND I wouldnt have shot those fans...well maybe some thumbs, and knee caps, but no homicides. PROMISE.

But I do disagree with you saying Jason isnt on the top 40 list of best players. Can you name 39 players better? I would go as far as to say that I believe he's in the top 30, and its not through jaded, fan boy eyes either. Just look at what you got on the table. A big gaurd capable of averaging 24 ppg, 7 rpg, and 4-5 apg, and 1.5 spg. He and Monta's game are perfect contrasts. That is why I believe it would be a great fit to keep both of them on the team. Again, I respect your opinions.

This is my team There are many like it But this one is mine. My team, without me is useless. Without my team, I am useless

by BlueNgoldBlood on Jun 27, 2007 11:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

why would baron opt out and take less money

than his current contract is already paying him in '08-'09? makes no sense.

in '08-'09, 5 players (BD, JR, Jax, Al, & Foyle) are on the books for $55.5 mill. so barring BD opting out of the $17.2 mill he is owed(& if he does, he'll only do so to get more money), a Foyle buyout (which will probably only save them 2 mill a yr), or a trade for players or picks w/ LESS SALARY than is going out.

Assuming they stand pat & keep their draft picks for the next 2 years, that should put them on the hook for another $4 mill by '08-'09. That's already $59.5 mill. The luxury tax threshold should be about $69 mill.

So by '08-'09 they'd have only BD, JR, Jax, Al, Foyle, the 5 picks, Andris(probably), & Monta(possibly). To get back under the tax, Foyle should be tradeable by then (being that he's basically an expiring since '09-'10 is a team option).

The real problem is the above team is threadbare. If you trade Al beforehand, you need to take back a lot less salary for it to be beneficial. Meanwhile, the other team has to be willing & able to take back more salary. W/ that in mind, a trade involving Al would leave a team that's already bereft of talent even more so.

And how's BD going to feel losing 2 of his 3 best friends on the team in Barnes & Al? He's a FA in '09-'10.

That's why even though Mully loves Jrich, it's pretty obvious why he & Nellie have been shopping Jason this offseason.

by the evil monkey on Jun 27, 2007 12:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

'08-'09 season

yeah I forgot to mention that we are pretty screwed for the 08-09 season in terms of salary cap. Baron will be making 17 million, as you said, and Foyle's in his last season.

If the warriors have the opportunity to trade Foyle and a #1 for a contract that expires this year, its a no brainer: you do the deal. If Foyle cannot be moved, I can only hope Cohen has something in his hear (and wallet) to go into the luxury for one season to keep the team together.

I don't expect Baron to opt out of his deal but when his deal does expire I don't think he'll make much more than 15 million/year. What if he only plays 30-40 games in one of the next two seasons? teams aren't going to risk their playoff dreams on his health.

To sum up my stance on JRich: only trading richardson won't solve any problems that trading Harrington would solve. If Cohen refuses to go into the luxury to resign Monta and Andris, and Foyle plays out his contract, then trading either one of the above players will not help the salary situation. They both have to go, or one of Monta/Andris does.

But if Cohen does go into the luxury (again, for ONE SEASON) OR Foyle is bought out OR Monta or Andris sustain an injury/off year and get resigned for less money then we're projecting, then trading Al or JRich solves our problem and although I like both, Al's gotta go in this situation.

by BingBluNT on Jun 27, 2007 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like both guys as well,

thing is JRich makes more (~$24 mill through the life of his contract) and let's face it, it's just harder to trade Al.

The reason why Jrich is mentioned in most scenarios is b/c their is some interest in JRich (Cavs, Magic, Bobcats).

Al is NOT going to bring you a lottery pick, in which the cap savings would allow us to keep the rest of the team together if they so choose as well as having the option to add players.

I don't think it's that the majority of GSoMers would rather have Al over JR, it's just that it's less feasible. Of course we'd all rather see Foyle go, but that's next to impossible and at this point, even a buyout does little to help the cap situation.

A buyout spreads the agreed upon dollar amount over the life of the original contract based on the % of money each yr of the original contract. And they usually tend to save only a few million per year (see Webber - he's still on philly's books for 19 mill in '07-'08).

I'm more worried they'll overpay Monta & AB than i'm worried that they'd lose one of them. The real problem is they'll be hard-pressed to add anyone else. Losing Barnes & even the clueless one, Pietrus, will hurt this team.

by the evil monkey on Jun 27, 2007 1:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most importantly

I don't want commish's question to get lost in all this because the answer might determine the fate of this team for years:

How much will the warriors have to pay Biedrins and Monta to keep them? I'd also ask when should these contracts be negotiated?

If you can lock up Biedrins for 6-7 million/year this offseason do you do it (he'd still be payed 3 million this year and then the new contract would kick in for 08-09) ?

If you don't, he could learn a couple post moves, get bigger, and shoot 60% from the line. Then he'd be asking for a 10 million/year contract.

Same goes with Monta, although he just won MIP so his agent could play hardball.

by BingBluNT on Jun 27, 2007 12:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

if monta falls under the gilbert arenas provision

i think the max he could make that 1st yr is the avg salary or $5 millionish, the big jump (potentially) happens in the 3rd yr of those who fall under that scenario.

by the evil monkey on Jun 27, 2007 12:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

the limit with Monta's contract.

Sky's the limit for Monta since he's been under contract without changing teams via free agency for 3 years. We have the Arenas provision to match offers (with the loophole that's still too tough to really comprehend), but unlike Gil, we also have full-Bird-rights to go to the max to pay him. If we want to keep him, he stays, but it won't necessarily be cheap.

Of course, he could take a one year deal here to become completely unrestricted a year later.

by jae on Jun 27, 2007 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Instead of buying out Foyle

Would it be possible to trade him to another team, but at the same time, pay a portion of his contract? If I remember correctly, Michael Finley was getting paid $5M by the Spurs this year, but the Mavericks were still paying him something like $15M as well. What if the Warriors were to trade Foyle to another team buy pay 50% or more of his contract, so that the other team would only be paying him a smaller portion. Would another team find it reasonable to pay Foyle $4-$5M a season as a defensive center on their team?

by emeyeceeONE on Jun 27, 2007 7:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs