The 2007 plan was killed to extend Kwame's contract?!

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Now_I_Know
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 658
Location: Los Angeles

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:49 am    Post subject: The 2007 plan was killed to extend Kwame's contract?!

What's this all about?...

The 2007 Plan Dead?
After making a stab at Ron Artest, the Lakers have appeared to be quiet on the trade front. A rebuffed inquiry to the New York Knicks on Channing Frye aside, LA has been said to be offering no more than Devean George, Slava Medvedenko and the Miami 2006 pick to any inquiring suitor.

The plan from the moment Shaquille O'Neal was traded to the Miami Heat was to attain cap room in 2007 to pursue a top free agent. Unfortunately for the Lakers, names like Yao Ming and Amare Stoudemire inked long term extensions with their existing teams. The hope of acquiring LeBron James may be nothing more than a fantasy.

Still, all of the team's moves over the last year or so have seemingly been geared towards maintaining their cap flexibility in 2007.

Or have they?

This summer, the Lakers traded Caron Butler and Chucky Atkins to the Washington Wizards for Kwame Brown. The deal was a sign and trade which had Brown's contract guaranteed for two seasons. The third season was originally $9.075 million in non-guaranteed money at the Lakers' discretion, thus fitting into the 2007 plan.

BUT

After a number of inquiries to sources within and around the NBA, the Lakers have already GUARANTEED Brown's third year.

Why would they do so? The answer can only be speculative, but whatever the reason may be the 2007 plan is now defunct.

Unless the Lakers are able to clear Kwame Brown's contract off their books before then, the Lakers will have nearly $45 million in guaranteed salaries heading into the summer of 2007 with just Kobe Bryant, Lamar Odom, Andrew Bynum and Brown on the roster. A reasonable projection is that the salary cap in 2007 will be near $53 million dollars, but with the complex rules of the collective bargaining agreement, the Lakers will have no more to offer than that summer's mid-level exception. In other words, the waiting will have been for nothing.

Perhaps the 2007 plan has been cast by the wayside for 2008 when players like LeBron James, Chris Bosh and Kevin Garnett may be unrestricted free agents (Garnett has an early termination option in 2008, not in 2007 as recently misreported by ESPN Insider).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bambam
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Jul 2003
Posts: 9013

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:50 am    Post subject:

The 2007 plan was always really the 2008 plan.
The best chance in 2007 was to LUCK Into a player forcing a sign a trade here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Zhengi
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Posts: 6445

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:51 am    Post subject:

We'll see what happens. I think the 2008 FA class is a lot better than the 2007 FA class.
_________________
I'm like a Hadouken, down-right Fierce!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:52 am    Post subject:

bambam wrote:
The 2007 plan was always really the 2008 plan.
The best chance in 2007 was to LUCK Into a player forcing a sign a trade here.


That still doesn't explain the purpose of guaranteeing that 3rd year so soon. Something else is up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pjiddy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 29016

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:56 am    Post subject:

can we get a confirmed source on this? i can't BELIEVE the Lakers would extend Kwame when he has prove absolutely nothing and there was no reason to re-up this early.


FIRE MITCH!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Zhengi
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Posts: 6445

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:59 am    Post subject:

pjiddy wrote:
can we get a confirmed source on this? i can't BELIEVE the Lakers would extend Kwame when he has prove absolutely nothing and there was no reason to re-up this early.


FIRE MITCH!


It's right here in this thread with emplay's article.

http://forums.lakersground.net/viewtopic.php?t=18010
_________________
I'm like a Hadouken, down-right Fierce!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:34 am    Post subject:

Signing Kwame to that extension doesn't really mean very much.

First, contrary to the views of many posters in this forum - Kwame still has value in this league as a young big with athleticism. There is no way the Lakers would just have let him walk without getting something in return. So when you think about it, making that third year guaranteed isn't really a big deal. Kwame will either be resigned or traded. He'll never just be released. Any team he gets traded to would sign him to a two year deal minimum and would not be seeking to just take on his contract so they could dump him and get cap relief. A team would take on a Slava as a salary dump, but not Kwame. So the Lakers don't lose anything by extending, but they give Kwame a little more confidence and security. Kwame with one or two years left on his contract doesn't really do a thing to his trade value since any potential suitors would not be looking at Kwame as a potential salary dump in the first place.

Second, if it looks as if Kwame is going to stick with the team, the Lakers put themselves in a better bargaining position when it comes to negotiating a new contract. They'd likely resign him in the spring or summer of 2007 with a year still left on his contract. Resigning a player who is already under contract without unrestricted free agency status looming is almost always cheaper than trying to resign him when he wants to go test the market. If the Lakers did not extend him before the end of this season, and they ultimately decided next summer, or early next season that they were going to keep him - it would likely be because Kwame was progressing well. Other teams would be certain to notice and would offer Kwame huge money in the free agent market. Now the Lakers have simply bought themselves more time to decide if Kwame is a good fit. Resigning Kwame in Spring/summer 2007 in the middle of his contract isn't likely to cost more than 9 million/year. Resigning him at that point as an unrestricted free agent is likely to cost about 12 million per.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerJam
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Posts: 18408
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:46 am    Post subject:

According to both 570 and 1540, if the Lakers waive Kwame Brown, then the deal is NOT guaranteed, so it really doesn't matter.

In any event, this topic has been discussed TO DEATH in the 2007 PLan Dead thread (stickied). This needs to move there. We have to many of the same threats regurgitated over and over and over and over again.

Do we really need yet another one to whine in?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
G1 Hydrogenic
Sixth Man
Sixth Man


Joined: 13 Feb 2006
Posts: 38

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:49 am    Post subject:

The 2007 plan was never realistic, and it was slammed shut once Yao and Amare signed their extensions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:53 am    Post subject:

G1 Hydrogenic wrote:
The 2007 plan was never realistic, and it was slammed shut once Yao and Amare signed their extensions.


Obviously, you missed the point of the 2007 plan.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11264

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:56 am    Post subject:

LakerJam wrote:
According to both 570 and 1540, if the Lakers waive Kwame Brown, then the deal is NOT guaranteed, so it really doesn't matter.

Not true. They picked up the compensation protection on 07-08.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
bounty
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 3946

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:57 am    Post subject:

LakerJam wrote:
According to both 570 and 1540, if the Lakers waive Kwame Brown, then the deal is NOT guaranteed, so it really doesn't matter.

In any event, this topic has been discussed TO DEATH in the 2007 PLan Dead thread (stickied). This needs to move there. We have to many of the same threats regurgitated over and over and over and over again.

Do we really need yet another one to whine in?

Heard that as well. Also I would think trading a player in the last makes it easier to aquire a player than just having the cash. No?
_________________
Lakers Tickets
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerJam
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Posts: 18408
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:03 am    Post subject:

G1 Hydrogenic wrote:
The 2007 plan was never realistic, and it was slammed shut once Yao and Amare signed their extensions.


No offense, but you're seriously off base here. The 2007 plan wasn't ever specifically about Yao or Amare - they were merely targets. It was and is about having the flexibility to give ourselves options.

The plan is about (a) being able to sign a true all-star or superstar caliber player outright (or 2 lesser impact players), or (b) have the salary cap space necessary to do a sign and trade to acquire that caliber of player. Choice (b) becomes far more realistic when said player (whomever he may be) threatens to walk to the Lakers for max money, unless his team does a S&T with the Lakers. In order for that threat to be real, the Lakers have to have that salary slot so that the other team knows it isn’t just a bluff - that the Lakers CAN pony up the money.

Do you seriously think there’s no player out there worth acquiring other than Yao Ming or Amare Stoudemire? If we can’t get them, then forget it? If you don’t believe that, then you should realize how silly your statement is.


Last edited by LakerJam on Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:07 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerJam
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Posts: 18408
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:06 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
LakerJam wrote:
According to both 570 and 1540, if the Lakers waive Kwame Brown, then the deal is NOT guaranteed, so it really doesn't matter.

Not true. They picked up the compensation protection on 07-08.


Should have thought to confirm with you, Larry. You are the man when it comes to this stuff.

So let me ask you, what impact does picking up compensation protection have?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11264

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:13 am    Post subject:

It means his contract is guaranteed for 07-08. Which means they can't waive him on or after 7/1/2007 and have that money come off their cap. It also means they can't trade him to another team so that they could immeidately waive him and remove all his salary from THEIR cap. They can still trade him as an ending contract, but that's not as desirable.

My personal speculation on this is that it was arranged when the contract was signed. Remember, a sign-and-trade is a three-way arrangement between the two teams and the player, and is in effect (though not in execution) a contract with the new team. The Lakers could have offered a non-guarantee on the last year, explaining that they wanted to have the flexibility should Yao or Stoudemire become available in 2007. Kwame's agent could have countered with "fine, but only if you agree that if Yao & Stoudemire sign extensions, you'll guarantee the last season."

Again, that's complete speculation on my part, but it's the only thing I can think of that plausibly explains a non-guaranteed season being picked up so soon -- and so coincidental to those two players being extended.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
LakerJam
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Posts: 18408
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:20 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
It means his contract is guaranteed for 07-08. Which means they can't waive him on or after 7/1/2007 and have that money come off their cap. It also means they can't trade him to another team so that they could immeidately waive him and remove all his salary from THEIR cap. They can still trade him as an ending contract, but that's not as desirable.

My personal speculation on this is that it was arranged when the contract was signed. Remember, a sign-and-trade is a three-way arrangement between the two teams and the player, and is in effect (though not in execution) a contract with the new team. The Lakers could have offered a non-guarantee on the last year, explaining that they wanted to have the flexibility should Yao or Stoudemire become available in 2007. Kwame's agent could have countered with "fine, but only if you agree that if Yao & Stoudemire sign extensions, you'll guarantee the last season."

Again, that's complete speculation on my part, but it's the only thing I can think of that plausibly explains a non-guaranteed season being picked up so soon -- and so coincidental to those two players being extended.


I agree with your speculation - thought the same thing, myself.

So let me ask you this: What happens if the Lakers waive Kwame before 7/1/07? Does his contract come off the books?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:22 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
It means his contract is guaranteed for 07-08. Which means they can't waive him on or after 7/1/2007 and have that money come off their cap. It also means they can't trade him to another team so that they could immeidately waive him and remove all his salary from THEIR cap. They can still trade him as an ending contract, but that's not as desirable.

My personal speculation on this is that it was arranged when the contract was signed. Remember, a sign-and-trade is a three-way arrangement between the two teams and the player, and is in effect (though not in execution) a contract with the new team. The Lakers could have offered a non-guarantee on the last year, explaining that they wanted to have the flexibility should Yao or Stoudemire become available in 2007. Kwame's agent could have countered with "fine, but only if you agree that if Yao & Stoudemire sign extensions, you'll guarantee the last season."

Again, that's complete speculation on my part, but it's the only thing I can think of that plausibly explains a non-guaranteed season being picked up so soon -- and so coincidental to those two players being extended.


LC- Could this signal that Kwame might be moved to another team, and that team is the one asking that the Lakers extend Kwames contract as part of the trade?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11264

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:22 am    Post subject:

No. That's the entire point of a guaranteed contract. (Or, looking at it the other way, that's the entire point of a non-guaranteed contract). Kwame is now on SOMEBODY'S books through 7/1/2008.

The only exception is a career-ending injury or illness.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11264

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:27 am    Post subject:

JerryMagicKobe wrote:
LC- Could this signal that Kwame might be moved to another team, and that team is the one asking that the Lakers extend Kwames contract as part of the trade?

First, let's get the terminology straight, since using the wrong terms can only lead to confusion. There's no extension -- an extension is when a new contract is signed that adds additional years onto an existing contract. What the Lakers did with Brown was add compensation protection to the last year of his existing contract, which previously was not guaranteed.

If teams had their way, EVERY contract would be completely non-guarateed. There's no benefit to teams to have guaranteed contracts -- it just means that if something happens and things don't work out, they have to keep paying the player to NOT play for them. There's no reason for a team to want to add additional compensation protection when they don't have to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Ank
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 1043
Location: New York, NY

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 12:19 pm    Post subject:

I have a feeling that Kwame's contract change due to an earlier agreement is exactly why we ARE going to make a trade at the deadline. 2007 plan is dead, so Mitch is making calls. I hope that's what all these rumors we're hearing are.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Reply with quote
raffi
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 9987

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 4:06 pm    Post subject:

LakerJam wrote:
G1 Hydrogenic wrote:
The 2007 plan was never realistic, and it was slammed shut once Yao and Amare signed their extensions.


No offense, but you're seriously off base here. The 2007 plan wasn't ever specifically about Yao or Amare - they were merely targets. It was and is about having the flexibility to give ourselves options.

The plan is about (a) being able to sign a true all-star or superstar caliber player outright (or 2 lesser impact players), or (b) have the salary cap space necessary to do a sign and trade to acquire that caliber of player. Choice (b) becomes far more realistic when said player (whomever he may be) threatens to walk to the Lakers for max money, unless his team does a S&T with the Lakers. In order for that threat to be real, the Lakers have to have that salary slot so that the other team knows it isn’t just a bluff - that the Lakers CAN pony up the money.

Do you seriously think there’s no player out there worth acquiring other than Yao Ming or Amare Stoudemire? If we can’t get them, then forget it? If you don’t believe that, then you should realize how silly your statement is.


Actually, he's right on. And the speculation surrounding why we would guarantee Kwame's 3rd year this early supports that position. And it appears the organization agrees.

Look, as much as it hurts to admit, the 07 plan was about 2 guys. Mitch basically told me as much when I spoke to him last year. When that fizzled, everyone defended the organization by pointing to cap flexibility - which no longer exists until 08. Now, the excuses are the 07 class wasn't very strong, Kwame's agent had leverage, etc.

I know many of you are much more optimistic than me, but as a realist (and no that doesn't make me any less of a fan), I knew we were taking a huge gamble. Who knows, maybe Amare was planning on coming here before his knee injury surfaced and he was then forced to make a prudent financial decision and sign the extension with the Suns. Regardless, it didn't work. So plan B is to wait until 08 or make a trade (next week, this summer, next year . . .).

I honestly don't have a problem with being patient - I just don't think they know what they're doing. So far it hasn't worked, but they've also gotten lucky (Bynum and Phil weren't part of the plan). It remains to be seen if they are able to course correct.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sage_10
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Dec 2005
Posts: 6668

PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 4:17 pm    Post subject:

I don't have a problem with taking on Kwame for another year but damn... for 9 mil? That is too much. Yes he does have potential and yes he does show flashes of what he can do from time to time but...damn that is just too much for an unproven big!

Jim McIllvaine syndrome....all over again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LTD
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Posts: 463

PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 6:46 am    Post subject:

If we did guarantee the last year of his contract because of the Yao and Amare signings, then there's some egg on the faces of quite a few people that kept saying that some of us didn't know what we were talking about with regards to the 2007 plan.

I can't remember how many times I heard someone say that we just didn't understand and how the 2007 plan wasn't about those two guys. This was even after the Jim Buss interview where he prety much said, "we can either be good right now, or have a chance to be great in two years." He said that he couldn't mention names, but that everyone knew who the free agents were in 2 years and that we were going to make a run for them.

Looks like some of us that didn't understand may have had a better understanding than was initially thought.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Drifts
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 28374

PostPosted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 8:25 am    Post subject:

Aussiesuede wrote:
Signing Kwame to that extension doesn't really mean very much.

First, contrary to the views of many posters in this forum - Kwame still has value in this league as a young big with athleticism. There is no way the Lakers would just have let him walk without getting something in return. So when you think about it, making that third year guaranteed isn't really a big deal. Kwame will either be resigned or traded. He'll never just be released. Any team he gets traded to would sign him to a two year deal minimum and would not be seeking to just take on his contract so they could dump him and get cap relief. A team would take on a Slava as a salary dump, but not Kwame. So the Lakers don't lose anything by extending, but they give Kwame a little more confidence and security. Kwame with one or two years left on his contract doesn't really do a thing to his trade value since any potential suitors would not be looking at Kwame as a potential salary dump in the first place.

Second, if it looks as if Kwame is going to stick with the team, the Lakers put themselves in a better bargaining position when it comes to negotiating a new contract. They'd likely resign him in the spring or summer of 2007 with a year still left on his contract. Resigning a player who is already under contract without unrestricted free agency status looming is almost always cheaper than trying to resign him when he wants to go test the market. If the Lakers did not extend him before the end of this season, and they ultimately decided next summer, or early next season that they were going to keep him - it would likely be because Kwame was progressing well. Other teams would be certain to notice and would offer Kwame huge money in the free agent market. Now the Lakers have simply bought themselves more time to decide if Kwame is a good fit. Resigning Kwame in Spring/summer 2007 in the middle of his contract isn't likely to cost more than 9 million/year. Resigning him at that point as an unrestricted free agent is likely to cost about 12 million per.


on the contrary...it means a lot.

It means that the Lakers over spent in signing Kwame (argh!). Kwame was ONLY asking MLE for 3 years. Lakers offered him the outrageous 8 mil for 2 years, so they can give him the $$$ in 2 yrs what he would've received in 3 with the MLE, keeping the 2007 cap dream alive.

Again, Kwame was only asking for MLE for 3 years...the Lakers should've just given him that instead of overpaying him.
_________________
"Now, if life is coffee, then the jobs, money & position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold & contain life, but the quality of life doesn't change. Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB