Can Pierce restructure?

[winsomme]

In 2010, Paul has a player option for 21.5 million. Can he and the team work out an extension ahead of time where he would decline to option but have in place a deal that would pay him less for that season, but made up for by signing him more years down the road?

the idea would be to free up more cap space for that offseason.

This would go along with reports that DA might be looking at the #2 pick and maybe moving Rondo and taking in Rubio.

That would leave four contracts on the books for that offseason

KG
Paul
Perk
Rubio

if we could knock Pierce down to say 15 from 21.5 (made up for say with an extra year down the road), we could actually have some money to spend in 2010.

I think someone was thinking along these lines in one of the other threads.

[ManUp]

I'm sure he could, but I don't see why he would.

[hwangjini_1]

I'm sure he could, but I don't see why he would.

to help win another championship might be one reason. hey, after the first $20,000,000 it can get hard to know how to spend it all.

but aside from giving up millions of dollars (no debate necessary on whether those millions would really be missed) the player's union may have a say in it all.

i believe that was a problem when the red sox wanted to trade for alex rodriquez (may steriods puff his head up to the size of a small zepplin). he was willing to take less per year to get his money, but the player's union said no.

i am not sure if any NBA player has done this. though malone and payton did take cuts when then signed with LA a few years back, no?

[Roy Hobbs]

No, I don't think that could be done ahead of time.   The team can approach him with the idea next off-season, of course, but I don't believe they could do it a year ahead of time.

[xmuscularghandix]

i think he could if there was an extension involved.

[Roy Hobbs]

i think he could if there was an extension involved.

Based upon what?  I can't think of another similar example, and the CBA generally disfavors players negotiating their salaries downward.  Also, I don't think Pierce would have the right to decline his option this soon.

I think it's moot, though; what's the incentive to do this now, rather than waiting until next year?  I guess Pierce might want the extra security in case he blows out his knee or something, but I don't really see it making a lot of sense.

Also, of course, players generally just don't walk away from $21 million, no matter how much they want to win.

[xmuscularghandix]

i think he could if there was an extension involved.

Based upon what?  I can't think of another similar example, and the CBA generally disfavors players negotiating their salaries downward.  Also, I don't think Pierce would have the right to decline his option this soon.

I think it's moot, though; what's the incentive to do this now, rather than waiting until next year?  I guess Pierce might want the extra security in case he blows out his knee or something, but I don't really see it making a lot of sense.

Also, of course, players generally just don't walk away from $21 million, no matter how much they want to win.

i forgot that there was an option involved.

[guava_wrench]

In 2010, Paul has a player option for 21.5 million. Can he and the team work out an extension ahead of time where he would decline to option but have in place a deal that would pay him less for that season, but made up for by signing him more years down the road?

the idea would be to free up more cap space for that offseason.

This would go along with reports that DA might be looking at the #2 pick and maybe moving Rondo and taking in Rubio.

That would leave four contracts on the books for that offseason

KG
Paul
Perk
Rubio

if we could knock Pierce down to say 15 from 21.5 (made up for say with an extra year down the road), we could actually have some money to spend in 2010.

I think someone was thinking along these lines in one of the other threads.

Why would he decline the option ahead of time (if it were possible)? Why not wait until that year comes? There is no reason to be concerned with that right now.

Restructuring isn't an option. You can't give up money in the NBA.

[winsomme]

i think he could if there was an extension involved.

Based upon what?  I can't think of another similar example, and the CBA generally disfavors players negotiating their salaries downward.  Also, I don't think Pierce would have the right to decline his option this soon.

I think it's moot, though; what's the incentive to do this now, rather than waiting until next year?  I guess Pierce might want the extra security in case he blows out his knee or something, but I don't really see it making a lot of sense.

Also, of course, players generally just don't walk away from $21 million, no matter how much they want to win.

No, I'm not suggesting he would walk away from money. The Cs would make it up later in the contract...maybe with bigger raises or by adding on an extra year in an extension, etc...

so he would ultimately be getting the money or close to it and giving the Cs a chance to land someone from the 2010 FA class...

Again, this is also in light of potential Rondo rumors (which i know are total speculation and i'm not even in favor of) which could also be to free up money for that same FA period.

[paintitgreen]

I don't think it could be something to take less money overall or to free up enough cap space to sign a big free agent in 2010 (we won't have the money anyway). I think it'd be to restructure so the money's spread out more. I.e., say Pierce would be willing to take 3 more years at about $11 mil a year after this contract runs out in 2011. Instead, he opts out next summer, and takes a 4 year, $56 million extension, thereby not giving up any money, but letting the Celtics pay him $14 mil a year for 4 years instead of 21 then 11 for 3 years. That frees up more cap space and money in the short term while keeping Pierce well paid and locked up till he hangs them up (and giving him a little bonus to defer the money). Plus, he has the security of that money being guaranteed before the 2010-11 season instead of after. 

In that regard, it might be a reasonable possibility.