Perk has signed an extension with OKC

[droponov]

It's a $9 millions per year salary. It's a good price for OKC but not some sort of unprecedented bargain. That would be Rondo's contract, for example.

Rondo's low scoring totals always set him up to get a bargain of a deal for the C's.

Ben Gordon got slightly more money, how crazy is that!?

Such is life in the NBA. But it was at the right moment also. Before Rondo became more ball-dominant and the clear quarterback for the team. He'd cost a lot more money now, probably a max contract or close to it, even with the pedestrian scoring numbers.

---

Re: Perkins

Raise this season: $2,056,512
Total extension: $33,818,436

Total value: $35,874,948

Per year: $8,968,737

[winsomme]

http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2011/03/01/kendrick-perkins-inks-extension/

No details on the length and money yet but it's done!

Where they able to offer him more than the C's because of cap room?

Future cap room doesn't make a difference.

Current cap room can be used to give a player a raise up to the amount the team has under the cap (i.e., a team with $3 million can give one player a $3 million raise) under certain circumstances.  That new salary can then be used as the basis of the extension.

Here, OKC had around $2 million in cap room.  They could have increased Perk's salary this year to around $6.6 million, which means that the extension could start around $7 million per season, and be for up to four years.

So it could be the around 30 million Perkins talked about.

110.5% of 6.6 million = 7.3 million starting salary.

Then .7 Million dollar rasies for each year. So that's 31 million on the extension, plus the original raise of 2 million. So Perkins could have gotten 33 million from OKC.

Yep.  And if 4 years, $33-ish million was enough to keep Perk in green long-term, I feel a little bit sick.  I understand the need for cap room, but that's an extremely reasonable deal.

extremely reasonable. plus, we would now have Murphy, making Krstic not necessary and could be in line for Brewer who would make Green not necessary...

[BballTim]

http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2011/03/01/kendrick-perkins-inks-extension/

No details on the length and money yet but it's done!

Where they able to offer him more than the C's because of cap room?

Future cap room doesn't make a difference.

Current cap room can be used to give a player a raise up to the amount the team has under the cap (i.e., a team with $3 million can give one player a $3 million raise) under certain circumstances.  That new salary can then be used as the basis of the extension.

Here, OKC had around $2 million in cap room.  They could have increased Perk's salary this year to around $6.6 million, which means that the extension could start around $7 million per season, and be for up to four years.

So it could be the around 30 million Perkins talked about.

110.5% of 6.6 million = 7.3 million starting salary.

Then .7 Million dollar rasies for each year. So that's 31 million on the extension, plus the original raise of 2 million. So Perkins could have gotten 33 million from OKC.

Yep.  And if 4 years, $33-ish million was enough to keep Perk in green long-term, I feel a little bit sick.  I understand the need for cap room, but that's an extremely reasonable deal.

extremely reasonable. plus, we would now have Murphy, making Krstic not necessary and could be in line for Brewer who would make Green not necessary...

  First of all, Brewer wouldn't make Green unnecessary. Secondly, I doubt that Danny has a time machine that allows him to go back and rescind trades based on unknown future events.

[mgent]

http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2011/03/01/kendrick-perkins-inks-extension/

No details on the length and money yet but it's done!

Where they able to offer him more than the C's because of cap room?

Future cap room doesn't make a difference.

Current cap room can be used to give a player a raise up to the amount the team has under the cap (i.e., a team with $3 million can give one player a $3 million raise) under certain circumstances.  That new salary can then be used as the basis of the extension.

Here, OKC had around $2 million in cap room.  They could have increased Perk's salary this year to around $6.6 million, which means that the extension could start around $7 million per season, and be for up to four years.

So it could be the around 30 million Perkins talked about.

110.5% of 6.6 million = 7.3 million starting salary.

Then .7 Million dollar rasies for each year. So that's 31 million on the extension, plus the original raise of 2 million. So Perkins could have gotten 33 million from OKC.

Yep.  And if 4 years, $33-ish million was enough to keep Perk in green long-term, I feel a little bit sick.  I understand the need for cap room, but that's an extremely reasonable deal.

True, unless we're targeting another center  

[winsomme]

http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2011/03/01/kendrick-perkins-inks-extension/

No details on the length and money yet but it's done!

Where they able to offer him more than the C's because of cap room?

Future cap room doesn't make a difference.

Current cap room can be used to give a player a raise up to the amount the team has under the cap (i.e., a team with $3 million can give one player a $3 million raise) under certain circumstances.  That new salary can then be used as the basis of the extension.

Here, OKC had around $2 million in cap room.  They could have increased Perk's salary this year to around $6.6 million, which means that the extension could start around $7 million per season, and be for up to four years.

So it could be the around 30 million Perkins talked about.

110.5% of 6.6 million = 7.3 million starting salary.

Then .7 Million dollar rasies for each year. So that's 31 million on the extension, plus the original raise of 2 million. So Perkins could have gotten 33 million from OKC.

Yep.  And if 4 years, $33-ish million was enough to keep Perk in green long-term, I feel a little bit sick.  I understand the need for cap room, but that's an extremely reasonable deal.

extremely reasonable. plus, we would now have Murphy, making Krstic not necessary and could be in line for Brewer who would make Green not necessary...

  First of all, Brewer wouldn't make Green unnecessary. Secondly, I doubt that Danny has a time machine that allows him to go back and rescind trades based on unknown future events.

all moves (and non-moves) have risks...you didn't need a time machine to think Murphy would be bought out and come to the Cs, Bball. Sorry.

[misha]

I just saw it was 35 million over 4 years.

Yep. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AjdnONVJl.ZowwrnPExUsjy8vLYF?slug=aw-perkinsextension030111

[winsomme]

http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2011/03/01/kendrick-perkins-inks-extension/

No details on the length and money yet but it's done!

Where they able to offer him more than the C's because of cap room?

Future cap room doesn't make a difference.

Current cap room can be used to give a player a raise up to the amount the team has under the cap (i.e., a team with $3 million can give one player a $3 million raise) under certain circumstances.  That new salary can then be used as the basis of the extension.

Here, OKC had around $2 million in cap room.  They could have increased Perk's salary this year to around $6.6 million, which means that the extension could start around $7 million per season, and be for up to four years.

So it could be the around 30 million Perkins talked about.

110.5% of 6.6 million = 7.3 million starting salary.

Then .7 Million dollar rasies for each year. So that's 31 million on the extension, plus the original raise of 2 million. So Perkins could have gotten 33 million from OKC.

Yep.  And if 4 years, $33-ish million was enough to keep Perk in green long-term, I feel a little bit sick.  I understand the need for cap room, but that's an extremely reasonable deal.

True, unless we're targeting another center  

with what cap space? Perk worked for us because he was already ours...

[BballTim]

all moves (and non-moves) have risks...you didn't need a time machine to think Murphy would be bought out and come to the Cs, Bball. Sorry.

  Yeah, never mind the fact that there were discussions about GS keeping Murphy, or all the talk about Murphy having a tough time deciding between the Celts and the Heat. It was in the bag all along, and Danny was crazy not to shape his roster based on the chance that it might happen.

[mgent]

http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2011/03/01/kendrick-perkins-inks-extension/

No details on the length and money yet but it's done!

Where they able to offer him more than the C's because of cap room?

Future cap room doesn't make a difference.

Current cap room can be used to give a player a raise up to the amount the team has under the cap (i.e., a team with $3 million can give one player a $3 million raise) under certain circumstances.  That new salary can then be used as the basis of the extension.

Here, OKC had around $2 million in cap room.  They could have increased Perk's salary this year to around $6.6 million, which means that the extension could start around $7 million per season, and be for up to four years.

So it could be the around 30 million Perkins talked about.

110.5% of 6.6 million = 7.3 million starting salary.

Then .7 Million dollar rasies for each year. So that's 31 million on the extension, plus the original raise of 2 million. So Perkins could have gotten 33 million from OKC.

Yep.  And if 4 years, $33-ish million was enough to keep Perk in green long-term, I feel a little bit sick.  I understand the need for cap room, but that's an extremely reasonable deal.

True, unless we're targeting another center  

with what cap space? Perk worked for us because he was already ours...

With ours....

[droponov]

http://blog.newsok.com/thunderrumblings/2011/03/01/kendrick-perkins-inks-extension/

No details on the length and money yet but it's done!

Where they able to offer him more than the C's because of cap room?

Future cap room doesn't make a difference.

Current cap room can be used to give a player a raise up to the amount the team has under the cap (i.e., a team with $3 million can give one player a $3 million raise) under certain circumstances.  That new salary can then be used as the basis of the extension.

Here, OKC had around $2 million in cap room.  They could have increased Perk's salary this year to around $6.6 million, which means that the extension could start around $7 million per season, and be for up to four years.

So it could be the around 30 million Perkins talked about.

110.5% of 6.6 million = 7.3 million starting salary.

Then .7 Million dollar rasies for each year. So that's 31 million on the extension, plus the original raise of 2 million. So Perkins could have gotten 33 million from OKC.

Yep.  And if 4 years, $33-ish million was enough to keep Perk in green long-term, I feel a little bit sick.  I understand the need for cap room, but that's an extremely reasonable deal.

True, unless we're targeting another center  

with what cap space? Perk worked for us because he was already ours...

With ours....

There's none. Only the MLE, LLE, minimum salary.

[winsomme]

all moves (and non-moves) have risks...you didn't need a time machine to think Murphy would be bought out and come to the Cs, Bball. Sorry.

  Yeah, never mind the fact that there were discussions about GS keeping Murphy, or all the talk about Murphy having a tough time deciding between the Celts and the Heat. It was in the bag all along, and Danny was crazy not to shape his roster based on the chance that it might happen.

keeping Perk and Nate IS shaping your roster....that's the point you keep missing. adding players after the trade deadline IS shaping your roster...

[fairweatherfan]

Yep.  And if 4 years, $33-ish million was enough to keep Perk in green long-term, I feel a little bit sick.  I understand the need for cap room, but that's an extremely reasonable deal.

True, unless we're targeting another center  

with what cap space? Perk worked for us because he was already ours...

It's all speculation but I think the center we're targeting won't be available until the summer of 2012, when we'll likely have a good bit of cap space.

[BballTim]

all moves (and non-moves) have risks...you didn't need a time machine to think Murphy would be bought out and come to the Cs, Bball. Sorry.

  Yeah, never mind the fact that there were discussions about GS keeping Murphy, or all the talk about Murphy having a tough time deciding between the Celts and the Heat. It was in the bag all along, and Danny was crazy not to shape his roster based on the chance that it might happen.

keeping Perk and Nate IS shaping your roster....that's the point you keep missing. adding players after the trade deadline IS shaping your roster...

  I'm not missing anything. You're claiming that Danny should have made roster decisions based on having Murphy on the roster whether he knew that was going to happen or not, and to forgo any solid chance to get a good backup wing as well, in order to hold on to a center who's a health risk and will be a free agent at the end of the season.

  By the way, how many dozens of posts do you think that you've written about how we need a big backup wing who can hit the three, because Posey did that when we won? You've finally got your wish. Be happy.

[Brendan]

Perk's deal has a number value of 35 / 4 years, but its present value is even greater because:

1. Some of that money comes right away (meaning less in the lock out season.)
2. It effectively insures against anymore injuries this year. (i.e. he doesn't have to worry about getting injured and having that make it hard for him to get a new deal.)
3. Same as #2, but it insures against CBA issues pushing down what he can get - by eliminating cap room and lowering MLE the league might have shrunk the market's ability to pay a Perk type guy.

So I'd say signing this deal is probably worth something like signing a 40 million deal in the off-season.

Of course - its a better deal for OKC too. They use superfluous cap space in the present in exchange for a lower contract figure in the out years and they mitigate their risk of losing Perk in the off season.

[FrDrake]

I think people have (sort of) posted this and understand this, but just to reiterate, OKC just signed Perk to the exact same deal that the Cs could have offered him.

My understanding is that it wasn't an issue of the Cs having the capability of offering the years and dollar amount, but rather DA didn't WANT to offer this extension.

Now if Perk had hit the open market and gotten a huge offer from a team under the cap then that is another story, but the Cs could have offered Perk four years and $35 mil.  They decided not to.