re: Pelicans to bring Mickey and quality offer to Oden meeting

quote:

---

Chances are just as good that Rivers is the next MJ as Oden playing an average of 15 minutes per in 50% of the games.

---

Rivers shot, what, 55% from the line at 6'3"?

Exactly. Oden has had three microfracture surgeries and two or three other knee procedures all before the age of 25. Even if people think Rivers has no future at all at this point in time he's surely a more valuable trade asset than whatever Oden is worth.

That's all well and good and I have no problem signing him no strings attached or maybe throwing in Smith who would be superfluous once you acquire Oden; but to give up Rivers for this guy is folly. He's a huge gamble. Huge.

All I know is Loomis, Demps, and Monty are paid a lot more than any slap dicjs in this thread to decide if its worth the gamble.

They have his medical records and shite...

Rivers fricking sucks. And will always suck.

quote:

---

Did you read the scenario? It is based on sporttrac and your #s on BSS.

---

I did. I was in a hurry earlier. Sorry about the brevity.

Let me explain more fully.

If start with a roster of

Gordon, Evans, Holiday, Anderson, Davis, Aminu, Smith, Rivers

You end up with what looks like $2.6m in cap room, but it's really about $0.65m because of the incomplete roster charge, as it occupies $490,180 of cap space for each roster spot needed to bring you to at least 12 (explained below). All of these signings and trades are done, have been announced, and the figures include no incentives at all.

This means that even if you could just rework the Stiemsma signing so it'd be later (let's assume this is ok), there's still no room to sign Oden to even a vet min deal using room (you can using the vet min exception, of course). A vet min deal can not be called a quality offer, can it? Maybe guaranteed for 2 years? But you don't get to $3m that way.

The reporting on some of the deals could be wrong, and I'm ok with that . . . these are gathered from numerous sites . . . that's on them if they are wrong.

The roster charge. The idea is that if you have cap room, you have to be able to field a roster using cap room alone. With roster sizes at 13, if you are at 13 or more players, there's nothing to think about . . . go spend.

If you have 12 players under contract, you can use all the available room to sign a player, and then you'll be at the min roster size. Great. No complication.

What if you have 11 players. If you spend it all on one player, you can't get to the min size. Thus, you have to set aside a rookie scale contract to sign someone (say, me) to meet the min roster size. So, for this season that figure is $490,180. So you can spend all of your `room', except for $490,180, on one guy, if you choose.

This logic applies to smaller rosters, chewing up a rookie contract value for each `missing' roster piece.

Any player causing a cap hold in another fashion `counts' as a roster member for this calculation, including first rounders that are not signed. unsigned second rounders don't count.

There may be other wrinkles, but that is what I meant. You can't get the room even if you can `reorder' the salary offers . . . I'm sure there is some allowance for that as long as the moves are not in conflict. See: Holiday trade.

Helps? Am I missing something?

No. He wasn't on the team prior to the new CBA. In fact, no one was. We can't ever use the provision from what I understand.

When does Smith's contract become guaranteed?

quote:

---

It became guaranteed in June.

---

Thanks. Spotrac still shows it as non-guaranteed.