« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down

Author Topic: josh childress  (Read 13646 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: josh childress
« Reply #45 on: July 16, 2008, 11:43:53 PM »

Offline Robb

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1560
  • Tommy Points: 128
Using the MLE for 5 years on Childress leaves us without the use of the MLE for the remainder of his contract, right?  I thought I heard something about that a few seasons back, but I don't remember reading it in Hobbs' run down of the Cap this season.
Logged
We're the ones we've been waiting for.
Re: josh childress
« Reply #46 on: July 16, 2008, 11:46:10 PM »

Offline CoachBo

  • NCE
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6069
  • Tommy Points: 336
No.
Logged
Coined the CelticsBlog term, "Euromistake."
Re: josh childress
« Reply #47 on: July 17, 2008, 12:27:46 AM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • NCE
  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4205
  • Tommy Points: 777
Quote from: Robb on July 16, 2008, 11:43:53 PM
Using the MLE for 5 years on Childress leaves us without the use of the MLE for the remainder of his contract, right?  I thought I heard something about that a few seasons back, but I don't remember reading it in Hobbs' run down of the Cap this season.

Nope, as long as you are over the cap you get a fresh MLE each year. It's factored to be the exact "average salary," so the MLE allowance increases a bit each year.

This is one way teams can get way over the cap:
say you are at the cap limit with 4 yr. long contracts, and for four years in a row you use the full MLE for 5 yr contracts. In year 4, you are at the cap due to the original contracts that had you at the cap limit PLUS about 24 million from still having 4 MLE contracts on the books, putting you 24 mil over the cap.
Logged
Re: josh childress
« Reply #48 on: July 17, 2008, 12:43:51 AM »

Offline Robb

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1560
  • Tommy Points: 128
I didn't think it was the case, but I could have sworn that someone said that.  Glad to hear it's not.
Logged
We're the ones we've been waiting for.
Re: josh childress
« Reply #49 on: July 17, 2008, 03:01:57 AM »

Offline SamuelAdams

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 482
  • Tommy Points: 51
Will he wear PP's "colors?"   :P
Logged
Re: josh childress
« Reply #50 on: July 17, 2008, 07:58:27 AM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
Quote from: vjcsmoke on July 16, 2008, 10:51:49 PM
I'm interested at Childress but not for 5 years.  That's a cap killer.
He has potential to develop his game, or he might just stay the same, a rather unrefined offensive player who scores mainly on putbacks, offenseive rebound opportunities.
3 years of the MLE, yeah i'd be willing to risk that on Childress.  But so likely, will the Hawks.

This is the kind of thinking that caused us to lose Posey.  And Childress is only 25 years old.
Logged
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson
Re: josh childress
« Reply #51 on: July 17, 2008, 08:21:58 AM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52819
  • Tommy Points: 2568
Quote from: Bankshot on July 17, 2008, 07:58:27 AM
Quote from: vjcsmoke on July 16, 2008, 10:51:49 PM
I'm interested at Childress but not for 5 years.  That's a cap killer.
He has potential to develop his game, or he might just stay the same, a rather unrefined offensive player who scores mainly on putbacks, offenseive rebound opportunities.
3 years of the MLE, yeah i'd be willing to risk that on Childress.  But so likely, will the Hawks.

This is the kind of thinking that caused us to lose Posey.  And Childress is only 25 years old.
I don't think Childress is worth 5 years at the MLE either.
I did and do think Posey is worth 4 years at the MLE.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up
« previous next »