Worse than the Knicks...

On Jul 10, 1:52 pm, Pablo <pab....TakeThisOut@stwing.spmBGone.org> wrote:
>
> They're on the top of the world now, but in 2010/11 they'll have $40
> million tied up in 37 year-olds Garnett and Pierce.  Just sayin'.
>
except that then they're called "expiring contracts". useful for
restocking the team or holding on to for creating cap space for
scooping up alpha-level free agents while getting an excellent draft
position. not such a bad place to be in when you're three or fewer
years removed from a championship season. 2010-2011 might not be a
great season for my c's, but i bet the next few will bring another
major upswing.
 >> Stay informed about: Worse than the Knicks... 

On Jul 10, 3:29 pm, Pablo <pab....DeleteThis@stwing.spmBGone.org> wrote:
> mr. gone wrote:
> > On Jul 10, 1:52 pm, Pablo <pab....DeleteThis@stwing.spmBGone.org> wrote:
>
> >> They're on the top of the world now, but in 2010/11 they'll have $40
> >> million tied up in 37 year-olds Garnett and Pierce.  Just sayin'.
>
> > except that then they're called "expiring contracts". useful for
> > restocking the team or holding on to for creating cap space for
> > scooping up alpha-level free agents while getting an excellent draft
> > position. not such a bad place to be in when you're three or fewer
> > years removed from a championship season. 2010-2011 might not be a
> > great season for my c's, but i bet the next few will bring another
> > major upswing.
>
> Expiring contracts might not be worth what you think they're worth.  See
> Marbury, Stephon.

major differences here: 1) marbury is poison and everyone knows it.
pierce and garnett will be at least one-time, possibly multiple-time
champions. there's no risk in having a guy like that on your team. 2)
the knicks are still waaaaaaay over the cap right now, meaning
marbury's expiring contract has no real value in free agent terms. in
2011, if ainge handles things right, the celtics will be able to go
way under, meaning they can go after any free agent.

> Sure, you can hold onto the contract and let it expire
> at the end of the season (or cut the player, as should be done in
> Marbury's case, which has basically the same effect on the salary cap).  
> If you're rebuilding, you're still hamstrung until the next summer.
>
right. like i said, i don't see the 2010-2011 celtics being a very
good team. but if ainge limits the long-term deals, they'll have a
golden opportunity to make a splash that summer.

> But after 2011, the Celtics (and most teams, by the way) are in the clear..  
> For now -- don't underestimate the ability of a team's management to screw
> up a perfectly healthy cap situation.  Or am I just projecting...?
>
given that you're a knicks fan, i'd say projecting is a distinct
possiblity. :)
 >> Stay informed about: Worse than the Knicks... 

> Nobody. Who owes more on the cap than the Knicks?

Mavs?
 >> Stay informed about: Worse than the Knicks... 

mr. gone wrote:
> On Jul 10, 1:52 pm, Pablo <pab....TakeThisOut@stwing.spmBGone.org> wrote:
>>
>> They're on the top of the world now, but in 2010/11 they'll have $40
>> million tied up in 37 year-olds Garnett and Pierce.  Just sayin'.
>>
> except that then they're called "expiring contracts". useful for
> restocking the team or holding on to for creating cap space for
> scooping up alpha-level free agents while getting an excellent draft
> position. not such a bad place to be in when you're three or fewer
> years removed from a championship season. 2010-2011 might not be a
> great season for my c's, but i bet the next few will bring another
> major upswing.

Expiring contracts might not be worth what you think they're worth. See
Marbury, Stephon. Sure, you can hold onto the contract and let it expire
at the end of the season (or cut the player, as should be done in
Marbury's case, which has basically the same effect on the salary cap).
If you're rebuilding, you're still hamstrung until the next summer.

But after 2011, the Celtics (and most teams, by the way) are in the clear.
For now -- don't underestimate the ability of a team's management to screw
up a perfectly healthy cap situation. Or am I just projecting...?

=p=
 >> Stay informed about: Worse than the Knicks...