Author Topic: Perk has signed an extension with OKC  (Read 15382 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Perk has signed an extension with OKC
« Reply #90 on: March 01, 2011, 03:05:07 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
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.

Well no, that's not true, actually.  We could have offered that much in the summer, but we couldn't do this deal as as extension.  The most the Celts could offer was $23.4 million.  Since the Thunder had cap space, they could offer more.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Perk has signed an extension with OKC
« Reply #91 on: March 01, 2011, 03:18:31 PM »

Offline FrDrake

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 412
  • Tommy Points: 43
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.

Well no, that's not true, actually.  We could have offered that much in the summer, but we couldn't do this deal as as extension.  The most the Celts could offer was $23.4 million.  Since the Thunder had cap space, they could offer more.

Thanks much for the clarification but I have to ask why this is the case.  I thought the CBA as currently constructed is meant to encourage free agents to remain with their current teams by allowing them to offer more years and more dollars than other capped teams. 

Why would the Cs be able to offer more money to Perk after the contract expires rather than before?

Re: Perk has signed an extension with OKC
« Reply #92 on: March 01, 2011, 03:22:24 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
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.

Well no, that's not true, actually.  We could have offered that much in the summer, but we couldn't do this deal as as extension.  The most the Celts could offer was $23.4 million.  Since the Thunder had cap space, they could offer more.

Thanks much for the clarification but I have to ask why this is the case.  I thought the CBA as currently constructed is meant to encourage free agents to remain with their current teams by allowing them to offer more years and more dollars than other capped teams. 

Why would the Cs be able to offer more money to Perk after the contract expires rather than before?

There are rules to signing current players under contract to extensions, versus signing free agents.  Under the current CBA, non-rookie deal guys can only be given a 10.5% raise over their existing salary on an extension.  In the summer, though, using "Bird rights", the team would have been able to give their own free agent a larger deal.

OKC was bound by the same extension rules as we are (i.e., no more than a 10.5% pay raise).  However, because they were under the cap, they were allowed to give Perk an immediate raise in salary (which we couldn't, since we were over the cap), and after that extend him.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Perk has signed an extension with OKC
« Reply #93 on: March 01, 2011, 03:24:52 PM »

Offline FrDrake

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 412
  • Tommy Points: 43
OK...that makes sense in a twisted sort of NBA way, which tends to happen when David Stern runs the League for way too long.   :P  Thanks Roy.

Re: Perk has signed an extension with OKC
« Reply #94 on: March 01, 2011, 03:30:33 PM »

Offline snively

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5866
  • Tommy Points: 454
That would have been too much in tandem with Pierce and Rondo in 2012 and 2013.  We need to use our cap space to add a star and then hope to add Perk-level roleplayers at bargains (like Miami did with Miller and Haslem).
2016 CelticsBlog Draft: Chicago Bulls

Head Coach: Fred Hoiberg

Starters: Rubio, Danny Green, Durant, Markieff Morris, Capela
Bench: Sessions, Shumpert, G. Green, T. Booker, Frye
Deep Bench: CJ Watson, H. Thompson, P. Zipser, Papagiannis, Mejri

Re: Perk has signed an extension with OKC
« Reply #95 on: March 01, 2011, 05:07:00 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Perk's mouth is saying the right things, but he doesn't sound happy, especially for a guy who just guaranteed himself another $35 million.

http://www.nba.com/thunder/video/2011/03/01/perkmov-1576174/index.html


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Perk has signed an extension with OKC
« Reply #96 on: March 01, 2011, 05:18:04 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Perk's mouth is saying the right things, but he doesn't sound happy, especially for a guy who just guaranteed himself another $35 million.

http://www.nba.com/thunder/video/2011/03/01/perkmov-1576174/index.html

Come on, it's Perk...if he sounded happy I'd think he was on drugs. 

His body language was a little "down" though.  It's probably been a roller coaster of a week for him, he seems wiped out.

Re: Perk has signed an extension with OKC
« Reply #97 on: March 01, 2011, 05:52:01 PM »

Offline winsomme

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6058
  • Tommy Points: 255
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.


not at the cost of trading our starting center...how many posts did I suggest that in?

Thornton being released must make Danny really be sweating this trade....Is this the year of the released/waived player or what...