The post-trade deadline window is slowly coming down on the teams jockeying for playoff position to sign players receiving buyout contracts, and the intensity is gaining steam.
This can be a frustrating time of year for the mediocre teams, because it only allows the rich to get richer. And we’re talking about the players and the best teams gaining more talent for a cut rate.
We don’t like it one bit … allowing the players to moan, groan and finagle their way out of a contract … and get paid! Yikes. Nonetheless we’re here to figure out who has the most to gain by Saturday’s deadline. Anyone signed after that would not be eligible for the playoffs.
It began with the Spurs getting sweet-shooting little guard Damon Stoudamire, bought out and released by the Grizzlies, on Feb. 3 and it has gained steam from there. In this case, it made sense for the Grizzlies considering they have three other point guards.
The Nets rid themselves of center Jamaal Magloire for a price last week, and the Mavericks picked him up for some much-needed depth in the wake of losing DeSagana Diop in the big Jason Kidd trade. Magloire was essentially a ghost with the Nets, so it was hardly much of a loss with the young big bodies they have, but the Mavs figure there's still some juice left in this lemon.
Wednesday, the Celtics confirmed they had signed P.J. Brown, who did not necessitate a buyout, however, since he retired after playing 20 minutes a game for the Bulls last season. A stout defender and rebounder, the 38-year-old Brown is in his 15th season.
The Pistons, who waived guard Flip Murray to open up a roster spot for a big man, were foiled in their desire for Magloire, and perhaps Brown to a lesser extent. Now it appears they’ll turn their sights on the dormant Dale Davis, who played 37 games for them last year and would be in his 17th season.
The Hornets are holding out hope that Chris Andersen, banned for violating the substance abuse policy two years ago, will get reinstated over the next 48 hours, so they can sign him. A dynamic figure of raw energy who blocks shots and rebounds as a way of life on the court, Andersen would be a huge difference-maker for their lean bench. This is a long-shot.
That leaves three players of interest left – Brent Barry, who was already bought out and waived by Sonics after he, Francisco Elson and a first round draft choice were sent to Seattle by the Spurs for Kurt Thomas; Sam Cassell, still hoping for a reasonable buyout from the Clippers; and Gordan Giricek, on the verge of a striking a deal to be released by the Sixers.
Barry had considered the Celtics, Rockets, Suns and a return to the Spurs -- and a couple of other destinations on the NBA map -- but has reportedly narrowed it to the Suns and Spurs, where he has earned a couple of championship rings and presently lives with his wife and two boys. However, the Suns' open-court style better suits him and he can’t play for the Spurs until March 21 -- the first day a player dealt by a team is allowed to return. So he is stuck in a quandary between allegiance and opportunity for change. Then again, he’s been plagued by a bum left calf the past couple of months and at 36, he’s a bit oBLEEPamble for this season. Nonetheless, he is still a great 3-point shooter and exceptional passer.
Should he pass on the Suns and stay put with the Spurs, Phoenix turns its fickle love interest to Giricek, whose most notable contribution this season has been being dealt by the Jazz to Philly with a No. 1 draft choice for Kyle Korver. Since then, Korver has helped the Jazz to a 21-5 burst and they have secured a hold on the Northwest Division lead. Sure, Giricek can shoot the rock, but he also comes with no hops and plenty of whine.
That brings us to Cassell, who led the Clippers to the conference semifinals two years ago. The Celtics and Nuggets badly want his services at point guard for the stretch run. The problem is the Clippers appear amenable to letting him go, but not playing him close to the $2.1 million left on his contract for this season. In fact, they reportedly don’t want to pay him anything.
Quite frankly, why should they? That’s not to pick on Cassell and who would ever have believed that beleaguered Clippers owner Donald Sterling would set a good precedent for the NBA? And this would be a great one. Cassell is the one who wants out. They’re not getting any value in return. So if he’s not playing for them anymore, why should he get paid?
Consequently, if Cassell decides to bolt for nothing, the Celtics or the Nuggets would stand to gain the most, and he would stand to lose the most financially. Isn’t that just lovely irony?
If the Suns were to pickup Giricek, I'd have to stop believing the Shaq experiment was a calculated risk that could pay off, and begin believing that front office has lost its mind. Kerr? Missing the limelight are you?
If Sam I Am really wants a shot at a ring, he should consider the 2.1 million a loss and sign with Boston already. I mean, the guy has made 56 million over his career and he's worried about getting half of the 2.1 million he's still owed?
I don't know why Barry would consider the Suns. Has he seen them play recently? Forget an NBA championship, with their remaining schedule, they might not make the playoffs.
What's the hold up with Chris Andersen? Hasn't he done everything that was required of him?
I'm also with Sterling on this one. The whole "buyout" concept is comically ridiculous if you apply it to any other industry or business.
Here's the basic concept of a buyout:
"I don't like the company I work for but I sure do like the paycheck... Why don't I get the company to keep paying me but let me go work for another company too!"
And I'd love your thoughts on this one, Mike:
How the heck can any NBA team EVER ask for taxpayer cash for an arena when they're doing things like contract buyouts???
These veterans that want to jump ship from the current team that's paying them obscene money, to bandwagon their way to a title are a joke. The Clippers have treated him like a god, because he brought them to the brink of legitimacy. Loyalty is out the window. Aren't they paying him to help THEM win? Why the sense of entitlement? Let him, and all the other crybabys go the Spreewell route. They should appreciate the blessings they have.
EVERYONE wants to win, but as players get closer to the end of their careers, they feel they DESERVE a title....EARN IT. Don't bandwagon...it only lessens the value of it. Does anyone really believe Mitch Richmond EARNED his ring he got with the Lakers?
Great blog Mr. Kahn. I also liked Max's post, I hadn't thought about the fact that a city/taxpayers may be indirectly subsidizing personnel moves (and ill-advised ones at that) by paying for arenas while management mismanages other assets. Certainly seems like a questionable use of taxpayer dough. I think we should spend that money on streets and other infrastructure; education is underfunded as well.
The point of the article is certainly well made, I don't want to see teams caving for these crybabies who don't want to live up to their word. Dealing specifically with Cassell though, how selfish and short-sided can you be? I mean, I have known what a narcissistic money-worshipping BLEEP Cassell is for a long time, but I didn't think even he could be so greedy. Hoffman says he has already made $56M and now wants to get paid so he doesn't want to honor his contract and he can help out an opponent?
Congratulations Sam Cassell, you have just made my Public Enemy #1 (in the sports world at least).
Is it "Sam I am" or "I am Sam?" (No offense to Sean Penn's character intended).
chris anderson will be good for the hornets, i mean give him 10 chances to dunk and he might actually make it ha
i dont like buyouts either, if they player is THAT unhappy with the team, why not walk away from the remaining money? whats $2.1million to sam cassel? just say you want a plain ticket to boston and the deal would be done.
just shows how greedy nba players are
The amount that the stars in the NBA today ruin them. Ben Wallace used to be the one that always won because of his hustle. Then Scott Skiles signed him for 60 million and he started playing for himself. Look at the players that get things done because of hustle. Chris Kaman, Bruce Bowen, Tyson Chandler and Danny Granger they all have small contracts. Chrales Barkley out hustled people all the time and he was paid plenty so what has happened to day.
Good article Kahn. Im glad someone finally spoke up about this BLEEP thats going on. My gripe is why can a player be traded like Barry was, and then a month later be able to come back to the same team that traded him. Thats BS. And yes its BS that buyouts exist too. I already hate how players jump ship year to year anyway, dont let them do it mid season too.
PRPL&GLD, I have to ask....What could you possibly have beef with The Rock for? You guys got him for almost nothing as insurance and depth. Are you saying he didn't practice with the team for a year? Are you saying he didn't perform when required (granted it wasn't required very often.) They needed a role filled and he filled it. Riding pine in the event that a starter goes down. Richmond didn't get bought out to go play with the Lakers, he was a free agent. By that kind of logic, the only two players who deserved a chip that year would be Shaq and Kobe. I think buyouts are lame as well, but you could have called out alot of other people besides Richmond in regards to the mercenary days of the Lakers.
Last edited by Shiprecd on February 28th at 10:49 AM.
Good stuff BleedPPLGLD. These guys are a disgrace to their families and the game. I am glad my last name is not Cassell.
Also, when is Sam Cassell going to take his make-up off from shooting Enemy Mine? He was an incredibly convincing alien, but didn't that movie come out in the 80s? Someone should tell him it is time to move on.
Last edited by DrNeverWFU on February 28th at 11:01 AM.
maconator77,
tyson chandler is playing for $10mil this season and has 3yrs, $35+ left on his contract.
chris kaman getse $8.6 this season and has 4yrs, $40+left on his contract.
Alonzo Mourning was traded to Toronto in the Vince Carter deal with New Jersey a few years back. He refused to play for the Raps, and Rob Babcock (who was thankfully canned) ended up buying out his contract so he could move on to Miami... I don't care what personal problems Zo had, he should of just been thankful that he could play...
It is a bunch of BLEEP what these players do sometimes and I think Mike Kahn hit it right on the nose with this article. Why should these players get paid when they are the ones that want out? I feel just the same as he does that way as well. But then again I think, the team has to honor the contract that they wrote up for their player. In turn the player needs to honor his side as well.
Maxpowerman, I completely agree with what you said about,"How the heck can any NBA team EVER ask for taxpayer cash for an arena when they're doing things like contract buyouts???" It is a bunch of BLEEP that goes on man. The fans have to pay for everything. The tickets, the new arena's, the stuff they sell at the game, and to pay to watch the game on NBA TV or cable TV. The owners and players do not pay for anything, but they sure complain about when they need a new arena. If the taxpayers have to pay for the stupid arena we should at least be able to watch the game on regular TV for free Instead of having to pay for cable or NBA TV.
Why should the taxpayer vote to build a new arena for a team that BLEEPs anyway? BLEEP since the owners charge us to go attend a game they should at least put up 40 percent of the money for a new arena if not more than 40%.
The reason why barry got released so quickly is because BJ...I mean PJ is hooking up his boy Pop o face!! The 30 day window should apply to all teams, and the team releasing them should have to pay the balance of the contract if the player plays. That way they have to "trade" like everyone else. For those who are interested, Baseball and Hockey also have yearly "garage sales" and pick up players for the stretch run, and allow losers to shed payroll. Like steroids, let's not put this all on the players because we know what they all make. Look at the Astros....they don't mind Clemens and his negativity dealing with 'young players"?? What irony is that?? I thought it was about "saving the kids"?
You're right these guys are b@$tard$!
They owe it to fans (the people who pay their dam salaries) to stay where they are and win a ring fair and square....
Not ride someone else's coat tails to a ring...right antoine walker & gary payton!?
...Oh you too ZO
Last edited by smaug7800 on February 28th at 11:36 AM.
Shiprecd,
I have no beef with Mitch, he was a great player, I loved watching RUN-TMC work their magic. I used him as an example of players in their twilight mooching a ring. It's never a given that they'll win anyway. Look at the Payton & Malone experiment...although if Malone hadn't gotten hurt and Shaq didn't tank it to get out of L.A., they probably win that series for the 4,5,6???...peat.
DrNever,
That Enemy Mine crack was classic ,I laughed out loud. I've heard Sam called E.T., but that one was a first. Maybe after hitting a clutch shot we could get him to let out that Chewbacca, clicking sound that Gossett JR. spewed in that flick. CLASSIC!
goTO - I always think about the Carter trade and the buyout Zo got out of that too. It's completely ridiculous. I've never understood it, I kept wondering why Babcock didn't either tell Zo he could ever accept a buyout of nothing (or $1 if some money is required) or simply be suspended without pay for refusing to report/play.
I don't mind a buyout if the player fore goes the rest of the money his current team owes him, after all he will get paid something on his new team plus get to play in the playoffs and get a chance to win. Either they should get nothing, or buyouts should only be available in the off-season, say between July 1st and October 1st.
I agree that it BLEEPs that a player can essentially "blackmail" his team into paying him to play somewhere else.
But there is another side to this. Sometimes it is the team who wants to dump the player.Usually they want to make room for someone else.
In this case why should a player have to sacrifice what he is due under his contract? Or why should he have to wait 30 days before he can play for someone else.
In many cases, it falls on the teams for making the contract in the first place. If some of the teams did not "buy into" some of these players, they would not ba obliged to "buy them out." They make a bad contract and then they want to get out of it with no consequences. That is as bad as a player wanting to "jump ship."
In the Barry situation, it is not uncommon at all for a player to be traded and released. They do it to make the trade work under the salary and cap guidelines. The league however frowns on the player going back to his old team. Thus the 30 day restriction. But as far as I know there is no rule against it.
Did Pop and PJ have a "wink, wink" deal. Possibly. But the Spurs took a chance, because there is nothing to make Barry honor such an agreement if he decides to go elsewhere. And 30 days is a long time. A lot can happen. The Spurs could have the top spot and be odds on favorites for the championship, or they could slide completely out of the playoff picture.
As a Spurs fan, I hope he does come back. There are storng reasons for him to do so.
His kids are in school in SA. He and his wife like the city and the people here like him
Last edited by Spurcse on February 28th at 12:37 PM.
He has had a calf injury that was going to keep hin out of the lineup another 3 or 4 weeks anyway. This would give him time to heal with no pressure to return too soon.
He would be back in time for the playoffs.
SA is a contender for a championship.
He knows the system. He is well liked by his teammates.
He has commericala endorcements here that he would lose if he leaves.
No income tax in Tesas.
Last edited by Spurcse on February 28th at 12:35 PM.
I feel that if a player has clearly stated that he doesn't wanna be there then let him go. Sam is pretty much done as for as his basketball career goes he'll probably go to retire in a bout 1 or 2 more years and get a job at ESPN, I mean there is nothing wrong with that. For as Brent Barry goes I think the Spurs planned this all along and expect to be seeing Brent come March 21 in black and silver. When you start getting into double digits for as your career goes for as the NBA is concerned there only one thing on your mine and thats a Championship Ring.
Spurcse - "But there is another side to this. Sometimes it is the team who wants to dump the player.Usually they want to make room for someone else."
But the team still has to pay them.
"In this case why should a player have to sacrifice what he is due under his contract? Or why should he have to wait 30 days before he can play for someone else."
He wouldn't.
"They make a bad contract and then they want to get out of it with no consequences."
There ARE consequences, they still have to pay them.
"In the Barry situation, it is not uncommon at all for a player to be traded and released. They do it to make the trade work under the salary and cap guidelines. The league however frowns on the player going back to his old team. Thus the 30 day restriction. But as far as I know there is no rule against it."
I don't mind that happening at all, because I'm sure the Spurs only included Barry in the deal to match up the salaries. If it was a pure basketball trade with no salary cap, it would have been Elson and the 1st rounder for Thomas.
This trade me / Buy me out when you are not winning makes me want to VOMIT all over myself . So So disgusting !!! All this whining and stuff !! If everybody did that then the NBA would be reduced to 12 teams with 10s of players !!! And the BLEEP won two chips already . It would be understandable if he did not win any yet and getting ready to retire . Out of courtesy , Sterling could allow it but Dang !!! His ugliness (pun intended ) , Sam the alien (litterally looks like an out of earth creature) , and greed just disgust me . Man are not supposed to look at other man's features but dude is extremely ugly man . lol
I was not referring to what is, I was referring to what some people think should be. I realize the team has to pay the player. I am responding to the people who think they should not have to pay the player if they are released.
I am just saying that if the release is not the players' wish, why should the team get away without them paying?
People talk a lot about loyalty and greed when a player wants to leave a team, but when a team wants to get rid of a player it is just considered business.
My personal opinion is that when a contract is signed both player and team should honor it. And the one who breaks it should be the one who gives up the money. So I agree with the posters who think a player should not be allowed to blackmail a team into trading them or paying them if they leave, but I also think a team has an obligation to pay a player if they get rid of them. I know it is that way and it should be.
Last edited by Spurcse on February 28th at 1:18 PM.
Most of the guys mentioned are "Has-Been" except for Kidd and Barry...
I hope Barry picks the Spurs because he will be a much bigger threat with the Suns.....
Spurcse, I have ZERO problem with a team trading a player. They have a responsibility to the team and the fans, it is a business as well and a necessary part of it. Management is obligated to put a quality product on the floor. In the NBA, the contracts are guaranteed, that is why they must buy players out to go back on their word. If the player is good enough, he can demand a no-trade clause or negotiate trade escelators to avoid getting traded. But these contracts are heavily on the players' favors, being traded is part of the deal.
But when players give up on a team or demand money so they can join up with a competitor, it reeks of foul play and utter greed. It is complete bad faith. It is not business, it is exploitation and almost extortion. It dishonors the contract and the spirit of competition. There is a big deal between a team trading a player and a player holding ransom his team.
Haven't posted in a long time cuz one reality kept hitting me in the face - Lakers fans really do live in LA LA Land and there's no waking them up...then I read the comments to this article and just had to ask something...
How are these buyouts any different than a Golden Parachute?
Had a friend who went to work for a company in Seattle, and part of his contract stated that if for any reason he, or the hiring company were not happy then he was still to get paid his remaining GUARANTEED monies.
The fact that they are playing a game doesn't mean they are not in a business venture. Don't blame people for doing exactly what they are supposed to do...good business. He'd be considered an BLEEP by any business major if he walked away without the money he's supposed to get according to his contract...and I'm surprised at Mr. Kahn for not pointing that out and spinning it the way he is...
That said...the idea oBLEEPolden Parachute is retarded to me, but find me a CEO, CFO or any other corporate person in a high position without one...then come back and tell me how F-ed up Cassell is for being a capitalist.
The way Cassell is trying to approach the Clippers is that this is his last year of basketball, the Clippers are not going to make the playoffs and he has $2.1 million left due him if he stays and plays out the year. So If they pay him something like half and let him go they save $1 million and he gets one last chance to go to the finals. Obviously Sterling is saying shove it, but in that case Sterling will pay $2.1 million for his right to say you belong to me. This is about egos and power as Cassell can't help or hurt the Clippers at this point. I don't think Cassell is out of line with this buyout at all. Wherever he goes he will get 1/3 of the veteran minumum which is around $500,000.
Spurcse - well if the team is the one that wants to cut the player, then they should have to pay. That's a different situation.
"My personal opinion is that when a contract is signed both player and team should honor it. And the one who breaks it should be the one who gives up the money."
The option to buy out a contract belongs to the owner. When a player stops performing because he wants a buy out, that is an ownership problem, too. The owner chose to pay the player for the length of the contract. Maybe they shouldn't have signed that player to begin with.
SAMIAM gotta feed his family man! Twice. Buyouts are a joke. Maybe the players should have to take some financial responsibility. Have them pay the other players and balance the books then they would realize how foolish the spending is in all of the leagues.
This is a joke...i would have to agree with the majority that Donald Sterling is right to stand his ground as a owner...If SAM-I-AM really wants out of the Clip's to ride the coat-tails of the Celtics, he should be the one to fork over the $2.1 million to buy his contract out. Let's see how he feels.
Last edited by urmomswasgr8lastnite on February 28th at 2:57 PM.
Collective bargaining agreements in sports are wack!
Trading a 'retired' player is a joke.
SamIAm's sitution is more unusual than most of these buyouts. Teams chasing a playoff berth will dump a contract, dreaming of a championship.
Some teams dump a talented player who was buried on the pine, while others seem to have back door deals to buy out a player who ends up on an already stacked team.
The East hasn't picked up depth this trade/cut season.
It began with the Spurs getting sweet-shooting little guard Damon Stoudamire, bought out and released by the Grizzlies, on Feb. 3 and it has gained steam from there. In this case, it made sense for the Grizzlies considering they have three other point guards.
