No Contract Extension for Greg Oden?

[bluefrog]

Chris Tomasson doesn't think so:

Nov. 1, for instance, is the deadline for Portland to decide whether to sign Greg Oden, the top pick in the 2007 draft, to a contract extension or allow him to become a restricted free agent next summer. Due to Oden's numerous injuries, most recently a knee injury that finished him for the season last December, it's not expected such an extension will be signed.

LINK

I think we offer him one. The team has put so much time and effort in developing his game and getting him healthy that it would be dumb to just let him walk. It's a tough call though

 

[jlprk]

Oden said this week that he realizes there will be no contract till he plays. Apparently, management has told him that he has to play some real games before they will talk about it.

 

[Jayps15]

With the CBA up in the air this offseason not signing Oden to an extension now could be a risk, but if he can get and stay healthy I'm sure management will do what they can to keep him.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

Chris Tomasson doesn't think so:

LINK

I think we offer him one. The team has put so much time and effort in developing his game and getting him healthy that it would be dumb to just let him walk. It's a tough call though

It's my understanding that he would be a restricted free agent next year if they don't sign him to an extension now. Even if he had a good year, i'm not sure if we would have to pay him anymore than what a max extension would be now. I think both parties might be more comfortable waiting to see what the coming season brings.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Oden said this week that he realizes there will be no contract till he plays. Apparently, management has told him that he has to play some real games before they will talk about it.

That's a gutsy move by the Blazers. Well, that's one way to tell a player you don't want him.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

That's a gutsy move by the Blazers. Well, that's one way to tell a player you don't want him.

I don't think that is saying they don't want him; it's just saying we want to see at least the possibility that you might be healthy for awhile before we give you a very expensive extension.

 

[MIXUM]

I think its safe to say if theres one word to describe odens time in portland from on the court to contract status I would say....


DISASTER

 

[hasoos]

I disagree. You let him play this year, become a restricted free agent and see what he is offered before signing him. Because there is a distinct possiblity signing him to a contract could be an albatross around the teams neck for years. I would rather wait and see if he plays this year and is unhurt. If he plays well I have no problem matching what other teams offer for him.

 

[illmatic99]

I like the idea of waiting and using the contract as an incentive for him to work harder. It might cost PA a bit more in the long run, but I doubt he minds it if we get a better Oden as a result.

 

[Shooter]

Hell no, you don't offer Oden an extension! The guy may never have a productive season in his NBA career, so why sign him up for another multiple-year deal? It would be foolhardy to do so.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I think Oden owes the Blazers a couple years of free work.

 

[Blaze01]

IF you can sign him to a reasonable deal AFTER he shows he can play this year....then yes sign him to an extension....

If not then let him become a RFA, knowing that you can match any offer and retain him....

 

[RR7]

You can't sign him to an extension AFTER this season, OR let him become a RFA. After this season, he is a RFA. Deadline to give him an extension is October 31, or he is a RFA next season.

 

[MIXUM]

wow... next year instead of dont fire kpee signs... we will see "DONT GO G.O."

greg will be reading those while hes recovering watching game casts on cbs.com cause they dont get league pass in indiana.

 

[blazedanugz]

[Comment From Mixum Mixum: ]
Thanks Greg! I love you!

that cant be the same mixum....

 

[BGrantFan]

The owners must be very confident that they will keep RFA rights on first-round picks after their rookie deals expire in the new CBA. Only Durant has signed an extension from that draft class at this point.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I agree that the owners must be thinking that they aren't about to let their restricted free agents walk, and I'm not sure the player's union is going to fight that too much, given that they have bigger fish to fry in the fight against the supposed hard-cap that's been rumored to be on some owners' wishlists and the likelihood that fully guaranteed contracts might go the way of the dodo.

 

[MickZagger]

wow... next year instead of dont fire kpee signs... we will see "DONT GO G.O."

greg will be reading those while hes recovering watching game casts on cbs.com cause they dont get league pass in indiana.

Thats something a clown would come up with.

Put more thought into your horrible posts, Bozo.

Step up your game son, your weak this year paht-nah

 

[SheedSoNasty]

I wonder how the lockout is going to have an effect on this kind of situation. If there's a hard cap, would this mean that we'd be out of luck since we wouldn't have enough room to sign him? Would free agents no longer be restricted? I feel like we're taking a gamble either way.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I wonder how the lockout is going to have an effect on this kind of situation. If there's a hard cap, would this mean that we'd be out of luck since we wouldn't have enough room to sign him? Would free agents no longer be restricted? I feel like we're taking a gamble either way.

If a hard cap is implemented then I have a feeling that the owners are angling for a more NFL style CBA, wherein contracts are only partially guaranteed, guys can be cut and some of the existing max or large contracts will be scaled back to fit within the new salary structure or at least grandfathered in. What that means for retaining your restricted free agents remains to be seen, but I can't imagine most owners will be in a big rush to create a rule that makes it harder for them to retain their players ... but you never know.

 

[Jayps15]

I wonder how the lockout is going to have an effect on this kind of situation. If there's a hard cap, would this mean that we'd be out of luck since we wouldn't have enough room to sign him? Would free agents no longer be restricted? I feel like we're taking a gamble either way.

That's what I was talking with the risk of not signing him, the standard let him become a restricted FA would be an easy choice any other offseason, but with a new CBA on the way and talks of some pretty drastic changes it's a less clear than that. Greg doesn't become a restricted FA right after the season, it's when the new NBA year starts that his contract runs out, and that's at the same time the CBA runs out, so his free agency and what we can and can't offer him will fall under whatever rules are in the new CBA. What if restricted free agency is changed in a way that screws us(unlikely)? What if a hard cap is put in place and we're to close to it to match an offer?

If there is a hard cap any current contracts are going to have to be grandfathered in, or else alot of the contending teams like the Lakers/Magic/Heat/Bulls aren't going to be able to field an entire/competitive rosters (and would Stern screw those markets? No), so a contract now could end up being more flexible for us in the future. Also overlooked in the 'what if he suffers another injury and is done forever' discussion is the Allan Houston provision included in the last CBA negotiation, the owners/management got the right to remove one current contract from their salary cap numbers last time (which the Knicks used on an injured Allan Houston to relieve 10+ million dollars from their cap, hence the nickname), so if we were to sign Oden for say 4yrs 40mil with a team option 4th yr and he suffered a career ending injury this year there very well may be a way to remove a salary like that from our cap once the new CBA comes into effect. I know I can see owners asking for something like that again as a little thing they can get that the Players Union has already given them once, and that could help some teams willing to pay a guy his full contract without playing.

EDIT- I was wrong on the Allan Houston thing, it was to avoid the luxury tax, not the salary cap, and despite the fact they should have used it on Houston I guess the Knicks kept him and waived Jerome Williams instead (should have looked that up before I hit the post reply button, damnit)

EDIT2- Actually if he suffered a career ending injury there's no reason we wouldn't just go the Darius Miles route, still removing the risk of a long term contract bogging us down for a guy who can't play.

 

[Nikolokolus]

I think the worry over him getting an extension is a lot of hand wringing about nothing. Restricted free agency isn't likely to die in the next CBA and I have no problem letting the market dictate what he's worth. If he has another injury plagued year, very few teams will risk tying up a large amount of money in him (or at least a lot of years) and even if he blows up I can't imagine him being offered much more then 3 years 10 million per year, maybe 4 at the outside, which is something I think the Blazers would be likely to match. Lastly, if you're Rich Cho wouldn't you rather take care of this under the next CBA than to tie yourself to a deal you may not like?

Let it ride.

 

[Minstrel]

I think the worry over him getting an extension is a lot of hand wringing about nothing. Restricted free agency isn't likely to die in the next CBA and I have no problem letting the market dictate what he's worth. If he has another injury plagued year, very few teams will risk tying up a large amount of money in him (or at least a lot of years) and even if he blows up I can't imagine him being offered much more then 3 years 10 million per year, maybe 4 at the outside, which is something I think the Blazers would be likely to match. Lastly, if you're Rich Cho wouldn't you rather take care of this under the next CBA than to tie yourself to a deal you may not like?

Not if there's a hard cap. In that case, RFA may just be the right to match any offer...if you have the cap space.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Not if there's a hard cap. In that case, RFA may just be the right to match any offer...if you have the cap space.

Assuming they adopt an NFL model, if a hard cap gets implemented then I have a suspicion that teams will also have the option of cutting players to free up space and in the Blazers particular case there it may not even be necessary since there are a few players that probably won't be in the team's plans after a lockout anyway; namely Camby, Miller and Joel which together represents about 25 million per year.

 

[Minstrel]

Assuming they adopt an NFL model, if a hard cap gets implemented then I have a suspicion that teams will also have the option of cutting players to free up space

It's not that easy in the NFL. Contracts have signing bonuses, and those signing bonuses are accelerated as cap hits to the year you cut the player, to provide a disincentive to owners cutting players. While obviously any grandfathered NBA contracts won't have any signing bonuses to accelerate, I can't imagine the players union agreeing to their current contracts being torn up at owner whim. If they agree to an NFL style cap, then there will likely be NFL style signing bonuses in future and some kind of guarantee that current contracts cannot simply be cut.

and in the Blazers particular case there it may not even be necessary since there are a few players that probably won't be in the team's plans after a lockout anyway; namely Camby, Miller and Joel which together represents about 25 million per year.

But they're over the cap by a significant amount (with Roy's and Aldridge's extensions kicking in) aren't they? Will that $25 million put them well under the (current) cap? And I guess it depends on where the new cap is set.

 

[Ed O]

It's not that easy in the NFL. Contracts have signing bonuses, and those signing bonuses are accelerated as cap hits to the year you cut the player, to provide a disincentive to owners cutting players. While obviously any grandfathered NBA contracts won't have any signing bonuses to accelerate, I can't imagine the players union agreeing to their current contracts being torn up at owner whim. If they agree to an NFL style cap, then there will likely be NFL style signing bonuses in future and some kind of guarantee that current contracts cannot simply be cut.

I could see a deal that phases in a hard cap, perhaps including the ability to waive fully guaranteed players without salary cap ramifications... the players still get their money (and, perhaps, get another contract, too!) but the owners get out from under cap-clogging deals... while being in a much stronger position with their RFAs (since so many teams will be at or above the hard cap, etc.)

Ed O.

 

[Nikolokolus]

It's not that easy in the NFL. Contracts have signing bonuses, and those signing bonuses are accelerated as cap hits to the year you cut the player, to provide a disincentive to owners cutting players. While obviously any grandfathered NBA contracts won't have any signing bonuses to accelerate, I can't imagine the players union agreeing to their current contracts being torn up at owner whim. If they agree to an NFL style cap, then there will likely be NFL style signing bonuses in future and some kind of guarantee that current contracts cannot simply be cut.

I don't have a crystal ball, so I have no idea how the next CBA is going to handle this. We'll see

But they're over the cap by a significant amount (with Roy's and Aldridge's extensions kicking in) aren't they? Will that $25 million put them well under the (current) cap? And I guess it depends on where the new cap is set.

I have a feeling that the NBA's hard cap would be somewhere closer to the luxury tax line than the soft cap that currently exists. Just look at the bulk of NBA team salaries in two year's time and it becomes pretty clear that a budget of 55 million or so doesn't buy you a whole lot of talent.
http://www.storytellerscontracts.info/resources/10-11salaries.htm