Pelicans & Asik are talking new deal (deal is done-- 5/60)

So wait how is it only guaranteed $45m? Is it a 4 year deal with a team option or something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RekesNotWeak

Damn! A couple seasons back, I would of been all good with this move. BUT the way he's looked in a Pelicans uniform thus far makes me worry a bit. I was hoping for something like 4 years at 40 million, but guess that was out of the question. I just wish we could of waited to see what some of the other big men got paid first. But whose to say that may have made it worse, lol. At 12 per, I wish we would of at least seen what Monroe would of wanted. Don't think he and AD play all that great together. Would of loved to see what a legitimate low post scorer would looked like next to AD. But oh well!

---

So your worried about an extra 1M a year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

So wait how is it only guaranteed $45m? Is it a 4 year deal with a team option or something?

---

Basically 11 per year. 4/44 with 5th year to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Perth_Hornet

MM gives it a C- on Twitter

---

gotta give him respect as he's been the sole defender of Asik on this forum. I'm just gonna go with the overly optimistic route as long as the pells perform like a top 6 team in the west.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AUSSIE_PELICAN

Basically 11 per year. 4/44 with 5th year to.

---

So is the 5th year a team option? Is the 5th year $16m and all the guaranteed years $11m?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Oh ok. So basically neither of us has any idea how it will play out until the new CBA is signed.

Remember the NBA asked the Players Association about smoothing out this spike and they said no. I see absolutely zero guarantee they will smooth out the next.

---

The smooth out is not what I'm referring to, that was something the NBA wanted so that they could reduce the risk of owners reenacting 2005-2008. That was when the cap rose and then teams spent way too much money, so that when the cap began to level out the spending exceeded the cap growth and eceryone had crazy albatross contracts (this caused the amnesty clause in the 2011 Cba).

What I am referring to is that the league is required to pay something like 53 percent of the total revenue to players. If they fail to do so in a given season the difference is added to the salary cap of the following year. last year the NBA owed the players 50 mill or so. After next year the cap will jump so much the NBA anticipates they will miss this mark by close to 450 MILL. That means the following year (2017) when the cap raises only about 5 mill in actual money, the NBA will have to add 15 mill to inflate the 2017 cap. That sounds great for players at first, but the following years the cap is projected to go down by several million once the spending catches up.

The cap going down at any time is good for the owners bad for the players. This is why the players will likely push to have the unpaid funds allocated out over several years to allow the cap to grow consistently. And the league will likely want this so that it avoids the mid 2000's again like a said earlier.

I am not trying to correct you, and I don't know this with any certainty, but financially this is one of the main reasons both the league and the union want to return to arbitration in 2017 even though they can opt not to. And besides they are 100% going to return to arbitration, and anytime there's arbitration the cap the following year or two is going to be different than projected because they always review the way the cap Is calculated in an arbitration period. Money is the main reason for any arbitration

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

So is the 5th year a team option? Is the 5th year $16m and all the guaranteed years $11m?

---

No. Odds are its 7.5% raises each year. Meaning it starts at 10m this year and increases from there. Last year is just under 14m and fully un guaranteed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmariaou

The smooth out is not what I'm referring to, that was something the NBA wanted so that they could reduce the risk of owners reenacting 2005-2008. That was when the cap rose and then teams spent way too much money, so that when the cap began to level out the spending exceeded the cap growth and eceryone had crazy albatross contracts (this caused the amnesty clause in the 2011 Cba).

What I am referring to is that the league is required to pay something like 53 percent of the total revenue to players. If they fail to do so in a given season the difference is added to the salary cap of the following year. last year the NBA owed the players 50 mill or so. After next year the cap will jump so much the NBA anticipates they will miss this mark by close to 450 MILL. That means the following year (2017) when the cap raises only about 5 mill in actual money, the NBA will have to add 15 mill to inflate the 2017 cap. That sounds great for players at first, but the following years the cap is projected to go down by several million once the spending catches up.

The cap going down at any time is good for the owners bad for the players. This is why the players will likely push to have the unpaid funds allocated out over several years to allow the cap to grow consistently. And the league will likely want this so that it avoids the mid 2000's again like a said earlier.

I am not trying to correct you, and I don't know this with any certainty, but financially this is one of the main reasons both the league and the union want to return to arbitration in 2017 even though they can opt not to. And besides they are 100% going to return to arbitration, and anytime there's arbitration the cap the following year or two is going to be different than projected because they always review the way the cap Is calculated in an arbitration period. Money is the main reason for any arbitration

---

No worries thanks for going into more deals explaining what you were saying. As it stands I suppose we have to wait and see what happens at the next arbitration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

No. Odds are its 7.5% raises each year. Meaning it starts at 10m this year and increases from there. Last year is just under 14m and fully un guaranteed.

---

Ok got ya. Is the last year a team option though? What is the 5th year to make it not guaranteed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Oh ok. So basically neither of us has any idea how it will play out until the new CBA is signed.

Remember the NBA asked the Players Association about smoothing out this spike and they said no. I see absolutely zero guarantee they will smooth out the next.

---

Readhttp://http://heathoops.com/2015/04/...ance-to-teams/

This will explain much better than I just did. The very bottom he gives a prediction of the 2017 cap that seams a little small but he may have had more accurate numbers than what I found.

Talked to Pelicans source who said a big part of their demands was that 5th year unguaranteed. Think they could use it as a big trade chip that summer or maybe even the year before.

Something to consider.

I still don't love it. Not the worst deal ever, and yes I get all the cap percentage stuff (I bring it up all the time). But I still think it is too many years. One year less and I am fine.

C- isn't the end of the world, especially when the AD deal is an A+

BTW - expect Cunningham back and maybe a cheap wing or two. Don't hold your breath for a bigger signing than that moving forward. As I said before - Running it back

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

Ok got ya. Is the last year a team option though? What is the 5th year to make it not guaranteed?

---

Sorry. Yes I could have explained that. The 5th year appears to be a team option.

As far as what makes it not guaranteed. . . They negotiated the terms. Said hey we will give you 44m/4yrs and have a team option to pick up your contract for a 5th year.

I know it looks like 11m/yr but in actuality (went back and checked the numbers) it's more like this:

@MasonGinsberg: New stab at Asik deal using 5/58:

2015-16: $10,000,000
2016-17: $10,750,000
2017-18: $11,500,000
2018-19: $12,250,000
2019-20: $13,000,000

Keep in mind we don't have exact, full details and what's why some of our numbers might be slightly off. But the basic idea is that At least the final year is fully un guaranteed.

Reading MM on twitter I think I agree with him here. I think we overpaid. I really don't like the price and what it will mean for next year. Nor the 4 years.

I was happy we were taking the lead to resign him but that was when I thought we would slightly lowball him and maybe get him at a discount rate. 10mil for 3 years or something. Maybe with escalating salary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmariaou

Readhttp://http://heathoops.com/2015/04/...ance-to-teams/

This will explain much better than I just did. The very bottom he gives a prediction of the 2017 cap that seams a little small but he may have had more accurate numbers than what I found.

---

I always like this kind of reading. Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Talked to Pelicans source who said a big part of their demands was that 5th year unguaranteed. Think they could use it as a big trade chip that summer or maybe even the year before.

Something to consider.

I still don't love it. Not the worst deal ever, and yes I get all the cap percentage stuff (I bring it up all the time). But I still think it is too many years. One year less and I am fine.

C- isn't the end of the world, especially when the AD deal is an A+

BTW - expect Cunningham back and maybe a cheap wing or two. Don't hold your breath for a bigger signing than that moving forward. As I said before - Running it back

---

What happens with Cole?
Do we offer a larger contract or does the QO remain?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AUSSIE_PELICAN

What happens with Cole?
Do we offer a larger contract or does the QO remain?

---

As of now, the expectation is for him to sign the QO.

Jrue, Reke, QPon, AD, Ajinca, and Asik would be under contract for 2016. Can make a major move at deadline or jump into FA next summer. Would just need to shed 5 mil or so to make a max offer to a veteran. Like I said in my Durant piece, Tyreke is the obvious candidate and you could actually get something for him too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Sorry. Yes I could have explained that. The 5th year appears to be a team option.

As far as what makes it not guaranteed. . . They negotiated the terms. Said hey we will give you 44m/4yrs and have a team option to pick up your contract for a 5th year.

I know it looks like 11m/yr but in actuality (went back and checked the numbers) it's more like this:

@MasonGinsberg: New stab at Asik deal using 5/58:

2015-16: $10,000,000
2016-17: $10,750,000
2017-18: $11,500,000
2018-19: $12,250,000
2019-20: $13,000,000

Keep in mind we don't have exact, full details and what's why some of our numbers might be slightly off. But the basic idea is that At least the final year is fully un guaranteed.

---

Alright awesome thanks! That is about as good as it can be explained haha. I think that's actually a very good contract and very trade able even during next season if something pops up out there and don't like what they have or as part of a bigger deal sometime in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Sorry. Yes I could have explained that. The 5th year appears to be a team option.

As far as what makes it not guaranteed. . . They negotiated the terms. Said hey we will give you 44m/4yrs and have a team option to pick up your contract for a 5th year.

I know it looks like 11m/yr but in actuality (went back and checked the numbers) it's more like this:

@MasonGinsberg: New stab at Asik deal using 5/58:

2015-16: $10,000,000
2016-17: $10,750,000
2017-18: $11,500,000
2018-19: $12,250,000
2019-20: $13,000,000

Keep in mind we don't have exact, full details and what's why some of our numbers might be slightly off. But the basic idea is that At least the final year is fully un guaranteed.

---

That honestly would be more palatable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Talked to Pelicans source who said a big part of their demands was that 5th year unguaranteed. Think they could use it as a big trade chip that summer or maybe even the year before.

Something to consider.

I still don't love it. Not the worst deal ever, and yes I get all the cap percentage stuff (I bring it up all the time). But I still think it is too many years. One year less and I am fine.

C- isn't the end of the world, especially when the AD deal is an A+

BTW - expect Cunningham back and maybe a cheap wing or two. Don't hold your breath for a bigger signing than that moving forward. As I said before - Running it back

---

Rotoworld had the Pelicans interested in Richard Jefferson, that kind of wing?


The Mavericks and Pelicans are interested in unrestricted free agent Richard Jefferson.
The Mavs reportedly want to keep Jefferson and it would likely be for the minimum, which would help their cap situation.
Source: Chris Mannix on Twitter Jul 1 -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redrum

Rotoworld had the Pelicans interested in Richard Jefferson, that kind of wing?

---

Yes. Cheap, 1 yr type guys who provide depth.

Top 10 from last years rotation should all be back. Not much playing time available when healthy for anyone else.

firstly I was terrified
secondly I heard about NG 5th year
thirdly I liked increasing amount (in addition to increasing cap)

everybody are overpaid. our MLE and BA candidates (MM's piece) are getting 6-8 mln (Wright is an exception). So Asik is also. if he fits in the style of Gentry and stay healthy it might not be a bad deal


I am curious who will be next - Cole or Dante. Cole is RFA, so probably Dell will wait. So I agree with MM - next one is Dante.
I like the Jefferson rumour. 1 year BAE. Than shed the MLE for Dante and f.e. Anderson and Barbosa and I am fine.

With such a speed there will be only minimum players available by July 9th...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Talked to Pelicans source who said a big part of their demands was that 5th year unguaranteed. Think they could use it as a big trade chip that summer or maybe even the year before.

Something to consider.

I still don't love it. Not the worst deal ever, and yes I get all the cap percentage stuff (I bring it up all the time). But I still think it is too many years. One year less and I am fine.

C- isn't the end of the world, especially when the AD deal is an A+

BTW - expect Cunningham back and maybe a cheap wing or two. Don't hold your breath for a bigger signing than that moving forward. As I said before - Running it back

---

So are you saying DC for the BAE and a wing or two with the MLE?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RUFshreve

So are you saying DC for the BAE and a wing or two with the MLE?

---

I think DC gets part of the MLE. A wing or two with the other part or the BAE and/or minimum contracts

I love Omer a lot , he did a good job for us , I want to see him in our roster , but at the same time , I need to be fair . This is a horrible deal if he doesn't develop his finishes around the rim which I don't think it will be the case . 5th year is a TO which won't be opt in that's for sure , even that 4th year is a mistake . I'm not concerned about the money but the lenght . We're gonna have a second andris biedrins case in Nola .

It's very risky to give eastern european players huge long contracts . After getting their big paychecks , they don't practice/work/hustle and play hustle . They get injured a lot . We have plenty of examples . Only a few maintainted their playing level .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I mean this. Freaking this. I honestly can't believe the Q.Q people are doing over Asik getting 11m/yr.

Only fools thought it would be a 3 yr deal. It was always gonna be 4 and honestly 1m/yr over 10m is not a big deal at all. Look at the other C deals signed today.

---

Amen to that

Centers are way overpaid in the NBA .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by moon54

It's very risky to give eastern european players huge long contracts . After getting their big paychecks , they don't practice/work/hustle and play hustle . They get injured a lot . We have plenty of examples . Only a few maintainted their playing level .

---

Ok. :lol:

Oh god i'd lost that pearl. Good thing that asik is not from eastern europe then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurgan

Oh god i'd lost that pearl. Good thing that asik is not from eastern europe then.

---

While I know where you are going with this, asik is actually from eastern europe being that turkey is considered euraisa and the minority of the country is in europe. So his asinine statement does have some validity.
Edit I see he is from bursa. Strictly in Asia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tthier2

While I know where you are going with this, asik is actually from eastern europe being that turkey is considered euraisa and the minority of the country is in europe. So his asinine statement does have some validity.
Edit I see he is from bursa. Strictly in Asia.

---

Yep. And in truth, it really matters little even if he was born in istanbul. From pretty much every point of view except, partly, a geographic one, turkey is european about as much as lebanon is

We didn't overpay. The deal is basically 11.25mil per year. Tyson Chandler who is 4 years older got 13mil per year. The only thing you can really be upset about here is the length of the deal. My ideal contract structure was a 3 year deal with a TO for the 3rd year, pretty much giving us flexibility sooner with him only guaranteed to be here for 2 seasons. So now its an extra 2 years to that. Again not upset at the price, especially with the cap increase, but get used to Asik being around; he won't be going anywhere for a while. Also scratches a need for next offseason off the list. Going all in for SF or SG summer 2016.

Lol, people are disappointed and a C- for a starting caliber C with a high rebounding rate? I'd like to see a better deal for a similar big man.

Tyson Chandler just got 4/$52 and will be 33 when the contract starts. ($13/year).
Brook Lopez just go 3/$60 and, while good, is not a team center piece of a winning team and has injury issues. ($20/year).
Tristan Thompson just got 5/$80. ($16/year).
Deandre Jordan is about to get a max deal...
Greg Monroe is about to get a max deal...

Those are just the 'big man' deals. Each year, the market increases. People can say what they want about any of the above-mentioned players, but none is a world-beater or even a second option on a winning team.

Asik at essentially $11/year is bad? No way. A guy that literally only does the dirty work. People really just don't like his demeanor because he's a very solid player and this is a great signing. He also allows your superstar to play in his natural position. Not to mention you have a decent size expiring going into AD's last years if you need to make a move. I'd be curious as to who anyone thinks would be able to fill this role as good as Asik for less money than this given the contracts that have been thrown around so far...?

...especially with no cap left for the center apart from MLE

Tristan thompson got 16 mil a year? Wow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Tristan thompson got 16 mil a year? Wow

---

At least:

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13...-thompson-deal

That's what I'm saying. People can gush over him as much as they want, but the guy averaged 8/8. Asik's deal is more than fair.

Gentry must feel like he will fit in his system. I'll trust them. 11.25 mil will look like a bargain going into next year when cap goes up.

Considering Tyson Chandler's 4/$52, 4/$44 isn't bad for Asik. Chandler is better, but also 4 years older.

This doesn't really jeopardize FA next year either. If a guy like Durant wants to come here, Tyreke will be easy to move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greewe

Considering Tyson Chandler's 4/$52, 4/$44 isn't bad for Asik. Chandler is better, but also 4 years older.

This doesn't really jeopardize FA next year either. If a guy like Durant wants to come here, Tyreke will be easy to move.

---

Tyson is better, so are the others, but at the end of the day, per 40:

Player A: 13.5 /15.1
Player B: 12.6/12.0
Player C: 13.4/17.4
Player D: 11.2/15.1

Asik is Player D, and Players A, B, and C are all making more than him (B and C will make at least 50% more). Asik also happens to have a higher rebounding rate than both Thompson and Chandler. I think sometimes people get enamored by the style of play rather than the actual play. Not to mention that, as stats don't show, Asik is a smart help defender and very low maintenance. But again, the much larger question is 'who is/was the alternative?' Unless there is a great answer to that question that I am not thinking of, I don't understand how people can be disappointed or how this can be a 'C-' deal given the current state of the FA market.

I'll take it. Not big on Asik but I think with all else considered, it's a decent deal. B-

Yeah I'd say B great B- at the worst.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornets2013

I'll take it. Not big on Asik but I think with all else considered, it's a decent deal. B-

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

Yeah I'd say B great B- at the worst.

---

I agree with that. The deals the Spurs have struck would be 'A' status.

Can someone do a 2016 free agents piece?

Welcome back Asik. I love how almost all of the NOLA media ripped Dell when he traded for Asik saying it's only worth it if he can lock him up long term. Now he locks him up long term and everyone complains about that. NOLA media know so much about basketball, one of the first questions they asked when we introduced Asik was if Dell would give him an extension. Dell had to explain how basketball contracts work.

In this market, everyone is getting paid. Teams are spending and it may look like we bid against ourselves, but I'd bet Asik would have gotten interest from another team left at the alter of another free agent. This move is and always will be about AD though. He wants/needs someone to handle the other bigs in this league. We all want AD to play more center, but he doesn't want or need to go up against bigs every night. With Asik and Ajinca's 6 fouls, they can take care of the bigs on most nights.

I was dead on for 4yr 10-12 per, where is my prize?

Good deal we need him, now go get Cole/DC + one more ball handler with size.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greewe

Considering Tyson Chandler's 4/$52, 4/$44 isn't bad for Asik. Chandler is better, but also 4 years older.

This doesn't really jeopardize FA next year either. If a guy like Durant wants to come here, Tyreke will be easy to move.

---

Here's my thing. Another possibly bad deal doesn't make our bad deal better - and I see many justifying it by pointing out other deals.

Again, I don't think it is a terrible deal, but in all honesty, do people think there was another team out there offering 4/42 that we had to top? Obviously, none of us can know, but what does your gut tell you?

I just think that with patience, Dell could have secured a shorter deal, maybe even for less annually. Again, I can't know but we are all just posting our opinions here.

What is done is done, and I do still think Asik can live up to the value of this contract, but I can not agree that we paid market value of him at this current point because I simply do not believe he had any similar offers out there. That is my issue, and it can't be proven or disproven, but it is my one issue with this deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Here's my thing. Another possibly bad deal doesn't make our bad deal better - and I see many justifying it by pointing out other deals.

Again, I don't think it is a terrible deal, but in all honesty, do people think there was another team out there offering 4/42 that we had to top? Obviously, none of us can know, but what does your gut tell you?

I just think that with patience, Dell could have secured a shorter deal, maybe even for less annually. Again, I can't know but we are all just posting our opinions here.

What is done is done, and I do still think Asik can live up to the value of this contract, but I can not agree that we paid market value of him at this current point because I simply do not believe he had any similar offers out there. That is my issue, and it can't be proven or disproven, but it is my one issue with this deal.

---

This is really my only disappointment in it. It would make me feel a lot better if I heard of another team that was making a run at him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Here's my thing. Another possibly bad deal doesn't make our bad deal better - and I see many justifying it by pointing out other deals.

Again, I don't think it is a terrible deal, but in all honesty, do people think there was another team out there offering 4/42 that we had to top? Obviously, none of us can know, but what does your gut tell you?

I just think that with patience, Dell could have secured a shorter deal, maybe even for less annually. Again, I can't know but we are all just posting our opinions here.

What is done is done, and I do still think Asik can live up to the value of this contract, but I can not agree that we paid market value of him at this current point because I simply do not believe he had any similar offers out there. That is my issue, and it can't be proven or disproven, but it is my one issue with this deal.

---

Chandler's deal isn't one bad deal. There are several listed above and more to come in the next few days. That's not a "bad deal," that's called the market. Asik got fair market value.

Additionally, there is also something to be said for dealing with players in a fair manner. Is it really worth it to shave a million a year off and run the risk of ticking a guy off and having him begin to solicit deals? You've said over 100 times leading up to this deal that there is simply no reasonable alternative that doesn't cause us to take a big step back that we can afford. If that remains true, how can you justify a C- grade? Unless we see another comparable big man making cheaper, I don't think that's a fair assessment. Not to mention, the only shorter deal is for a guy who is 4 years older than Asik.

"sarcasm on" Soooo.. we get to see Asik fumble away layups and dunks for the bargain price of 5/60? We get to see 4 on 5 on offense for that price also? Finally to not see him in the game in the fourth quarters most nights and in the the playoffs? Great! sign me up. "sarcasm off"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkHornet

This is really my only disappointment in it. It would make me feel a lot better if I heard of another team that was making a run at him.

---

Yeah, and maybe they were. But with RoLo, Koufos, Monroe, etc. still on the market, I don't believe Asik was atop anybody's list - and definitely not for that money.

Now, this could have been a combo deal to appease AD (same agent) or Dell was scared to risk it for some other reason. But I just feel a master negotiator plays this differently and comes out with a better deal. Again, I am not saying F, just C- because I think it is below what the average expected outcome should have been.

You know that video of AD hitting corner 3's going around? What ya'll didn't see is version 2.0 with Asik nailing the corner 3 at an even better rate. Look out, Asik got game!