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

Crunching the 2010-2011 numbers.
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
6/28/2009  9:37 AM
Chandler, Curry, Gallinari and Jeffries, are the only players the Knicks are obliged to pay (if all options are picked up, as expected) in 2010-11: $23.6 million in all.

Add Hill's and Douglas' rookie-scale contracts ($3.3 million combined) and that's a $26.9 million cap total, nearly half of the anticipated $50 million-plus cap for that season.

Lee and Robinson would gobble up much of that room, which is why Walsh said his ability to re-sign both likely will depend upon whether he can unload a salary. Although he didn't cite anyone, start with Jeffries and Curry.

.
.

http://www.northjersey.com/sports/knicks/49353967.html

.
.
.

Lee wants about 10, Nate about 7 - lets assume that. That means we're committed for 44M of our 50M cap in 2010-2011. Who do we sign for 6M the summer of 2010? Not any max FA I know of....


Can the Knicks afford Lee (at as much as $10 million per season) and/or Robinson (possibly $6-7 million) and occupy precious 2010 cap space they'd like to spend on one or more free agents?

"Yes," Walsh said, "but I don't know what those numbers are going to be yet."

[Edited by - cosmic on 06-28-2009 09:40 AM]
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
AUTOADVERT
K22
Posts: 25143
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/18/2006
Member: #1182
USA
6/28/2009  9:48 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if Lee gets S&T'ed and Nate walks.
-- the preceding post was brought to you by the letter K and the number 22.
loweyecue
Posts: 27468
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 11/20/2005
Member: #1037
6/28/2009  10:57 AM
But who really wants Lee at his point and what can we get realistically?
TKF on Melo ::....he is a punk, a jerk, a self absorbed out of shape, self aggrandizing, unprofessional, volume chucking coach killing playoff loser!!
orangeblobman
Posts: 27269
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/1/2009
Member: #2539
Nauru
6/28/2009  10:57 AM
Who wants an 18/14 guy? I think many teams.

For all the Lee bashing, it's not like this guy had a fluke 20 ppg season or anything..this guy averaged 18/14 after the z.bo trade. In the NBA. This is the NBA. 18/14. That's impressive.

[Edited by - orangeblobman on 06-28-2009 10:58 AM]
WE AIN'T NOWHERE WITH THIS BUM CHOKER IN CARMELO. GIVE ME STARKS'S 2-21 ANY DAY OVER THIS LACKLUSTER CLUSTEREFF.
ahouston20
Posts: 20036
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/27/2009
Member: #2587
6/28/2009  11:11 AM
I have a feeling the cap is gonna be more like 58 Million next year. The Cap this past year was set at 58.7 million. There has been talks of it going down to maybe 56 or 57 million for the upcoming season. But i have a hard time believing they will lower the cap two years in a row. And if they lowered the cap all the way to the low 50's, theyd have to also lower the luxury tax threshold which most teams dont want to go over. That would wind up screwing over lots of teams bc they would then have to pay luxury tax which their owners dont want to do.

Long story short, I think the cap will be around 58 million. I still feel we should sign and trade D-Lee and Nate for expirings and prospects/picks and preserve the cap space but if we could keep Lee at a discount where his cap number for 2010 would be around 7 million, only then would i keep him. I highly doubt that scenario tho so we'll see/
orangeblobman
Posts: 27269
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/1/2009
Member: #2539
Nauru
6/28/2009  11:16 AM
Maybe they can exempt teams that would get screwed by the unexpected cap from the luxury tax.
WE AIN'T NOWHERE WITH THIS BUM CHOKER IN CARMELO. GIVE ME STARKS'S 2-21 ANY DAY OVER THIS LACKLUSTER CLUSTEREFF.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/28/2009  1:41 PM
IMO both those guys will be traded... if not this offseason then at the trade deadline... good luck to Donnie in getting fair value for them now he's gonna have to pull some of his strings & present some offers they just can't refuse.

After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
VDesai
Posts: 42769
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
6/28/2009  1:46 PM
First of all the Knicks would backload the contracts to maximize cap space, so even if David were to average 10 mil over 5 years, that number would be closer to 9 in 2010, and if Nate were to average 7 mil over 5 years, we're talking 6 mil. So that shaves off 2 mil in space. That said, I see no way Nate is on the squad, so take away another 6. And I think Lee makes about 9 mil per at most, so lets kill another million.

So know your 6 million is more like 15 mil for an FA. If you shave off Curry and Jefferies contracts somehow, you have enough for 2 FA's. Don't re-sign Lee and shed those two and you may be able to get 2 Max and even 1 mid-level FA.
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
6/28/2009  2:02 PM
So 15M is our best bet if we keep Lee and Nate and don't shed Curry and Jeffries. Something that is quite possible.

15M doesn't get us a superstar. A 15M player added to that possible roster means we're stuck in mediocrity yet again for a long long time.

This is the concern.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
6/28/2009  2:11 PM
Posted by Cosmic:

So 15M is our best bet if we keep Lee and Nate and don't shed Curry and Jeffries. Something that is quite possible.

15M doesn't get us a superstar. A 15M player added to that possible roster means we're stuck in mediocrity yet again for a long long time.

This is the concern.

How does 15million not get you a superstar?

Isn't the starting salary of a max player at or less than 15?
"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
6/28/2009  2:12 PM
Posted by Cosmic:

So 15M is our best bet if we keep Lee and Nate and don't shed Curry and Jeffries. Something that is quite possible.

15M doesn't get us a superstar. A 15M player added to that possible roster means we're stuck in mediocrity yet again for a long long time.

This is the concern.

15 mil is if we keep Lee and not Nate. Its also close to where the Max contract starts (around 16.5 mil), so with a little creativity (i.e. drop one minor salary or reformulate one of the other contracts) its enough to land a superstar. If they are able to shed Jefferies they can keep Lee and Nate as Nate's contract would probably be similar in value to JJ's. If they shed Curry that leaves them space for 2 FA's. Shed Curry, Jefferies and Nate and its 2 max FA's with space left over.
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
6/28/2009  4:37 PM
Wait....I thought max contracts were to start around 17M+ ?

Regardless, it shows just how close to not achieving the dream we are despite all this legwork. Those who want to retain Lee and Nate - if we can't move Jeffries and Curry - something which is very possible - our roster isn't going very far even if we have just enough to sign 1 max FA.

I thought we were in better shape but it is very clear we aren't and still have work to do.

I feel we can move Jeffries but not Curry. I feel we want to keep Lee but not Nate. Even if those two things pan out we still pretty much add 1 max FA and another "duhon" level player.

That's only going to guarantee us a playoff appearance and not much else.

http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
Andrew
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #1
USA
6/29/2009  9:15 AM
Max contracts will be around 25% or 30% of the salary cap.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q11
PURE KNICKS LOVE
Markji
Posts: 22753
Alba Posts: -4
Joined: 9/14/2007
Member: #1673
USA
6/29/2009  9:42 AM
Good number crunching.

You also need to add in salaries for the other players we will need to fill out the roster to probably 15 players (at least 14). Even at minimal salaries that still is about $7 - $10 million. Guestimating: 7 more players at an average $1 to $1.5 million but that may not be close to realistic.

But if we sign the Super star FA first, then I believe we can add players at veteran's minimums even tho we are over the cap.
The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense. Tom Clancy - author
AnubisADL
Posts: 27382
Alba Posts: 13
Joined: 6/29/2009
Member: #2771
USA
6/29/2009  10:03 AM
We need to dump Curry and Jefferies to truly make a splash in 2010.

The higher the salary cap in 2010 the more a Max free agent is going to eat up. You also would have to factor in other teams having more space to overpay for guys who aren't max type players.

NY Knicks - Retirement home for players and GMs
OasisBU
Posts: 24138
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 6/18/2002
Member: #257
USA
6/29/2009  11:34 AM
Posted by AnubisADL:

We need to dump Curry and Jefferies to truly make a splash in 2010.

The higher the salary cap in 2010 the more a Max free agent is going to eat up. You also would have to factor in other teams having more space to overpay for guys who aren't max type players.

Getting rid of those 2 contracts is the key, and I am afraid with a lot of the league looking to do the same it will be almost impossible. At the very least it is going to take a huge stroke of luck.
"If at first you don't succeed, then maybe you just SUCK." Kenny Powers
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/29/2009  11:39 AM
Posted by OasisBU:
Posted by AnubisADL:

We need to dump Curry and Jefferies to truly make a splash in 2010.

The higher the salary cap in 2010 the more a Max free agent is going to eat up. You also would have to factor in other teams having more space to overpay for guys who aren't max type players.

Getting rid of those 2 contracts is the key, and I am afraid with a lot of the league looking to do the same it will be almost impossible. At the very least it is going to take a huge stroke of luck.
What it's gonna take is throwing in a lot of sweetener to make a team willing to take back those contracts. We'll be giving up draft picks and/or promising young players.
King1
Posts: 22993
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/2/2005
Member: #998
USA
6/29/2009  11:40 AM
No one is going to offer anything for nate. He is the worst defender in the league. I bet he signs a QO from the Knicks. Maybe a team will give him 3 years 10 million at the most
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
6/29/2009  11:43 AM
Posted by King1:

No one is going to offer anything for nate. He is the worst defender in the league. I bet he signs a QO from the Knicks. Maybe a team will give him 3 years 10 million at the most

I'm sorry King, I'm not the biggest Nate supporter, but to think he won't get more than 3yr/10mil is completely asinine.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
AnubisADL
Posts: 27382
Alba Posts: 13
Joined: 6/29/2009
Member: #2771
USA
6/29/2009  12:25 PM
Posted by King1:

No one is going to offer anything for nate. He is the worst defender in the league. I bet he signs a QO from the Knicks. Maybe a team will give him 3 years 10 million at the most

A playoff team will make a run at him because he is a spark off the bench. He is instant offense off the bench. He will get MLE of 5 million a year.
NY Knicks - Retirement home for players and GMs
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Crunching the 2010-2011 numbers.
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