[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Did Donnie fool us all with the Mobley deal?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
6/4/2009  11:56 AM
yeah. the deals i posted for getting the #5 pick from the wiz also involving mobley (if the wiz are cost cutting) could be more viable then too.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
AUTOADVERT
purple012870
Posts: 21778
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2003
Member: #432
6/4/2009  12:01 PM
He can trade it for a expiring conract of = value. So the team getting Mobley pays the uninsured part & the Knicks pay for the player they receive. Meanwhle the Knicks saved the trading counterpart 7mm. In return for that, the Knicks would presumably get picks/cheap players.
purple012870
Posts: 21778
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2003
Member: #432
6/4/2009  12:02 PM
I think its more like Darko + # 2 for Mobley + # 8.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/4/2009  12:05 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by martin:
Posted by orangeblobman:
Posted by djsunyc:

i thought you can't trade a medical exempt player...

interesting point..does anyone know how this works? i tried to quickly find something and came up with an old hahn post: http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/basketball/knicks/blog/2008/12/knicks_may_have_a_cba_debate_w.html, though i am not clear as to how it pertains to mobley's current status.

Mobley is NOT retired and the Knicks were denied the medical exception. But that is different than insurance paying for 80% of his contract.

I think.

Mobley's retired

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3762828

I think the deal is that Mobley the player is retired, ie not playing any more, but he and his contract are technically not retired from the NBA.

gotcha.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
martin
Posts: 76317
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/4/2009  12:41 PM
Posted by purple012870:

I think its more like Darko + # 2 for Mobley + # 8.

right, and the Knicks can throw in an additional $3M. that's $10M savings for a team. That's f'ing HUGE.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
earthmansurfer
Posts: 24005
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2005
Member: #858
Germany
6/4/2009  12:43 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by martin:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by martin:
Posted by orangeblobman:
Posted by djsunyc:

i thought you can't trade a medical exempt player...

interesting point..does anyone know how this works? i tried to quickly find something and came up with an old hahn post: http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/basketball/knicks/blog/2008/12/knicks_may_have_a_cba_debate_w.html, though i am not clear as to how it pertains to mobley's current status.

Mobley is NOT retired and the Knicks were denied the medical exception. But that is different than insurance paying for 80% of his contract.

I think.

Mobley's retired

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3762828

I think the deal is that Mobley the player is retired, ie not playing any more, but he and his contract are technically not retired from the NBA.

gotcha.

Yes, now we all CLEARLY understand why they didn't waive him from the roster. He is taking up a roster spot but with Great reason...
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. Albert Einstein
s3231
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #544
USA
6/4/2009  12:56 PM
And this is why we are very lucky to have a good basketball executive in charge that also happens to be a lawyer.

Donnie knows the CBA as well as anyone and I'm sure he is looking for ways to make good use of Mobley's contract. Whether that is using the contract to get an additional pick or trying to move up in the draft is anyone's guess.
"This is a very cautious situation that we're in. You have to be conservative in terms of using your assets and using them wisely. We're building for the future." - Zeke (I guess not protecting a first round pick is being conservative)
eViL
Posts: 25412
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 1/21/2004
Member: #561
USA
6/4/2009  12:58 PM
Is there any doubt that we trade Mobley? That's a pretty good asset actually. He's one step better than an expiring. Good job DW.
check out my latest hip hop project: https://soundcloud.com/michaelcro http://youtu.be/scNXshrpyZo
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
6/4/2009  12:58 PM
Posted by s3231:

And this is why we are very lucky to have a good basketball executive in charge that also happens to be a lawyer.

Donnie knows the CBA as well as anyone and I'm sure he is looking for ways to make good use of Mobley's contract. Whether that is using the contract to get an additional pick or trying to move up in the draft is anyone's guess.

Amen.. if this were Isiah he would have resigned Mobley to a 3 year 30 million dollar extension by now.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
VDesai
Posts: 42769
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
6/4/2009  1:12 PM
Posted by eViL:

Is there any doubt that we trade Mobley? That's a pretty good asset actually. He's one step better than an expiring. Good job DW.

Yup he actually gives a team immediate cost savings. Even if the Knicks can't use the contract, Dolan must be pretty happy with the fact that Walsh basically saved him like 25 mil or more on that Zach deal. He's pretty frivlous but that's not chump change
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34060
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
6/4/2009  1:19 PM
maybe he did fool us, maybe he didn't... the deal that pisses me off is the deal he passed on, when he could have packaged Nate with Jeffries and sent them to Sac
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
Andrew
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #1
USA
6/4/2009  3:39 PM
Posted by SupremeCommander:

maybe he did fool us, maybe he didn't... the deal that pisses me off is the deal he passed on, when he could have packaged Nate with Jeffries and sent them to Sac

...for Kenny Thomas. That doesn't bother me that much.
PURE KNICKS LOVE
Nalod
Posts: 71213
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
6/4/2009  4:39 PM
Is mobley's deal like Eric Snows?

He counts on our cap, but paid by insurance company.

He moves Eddy he would have actually cleaned house!
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27508
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
6/4/2009  4:47 PM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by martin:
Posted by orangeblobman:
Posted by djsunyc:

i thought you can't trade a medical exempt player...

interesting point..does anyone know how this works? i tried to quickly find something and came up with an old hahn post: http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/basketball/knicks/blog/2008/12/knicks_may_have_a_cba_debate_w.html, though i am not clear as to how it pertains to mobley's current status.

Mobley is NOT retired and the Knicks were denied the medical exception. But that is different than insurance paying for 80% of his contract.

I think.

insurance doesn't pay until a player is declared medically exempt. walsh traded for his expiring and that's it. he's no longer an asset.

Now that is just wrong. In terms of the salary cap, Mobley is not a medical exemption and we did not receive a disabled player exception for him. But, his contract was insured and the insurance company is responsible to pay the covered portion of that contract. Martin is absolutely correct in his statement that the contract is insured and that is different. As it pertains to us, Mobley's contract still counts against the cap and we still pay luxury tax on his dollars. If we trade his contract, we must take back the full amount of salary from the other team, but that team will obtain the benefits of his insured contract.

Last, because Mobley still has a roster spot, he is exempt from the requirement that he has to have the intention (or ability) to continue playing in the NBA. Remember when Dallas got KVH up and practicing before the trade with NJ? That was because he retired and no longer had a roster spot.

You know I gonna spin wit it
fishmike
Posts: 53851
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
6/4/2009  4:48 PM
this was done with Terrell Brandon. The guy was done playing and insurance was paying his contract.

I think the real value is when he tried to aquire another pick. Now he can take back a crap player with an expirig deal and essentially save a team $7mm. Thats mucho dinero
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27508
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
6/4/2009  4:58 PM
Posted by fishmike:

this was done with Terrell Brandon. The guy was done playing and insurance was paying his contract.

I think the real value is when he tried to aquire another pick. Now he can take back a crap player with an expirig deal and essentially save a team $7mm. Thats mucho dinero

Exactly. When we talk to Memphis about Darko for Mobley, we can offer them the insured contract and $3M cash if they include a pick we toss in the #8, that might be worth the #2 pick to them-- maybe (there's about $8m in value to them. We can also offer the $4m in trade exceptions + $3M cash in another trade.

We are in a good trading position if teams are economically concerned.

[Edited by - ewingsglass on 06-04-2009 4:59 PM]
You know I gonna spin wit it
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
6/4/2009  5:01 PM
Posted by Andrew:
Posted by SupremeCommander:

maybe he did fool us, maybe he didn't... the deal that pisses me off is the deal he passed on, when he could have packaged Nate with Jeffries and sent them to Sac

...for Kenny Thomas. That doesn't bother me that much.

I was gonna say the same thing. What was so great about that deal?

I guess moving Jeffries, but basically we move him + Nate for cap space. Not the best value, IMHO.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
6/4/2009  5:03 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

i thought you can't trade a medical exempt player...

Terrel Brandon.

http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
6/4/2009  5:07 PM
Posted by martin:

little bit of a re-hash, but I know there were plenty who killed Donnie for 1) not getting a first rounder in the Zbo trade and/or 2) getting back damaged goods in the name of Mobley.

Insurance is paying 80% of the $9M for the year 2009/2010 on Mobley's contract. That's a $7M savings for a team.

ie, Tyson Chandler was traded for caca in the name of less $ on a contract.

And not only that, Mobley is an expiring contract before 2010, that's a good double whammy.

Get rid of Zbo contract, check. Get expiring deal, check. Get insured contract as another asset, check. Make coach Dunleavy look stupid for his comments, check.

Zach Randolph was a selfish chucking bonehead that had to go if even for that purported 2nd round pick and nothing else.

As to Mobley I think that the Knicks actually wanted to use him to "replace" Crawful for a spell but even once they figured out he could not play they thought that (A) it was still a good deal to dump Zach's 2011 given them not taking the first offer and knowing that the Grizzlies offer was far worse and they probably would not get another opportunity to do this and (B) once it was known he would not play they of course rationalized the trade again by dumping Zach's 2011 and saying to themselves that if there was a chance Mobley's contract would be paid for by insurance the deal was still a good one.


.....I don't understand the uproar from some over the Zach trade. He was a bum and had to go. There is no conspiracy regarding Mobley and his situation. It was a very good trade for the Knicks. I just don't get the furor over this trade and why months later it is still a topic. It's a non issue to me. It was an exceptional deal to dump a piece of garbage that was overpaid through 2011. Had Mobley been able to play we would have had a shot at the playoffs IMO. Turns out he was hurt, Knicks still did the deal knowing that insurance might pick up the contract. Nothing more. As a cop at an accident says in a 1980s movie: Nothing to see here, move along.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
LivingLegend
Posts: 25725
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 8/13/2007
Member: #1645
6/4/2009  5:33 PM
Posted by nyk4ever:

Wow that's pretty interesting. I would love to know if that was Donnie's grand design or just a fluke? Either way, I like the way it works out for us, it's going to be a huge asset this offseason.

Donnie has cut deals for LARGE EXEMPTIONS in the past -- I think he picked up a very large exemption either in the Artest trade or the Peja trade. In any event - Mobley's situation isn't like a pure exemption but the point is that Walsh has made trades at Indiana to acquire exemptions that he later used to acquire good players.
Page 2 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Did Donnie fool us all with the Mobley deal?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy