Terry Pluto's Talkin' about Dion Waiters, Andrew Bynum, the Browns, Tribe and more
Published: Saturday, July 21, 2012, 10:11 PM Updated: Sunday, July 22, 2012, 1:47 PM
By Terry Pluto, The Plain Dealer
ABOUT THE CAVALIERS:
"1. There are at least 20 million reasons, and there could be more than 40 million reasons why Dwight Howard and Andrew Bynum won't sign contract extensions to help complete a trade. That's right, 40 million, as in about $40 million. Or at least $20 million, as in one year's salary.
2. Howard and Bynum are under contract through the 2012-13 season. If they are traded and sign an extension now, it can be for no longer than THREE years.
3. That's why Howard's agent has said his client has no interest in signing an extension now. He'll wait for free agency. The new labor agreement changed the rules on players signing extensions before free agency. It made it wiser for players to wait to become free agents because they can sign longer, more lucrative deals.
4. Bynum is expected to follow the same path as Howard. Why sign a three-year deal in the $60 million range when he can wait a year, and sign for more than $100 million over five seasons, depending on his decision of where to play.
5. If Bynum is traded to the Cavs, and becomes a free agent in 2013, he can sign with them for FIVE YEARS.
6. If Bynum is traded to the Cavs, becomes a free agent and wants to sign with another team...it can be for FOUR YEARS.
7. This is why every proposed deal for Howard has been a mess. He won't commit to a contract now because he can get so much more later. Yes, Howard can be traded to the Lakers. He can even say he really wants to sign with the Lakers -- but not until he's a free agent. But a lot of things can change in a year. Cavs fans know all about verbal agreements/promises/hints or whatever from when Carlos Boozer bolted Cleveland.
8. The Cavs can trade for Bynum, wait a year and hope he signs with them for five years in 2013. But there are no promises, as he could go elsewhere even if it's only for four years.
9. Do the Cavs want Bynum? Of course. He's 24, a legitimate 7-foot center who averaged 18.7 points and 11.8 rebounds for the Lakers last season. There are issues with Bynum. He has a cranky knee. He seems to float in some games. He has missed 83 games over the past four seasons because of injuries. But, yes, they want him. So do most NBA teams.
10. This from ESPN: "The longest Howard could sign an extension, according to ESPN Insider's Larry Coon, would be two years if he signed with Orlando . . . or it can be three years if he signed after being traded. If he waits until his current deal expires, Howard would be eligible to sign a new five-year deal for as much as $116.9 million."
11. The same basic math applies to Bynum. So if the Cavs deal for Bynum, they have to view him as a one-year rental and hope to convince him to sign with them in summer 2013.
12. It makes no sense for the Cavs to give up much in the way of draft picks and young players. That's what Orlando would want as part of a three-team deal sending Howard to the Lakers. If Orlando and the Lakers want to assemble a blockbuster trade and the Cavs can take on some veterans and add some drafts, they are interested.
13. The Lakers have no interest in trading Bynum anywhere unless they can get Howard as part of the deal. The Lakers are willing to take a chance on Howard for the last year of his contract, figuring he'll want to stay in L.A. and chase titles with Kobe Bryant. And they could be right. But Bynum could end up anywhere, and he wants the freedom to choose. That's why it's very doubtful he will end up in Cleveland."
This would be the first actual explanation to why Dwight isn't committing to signing an extension when/if he's traded.
He's stuck in Orlando.
Keeping Howard in Orlando is not an option. Another reason why this whole thing is messed up. There is no way Howard can play for the Magic next season. They would have the fall back of the trade deadline, yes, but having him play even one more game there would not be good for anybody.
You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here.
Howard has said many times hat he will play for the nets next season,
Bynum has told freinds that he wants to go to the bobcats! (??????)
a place he enjoyed with his father as a youth.
I wish he would sign with the Bobcats. By next year they will have MKG, Kemba, Biyombo, Mullens, and Jeff Taylor plus their 2013 lotto pick. Then add Andrew Bynum to that and they will be looking pretty good!
That new CBA really screwed the Magic.
The Nets have the best chance to trade for him then but will that happen.
why trade for him? when they can get him next year with out giving up assets?
The Nets right now are way over the cap so no matter what they'll have to trade for Dwight if they want to acquire him. If they wait the season out they'll need to do a sign and trade to bring him in and they'll have to trade out matching contracts.
Bynum in Charlotte would be amazing; he'd have no threat of a franchise player raising up to challenge him, he'd be able to put his stamp on the organisation and possibly get his jersey retired (seems unlikely to happen in LA), and he'd have a group of solid role players to form a core with; MKG, Kemba, Henderson and Biyombo make a very good starting five with Bynum as the C in a couple of years.
Thanks for taking the time to break all of that down. I had not accounted for how the new CBA played out with contract lengths.
It seems there ends up being a weird dynamic. Basically really good players are screwed when it comes to free agency once their rookie deal expires because the team has all the leverage and it seems that 2nd rounders and undrafted players are capped out in earnings no matter how well they play. After that deal expires or nears, then teams are screwed because it's not likely you are going to see guys take less money on an extension even if they go where they want to go, but the team receiving the players often want that for assurance that the guy stays. It makes me wonder if we see more Dwight Howard like scenarios in the future or less trades of bigger named players in the future.
Well that's why Gerald Wallace opted out and then re-signed shortly afterward with the Nets, more years and money if he waits for the season to end to extend. The new CBA will cause a lot of stressed insomnia nights for GMs.
I think I have said this before but if not I will say it now. I have absolutely NO problem with Dwight not signing an extension with anyone. Its not the smartest business decision. However, thats not what got him and the Magic in this mess. Its simple....if you want to be a FA, DONT OPT IN! Gerald didnt pick up his option, DWill didnt pick up his, Lebron didnt pick up his, etc...etc...etc...If you want to get paid, then you go FA asap, that means not opt-ing in. He wouldve been a Net or Maverick or something besides a Magic right now had he not.
With teams wanting to keep hold of their star players and the league we assume wanting to stop all the top players going to the biggest 6 to 8 teams, it seems strange that a player under contract cannot extend on the same terms as if he was an FA if he was in his last one or two years of his current deal.
Imagine that Orlando could put that $116 million over 5 years on the table to Dwight and say basically you can sign this as part of any S and T we do for you. This way Dwight gets his best deal, Orlando would get more assets back as the receiving team has Dwight tied up for 5 further years and the team receiving D12 has a franchise player with 5 years on his deal.
It was ironic that Melo panicked that he could have lost money with the new CBA and took the deal on the table when he could have got a longer deal via FA.
I dont think it is as simple as pure contract money. Melo and apparently Dwight did not want to play for their teams they were drafted by. They wanted out, be it for bigger markets or whatever. Correct me if I am wrong, but couldnt Dwight opt out and still have Orlando do a S/T under a new 5 year $116 mil deal? I do see your point though.
I think things get out of hand, and then comes the miscomunication, then resentment and it becomes a dirty game. IMO, the Dwigh saga has been one of the most pointless P/R nightmares I can recall. It was completely unnecessary and avoidable. He really wasted a year of everyone's time, his, the team's, the fan's, and his destination team. Was the waste of time for $40 mil worth it? Not if you consider that he couldve had a new deal right now and be in a new uniform and not suiting up for and risking injury and loss of a lot more....for a team he doesnt want to play for.
I want to get this out there. I think that the NBA is completely messed up. How is it fair in any job that you get stuck with whoever choses you first gets you? All the top business people migrate towards New york, boston, chicago and washington. Nobody in cities like cleveland complain when they leave.
The NBA tries to make all of the teams even, which actually hurts the league because the league was at its most popular state when the celtics and lakers dominated, and then when Jordan dominated the league. If the government tried to implement rules like that on any other business we would all call it communist and complain that the government had too much power.
European soccer and baseball do fine with out a salary cap and luxery taxes. The NHL has so many average teams that any team in the playoffs can win the stanley cup, that makes the regualr season pointless to watch. If you could have the red wings playing the bruins or canadians every year(with star players on the teams) people would be more likely to watch hockey.
And then when a small market team does it the right way they get forced to trade or dump players that they got through drafting good(the okc thunder) because they cant pay the tax.
neg me all you want, but the business side of the nba is messed up