Can Nash save cash?
by jburning on Feb 18, 2009 11:42 AM MST
Email
Print
Now that the Suns are starting to face perhaps a very harsh financial reality -- given that Kerr seems to have decided to keep Stoudemire around -- management must find alternative ways to get under the luxury tax threshold. As much as Kerr would love to keep his talent in tact, I think most fans fear that Robert Sarver's (somewhat understandble) desire to avoid taking a tax hit on an underperforming team will trump any basketball sense. It has been suggested on this site that Leandro Barbosa may be shipped away for draft picks, for quick savings this season and next. However, there may be another option on the table, and it's starting to gain traction around the rumor mill.
Steve Nash's contract includes a team option for the 2009-2010 season. Is it perhaps feasible that, in cahoots with Nash, the team declines his option then persues re-signing him at a salary low enough to sneak under the tax threshold? Phoenix Stan did a little research and found that this is indeed allowed under the NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement.
Does this seem like a feasible option? While Steve Nash has expressed his uncertainty about his future with the franchise, it seems the team may again be heading the right direction. If Alvin Gentry helps this team regain some of its swagger and confidence, would Nash be willing to pull a Larry Fitzgerald and take a hit for the team?
I think so. Nash has never struck me as being concerned about money. I'm sure he would love to secure a long-term contract that brings in more than the veteran's minimum (which most teams would likely try to offer him once his contract with the Suns is up), that will allow him to retire as a Phoenix Sun. Of course, this would probably require some assurances from Steve Kerr that ownership and management has the best interests of the franchise in mind.
Sarver has never struck me as a being "cheap," despite his reputation. This move will keep some hefty talent around, but allow for the Suns to avoid any costs more than their payroll, which I'm sure Sarver would be fine with. This also keeps the Suns competing through the near-future, and then can begin the full rebuild when Shaq's massive contract comes off the books in the summer of 2010.
29 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Just an add-on ...
I personally think the Suns will use Shaq’s contract as a major trade chip near next year’s trade deadline, rather than let it expire, but either way, it will give the Suns huge flexibility going forward if they can just miss the luxury tax next year.
Great work!
This is a fantastic idea and certainly worthy of consideration and conversation…
Blogging Suns Basketball
Maybe
I vaguely recall reading about him doing something very similar when he first came to the Suns. Something about delaying cash towards the end of his contract in exchange for stronger guarantees on his last year so the Suns could have room to sign Q. The Suns PR’ed it as his first assist for the team or something like that.
Of course, if that’s true, having already done something like that once, he (or his agent) might be less likely to agree to it again, especially if he senses Sarver and crew are anything less than 100% committed to winning a championship. I would imagine at that point in Nash’s career, given his age and limited number of years remaining, he’s going to feel (and understandably so) that he owes it to himself to take the best opportunity out there, be that basketball-wise, financially or (more likely) both.
I guess my point is, this is something that would be wonderful and very unselfish if he were to do it, but something he shouldn’t be criticized for if he chooses not to. After all, would YOU take a sizable pay cut just so another employee wouldn’t get transferred?
This is actually a huge decision many companies are facing right now. Would you take a pay cut so that a friend of yours doesn’t get laid off? I think you’d be surprised at how altruistic some people can be.
For a friend to not get laid off...
..yes. But for a friend to have to relocate (but still get paid)? Much less likely. Especially if I was worried the company might eventually lay me off too, and I’d then have to go look for another job, which is not that far off from the reality of what Nash is facing. Granted, there’s a whole other level of finance involved in this analogy, but I imagine a starving family in Africa might view the typical American middle class family the same way.
I agree with your argument.
This isn’t life or death or anything … just depends on how much passion Nash has for this fanbase and the team. I certainly would understand if he went elsewhere, no hard feelings whatsoever. It’s just an idea, and I think if any NBA player were willing to do such a thing, it would be Nash.
I voted “no” because I don’t think it’s Nash’s responsibility to do this, but I think he’s the type of guy who’d be willing to do it, if he believed in the team and where it was heading.
Tim Duncan
has taken much less then market value on this contracts in SA to help the team…
Nash has made a lot of money and his time in Phoenix has increased his “brand” which allows him to more then make up for a $7m pay cut in endorsements etc.
I tend to think that if he wants his friends to stay in Phx then he can step up and help make that happen.
Blogging Suns Basketball
Timmy D. is a great example. He’s a big part of why San Antonio continues to be able to compete (not even taking into consideration that he’s a fantastic player).
On the other side of the ball
Nash left Dallas to join us ’cause we gave him a bigger and longer contract. He and Dirk were the bestest of buddies and the Mavs were WAY better than the Suns the season before that.
AND
I remember there’s some kind of “Over 36 rule” in the CBA. If you sign say a 4yr deal at 35, more of your salaries are shifted to the first year (before you’re 36) and counts more against the cap. I don’t know the exact details but that adds another wrinkle to this thing.
could be
I am not Capologist by any means…
We do have an infrequent member of this community who is a law school student and genius as this stuff. Hopefully he will have time to weigh in.
Blogging Suns Basketball
by Seth Pollack on Feb 18, 2009 12:07 PM MST up reply actions
From the legendary "NBA Salary FAQ"
If Nash signs a contract with the Suns this offseason that spans 4 years or longer, then it’ll be considered as a “Over 36” contract, and his salary through the whole contract will be divided into roughly 3 equal chunks and that is the number that counts towards the cap.
For an example, say the Suns give him 5yr contract at 6M/yr, a total of 30 million. While Mr Nash will be paid 6M per year for 5 years, his contract would count 30M/3 = 10M against the cap for the first 3 years (then zero during yr 4 and 5).
The numbers will be adjusted if Nash is still playing by yr2 or yr3 (thus showing that he’s still capable of playing and not yet retiring), but the 1st year will be 10M for sure. Which is bad because our point is to get our cap number low next year.
Time Out
First of all, every player with huge contracts should take a step back and think that a slight pay cut given to everybody wouldnt affect them as much as it was one or two people. Is that a hard sacrifice to make? To keep your team together? Shed a few bucks off your contract (money that’s probably made up by your endorsments).
Secondly, why are talking abot dealing Amare ad LB to save money? If we need to save money and are going to deal away (for practically nothing at that) a player…let it be the one that hurts the team more than helps the team. I have two great examples: Barnes and Richardson. Now I know many of us were pleased with those additions, but we’re also facing a fincancial reality that we fans dont get to see so often because its not our signature on the checks. Barnes doesnt make shots, makes too many turnovers, and bad decisions. He should be one of the first to consider moving. And then JRich…oh boy. Dude can ball, no doubt about it. He is a great addition to the team. But if we need to save money, lets save face too by getting rid of a troublesome player. We dont need our kind, giving, and family-style organization being tarnished by constant eff-ups off the court. JRich has been here only a few short months and already a DUI and wreckless driving…with a child in the car!?! You want to keep a player like that on the team but get rid of Amare and LB!?! Have you no soul?
I don’t think anyone here really WANTS to give up Amare or LB. Those are just two the players in rumors to go, due to their high value. I agree, if we can ship off JRich instead, that’d be fantastic.
The reason Nash is in this article is because he has the option to have his contract terminated without a fuss, rather than trying to just re-negotiate his contract. I don’t even know if that’s allows under the NBA’s CBA.
Right
I am almost certain you can’t renegotiate a contract while this would be possible since Nash has the option for next year
Blogging Suns Basketball
by Seth Pollack on Feb 18, 2009 3:11 PM MST up reply actions
J-Rich
as appalling as his recent act was, i don’t think the guy is as bad as everyone says he is. In fact, i remember when he first came here, everybody claimed he was a really good character guy. If you ask Golden State or Charlotte fans, they would say the same thing. He just made a stupid decision. Not sure what he was thinking, but I doubt he intended to put his child at risk
I've always wondered what would happen if a player took this idea to the extreme
Say someone older coming off of a big contract like Dirk signs a vet minimum and just says go get LeBron now.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Friend Us On Facebook
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Follow us on Twitter
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
