Shaun Livingston possible signing???

[Denny Crane]

I'm going on what I see of the ultra rich owners who've had really big payrolls in the past. Particularly Mark Cuban and James Dolan.

The likelihood of some of these players getting signed to big contracts and turning into Stoudamire type players is a big risk.

 

[Minstrel]

I'm going on what I see of the ultra rich owners who've had really big payrolls in the past. Particularly Mark Cuban and James Dolan.

The likelihood of some of these players getting signed to big contracts and turning into Stoudamire type players is a big risk.

Dolan seemed to have almost inexhaustible (and inexplicable) willingness to pay huge amounts of money for little in the way of results.

I think Roy and Aldridge are the only current players that will be given huge contracts soon. Barring injury, they look to be worth it. Oden, Bayless and Fernandez are still some years from being paid big bucks. The team will have a chance to evaluate them and see if they are major talents.

The risky one to me is Travis Outlaw. He's someone who might command a big deal soon and has the potential to become a tall Damon Stoudamire. So, I'll be interested to see how Pritchard handles it. I'd like to see Outlaw flipped to be someone else's tricky salary problem, if Pritchard can get good value back (essentially the quandary Chicago is in with Ben Gordon...he definitely has real value, but he's hard to value in terms of salary).

 

[The_Lillard_King]

The risky one to me is Travis Outlaw. He's someone who might command a big deal soon and has the potential to become a tall Damon Stoudamire. So, I'll be interested to see how Pritchard handles it. I'd like to see Outlaw flipped to be someone else's tricky salary problem, if Pritchard can get good value back (essentially the quandary Chicago is in with Ben Gordon...he definitely has real value, but he's hard to value in terms of salary).

Don't the Blazers have a four year deal at about 4 mil/yr with TO, the last two years being a team option? That is a good position to be in for the Blazer (if I have that right).

I agree with DC, these days in the NBA it isn't just about paying players big bucks to get them to sign, teams have to sign players to contracts that still make them a tradable asset (not overpaid), or else you end up with a Damon or Raef sitaution . . . untradable till the very end of their contract.

 

[Denny Crane]

There's a lot of talk about trading LaFrentz for someone. Similar contract would be a biggie, no?

 

[Ed O]

There's a lot of talk about trading LaFrentz for someone. Similar contract would be a biggie, no?

I think the idea is that the Blazers would look to acquire a very good player who is making a ton of money... instead of using potential cap space to sign a free agent (like the Magic did with Rashard Lewis, for example) the Blazers could take a bigger contract on (Kirilenko or Vince Carter or whomever) to upgrade the team without having the uncertainty of free agency in the summer determining what they can get.

Ed O.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think the idea is that the Blazers would look to acquire a very good player who is making a ton of money... instead of using potential cap space to sign a free agent (like the Magic did with Rashard Lewis, for example) the Blazers could take a bigger contract on (Kirilenko or Vince Carter or whomever) to upgrade the team without having the uncertainty of free agency in the summer determining what they can get.

Ed O.

Very good players who make a ton of money count against the cap and the LT threshold.

 

[gatorpops]

Something that has not been mentioned yet, I think, is that SL might have been one of the targets to try and acquire as a FA or as a trade target. I think that could have been a real possibility.

If so, we now can get him with risk for cheap.

And still leaves Raef as bait for future adjustment.

The only question for me would be, can he play?

His agent at least says the Dr.s have released him to play 5 on 5 much like Oden has.

If true he is just too good to pass up.

Get it done KP!!!!

 

[Natebishop3]

Re: Shawn Livingston possible signing???

But more important than either Hill or Luke is that we not waive Raef and the slim shot that we can use his contract before the deadline. I think there is not a good chance that anything will come of Raef's contract, but if we are talking about taking risks, I think this is the most bankable.

Why do you keep bringing up Raef? I don't think anyone is saying waive Raef, they're saying use our 15th spot on Livingston. We can keep Raef and sign Livingston.

With that said, I don't see any reason not to sign Livingston. Think of it this way, one of three possible outcomes are possible.

1) Livingston is never able to return to the NBA at a productive level and we waive him or choose not to re-sign him.

2) Livingston recaptures some or all of the player that he was with the Clippers, and we integrate him into our future core.

3) Livingston recaptures some or all of the player that he was and we trade him to another team for good value (I.E. a draft pick, a veteran, or another young prospect).

If option 1 happens, we're not really out anything. A couple million dollars and the sad fact that a young player with a lot of potential was unable to recover from a devastating injury.

If option 2 happens, we have essentially added a lottery pick for peanuts, and we are a stronger team because of it. Livingston is the pass-first point guard that we've beem clamoring for.

If option 3 happens, we have essentially flipped a low-risk commodity into value for almost nothing. From what I understand of KP, this is the kind of move that he favors. Low risk into high gain.

If we weigh this on a cost/benefit analysis, the benefits far outweigh the costs of signing Livingston.

 

[gatorpops]

Re: Shawn Livingston possible signing???

Why do you keep bringing up Raef? I don't think anyone is saying waive Raef, they're saying use our 15th spot on Livingston. We can keep Raef and sign Livingston.

With that said, I don't see any reason not to sign Livingston. Think of it this way, one of three possible outcomes are possible.

1) Livingston is never able to return to the NBA at a productive level and we waive him or choose not to re-sign him.

2) Livingston recaptures some or all of the player that he was with the Clippers, and we integrate him into our future core.

3) Livingston recaptures some or all of the player that he was and we trade him to another team for good value (I.E. a draft pick, a veteran, or another young prospect).

If option 1 happens, we're not really out anything. A couple million dollars and the sad fact that a young player with a lot of potential was unable to recover from a devastating injury.

If option 2 happens, we have essentially added a lottery pick for peanuts, and we are a stronger team because of it. Livingston is the pass-first point guard that we've beem clamoring for.

If option 3 happens, we have essentially flipped a low-risk commodity into value for almost nothing. From what I understand of KP, this is the kind of move that he favors. Low risk into high gain.

If we weigh this on a cost/benefit analysis, the benefits far outweigh the costs of signing Livingston.

Well, to be accurate I did say that we could waive Raef.

However that was because some were saying that we did not need SL, we needed another Big (Hill) etc.

OK we still have Reaf that we can do that with after, we sign SL. We get both the big and the potential gain from SL. That may not be enough for Raef, but it is one possibility.

Sounds perrty good to me.

On Hill, I watched him in Summer League and was not all that impressed. He Got schooled by Love. He did block a few shots but did not rebound very well, or so it seemed to me.

 

[Minstrel]

Re: Shawn Livingston possible signing???

OK we still have Reaf that we can do that with after, we sign SL. We get both the big and the potential gain from SL. That may not be enough for Raef, but it is one possibility.

Sounds perrty good to me.

Waiving LaFrentz would mean not having his contract to trade during the season as an expiring deal. We'd still get the cap relief next off-season, but Pritchard would lose the flexibility to make a move before then, if some team decided to give away a costly, good player for cap relief.

I don't think losing that possibility is worth signing Hill.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Re: Shawn Livingston possible signing???

Why do you keep bringing up Raef? I don't think anyone is saying waive Raef, they're saying use our 15th spot on Livingston. We can keep Raef and sign Livingston.

With that said, I don't see any reason not to sign Livingston. Think of it this way, one of three possible outcomes are possible.

1) Livingston is never able to return to the NBA at a productive level and we waive him or choose not to re-sign him.

2) Livingston recaptures some or all of the player that he was with the Clippers, and we integrate him into our future core.

3) Livingston recaptures some or all of the player that he was and we trade him to another team for good value (I.E. a draft pick, a veteran, or another young prospect).

If option 1 happens, we're not really out anything. A couple million dollars and the sad fact that a young player with a lot of potential was unable to recover from a devastating injury.

If option 2 happens, we have essentially added a lottery pick for peanuts, and we are a stronger team because of it. Livingston is the pass-first point guard that we've beem clamoring for.

If option 3 happens, we have essentially flipped a low-risk commodity into value for almost nothing. From what I understand of KP, this is the kind of move that he favors. Low risk into high gain.

If we weigh this on a cost/benefit analysis, the benefits far outweigh the costs of signing Livingston.

I agree that if the Blazers think he has a realistic chance of coming back, they should take the risk.

My big thing with SL, is what will it take to sign him. If it takes a multi-year contract, well the Blazers have been structuring contracts for cap flex next summer. Signing SL to a garranted contract for more than one year messes all that up.

But maybe Blazer switch focus, sign Livingston, trade Raef at the deadline and forget cap flexibility next summer.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Re: Shawn Livingston possible signing???

I agree that if the Blazers think he has a realistic chance of coming back, they should take the risk.

My big thing with SL, is what will it take to sign him. If it takes a multi-year contract, well the Blazers have been structuring contracts for cap flex next summer. Signing SL to a garranted contract for more than one year messes all that up.

But maybe Blazer switch focus, sign Livingston, trade Raef at the deadline and forget cap flexibility next summer.

I think you might be overestimating what it would take to put him under contract. Considering that it's still very much in doubt that he'll ever be able to be a productive player in the league I'd wager that Portland has more leverage than Livingston and his agent when it comes to making salary demands -- otherwise it seems pretty likely that he'd have been snatched up by another team already.

Regarding Cap room next year, the length of the contract isn't as important as the per year dollar amount. If he signs for around 1.5 to 2.5 million (which is what I consider a reasonable amount for SL) that still leaves a considerable amount of projected cap room should the team choose to hold onto Raef passed the trading deadline. The worst case scenario is that Livingston and his agent balk at the proposed deal and we've still got 300 point guards on this team next year.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Re: Shawn Livingston possible signing???

I think you might be overestimating what it would take to put him under contract. Considering that it's still very much in doubt that he'll ever be able to be a productive player in the league I'd wager that Portland has more leverage than Livingston and his agent when it comes to making salary demands -- otherwise it seems pretty likely that he'd have been snatched up by another team already.

Regarding Cap room next year, the length of the contract isn't as important as the per year dollar amount. If he signs for around 1.5 to 2.5 million (which is what I consider a reasonable amount for SL) that still leaves a considerable amount of projected cap room should the team choose to hold onto Raef passed the trading deadline. The worst case scenario is that Livingston and his agent balk at the proposed deal and we've still got 300 point guards on this team next year.

Good point. 1.5-2.5 might not hurt the slary cap room. I was thinking he was going to be more than that.

My thought is why would he sign for only that amount if her really felt he was good to go . . . or at that price he might join a team that will give him mins whenever he is ready.

But if his market value is that much, even a multi-year contract might not bother the Blazers (with reagrd to slary cap).

 

[Tortimer]

I don't think there is anyway we would pay Livingston more then 2.5 million per year. Maybe if it is a team option for the 3rd year of a 3 year contract at 3-4 million with 1.5-2.5 for the first couple years. It sounds like KP is going to make up his mind in 24-48 hours if he is even going to offer Livingston a contract. Here is a link from rotoworld:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NBA&id=1044

Shaun Livingston-G- Clippers Sep. 20 - 8:54 am et

Shaun Livingston worked out for the Blazers recently, and GM Kevin Pritchard said that they will decide whether to sign him within "24 to 48 hours".

"I haven't sat down and done all the pros and cons," Pritchard said. "And even if we do decide to move forward, whether a deal gets done or not is another question." The Blazers have one available roster spot, so if they sign Livingston it will mean Shavlik Randolph, Jamaal Tatum Luke Jackson and Steven Hill all failed to make the team.
Related: Luke Jackson, Shavlik Randolph, Jamaal Tatum, Steven Hill

 

[maxiep]

Just how much is Allen willing to pay? Starting 5 for $75M/season and already over the LT threshold?

For a championship contending team, I think he'd suffer almost any payroll. We Blazer fans are really lucky to have such a great owner.

 

[Denny Crane]

For a championship contending team, I think he'd suffer almost any payroll. We Blazer fans are really lucky to have such a great owner.

What if they go deep in the playoffs, but don't win championships? This is what Dallas and Phoenix have done, and both are now cap conscious.

If it becomes a "win a championship first" situation, contract extension signing time will be interesting.

 

[Tortimer]

What if they go deep in the playoffs, but don't win championships? This is what Dallas and Phoenix have done, and both are now cap conscious.

If it becomes a "win a championship first" situation, contract extension signing time will be interesting.

I think if we are going deep into the playoffs and not winning championships PA will do everything possible to add the last piece to get us the championship. I think he wants it that bad. He wouldn't be losing that much money if any. If we are going deep in the playoffs it means we are sold out every game and getting a ton of sponsors for everything the Blazers could think of selling. I think KP is smart and so far has used PA money wisely. PA seems to have a ton of confidence in KP and if we need that last Superstar that is on the market PA will trade, buy or blackmail(j/k) into getting that superstar. PA is the richest owner in sports and doesn't want to lose money but if we are winning and going deep in the playoffs I don't think he would stop because of having a team salary of 150 million instead of 130 million. Some of the Blazer fans don't know how lucky we are to have PA as the owner and KP as the GM.

 

[Denny Crane]

Just a FYI:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/32/biz_07nba_NBA-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

Portland is the least valuable franchise in the entire NBA, 29th in revenues, and losing the 2nd-most amount of money.

Is Paul Allen really willing to lose $100M / year or a $billion over 10?

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Just a FYI:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/32/biz_07nba_NBA-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

Portland is the least valuable franchise in the entire NBA, 29th in revenues, and losing the 2nd-most amount of money.

Is Paul Allen really willing to lose $100M / year or a $billion over 10?

Well that would be about 5% of his net worth, so I don't think he wants to lose it.

PA is guy who has spent money on submarines, a fleet of yachats, a rock and roll museum, a space ship and other crazy stuff. He built the Rose Garden after voters rejected the bill to finance one, he then sold it, publically tried to sell the Blazers, then took the Blazers off the market and bought back the Rose Garden.

You never know what PA is going to do . . . but he is a huge NBA fan and he has a lot of money (about 20 billion). So with PA and this roster (and KP runnning the ship or baking the cake or whatever) it should be fun to watch what happens . . . hell give Rudy a max contract while he is at it.

 

[Natebishop3]

Just a FYI:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/32/biz_07nba_NBA-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

Portland is the least valuable franchise in the entire NBA, 29th in revenues, and losing the 2nd-most amount of money.

Is Paul Allen really willing to lose $100M / year or a $billion over 10?

And that should change after this team starts kicking ass and taking names.

 

[Tortimer]

Just a FYI:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/32/biz_07nba_NBA-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

Portland is the least valuable franchise in the entire NBA, 29th in revenues, and losing the 2nd-most amount of money.

Is Paul Allen really willing to lose $100M / year or a $billion over 10?

That was I think for 06-07 season and the Blazers are not losing that much money the last couple years. I actually think we will make money this year. We were almost going to move because of the bad situation with the Rose garden and with the attendance being so bad at the Blazer games. The Rose Garden situation has been fixed and many old and new sponsors have come back plus the Rose garden is sold out now where we had to give tickets away in 06-07.

 

[ucatchtrout]

That is out of date info. Actually the team was in a situation where we kind of went from first to worst, not only in attendance but revenue.

Even late in the Jailblazer era we were still selling out regularly and doing reasonably well financially. The value of the team was ranked in the top three.

When the bottom fell out, and the team started losing the sellout string came to an end as did a lot of the advertising revenue that the team had relied on in the past. Then we lost the stadium and comments were made about a broken financial model.

It was true.

The financial model was broken. It was based on sellouts advertising revenue and community support.

When the revenue streams dwindled the red ink started to grow.

We've got the stadium back, a new team and renewed community interest.

Things are headed back in the right direction.

Look for the team again to be amongst the top in overall value in the next few years.

 

[maxiep]

What if they go deep in the playoffs, but don't win championships? This is what Dallas and Phoenix have done, and both are now cap conscious.

If it becomes a "win a championship first" situation, contract extension signing time will be interesting.

Again, I said "championship-contending". We had that situation at the turn of the century and Allen spared no expense on the team. With PA, it won't become "win a championship first". It will even be easier this time as he likes these players.

 

[Masbee]

Just a FYI:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/32/biz_07nba_NBA-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

Portland is the least valuable franchise in the entire NBA, 29th in revenues, and losing the 2nd-most amount of money.

Old news. Old news.

You might as well be talking about how great it is to be working for Lehman Brothers as they dish out super generous bonuses.

Yesterday's stories don't always apply to tommorow.

You do bring up a point though, the Blazers are somewhat constricted as their economic model limits the amount of income they can generate compared to teams with larger TV markets, more hometown corporate headquarters, and newer public subsidized more profitable stadium situations.