Clippers vs. Blazers Game Thread

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Portland will be 1.5 games behind Denver for the division lead after this game.

Not too bad.
 
i think they showed agentdrazenpetrovic snoozing in the stands late in the 4th ;)
 
Last edited:
A very impressive homestand before a very important road trip.

This team seems to be hitting its groove at just the right time.
 
Shavlik can actually play! He is pretty solid! It is just nasty to watch Ruffin play...

Great game Blake!!
 
Great homestand.

35-20. 4th seed. Now comes a game against a hot Houston team in their building to battle to stay in 4th place.
 
Minstrel said:
Sessions and Villanueva both with big games. If the Bucks can't afford both (in terms of team finances, not salary cap), that's gonna be a hell of a decision for them. Hope they pick Charlie V and leave Sessions to...us.
Click to expand...

If they like Sessions we'll be one of just a few teams able to offer him more. The first and second year of the contract would be mid-level exception numbers, but because we're going to be under the cap, we'll be able to offer the third year at a much higher rate than Milwaukee. The way I see it, Atlanta and us would be the ones in the driver's seat.

I love Sessions!!!!!!
 
Crimson the Cat said:
If they like Sessions we'll be one of just a few teams able to offer him more. The first and second year of the contract would be mid-level exception numbers, but because we're going to be under the cap, we'll be able to offer the third year at a much higher rate than Milwaukee. The way I see it, Atlanta and us would be the ones in the driver's seat.

I love Sessions!!!!!!
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. Whoever has his bird rights can offer him as much as they want even going over the cap to do so. But because Sessions is a 2nd year RFA, he has early bird rights and he has to take a 2-year minimum deal and his max salary is the MLE. It's to prevent him being able to get a huge salary and circumvent the rookie scale that 1st rounders have to adhere to.

I don't see Milwaukee letting Sessions or Charlie V. go to be honest.
 
BalancedMan said:
I don't know about that. Whoever has his bird rights can offer him as much as they want even going over the cap to do so. But because Sessions is a 2nd year RFA, he has early bird rights and he has to take a 2-year minimum deal and his max salary is the MLE. It's to prevent him being able to get a huge salary and circumvent the rookie scale that 1st rounders have to adhere to.

I don't see Milwaukee letting Sessions or Charlie V. go to be honest.
Click to expand...

I don't see the Blazers wanting him.
 
Crimson the Cat said:
If they like Sessions we'll be one of just a few teams able to offer him more. The first and second year of the contract would be mid-level exception numbers, but because we're going to be under the cap, we'll be able to offer the third year at a much higher rate than Milwaukee. The way I see it, Atlanta and us would be the ones in the driver's seat.

I love Sessions!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Milwaukee is allowed to go up to the MLE to match, and first year salary is all that matters for that, I think. Sessions can't be offered more than the MLE in first year salary. So, Portland can't price Sessions out of Milwaukee's range from a CBA rules perspective.

The hope is that Milwaukee simply can't afford him, but that seems unlikely.
 
yenniedn said:
Even Sergio???

Actually, I'm somewhat disappointed not to see a Sergio >>>> Blake post from you today, Maris. You not feeling well today or what?
Click to expand...

Sergio had a very good game, as did most of them. Nobody had a bad game.

I don't remember ever saying Sergio >>>> Blake, just that he would be our starting PG eventually.

Steve's not one to lie down though.

It's clear he learned a lot from sitting and watching Sergio run the team for awhile.

It would not surprise me at all to see all of our guards remain on the team for years to come.
 
Minstrel said:
Milwaukee is allowed to go up to the MLE to match, and first year salary is all that matters for that, I think. Sessions can't be offered more than the MLE in first year salary. So, Portland can't price Sessions out of Milwaukee's range from a CBA rules perspective.

The hope is that Milwaukee simply can't afford him, but that seems unlikely.
Click to expand...

I can see them dumping Ridnour on a team already under the cap for free which would basically nullify his 6.5 million in salary and would make giving Sessions the MLE a lateral salary move.
 
MARIS61 said:
Sergio had a very good game, as did most of them. Nobody had a bad game.

I don't remember ever saying Sergio >>>> Blake, just that he would be our starting PG eventually.

Steve's not one to lie down though.

It's clear he learned a lot from sitting and watching Sergio run the team for awhile.

It would not surprise me at all to see all of our guards remain on the team for years to come.
Click to expand...

Sergio started for several games. When did he get 17 assists?
 
BalancedMan said:
I don't know about that. Whoever has his bird rights can offer him as much as they want even going over the cap to do so. But because Sessions is a 2nd year RFA, he has early bird rights and he has to take a 2-year minimum deal and his max salary is the MLE. It's to prevent him being able to get a huge salary and circumvent the rookie scale that 1st rounders have to adhere to.

I don't see Milwaukee letting Sessions or Charlie V. go to be honest.
Click to expand...

I believe you're wrong. Yes, he's a 2nd year RFA and he has early bird rights. He doesn't have to take a 2-year deal. Another team if under the cap can offer him more, just as Milwaukee can offer him a longer term than two years. Milwaukee though, because they're over the cap, can offer him only their mid-level exception with yearly increases of approx. 8%. Portland, or a team that's under the cap, can only offer him salary amounts equal to that of the mid-level exception for the first two years, but can offer a third year at a maximum starting rate to what that team could have offered assuming this rule wasn't in affect. Any additional years would be at 6.9% increases.
 
Last edited:
MARIS61 said:
Sergio had a very good game, as did most of them. Nobody had a bad game.

I don't remember ever saying Sergio >>>> Blake, just that he would be our starting PG eventually.

Steve's not one to lie down though.

It's clear he learned a lot from sitting and watching Sergio run the team for awhile.

It would not surprise me at all to see all of our guards remain on the team for years to come.
Click to expand...

LOL'ed . . . that's more like it!!! Welcome back!

Think how much better Blake could've been if he just sat for another 13 games and been tutored by Serg all that time! Scary!!!
 
What is the "Gilbert Arenas" provision?

With the previous CBA it was sometimes possible to sign restricted free agents to offer sheets their original teams couldn't match. This happened when a player was an Early Bird or Non-Bird free agent (see question number 19) and the team didn't have enough cap room to match a sufficiently large offer. For example, Gilbert Arenas was Golden State's second round draft pick in 2001, and became an Early Bird free agent in 2003. Golden State therefore could only match an offer sheet (or sign Arenas themselves) for up to the average salary (see question number 24), which was about $4.9 million. Washington signed Arenas to an offer sheet with a starting salary of about $8.5 million, which Golden State was powerless to match.

This loophole was addressed in the current CBA (although not closed completely -- see below). Teams are now limited in the salary they can offer in an offer sheet to a restricted free agent with one or two years in the league. The first-year salary in the offer sheet cannot be greater than the average salary (see question number 24). Limiting the first year salary in this way guarantees that the player's original team will be able to match the offer sheet by using the Early Bird exception (if applicable -- see question number 19), or Mid-Level exception (provided they haven't used it already).

The second year salary in such an offer sheet is limited to the standard 8% raise. The third year salary can jump considerably -- it is allowed to be as high as it would have been had the first year salary not been limited by this rule to the average salary. Raises (and decreases) after the third season are limited to 6.9% of the salary in the third season. The offer sheet can only contain the large jump in the third season if it provides the maximum salary allowed in the first two seasons. In addition, the offer must be guaranteed and cannot contain bonuses of any kind.

If the raise in the third season exceeds the standard raise (8% of the salary in the first season of the contract), then they place an additional restriction on the team. In order to determine the size of the offer the team can make, they don't fit just the first year salary under the cap. Instead, they must fit the average salary in the entire contract under the cap. So a team $8 million under the cap is limited to offering a total of $24 million over three years, $32 million over four years, or $40 million over five years. If the offer sheet does not contain a third-season raise larger than 8% of the first-season salary, then they only have to fit the first year salary under the cap.

Putting this all together, if a team is $11 million under the cap, wants to submit a five year offer sheet, and wants to provide a large raise in the third season, they can offer a total of $55 million. If the average salary is $5 million, then the second year salary will be $5.4 million (8% raise). This leaves $44.6 million to be distributed over the final three seasons. With 6.9% raises in years four and five, the entire contract looks like this:

Season Salary Notes
1 $5.0 million Average salary amount
2 $5.4 million 8% raise over season 1
3 $13.907 million This is the amount that yields $44.6 million over the final three seasons with 6.9% raises*
4 $14.867 million Raise is 6.9% of season 3 salary
5 $15.826 million Raise is 6.9% of season 3 salary
Total $55 million Average is $11 million, which equals the team's cap room
* If you want to know how I got that exact amount, (for a five year offer) you solve for (5R - 2.08A) / 3.207. R is the room the team has under the cap. A is the average salary amount (e.g., $5 million). The 2.08 represents the salary in the first two seasons (100% of the average, plus 108% of the average). The 3.207 represents the salary in the last three seasons, using 6.9% raises: 1.0 + 1.069 + 1.138 = 3.207. Similarly, for a four year offer you would solve for (4R - 2.08A) / 2.069.

For the team making this offer, this contract would count for $11.0 million (i.e., the average salary in the contract) of team salary in each of the five seasons if they sign the player. If the player's prior team matches the offer and keeps the player, then the actual salary in each season counts as team salary. The player's original team is allowed to use any available exception (e.g., the Mid-Level or the Early-Bird) to match the offer.

Since a team must fit the average salary from the entire contract under the cap in order to offer the large third-season raise, a team must have some amount of cap room above the average salary amount in order to effectively utilize this provision. For example, suppose the average salary amount is $5 million, and a team with $5.1 million of cap room wants to provide a five year offer sheet. If they want to offer a larger-than-normal third-year raise, then their cap room will be determined by the contract's average salary, so the total contract must pay $25.5 million or less. If they offer $5 million and $5.4 million in the first two seasons, then that leaves just $15.1 million for the final three seasons -- so there must be a decrease in salary in the final three seasons. A team in this situation is better off providing the standard 8% raise in the third season, which does not trigger the cap room requirement based on averaging. In this example, a five year offer starting at $5 million with 8% raises would total $29.0 million.

As I said above, the loophole was addressed with this rule, but not closed completely. This is because this provision is primarily intended to protect teams from losing their successful second round picks, who are Early-Bird free agents after two years. There are several situations where a team still might be unable to match an offer sheet:

If the player is a Non-Bird free agent and the team already used their Mid-Level exception to sign another player.
If the player is a Non-Bird or Early Bird free agent with three years in the league (this rule applies only to players with one or two years in the league).
If a team has two Non-Bird free agents with one or two years in the league. They can use the Mid-Level exception to keep one of them, but would lose the other.
This provision also ensures that second round picks can't cash in with a maximum salary sooner than first round picks can.
Click to expand...

Here's the explanation from http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
 
Got back from the game, and it was a nice solid win. Good to see us just blow out the Clips early.
Probably as enjoyable as that first quarter was trying to see Shavlik and Ruffin get aggressive, while Brandon, LaMarcus and Blake were busting up laughing on the bench whenever those two messed up.

The Clips have basically given up on the season, too bad we have a loss to them in our belt.. argh.
 
So for example if Portland is $8M under the cap. We could offer a salary of $5.5M for the first, $5.8M for the second, and as much as $10.2 for the third, and $10.2 for the fourth (either guaranteed or a team option).

Of course we wouldn't need to do this. Maybe a 3rd year at $7M and a team option for $8M would be more conservative.
 
Crimson the Cat said:
So for example if Portland is $8M under the cap. We could offer a salary of $5.5M for the first, $5.8M for the second, and as much as $10.2 for the third, and $10.2 for the fourth (either guaranteed or a team option).

Of course we wouldn't need to do this. Maybe a 3rd year at $7M and a team option for $8M would be more conservative.
Click to expand...

Pretty cool! Thanks for the information, Crimson. So Portland could get Sessions...only Atlanta could prevent it.
 
Great win. Good teams dominate bad teams at home and that's what we did tonight. Great way to hit the road.

Anyone else get tired of Rice calling Blake "Blakey"? Ugh.
 
Last edited:
Crimson the Cat said:
So for example if Portland is $8M under the cap. We could offer a salary of $5.5M for the first, $5.8M for the second, and as much as $10.2 for the third, and $10.2 for the fourth (either guaranteed or a team option).

Of course we wouldn't need to do this. Maybe a 3rd year at $7M and a team option for $8M would be more conservative.
Click to expand...

That's is good info. I think maybe if we really wanted Sessions we might need to offer the 10.2 for the 3rd year if we want Milw and/or Atl not to match or offer more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top