Venominal: The Merits of Declining Landry's Option

[venom_7]

Shamsports - not necessarily an endorsement, but it makes sense

Landry is under contract for only $3 million next season, a veritable steal for a man of such great production. (It still makes no sense that the only offer sheet he could get was for 3 years and $9 million. We should have campaigned hard for more.) At the end of that, Landry will be an unrestricted free agent, but if they decline his team option this summer, he can be a restricted free agent will full Bird rights.

The situation regarding Landry's contract involves a lot of risk on the Kings part. Now at a glance, the smart thing to do would be to pick up his option at 3 mil and guarantee another season of Landry in a Kings uniform. The only problem is that at the end of that option year, Landry becomes and unrestricted free agent (we could give him the most money, but he isn't worth the max, and UFA is very dangerous for players of his quality because a good team will offer him the MLA and off he goes). If the Kings decide to decline the team option, they retain full bird rights and they are able to match what he is worth on the open market. This summer, that seems to be just as dangerous as the UFA next summer because if some team (like Miami) falls short on their desired target, they might just get gutsy enough to offer Landry a 5 year 45 million dollar contract. IMO, that likelihood is slim, but possible.

If the Kings do decline the option, they have a few things on their side: If a stupid team decides to throw something ridiculous at Landry, the Kings do have the capspace to match and it wouldn't mortgage their future. The Kings also have the CBA negotiations on their side, which in my eyes guarantees that no team will throw a big contract at Landry. They can judge Landry's market worth, hope somebody throws a real low-ball offer at him so they can match, or wait till everything sifts through and re-sign him for a 5 year 20-25 million dollar contract.

Either way, you aren't safe, but taking care of it sooner than later is better in my eyes.

Kings probably pick up the option though because:
a) they have a good chance of re-signing him if he likes it here and
b) the new CBA kicks in in 2011, which again means that a team won't throw a big contract at Landry.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

The situation regarding Landry's contract involves a lot of risk on the Kings part. Now at a glance, the smart thing to do would be to pick up his option at 3 mil and guarantee another season of Landry in a Kings uniform. The only problem is that at the end of that option year, Landry becomes and unrestricted free agent (we could give him the most money, but he isn't worth the max, and UFA is very dangerous for players of his quality because a good team will offer him the MLE and off he goes). If the Kings decide to decline the team option, they retain full bird rights and they are able to match what he is worth on the open market.

Just remember that unrestricted free agency doesn't mean we LOSE his Bird Rights - we still retain them. If we picked up his option we would still have the ability to offer him his max contract even if we were over the cap (for instance, if we snag a max free agent this offseason). What we lose is the ability to match a competing offer and retain him automatically.

So if we pick up the option, no team could offer him more than we could in the 2011 offseason - we simply couldn't prevent him leaving for another contract if he wanted to be elsewhere. I think it's a bit too early to speculate about whether Landry will like Sacramento in a year and a half.

All this could be royally screwed up by the new CBA (or lack of one ) in the summer of 2011, anyhow, because the rules might change. It's really hard to figure what to do when the future rules are in limbo.

 

[venom_7]

Just remember that unrestricted free agency doesn't mean we LOSE his Bird Rights - we still retain them. If we picked up his option we would still have the ability to offer him his max contract even if we were over the cap (for instance, if we snag a max free agent this offseason). What we lose is the ability to match a competing offer and retain him automatically.

So if we pick up the option, no team could offer him more than we could in the 2011 offseason - we simply couldn't prevent him leaving for another contract if he wanted to be elsewhere. I think it's a bit too early to speculate about whether Landry will like Sacramento in a year and a half.

All this could be royally screwed up by the new CBA (or lack of one ) in the summer of 2011, anyhow, because the rules might change. It's really hard to figure what to do when the future rules are in limbo.

It may be a bit too early to ask the question, but the question still remains. I, for one, think that the Kings will just pick up the option and deal with it after a season. Maybe we see more success and Landry decides that this is his best option.

 

[Bricklayer]

Be nice too to have more than 30 games to figure out if we want to keep him. And to give him more than 30 games of turmoil, squished into the dying days of a lottery season, to decided if he wants to stay/build up some loyalty.

The looming CBA fight/lockout is scary though for all of this. They talk hard cap for finances, but one of the things that does is mean you can't retain your own players anymore. No Bird Rights. No matching if it takes you over the hard cap. If all that is done away with, then we may have no claim left to Carl next year beyond sentiment.

 

[Oskor]

The looming CBA fight/lockout is scary though for all of this. They talk hard cap for finances, but one of the things that does is mean you can't retain your own players anymore. No Bird Rights. No matching if it takes you over the hard cap. If all that is done away with, then we may have no claim left to Carl next year beyond sentiment.

Didn't realize this. Is there a "CBA 101" somewhere? I'd love to see all the proposed changes and what they mean for us and the league.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Didn't realize this. Is there a "CBA 101" somewhere? I'd love to see all the proposed changes and what they mean for us and the league.

Here (Larry Coon) is the best CBA 101 there is. It may actually be more like CBA 201 - the graduate-level version of the course.

But it's for the current CBA, not any proposed changes. I don't think there's any current compendium of proposed changes to be found, because nothing much formal has happened. We do know that 1) the owners are going to push to drop player salaries, 2) they will likely push for a hard cap, possibly one that is phased-in, and 3) they may try to strongarm reductions in currently-signed contracts. And we know the Players' Union isn't going to like any of these, 3) least of all.

 

[Bricklayer]

Didn't realize this. Is there a "CBA 101" somewhere? I'd love to see all the proposed changes and what they mean for us and the league.

As far as I know all just gleaned from newspaper articles at this point. The owners' proposal was just draconian and unrealistic, and at the All Star break the players shot it down completely and demand a brand new start, so doubt its out there anywhere as a document.

 

[DoDiGaG0]

too much $$ going to be thrown around this off season / the changing CBA really force us to pick up the option.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

There is speculation from some Houston fans that part of the reason they were willing to part with Landry was that their GM really played hardball on the contract negotiations and there is a lot of bitterness built up. So not picking up an option might not be the best way to start.

I also think that unless the intent was to dump him altogether we need to see him with whatever we're building for next season.

 

[bajaden]

Hey Capt., at what point can you offer a player an extension. It would seem an appropiate way to lock him up for a while regardless of the CBA outcome. I know one of the things proposed by the owners is that max contracts be for 4 years and that the last two be unguaranteed. Good luck with that one. The biggest obstical seems to be the reduction in the players share of revenues. If the owners stay together on their plan, I just see anything but a lockout in the future.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Hey Capt., at what point can you offer a player an extension. It would seem an appropiate way to lock him up for a while regardless of the CBA outcome. I know one of the things proposed by the owners is that max contracts be for 4 years and that the last two be unguaranteed. Good luck with that one. The biggest obstical seems to be the reduction in the players share of revenues. If the owners stay together on their plan, I just see anything but a lockout in the future.

Larry Coon sez: "Contracts for fewer than four seasons may not be extended." Since Landry is on a 3-year deal, no dice.

 

[Section 101]

Landry was a 2nd round pick. If the Kings dont pick up the option he becomes an unrestricted free agent.

 

[bajaden]

Larry Coon sez: "Contracts for fewer than four seasons may not be extended." Since Landry is on a 3-year deal, no dice.

Damm! Oh well. Then I guess the only question is how the new CBA, or lack of one will affect any contracts in 2011. Or, as proposed, don't offer to pick up his option and resign him this coming offseason. Which is taking a risk of course.