Bee: Money no object when it comes to cuts

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/index.php
Money is no object when it comes to cuts
The Maloofs will give Eric Musselman the team he wants; contracts won't figure into the decisions.
By Sam Amick -
Last Updated 1:24 am PDT Sunday, October 22, 2006


Even before the questions of who has played better, there is the one about who costs more.

At least that's usually the case.

Roster trimming in the NBA isn't always about the fit. The finances usually come into play, with decisions sometimes being made based on the price tag of parting ways rather than the value of the player himself.

But just as the Kings' situation appeared trickier than most, co-owner Joe Maloof came along to ensure his basketball branch that the dollar won't be dictating their moves, even if it means the team pays a luxury tax it has tried so hard to avoid. Their 17-man roster must be down to 15 by Oct. 30, though teams are allowed to carry as few as 13 players. Kings ownership, apparently, has made those decisions a whole lot easier.

"We're a young team, and we've got to try and take as many players as we can under contract," Maloof said. "That's how I look at it. Whatever the full amount of players is, we want to have that. It doesn't matter what we're paying him. If the guy can help us on the court, that's all we (care) about."

The quandary comes with the players who might cost a lot even if they're not around. And the temptation to cut them is in the potential of youth, with rookies like big men Louis Amundson and Justin Williams looking more capable of helping both now and in the future.

Amundson, for one, earned the best kind of fans in July, when the forward's scrappy summer-league play in Las Vegas left the Maloofs predicting big things for the rookie from UNLV this season even before he made the roster.

"I really like his hustle, but that's going to be up to coach (Eric) Musselman and (Kings basketball president) Geoff (Petrie)," Maloof said. "It's easier that way. You've got the two smartest guys in the country with basketball decisions.

"Let them make decisions and they come to Gavin (Maloof) and I, and we'll just stamp it."

Kings center Vitaly Potapenko has yet to pass a conditioning test and thus hasn't played in an exhibition game, this after a 2005-06 campaign in which he logged 31 minutes after being traded to Sacramento in February. But cutting him would cost $3.6 million, with no discount for the practical purposes of such a decision.

Loren Woods, a free-agent signee center who hasn't played in two consecutive games, would be a cheaper casualty ($400,000 in guaranteed money).

Or perhaps the Kings would consider freeing up their logjam at the point, where an unconventional approach to ballhandling means the depth chart behind Mike Bibby includes more than just point guards. And just as second-year point guard Ronnie Price has been drawing much praise for his improvement, the approach has left veteran Jason Hart out of the mix. Should Hart be cut, the Maloofs would have to cut a check for $1.6 million.

Unless the Kings cut Amundson and Williams, whose rookie minimum salaries are paid if only they make the team, the team's payroll might surpass the luxury tax threshold of $65.42 million. That, Joe Maloof said, was of no concern.

"Whatever team he wants, he can have it," Maloof said Friday.

Musselman, interviewed before he was arrested on a charge of driving under the influence, said he appreciates the choice for sense over cents. His team faces New Orleans in Reno tonight.

"This will be a big weekend, because we know it's getting close to time to make some decisions," Musselman said. "I think all of our conversations have been (about) what's best for the team. I think that the final outcome will be what's best for the team. That's a lot better than being in a situation where it's only based on contracts."

About the writer: The Bee's Sam Amick can be reached at samick@sacbee.com.
 
But just as the Kings' situation appeared trickier than most, co-owner Joe Maloof came along to ensure his basketball branch that the dollar won't be dictating their moves, even if it means the team pays a luxury tax it has tried so hard to avoid. Their 17-man roster must be down to 15 by Oct. 30, though teams are allowed to carry as few as 13 players. Kings ownership, apparently, has made those decisions a whole lot easier.

"We're a young team, and we've got to try and take as many players as we can under contract," Maloof said. "That's how I look at it. Whatever the full amount of players is, we want to have that. It doesn't matter what we're paying him. If the guy can help us on the court, that's all we (care) about."

"I really like his hustle, but that's going to be up to coach (Eric) Musselman and (Kings basketball president) Geoff (Petrie)," Maloof said. "It's easier that way. You've got the two smartest guys in the country with basketball decisions.

"Let them make decisions and they come to Gavin (Maloof) and I, and we'll just stamp it."

"Whatever team he wants, he can have it," Maloof said Friday.

"This will be a big weekend, because we know it's getting close to time to make some decisions," Musselman said. "I think all of our conversations have been (about) what's best for the team. I think that the final outcome will be what's best for the team. That's a lot better than being in a situation where it's only based on contracts."

I know it's easy to spend someone else's money or complain when they don't spend it, but this is a very encouraging sign. Looks like they will carry 15 and if, at least for now, they are a little over the cap they are OK with that.

Trades can always bring you under the cap by the trade deadline if adjustments need to be made.

Going a little over the cap isn't really that expensive, all things considered (say $300,000 over "only" costs you and extra $300,000). Of course, you also don't get the annual benefit for all those teams still under the cap, which is why Skinner is gone.
 
Ok well if they are not worried about spending money, why the heck didn't we sign Bonzi. It seemed to me they were worried about going over the tax threshold a month and a half ago when we were trying to resign Bonzi.
 
i don think bonzi only wanted a couple million more, he wanted a hefty sack of change, not the pennies will pay to keep amundun or williams around, big difference in the tax column between overpaying bonzi and signing these cats
 
Ok well if they are not worried about spending money, why the heck didn't we sign Bonzi. It seemed to me they were worried about going over the tax threshold a month and a half ago when we were trying to resign Bonzi.

And what has Bonzi done so far for Houston?

The ship has sailed, dude. Get over it.
 
I am over it, but not just for Bonzi but other free agents if there not worried about money we should have went out and spent more
 
It isn't about other free agents. The point is - and always has been - Bonzi and his agent over-inflated his worth. In addition, the agent tried to squeeze Geoff Petrie. Those two factors combined made it almost a certainty Wells would not get the contract.

Now, however, things have changed. We have a chance to keep some raw talent and the Maloofs - as they've done in the past when they felt it was worth it - are willing to pay what it takes.

"We're a young team, and we've got to try and take as many players as we can under contract," Maloof said. "That's how I look at it. Whatever the full amount of players is, we want to have that. It doesn't matter what we're paying him. If the guy can help us on the court, that's all we (care) about."

I love how some people are so cavalier about spending the Maloof's money. Just consider yourself lucky you weren't a Clipper fan back in the day.
 
Last edited:
This sounds promising. Mostly because right now even being a rookie Williams would bring more to the team than Woods or Potapenko. Now you get tolking about down the road 1,2,3 years from now the sky is the limit for potential. the 2 previous mentioned bigs we have potential has gone and you have what you have with those 2.
 
Ok well if they are not worried about spending money, why the heck didn't we sign Bonzi. It seemed to me they were worried about going over the tax threshold a month and a half ago when we were trying to resign Bonzi.

Bonzi was looking for way more than what would be reasonable, ESPECIALLY with the tax. If they couls have gotten him for what we offered and went over the tax because of that, I doubt it would have been a big deal.

There's a big difference between being $500k over and, say, $3 million over.
 
There's a lot of good stuff to talk about in that article? Why are we rehashing the Bonzi thing for the gazillionth time?
-------------------------------------------------------
This will be a big weekend, because we know it's getting close to time to make some decisions," Musselman said. "I think all of our conversations have been (about) what's best for the team. I think that the final outcome will be what's best for the team. That's a lot better than being in a situation where it's only based on contracts."

This, to me, is really exciting. If I read between the lines, it's not too hard to see us keeping Amundson and Williams, even if it does mean eating some salaries.
 
With the Bonzi situation, don't overlook the TRUST factor. Bonzi may very well have burned his bridge here with his behaviour (or agents, whatever) in regards to the contract issue. You better believe there were aware of who they were dealing with.
 
This is a really encouraging article, and probably the prelude to Hart being cut. I think you'll also see either Amundson or Williams cut and the one who makes it sent to the d-league. Williamson or Pot will be traded or bought out by midseason and Amundson or Williams will be brought up to play the second half of the season.
 
If anything, you might see Potato being cut, IMHO. Jason still has some trade value. He can at least play the game. Potato can't and I sure haven't been impressed with anything Loren Woods did.
 
And Grant tonight, in the 4th quarter indicated that Petrie might, stressing the word "might", make some cuts as early as Monday (tomorrow). Sure seems evident Pot and Hart "might" be the first 2 which gets them down to 15. And with Williams and Amundson making likely the rookie-FA minimum of around $300k each, not much of a luxury tax hit since they would need to eat Pot and Harts salaries of about $5.2M total. Makes sense down here, particularly after watching the Jazz and Hornets games.

If Bibby's thumb keeps him out for a game or two, wasn't that a position they wanted to use Salmons in anyway? Chill out until 2pm monday, eh?
 
well looking at the current roster and saying "money is no object" is a lot like taking someone to McDonalds and saying "Anything you want."
 
Think it's gonna be Woods and Pot, judging from their no-shows in the past couple games. Leaving the lineup (note, this is NOT the rotation):

Miller/Taylor/Williams
Thomas/SAR/Amundson
Artest/Corliss/Garcia
Martin/Salmons/Douby
Bibby/Price/Hart
 
Prediction: Woods first to be cut, Hart traded or cut

I predict Woods and Hart will be cut... the kings will try hard to trade hart before the season starts for a second rounder.... woods will be the first to be cut... if the kings cut woods, only 400K counts against the cap... the kings would still be under the salary cap, even if they keep amundson and williams, which i hope they do....
 
Back
Top