Batum not doing Blazers any favors, will sign first lucrative offer sheet

[KingsFanSince85]

According to the agent for Portland Trail Blazers forward, Nicolas Batum, they will not be holding off on deals to allow the Trail Blazers to sign a couple of free agents before the team tends to his client, who's a restricted free agent.

“The first good offer we get, we're going with that,” Bouna Ndiaye of Comsport Management told CSNNW.com. “We're not waiting for anything.”

http://www.csnnw.com/pages/landingb...any-favors-will-=1&blockID=708138&feedID=5212

10-11m is overpaying for Batum, but should the Kings consider it? Heck, they already are paying Salmons over 8m per season and he can't provide half the things Batum can. If they amnesty Salmons and offer Batum 10-11m it's only a difference of 2-3m against the cap. Yeah, I know the Maloofs are too cheap to allow Geoff Petrie to spend the extra money (they'd still have to pay Salmons) but one can dream, right?

If the Kings did offer Batum the money, it'd put the Blazers on a 72 hour clock to decide whether to match thus eating up most their available cap space. The fact that Batum's agent says they'll sign the first good offer at least gives the Kings a shot considering their available cap space compared to other teams that might be interested.

 

[Kings Faithful]

10-11m is overpaying for Batum, but should the Kings consider it? Heck, they already are paying Salmons over 8m per season and he can't provide half the things Batum can. If they amnesty Salmons and offer Batum 10-11m it's only a difference of 2-3m against the cap. Yeah, I know the Maloofs are too cheap to allow Geoff Petrie to spend the extra money (they'd still have to pay Salmons) but one can dream, right?

If the Kings did offer Batum the money, it'd put the Blazers on a 72 hour clock to decide whether to match thus eating up most their available cap space. The fact that Batum's agent says they'll sign the first good offer at least gives the Kings a shot considering their available cap space compared to other teams that might be interested.

Read this earlier and I'm interested. Its alot of money to spend but like you said we still have our amnesty available. Lets see what happens in the draft. If we get a big man, I say go for it...

 

[Capt. Factorial]

If they amnesty Salmons and offer Batum 10-11m it's only a difference of 2-3m against the cap. Yeah, I know the Maloofs are too cheap to allow Geoff Petrie to spend the extra money (they'd still have to pay Salmons) but one can dream, right?

I think a lot more likely they'd amnesty Garcia if they were to do this. It appears that for amnesties, team options are declined but partially-guaranteed seasons become fully guaranteed. Garcia is only owed $6.1M with a team option, while if Salmons is amnestied, his contract balloons to about $22.5M. That's $6M over what we'd have to pay to hold on to him (or waive him outright).

But the major problem is that Portland has LaMarcus Aldridge, Wesley Matthews, and nobody. Batum is basically their future 3, they've got a ton of cap space, and they'll want to hold on to Batum as they try to build. I don't think they let him go, and at that point you've amnestied a guy for nothing (like GS did with Charlie Bell trying to nab DeAndre Jordan). It's risky, it probably won't pay off, and for that reason I don't see our broke so-called owners even trying it.

 

[rainmaker]

I think a lot more likely they'd amnesty Garcia if they were to do this. It appears that for amnesties, team options are declined but partially-guaranteed seasons become fully guaranteed. Garcia is only owed $6.1M with a team option, while if Salmons is amnestied, his contract balloons to about $22.5M. That's $6M over what we'd have to pay to hold on to him (or waive him outright).

But the major problem is that Portland has LaMarcus Aldridge, Wesley Matthews, and nobody. Batum is basically their future 3, they've got a ton of cap space, and they'll want to hold on to Batum as they try to build. I don't think they let him go, and at that point you've amnestied a guy for nothing (like GS did with Charlie Bell trying to nab DeAndre Jordan). It's risky, it probably won't pay off, and for that reason I don't see our broke so-called owners even trying it.

I'd think they'd rather amnesty Salmons, as Cisco might be attractive as an expiring.

 

[JB_kings]

Amnesty is a useless tool for the Kings. They won't spend one real dime over what they already have in salary. So using amnesty on Salmons still means they have to pay him. He just doesn't count against the cap. That won't happen with the Maloofs. You want them to make an offer to Batum, figure out how to ship off Salmons and one other player with about 2 or 3 million in salary and take only draft picks in return. Just assume the Kings salary cap is right where they are right now and amnesty is not a tool in their box.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I'd think they'd rather amnesty Salmons, as Cisco might be attractive as an expiring.

I disagree. Here's my logic:

Broke loser owners' likelihood to spend nothing >>> broke loser owners' likelihood to burn $6.1M to spend extra money >>> broke loser owners' likelihood to burn $22.5M to spend extra money

As simple as that. I don't expect any more thought to come out of a Maloof brain than that. Even the relation $6.1M < $22.5M is probably pushing it.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

lol magoofs won't spend another penny. they are going to cash in on the revenue sharing. georgie is a genius

 

[ParniValjak]

This would be perfect for us....if our owners had the money to spend.

Since they don't, it is pointless for us to hope for it. They will not amnesty anyone. If the didn't amnesty K9 at the time, no way in hell they amnesty Salmons or Cisco. They just can't afford to pay that much money to a player that will not be on their roster and then potentially double it by paying someone else the same amount.

Just highly unlikely. More chance of us winning the NBA lottery this year.

The only possible way I could see us pull it off is a sign and trade and even then, I am questioning why would Portland do us a favor?! Batum only works if Thornton is traded. Even if he agrees to come off the bench, he will be eating up a lot of minutes and shots.

 

[bajaden]

10-11m is overpaying for Batum, but should the Kings consider it? Heck, they already are paying Salmons over 8m per season and he can't provide half the things Batum can. If they amnesty Salmons and offer Batum 10-11m it's only a difference of 2-3m against the cap. Yeah, I know the Maloofs are too cheap to allow Geoff Petrie to spend the extra money (they'd still have to pay Salmons) but one can dream, right?

If the Kings did offer Batum the money, it'd put the Blazers on a 72 hour clock to decide whether to match thus eating up most their available cap space. The fact that Batum's agent says they'll sign the first good offer at least gives the Kings a shot considering their available cap space compared to other teams that might be interested.

The Blazers are $35,488,290.00 under the cap. So 10 or 11 mil would hardly use up most of their available capspace.

 

[Mass]

With a good owner, overpaying for Batum wouldn't be a problem, and I'd do it. It's the only way we can attract this kind of player. We should amnesty Salmons, not Cisco, it makes no sense to amnesty a player on the final year of his contract. It's just wasting the amnesty rule.

Batum would be a dream, the perfect SF for this team. Come on Petrie, it's time to have a great offseason!

 

[The Hammer]

So we'll have to hypothetically have these discussions as if we had a real owner. So...

Here you go after Batum like a bat out of hell and yes you pay him $11 mil and not that's no overpaying for him. Then you amnesty Salmons (and I think you only have to pay the portion of his contract that is not made up by the difference another team gives him -- say he get's 5 mil on the open market).

You do this no matter who you draft. You let this move dictate who you draft. There's talent all over the place in this draft and there will be talent at every position at the spot we draft at. Sign Batum and, you fill your biggest need, with a guaranteed borderline all-start/roleplayer, who's fully developed but still young.

We already have our top two or three players. When you have a chance to fill one of your biggest needs, you do it. Then you draft the best defensive big in the draft at whatever spot you end up in.

Now, on the outside chance you get the number two slot, and MKG is available, you consider packaging that with a chip you already have to get best defensive, shot blocking big you can. #2 pick and Jimmer/Hayes/Donte for Joakim Noah? Or, you try to go for the homerun and you go #2 pick, JT, Jimmer and Thornton for Howard in a sign and trade.

But if we were willing to spend we'd just go get Dally back and not have to trade the pick.

Ahh if only we had owner's who would spend.

Our rotation could be:

IT
Evans
Thornton
Batum
Cuz
JT
Defensive Big (Dally)
TWill
stud rookie at whatever position we want

with a bench of:

Jimmer
Hayes
Mateen, etc.

That rotation has interior and perimeter defense, 3 pt shooting, crazy talented offensive players you can go to to win close playoff games, spark plug bench scorers, solid role players, and still a few projects that could pan out quite well.

With a good coach that team contends for a title in two-three years (and for a long time). I'm telling you, we're not that far away at all. Not. At. All.

 

[Section 101]

I disagree. Here's my logic:

Broke loser owners' likelihood to spend nothing >>> broke loser owners' likelihood to burn $6.1M to spend extra money >>> broke loser owners' likelihood to burn $22.5M to spend extra money

As simple as that. I don't expect any more thought to come out of a Maloof brain than that. Even the relation $6.1M < $22.5M is probably pushing it.

But they spent $60 million in free agency last year !

 

[Kingster]

Batum is the perfect fit, but with highly imperfect owners, this is just a pipe dream...

 

[Capt. Factorial]

You do this no matter who you draft. You let this move dictate who you draft.

The problem is that the draft happens before free agency. If we draft based on your assumption that we're going to 1) Be able to sign a particular restricted free agent (who we can't even talk to yet by rule) and 2) That our free agent's right-of-first-refusal team will let him go, well, we're probably going to be disappointed. We take the BPA in the draft.

Batum is probably less than a 1% shot if we want him. We can't let that 1% dictate draft strategy.

 

[The Hammer]

The problem is that the draft happens before free agency. If we draft based on your assumption that we're going to 1) Be able to sign a particular restricted free agent (who we can't even talk to yet by rule) and 2) That our free agent's right-of-first-refusal team will let him go, well, we're probably going to be disappointed. We take the BPA in the draft.

Batum is probably less than a 1% shot if we want him. We can't let that 1% dictate draft strategy.

Well, that shoots down my plan then. It would then all depend on who we draft, where we fall, etc.

We have free agency and the draft to get a defensive big, and a SF that can shoot 3s and defend the perimeter, and hopefully handle the ball a bit. It's all about the draft position and order now. Can't determine/guess much until we know that, and who's in front of us, etc.

But my point stands that we have relatively few, and focused needs at this point. In theory, they are very fillable if we're willing to spend.

 

[est.1999]

When is the draft lottery?

 

[sidney]

especially with the new CBA I just don't see how Batum is worth 10-11/year. He's solid but not spectacular. I remember shaking my head at all the similar Loul Deng hype before he signed his big deal. Not a bad player, but just not worth 20% of the cap. Let Portland handcuff themselves by signing a bad deal.

 

[bajaden]

The problem is that the draft happens before free agency. If we draft based on your assumption that we're going to 1) Be able to sign a particular restricted free agent (who we can't even talk to yet by rule) and 2) That our free agent's right-of-first-refusal team will let him go, well, we're probably going to be disappointed. We take the BPA in the draft.

Batum is probably less than a 1% shot if we want him. We can't let that 1% dictate draft strategy.

You are absolutely 100% right. To draft based on who you think you might aquire in freeagency is fools gold. You take the best player you can draft. Period!

 

[bajaden]

When is the draft lottery?

May 30th!

 

[bajaden]

especially with the new CBA I just don't see how Batum is worth 10-11/year. He's solid but not spectacular. I remember shaking my head at all the similar Loul Deng hype before he signed his big deal. Not a bad player, but just not worth 20% of the cap. Let Portland handcuff themselves by signing a bad deal.

Yeah, I agree. If Batum is worth 11 mil, then how much is Tyreke or Cuz worth when its their turn. My bet is that they'll think they're worth more than Batum. You sign Batum for that much and your setting a precedent, whether you want to or not.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Yeah, I agree. If Batum is worth 11 mil, then how much is Tyreke or Cuz worth when its their turn. My bet is that they'll think they're worth more than Batum. You sign Batum for that much and your setting a precedent, whether you want to or not.

From that point of view - our salary is about $44M for next year, with a cap hold of $7.5M for JT, and the 5th pick cap hold (for now) of $2.8M. That puts us at about $54.3M of cap holds if we renounce Donte's Bird rights. Conjecture seems to be the salary cap will be about $61M, if so, we'd have nearly $7M to offer Batum to start. A small trade here or there, or maybe getting JT signed at a starting salary under $7.5 and we might be able to push that to $8M without making any drastic moves and still keeping JT. But I just don't think that's enough to scare off Portland!

 

[rhythmless]

Yeah, I agree. If Batum is worth 11 mil, then how much is Tyreke or Cuz worth when its their turn. My bet is that they'll think they're worth more than Batum. You sign Batum for that much and your setting a precedent, whether you want to or not.

Cuz, the way he's been going, will get max or near max. 7 footers that have zero skill already get upwards of 10 with long contracts. IIRC, Nene gets 14 million, and the only thing he has over Cuz is better percentages. If Cousins can get consistent, he will get max regardless of Batum or anyone else.

Given what Tyreke has shown, signing Batum doesn't change the fact that he is a player entering his 4th year with no definable position, no shot outside of 5 feet and very little progress from his rookie year. He'll get interest, but don't expect 20 teams to be knocking down his door with offers. Teams want pieces that fit (ie Batum), not a piece that needs to have a team re-engineer their makeup for a guy who may or may not end up as an all star. You pay Batum 10 because he fits our team, because hes worth it TO US. He may not be worth it to other teams, but here, he is defnitely worth it. Cuban builds teams, regardless of individual salary. He's addressed "overpaying" for specific players by stating their skillsets allow other players to flourish.

For example, giving a lengthy shooter next to Tyreke may be worth 1.5 million to Tyreke's game. It will be worth 2 million extra for Cousins to get the spacing inside and a great kickout man. That means we are paying Batum 8 mil for Batum's sake, which is not overpaying.

The market dictates salaries, not individual team precedent. If 5 teams want to pay Batum 10 mil, then you pay Batum 10 mil. If 2 teams want to pay Tyreke 8 mil next offseason, you pay him 8 mil. Tell him to go to Cleveland, then throw in an extra million. There are agents who have played the landscape well and those that have gotten unlucky. Skill/potential does not correlate completely to salary within any team. Every offseason is different and your earning potential has a little to do with luck and bidding wars. A young 6'8" off ball small forward that can score, defend and shoot open shots will garner more interest than a young 6'5" guard who can only score inside, under the rim and needs the ball to do so, with no semblance of midrange or long range game. Not to say he's not more valuable, but it's a lot harder to fit Tyreke than Batum.

 

[SacTownKid]

Amnesty is a useless tool for the Kings. They won't spend one real dime over what they already have in salary. So using amnesty on Salmons still means they have to pay him. He just doesn't count against the cap. That won't happen with the Maloofs. You want them to make an offer to Batum, figure out how to ship off Salmons and one other player with about 2 or 3 million in salary and take only draft picks in return. Just assume the Kings salary cap is right where they are right now and amnesty is not a tool in their box.

Yeah, but you have to figure a team will bid on him and whatever that amount is the Kings won't have to pay. If Outlaw got 3 million a season you'd have to figure Salmons would get at least close to that. That means money saved for the Kings.

 

[bajaden]

From that point of view - our salary is about $44M for next year, with a cap hold of $7.5M for JT, and the 5th pick cap hold (for now) of $2.8M. That puts us at about $54.3M of cap holds if we renounce Donte's Bird rights. Conjecture seems to be the salary cap will be about $61M, if so, we'd have nearly $7M to offer Batum to start. A small trade here or there, or maybe getting JT signed at a starting salary under $7.5 and we might be able to push that to $8M without making any drastic moves and still keeping JT. But I just don't think that's enough to scare off Portland!

I still think its a possibility that they might use the amnesty clause, but I agree with you, that it would be Cisco and not Salmons, because of that last non-guaranteed year, that would become guaranteed if amnestied. I still haven't gotten around to reading the new CBA, but does the amnesty clause only affect non-guaranteed contracts, or does it also affect team options. If not, then the Kings would only be eating 6.1 mil with Cisco, and if another teams picks up part of the contract, it would be less.

Add that 6.1 mil to the 7 mil, and now you have some serious money to work with. It would be nice if the Kings were able to get done what they want before having to match any offers for JT. But thats not likely!

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I still haven't gotten around to reading the new CBA, but does the amnesty clause only affect non-guaranteed contracts, or does it also affect team options.

Larry Coon's FAQ doesn't address the issue, so I'm not sure. The CBA isn't apparently available publicly to look at directly (at least not yet).

 

[KingsFanSince85]

The Blazers are $35,488,290.00 under the cap. So 10 or 11 mil would hardly use up most of their available capspace.

The article stated that the Blazers expect to have between 15-20M in available cap space. If it's closer to 15, then signing Batum would use up most of it. If it's closer to 20, then you are correct..it wouldn't be most of it but rather about half of it.

 

[hrdboild]

Are we seriously going to pass on making Batum an offer because of Salmons, Garcia, Outlaw, and Hayes? This is how bad teams stay bad year after year. Patch up your gaping holes with inadequate stopgaps and price yourself out of any player who might represent a real solution to your problem. Salmons, Outlaw, and Garcia combined are going to be making 17 million dollars next season. That's ridiculous. A smart GM and a front office who understands that you sometimes have to spend money to make money would jettison the lot of them, and instead invest in a young player who is an excellent fit for our team and could lock down that SF position for the next 5 years if not longer.

That's before you even look at the 13 million we're giving to Hayes and Thornton. If all we do is add our draft picks and re-sign JT we're going to be nearly capped out and returning the same team that was one (meaningless) win away from the 3rd worst record in the league. That's salary cap mismanagement at it's worst. Petrie's moves last summer may have set us back another 2 or 3 years if the Maloofs won't use the Amnesty clause. And the coaching situation is more of the same. It's hard to use the excuse that lack of resources is handcuffing the front office when they continue to throw so much money down the toilet.

 

[rhythmless]

Are we seriously going to pass on making Batum an offer because of Salmons, Garcia, Outlaw, and Hayes? This is how bad teams stay bad year after year. Patch up your gaping holes with inadequate stopgaps and price yourself out of any player who might represent a real solution to your problem. Salmons, Outlaw, and Garcia combined are going to be making 17 million dollars next season. That's ridiculous. A smart GM and a front office who understands that you sometimes have to spend money to make money would jettison the lot of them, and instead invest in a young player who is an excellent fit for our team and could lock down that SF position for the next 5 years if not longer.

That's before you even look at the 13 million we're giving to Hayes and Thornton. If all we do is add our draft picks and re-sign JT we're going to be nearly capped out and returning the same team that was one (meaningless) win away from the 3rd worst record in the league. That's salary cap mismanagement at it's worst. Petrie's moves last summer may have set us back another 2 or 3 years if the Maloofs won't use the Amnesty clause. And the coaching situation is more of the same. It's hard to use the excuse that lack of resources is handcuffing the front office when they continue to throw so much money down the toilet.

Your pain, I feel it. I was very against the MT and Hayes signing. All Petrie knows is to overpay for middling talents and throw full MLE at anyone that's 6'6"-6'7". Oh sorry, forgot about Mikki Moore.

 

[bajaden]

The article stated that the Blazers expect to have between 15-20M in available cap space. If it's closer to 15, then signing Batum would use up most of it. If it's closer to 20, then you are correct..it wouldn't be most of it but rather about half of it.

I don't know where the article got its information, but I use three different sites against one another for accuracy, and all of them show the
Blazers having around 35 mil under the cap. Now the article may be anticipating that perhaps the Blazers won't relinquish some rights and therefore have capholds which would be held against the cap until resolved one way or another.

For instance, Batum is the only player on their team thats a restricted freeagent. But they also hold the rights to Thabeet, Felton, J.J. Hickson, Johnny Flynn, and Joel Pyzybilla. As long as they hold on to those rights, there's a cap hold in place for each player until they either resign with the Blazers, another team, or the Blazers relinquish the rights to that player.

For instance, in Thabeet's case, the cap hold is a pretty large amount. Far more than he's worth on the market. So they either sign him to a small contract on july 1st, or they probably relinquish his rights. Even then, there might be restrictions on the amount he has to be paid because he's a four year player. Don't know what the new CBA says.

 

[The Hammer]

From that point of view - our salary is about $44M for next year, with a cap hold of $7.5M for JT, and the 5th pick cap hold (for now) of $2.8M. That puts us at about $54.3M of cap holds if we renounce Donte's Bird rights. Conjecture seems to be the salary cap will be about $61M, if so, we'd have nearly $7M to offer Batum to start. A small trade here or there, or maybe getting JT signed at a starting salary under $7.5 and we might be able to push that to $8M without making any drastic moves and still keeping JT. But I just don't think that's enough to scare off Portland!

If it comes to that, and we want Batum, and think we can get him, you amnesty Salmons after you sign Batum. Then someone picks up Salmons for 5 mil, and we're kosher.