Interesting article about Rondo's contract negociations (Leon's influence)

[Drucci]

Great piece in the Herald from Steve Bulpett, we learn a lot about the negotiations of Rondo's contract. And Leon clearly had a influence on him :

“Yeah, but I don’t know,” Rondo said at the suggestion. “I don’t know. I play better with pressure.”

Ainge and Duffy are not so sure.

The former agreed with the hypothetical scenario regarding Rondo’s value on the market.

“But maybe he doesn’t have as good a year this year if this was hanging over his head,” Ainge said. “Maybe we’re not in the position we’re in. I think it helped that the burden was taken off him. I know it was something that, as a young player, was on his mind a lot the year before. I actually think having the contract done has helped him reach his full potential. You see the progress in him.

“Plus I think he’s a kid who felt better about everybody and everything and how he was viewed and that he was a big part of our future. I think all those things really helped him take the next step.”

Duffy sees things the same way.

“Whenever you’re negotiating an extension, that following year is an unknown,” he said. “But I truly believe that he’s having the year he’s having because he has the security. I think it validated him. I don’t know that this would be happening if we were in a contract (year) situation. I know he’s pretty emotional, so he knows he’s in good shape.

“I know that he was very brave about this free agent period, but it’s come to my attention from being close to him that he’s relieved that this thing is out of the way. It’s a very worrisome situation when you’re playing. Your contract’s in limbo. The media continues to talk about it. But just knowing how he is and in light of what he’s been through, I think the fact that the Celtics [team stats] stepped up and validated him has been very important. I really think that’s a big factor in him having the year he’s had.”

Rondo also weighed heavily the risks involved in seeking an even greater reward than five years for $55 million.

“Yeah, I thought about it a lot,” he said. “There were a lot of things that went into it. It wasn’t guaranteed that I would have the season I did this year, and also a friend of mine got hurt and he didn’t get an opportunity to get a contract. I can’t really say his name, but I’m just saying he’s a friend of mine and he got hurt and he didn’t get a contract. He almost made it through an entire season playing extremely well, but at the end of day, he got like a two-year deal. So I was definitely thinking about that.”

As with his stance last October, Rondo wouldn’t move on speculation about the “friend.” But his point is well taken anyway. And Duffy knew what he was dealing with.

“He has a lot of bravado, but at the end of the day he’s the sole provider for his family,” the agent said. “And it’s meant a lot for him to know that his family’s squared away and he’s squared away.

“Look, when you wait, anything can happen. I mean, something could happen in the next game. And if you’re going into free agency, you never know.

“I think what’s happening now is something he knew he was going to do, something he was capable of doing. But again I think it’s helped that the Celtics stepped up and showed confidence in him. I think he’s rewarding that confidence now. There was never any question with his performance. He just continues to grow and his game continues to develop. And I don’t think you’ve seen the best of him.”

Source (and more to read)

It's obvious that the "friend he can't name" is Leon, right? Looks like Leon's injury and blown opportunity influenced Rondo and made him favor security over risk.

[More Banners]

This is great--thanks for posting it.

As we head into the offseason with a host of free agent role players on our roster like TA and Nate, and also the bigger guns in Ray and PP, and with Perk and BBD having one year left and likely looking for extensions this summer, we should remember that, in most cases, players really want the security of long term deals. 

The notion of signing (or re-signing) player X to only a 2-year deal to coincide w/KG's deal might sound nice to the C's, but if players can get an extra year (or three) from another team, they're likely to take it for the same reasons attributed to Rondo in the article.  In all the "resign X player for Y years at Z money per" threads, we'd be wiser to look at front loading contracts for more years rather than offering only short contracts.  Take Nate for example:

A backup PG is probably worth $3 mil/year or so, and we'll always need one.  Assuming we'd take nate in that role going forward, we could front load the deal to average out to $3 million without screwing up cap space later, though the upfront cost would be in luxury tax:

Year 1:  4.5 million (his current salary plus $500K)
Year 2:  4 mil
Year 3:  2.5
Year 4:  2.5
Year 5:  2.5 (team option?)
Total:   16 million, 5 years, avg. $3.2 million/year

Just something I thought of reading the article...as the expiration of KG's deal gets closer and closer, finding players willing to sign shorter and shorter deals gets harder.  If Wyc is willing/able to pay the lux tax for the next two years (while we expect to be contending), we can be in pretty good shape in 2012 without emptying the roster.

[bobdelt]

This is great--thanks for posting it.

As we head into the offseason with a host of free agent role players on our roster like TA and Nate, and also the bigger guns in Ray and PP, and with Perk and BBD having one year left and likely looking for extensions this summer, we should remember that, in most cases, players really want the security of long term deals. 

The notion of signing (or re-signing) player X to only a 2-year deal to coincide w/KG's deal might sound nice to the C's, but if players can get an extra year (or three) from another team, they're likely to take it for the same reasons attributed to Rondo in the article.  In all the "resign X player for Y years at Z money per" threads, we'd be wiser to look at front loading contracts for more years rather than offering only short contracts.  Take Nate for example:

A backup PG is probably worth $3 mil/year or so, and we'll always need one.  Assuming we'd take nate in that role going forward, we could front load the deal to average out to $3 million without screwing up cap space later, though the upfront cost would be in luxury tax:

Year 1:  4.5 million (his current salary plus $500K)
Year 2:  4 mil
Year 3:  2.5
Year 4:  2.5
Year 5:  2.5 (team option?)
Total:   16 million, 5 years, avg. $3.2 million/year

Just something I thought of reading the article...as the expiration of KG's deal gets closer and closer, finding players willing to sign shorter and shorter deals gets harder.  If Wyc is willing/able to pay the lux tax for the next two years (while we expect to be contending), we can be in pretty good shape in 2012 without emptying the roster.

I think salaries have to increase over the course of the contract. You're scenario is against the CBA.

Also, Nate's gonna get more than 5mil a season next year, I think.

[RJ87]

This is great--thanks for posting it.

As we head into the offseason with a host of free agent role players on our roster like TA and Nate, and also the bigger guns in Ray and PP, and with Perk and BBD having one year left and likely looking for extensions this summer, we should remember that, in most cases, players really want the security of long term deals. 

The notion of signing (or re-signing) player X to only a 2-year deal to coincide w/KG's deal might sound nice to the C's, but if players can get an extra year (or three) from another team, they're likely to take it for the same reasons attributed to Rondo in the article.  In all the "resign X player for Y years at Z money per" threads, we'd be wiser to look at front loading contracts for more years rather than offering only short contracts.  Take Nate for example:

A backup PG is probably worth $3 mil/year or so, and we'll always need one.  Assuming we'd take nate in that role going forward, we could front load the deal to average out to $3 million without screwing up cap space later, though the upfront cost would be in luxury tax:

Year 1:  4.5 million (his current salary plus $500K)
Year 2:  4 mil
Year 3:  2.5
Year 4:  2.5
Year 5:  2.5 (team option?)
Total:   16 million, 5 years, avg. $3.2 million/year

Just something I thought of reading the article...as the expiration of KG's deal gets closer and closer, finding players willing to sign shorter and shorter deals gets harder.  If Wyc is willing/able to pay the lux tax for the next two years (while we expect to be contending), we can be in pretty good shape in 2012 without emptying the roster.

I think salaries have to increase over the course of the contract. You're scenario is against the CBA.

Also, Nate's gonna get more than 5mil a season next year, I think.

Salaries can increase or decrease by as much as 8% for players without birdrights and 10.5% for players with birdrights.

[More Banners]

This is great--thanks for posting it.

As we head into the offseason with a host of free agent role players on our roster like TA and Nate, and also the bigger guns in Ray and PP, and with Perk and BBD having one year left and likely looking for extensions this summer, we should remember that, in most cases, players really want the security of long term deals. 

The notion of signing (or re-signing) player X to only a 2-year deal to coincide w/KG's deal might sound nice to the C's, but if players can get an extra year (or three) from another team, they're likely to take it for the same reasons attributed to Rondo in the article.  In all the "resign X player for Y years at Z money per" threads, we'd be wiser to look at front loading contracts for more years rather than offering only short contracts.  Take Nate for example:

A backup PG is probably worth $3 mil/year or so, and we'll always need one.  Assuming we'd take nate in that role going forward, we could front load the deal to average out to $3 million without screwing up cap space later, though the upfront cost would be in luxury tax:

Year 1:  4.5 million (his current salary plus $500K)
Year 2:  4 mil
Year 3:  2.5
Year 4:  2.5
Year 5:  2.5 (team option?)
Total:   16 million, 5 years, avg. $3.2 million/year

Just something I thought of reading the article...as the expiration of KG's deal gets closer and closer, finding players willing to sign shorter and shorter deals gets harder.  If Wyc is willing/able to pay the lux tax for the next two years (while we expect to be contending), we can be in pretty good shape in 2012 without emptying the roster.

I think salaries have to increase over the course of the contract. You're scenario is against the CBA.

Also, Nate's gonna get more than 5mil a season next year, I think.

Salaries can increase or decrease by as much as 8% for players without birdrights and 10.5% for players with birdrights.

I knew there was a limit on raises, but in decreasing $$, too?  Interesting...

Changes the details, but I think the idea still holds.

[More Banners]

This is great--thanks for posting it.

As we head into the offseason with a host of free agent role players on our roster like TA and Nate, and also the bigger guns in Ray and PP, and with Perk and BBD having one year left and likely looking for extensions this summer, we should remember that, in most cases, players really want the security of long term deals. 

The notion of signing (or re-signing) player X to only a 2-year deal to coincide w/KG's deal might sound nice to the C's, but if players can get an extra year (or three) from another team, they're likely to take it for the same reasons attributed to Rondo in the article.  In all the "resign X player for Y years at Z money per" threads, we'd be wiser to look at front loading contracts for more years rather than offering only short contracts.  Take Nate for example:

A backup PG is probably worth $3 mil/year or so, and we'll always need one.  Assuming we'd take nate in that role going forward, we could front load the deal to average out to $3 million without screwing up cap space later, though the upfront cost would be in luxury tax:

Year 1:  4.5 million (his current salary plus $500K)
Year 2:  4 mil
Year 3:  2.5
Year 4:  2.5
Year 5:  2.5 (team option?)
Total:   16 million, 5 years, avg. $3.2 million/year

Just something I thought of reading the article...as the expiration of KG's deal gets closer and closer, finding players willing to sign shorter and shorter deals gets harder.  If Wyc is willing/able to pay the lux tax for the next two years (while we expect to be contending), we can be in pretty good shape in 2012 without emptying the roster.

I think salaries have to increase over the course of the contract. You're scenario is against the CBA.

Also, Nate's gonna get more than 5mil a season next year, I think.

The first is not true, though decreasing values is rare, flat-money happens, though (our own BBD and TA have flat-money 2-year deals).

I'm not sure anyone would pay Nate 5 million...actually, I highly doubt it.  He's not a starter on a winning team, and with the last draft and current one, a bumper crop of PG's came into the league, while old timers like Kidd and Nash still play.  The only shot is him getting close to MLE money to be a 6th man like Jamaal Crawford, but that's a bit too much cash for a bench player that shouldn't be a starter anywhere...