Posted by s3231:

In my finances thread ( the link that franco posted) I show that you can give sessions a big enough signing bonus that would essentially pay him over $11 million in his first season. Pritchard did a signing bonus with Millsap and I think it is the best way to go. I just don't see Milwaukee matching that for their third point guard.

[Edited by - s3231 on 07-27-2009 07:58 AM]

That's true but I don't think the signing bonus would affect the Milwaukee's team payroll and thus wouldn't be money they'd have to spend luxury tax on. The luxury tax is the big deterrent to them matching. I'm not even certain that by matching the contract, they'd have to pay the same signing bonus (rather than just spreading the money in a "normal" fashion over the duration of the contract). This stuff is definitely confusing and I doubt any of us are gonna think of something the GMs won't realize.

Now that the Knicks have Robinson signed (or at least that is the report), Walsh should work a sign and trade with the Bucks. I would offer them Duhon (they need a cheap backup), $3 million, and a second round pick. In exchange, we sign Sessions to a more reasonable 3yr/$18 million contract. If Session blows up, he can sign a new deal when he is 27 yrs old. If he bombs, we only have three years invested in him.

I agree with Briggs that Sessions has too much potential to let him slip away. He could have a Billups like jump in his skills. Really, once he gets his jumpshot down, this kid will be a top-10 pg.

donnie probably won't offer $$$ to Sessions til he sees what Tinsley has left in the tank and/or find a trade partner for Duhon

Sessions is the right age and at the right stage of his career for our needs. We want someone young enough to grow with the team, but at the same time, you want someone who has proven he can actually play and is not simply a "potential" player. Guys like Billups and even Magic Johnson, had to work on becoming better 3pt shooters. Sessions never takes 3s. Once he goes through a summer of taking 300-400 3s a day and then starts being forced to take them in games, I think his 3pt percentage will be respectable. If you only shoot 3s a small percentage of the time, that tell me that you are shooting them when you have to (shot clock running down), which is going to lower your percentage. I suspect with a summer of focus on the 3pt shot, Sessions can shoot in the high 30s, which given his other skills is all we really need.

Forget Tinsley. Walsh sign Sessions and give him what he wants.

i still don't understand signing your 4th/5th option this offseason to a long term deal when you're not sure what 2010 will yield...

Posted by martin:

Posted by djsunyc:

i still don't understand signing your 4th/5th option this offseason to a long term deal when you're not sure what 2010 will yield...

you still need a PG into 2010 don't you? what's the difference if you sign now or later if the player fills a position and you like him?

b/c what if the guy you get in 2010 is chris paul? they went after kidd first, then hill, then andre miller, then whoemever else. seems like they're settling on this potential signing. when all your eggs are in one basket (starting next summer) then why do anything to jeopardize it? they're holding a hard stance on lee b/c of that so why bring in someone else?

[Edited by - djsunyc on 07-27-2009 10:58 AM]

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by martin:

Posted by djsunyc:

i still don't understand signing your 4th/5th option this offseason to a long term deal when you're not sure what 2010 will yield...

you still need a PG into 2010 don't you? what's the difference if you sign now or later if the player fills a position and you like him?

b/c what if the guy you get in 2010 is chris paul? they went after kidd first, then hill, then andre miller, then whoemever else. seems like they're settling on this potential signing. when all your eggs are in one basket (starting next summer) then why do anything to jeopardize it? they're holding a hard stance on lee b/c of that so why bring in someone else?

[Edited by - djsunyc on 07-27-2009 10:58 AM]

i think they are holding a hard stance on Lee to get him to a reasonable contract for his talent: $7M per, yes; $10M per, no. What would be a good number for a starting PG with plenty of upside?

Posted by BRIGGS:

Detroit. That ended up being one of the best contracts signed in NBA history. I think Ramon Sessions has a great chance to Nba great ballplayer here. I don't think it is necessary to try to lower the MLE on him or not give him a fully guaranteed 5 years. The full MLE front loaded in year 1 is a deterrent to Milwaukee matching a cheaper modified offer. I don't think we should play that game. Where the NY Knicks got in trouble was with max contracts and the secondary max contracts. Using the full MLE on a promising reasonably proven up and coming big PG who is 23 years old will prove to be a savvy prescient signing. I look at how Joe Dumars does it every year --and lets face it Joe D is the best in the game. He never pays max contracts but he pays and he beats people to the punch. There is no indecision but rather intelligent quickly calculated maneuvers--striking before other teams lift a finger. We have identified a player who can really help this team. My advice--stop F around and give him a front loaded MLE. Get it done--no reason to be thrifty over a little bit of money which will turn out to be smart money spent anyway.

Walsh typically seems to make a subsequent move first before making his key move.

I would think if he wants Sessions - he first believes he has to find a taker for Jefferies or Eddy...(most likely Jefferies).

I'm sure they like Sessions but can't add him without relieving some salary that flows into next year first.

It's crazy because there is still so much that needs to work its way out on this club.

Larry Hughes for example --- he is being treated like he has the plague -- they must have plans to move him before the season starts.

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by martin:

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by martin:

Posted by djsunyc:

i still don't understand signing your 4th/5th option this offseason to a long term deal when you're not sure what 2010 will yield...

you still need a PG into 2010 don't you? what's the difference if you sign now or later if the player fills a position and you like him?

b/c what if the guy you get in 2010 is chris paul? they went after kidd first, then hill, then andre miller, then whoemever else. seems like they're settling on this potential signing. when all your eggs are in one basket (starting next summer) then why do anything to jeopardize it? they're holding a hard stance on lee b/c of that so why bring in someone else?

[Edited by - djsunyc on 07-27-2009 10:58 AM]

i think they are holding a hard stance on Lee to get him to a reasonable contract for his talent: $7M per, yes; $10M per, no. What would be a good number for a starting PG with plenty of upside?

ok, lee signs for $7 mil. are they still adding another $6 mil for 2010 by adding sessions b/c that would mean $13 mil on 2010's books that wasn't there before.

you can worry about a good # for the pg AFTER the 2010 guy signs b/c right now, it should be $0...

[Edited by - djsunyc on 07-27-2009 11:04 AM]

Donnie had no trouble getting rid of $26 mil off the 2010 payroll and could have gotten rid of $33 mil easily if he'd agreed to the Jeffries trade. I think a lot of people here are overestimating how difficult it would be for him to clear a little more space during the year. Heck at $6 and 7 mil for Sessions and Lee, they're great trade assets who might be involved in dumping a bad contract or in an S & T in 2010.

Posted by LivingLegend:

I say "keep it simple stupid" and don't mess with the long term cap $.

Sign Tinsley to a very reasonable one or even 2 year deal. If he plays great you have him at great price next year and if not you move his reasonable contract.

Walsh has called Tinsley "one of the most cerebral players he's ever coached" and Tinsley would be butter in a system that lets him attack and be creative. Especially if he doesn't have to play major minutes.

I've seen Tinsley when he was over-weight but I've also seen him in outstanding shape and playing great ball.

I think Walsh will take a serious look at Jamal and if he appears in very good shape I believe Walsh will grab him as a stop gap solution for this year.

Jamal Tinsley was never that good. He is always hurt he hasnt played in almost two years he's nearly ten years older than Sessions. In three years Tinsley will surely be out of the league and Sessions could be a star PG worthy of much more than his salary. What does that show potential FA--remember Sessions might end up being better than most of the TRULY available FA out there. You cant BANK on a FA you can only have the space--you dont build a team with retreads like Tim Thomas and Tinsley--you get Sessions and sign Skita who was very impressive to me.

Tinsley is a guy who can be a back up PG for a team that has things in place. I think Sessions represents great opportunity for a reasonable price.

I would sign Sessions now and worry about moving JJ and Curry later.