# Bonner asking 2.5mil for 5 years (not 3.5M)



## charlz (Jun 9, 2003)

> After speaking to two sources, it was reported here yesterday that Bonner's original contract request was for something close to <b>$3.5 million</b> US per year, over five years. For the record, that was disputed yesterday by Bonner's agent, Kenny Grant, who claimed the original contract request was for <b>$2.5 million</b> over five years.
> http://torontosun.com/Sports/Basketball/home.html


agents always ask for more than they want so I am thinking Bonner would go 

2.2 M for 4 years. That could be fair. I have always maintained that he should get a deal that resembled Hoffa's rookie contract.

I think Babs is worried that Bonner will turn out to be Austin Croshere who was lights out in the last 1/2 of his contract year and proceeded to stink once signing the 50Mill deal. @ 2.2 M/per even the harshest critique has a tough time faulting Rob for signing him.

For the record though I still think it is all posturing and that bonner will get his deal in TOR. :raised_ey 

Rob is trying to look brilliant - and in case we forgot what that is - it is amassing alot of talent at below market value.... and trying to erase the memory of some of his mistakes...


----------



## Benis007 (May 23, 2005)

5 years seems like a long time in todays league.

If he doesn't play well we are stuck with the salary.

If he outplays his salary he is going to want to renogotiate.


----------



## Junkyard Dog13 (Aug 9, 2003)

give him 4 years 10 mill

that ewould give us swolid depth at the 5 &4

5
Aruaja
Villinueva
Sow

4 
Bosh
Villinauvea
Bonner
Sow

I think CV3 will start mainly laying the 5 & Bonner if back will see more PT at the 3, CV3 will be moved a lot.


----------



## Ras (Jul 25, 2005)

Junkyard Dog13 said:


> give him 4 years 10 mill


Why give him 10 mil when he's only asking for 3.5?


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

He is asking for 2.5 million per year, not in all.


----------



## charlz (Jun 9, 2003)

Benis007 said:


> 5 years seems like a long time in todays league.
> 
> If he doesn't play well we are stuck with the salary.
> 
> If he outplays his salary he is going to want to renogotiate.


4 plus a team option for 5.

and he can try to renegotiate his contract if he outplays it but that is entirely up to the team - all he could do is not show up and then he would be suspended + worse. Not bonners style and even the lowest malcontent in the league thinks twice before doing that... once you sign that contract you have no leverage.


----------



## -James- (Apr 27, 2004)

Ras said:


> Why give him 10 mil when he's only asking for 3.5?


 ?

He doesn't want 3.5 in total over the 4 years. 4 years divided by 10 mil is 2.5. Not bad in the days of Austin Croshere.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

How about 2 per for 3.


----------



## Divine Spammer (Jul 11, 2005)

-James- said:


> ?
> 
> He doesn't want 3.5 in total over the 4 years. 4 years divided by 10 mil is 2.5. Not bad in the days of Austin Croshere.


Excellent deal in the days of Austin Croshere. 
That's good management. 
Not overpaying players is important, and leads you to success. Ask the Spurs.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

blowuptheraptors said:


> How about 2 per for 3.


Thats a good deal for both sides. But Bonner's agent is looking for a Scalabrine type deal, which hopefully he doesn't get.


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

I think we should give it to him. 50% shooting is crazy. If he keeps that up he's a steal. If he doesn't, you can always move a small contract like that after a couple years (before 2007)

we could groom him to be a lights-out scorer off the bench like gentle ben. (could call him gentle matt)


----------



## charlz (Jun 9, 2003)

ansoncarter said:


> I think we should give it to him. 50% shooting is crazy. If he keeps that up he's a steal. If he doesn't, you can always move a small contract like that after a couple years (before 2007)
> 
> we could groom him to be a lights-out scorer off the bench like gentle ben. (could call him gentle matt)


the other thing is that he is better than that other boston carrot top Brian Scale-Brain who is making 5 mil per to go an be the token white dude in Boston.


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

I didn't even know Boston signed gentle Brian. Matt has no bargaining chips left lol


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

and Dan Rosenbaum's stats just ranked him the worst defensive pf in the league

(we should still give him his 5yrs though. 2.5mil is fairly easy to move. And his shooting skills are ferocious)


----------



## jdg (Jun 13, 2003)

charlz said:


> the other thing is that he is better than that other boston carrot top Brian Scale-Brain who is making 5 mil per to go an be the token white dude in Boston.


I thought it was 3 mi per for Brian. Wasn't it a 5 year/$15 mill contract?


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

yeah 5yr, 15mil according to some Boston paper on google

who is better between those two? I'll take the uber-shooting-prospect (matt)


----------



## jdg (Jun 13, 2003)

ansoncarter said:


> yeah 5yr, 15mil according to some Boston paper on google
> 
> who is better between those two? I'll take the uber-shooting-prospect (matt)


I take Bonner over Brian any day. But I don't take Bonner for over $3 mill a year. Scalabrine was overpaid.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

I say give him whatever he wants cuz he's the fans favourits..

If he's asking for 2.5mil? give him 3.5..i just love his energy on the court.


----------



## EBP2K2 (Jun 23, 2003)

okay, 2.5 mil per year doesnt sound so bad for a guy who barely missed the all rookie team IMO...

I think the sticking point is the SECURITY of a long term deal, a 5 year deal Babcock clearly isnt comfortable signing... he's prbably looking for a 3 year deal IMO...

I'd say give him 2.2 over 4 and 1 year team option or something similar...


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

5 years is good for us. Thats a joedumars/detroit/HAMILTON style contract

if Bonner stops hitting shots? he's easily tradeable. This one is a no-brainer imo


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

Air Fly said:


> I say give him whatever he wants cuz he's the fans favourits..
> 
> If he's asking for 2.5mil? give him 3.5..i just love his energy on the court.


would you just let him go? for nothing? we could frigging own him for cheap

Matt having Bosh in front of him is good news imo

just sign him and if he doesn't shoot 50 again wait till 2006 offseason and move him then. (thats worst-case scenario and tons would gamble on him imo) (worst case is we get zero-sum back)


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> I say give him whatever he wants cuz he's the fans favourits..


Good logic :greatjob:


----------



## foul_balls (Jun 25, 2004)

If it is so easy to move a small contract, then why are Eric Williams, Aaron Williams still here? Once upon a time, Eric Williams was in demand by Philly and NJ....

Giving 5 year contracts on anyone who had one very good year but who isn't a bona fide talent (IMO) is a bit risky. Just ask Glen Grunwald about long contracts with Yogi Stewart, JYD, Hakeem, Huffman?, etc. Toronto is still paying the price for some of those contracts. Even San Antonio felt it with fan favorite Malik Rose, and Rasho now. If it were a 3 year deal with team option for two more years at end of year 3, that would be acceptable.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

ansoncarter said:


> 5 years is good for us. Thats a joedumars/detroit/HAMILTON style contract
> 
> if Bonner stops hitting shots? he's easily tradeable. This one is a no-brainer imo


If he stops hitting shots, I don't know who would want him at any price.


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

-if he keeps hitting them we have a huge steal for the next 5yrs
-if he stays in the top10 we have a steal for the next 5yrs
-if he stays in the top20 we have a fair deal for the next 5yrs

I like our odds. (didn't put much thought into those though lol)

Odds are also decent someone gambles in the 2007 offseason on a guy who recently hit at a ridiculous clip who's signed cheap for only 3yrs. THrow in a 2nd rounder or two and the odds are real good imo. Always small ending deals floating around. 

(i'd rather focus completely on 2007, including maxing our cap space, but don't get the feeling thats the way we're headed. I'd bet money Calderon runs past 2007, and that we add more next offseason. If we're adding salary anyways, Matt is a good gamble at that price)


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

foul_balls said:


> If it is so easy to move a small contract, then why are Eric Williams, Aaron Williams still here? Once upon a time, Eric Williams was in demand by Philly and NJ....
> 
> Giving 5 year contracts on anyone who had one very good year but who isn't a bona fide talent (IMO) is a bit risky. Just ask Glen Grunwald about long contracts with Yogi Stewart, JYD, Hakeem, Huffman?, etc. Toronto is still paying the price for some of those contracts. Even San Antonio felt it with fan favorite Malik Rose, and Rasho now. If it were a 3 year deal with team option for two more years at end of year 3, that would be acceptable.


he's not making money like those guys. 2.5 is chicken feed. Thats, what, 4% of the roster's salary? for a guy who could be a great scorer off the bench? 

also think Aaron and EWill actually are moveable. Eric makes a fair bit more anyways, and is older/lessvaluable imo.

jsut my opinions (based on carefull, painstaking study and a background in scouting professionally)


----------



## foul_balls (Jun 25, 2004)

ansoncarter said:


> he's not making money like those guys. 2.5 is chicken feed. Thats, what, 4% of the roster's salary? for a guy who could be a great scorer off the bench?
> 
> also think Aaron and EWill actually are moveable. Eric makes a fair bit more anyways, and is older/lessvaluable imo.
> 
> jsut my opinions (based on carefull, painstaking study and a background in scouting professionally)


I don't mind having Bonner back for 2~2.5 mil for a couple of years. What I don't want to see is Bonner locked into a long-term 5 year contract and sitting on the end of the bench or on the injured list for a "knee contusion" in 3 years when Bosh and CV are taking most of the minutes. That doesn't make any financial sense regardless if it is only for 4% of the salary cap. Nate Huffman also took up 4% of the salary cap. I know Bonner is probably more talented, but I still wouldn't want to spend that money again on Bonner based on one good year, if he is going to be playing 3-4 min/game in 3 years.

Are you serious about scouting or were you just joking?


----------



## Divine Spammer (Jul 11, 2005)

You can't compare Bonner with Nate Huffman. 
Bonner is more proven than huffman, because he has already played in the NBA.

2nd thing- he's less fragile than Nate.


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

foul_balls said:


> I don't mind having Bonner back for 2~2.5 mil for a couple of years. What I don't want to see is Bonner locked into a long-term 5 year contract and sitting on the end of the bench or on the injured list for a "knee contusion" in 3 years when Bosh and CV are taking most of the minutes. That doesn't make any financial sense regardless if it is only for 4% of the salary cap. Nate Huffman also took up 4% of the salary cap. I know Bonner is probably more talented, but I still wouldn't want to spend that money again on Bonner based on one good year, if he is going to be playing 3-4 min/game in 3 years.
> 
> Are you serious about scouting or were you just joking?


I get what your saying. You might be right. I just don't think the risk is as high as you do

since we seem to keep adding salary anyways (I'd rather not add anyone), I have no reservations giving him that deal. Is there no way you can envision him being like Dell Curry for us? at a bargain basement price for the next 5yrs? I think the odds of that happening are better than him seeing 3mpg in a few years. Even then, bouncing a 2yr/5mil contract wouldn't be the toughest thing in the world. Add a 2nd rounder or two and he's gone. 


(yes I was a pro scout. For the raptors. That wasn't a joke. I was also a capologist for a few years)


----------



## foul_balls (Jun 25, 2004)

ansoncarter said:


> I get what your saying. You might be right. I just don't think the risk is as high as you do
> 
> since we seem to keep adding salary anyways (I'd rather not add anyone), I have no reservations giving him that deal. Is there no way you can envision him being like Dell Curry for us? at a bargain basement price for the next 5yrs? I think the odds of that happening are better than him seeing 3mpg in a few years. Even then, bouncing a 2yr/5mil contract wouldn't be the toughest thing in the world. Add a 2nd rounder or two and he's gone.
> 
> ...


Wow, cool. I wasn't sure if the sarcasm was failing to reach me over the internet, or if you were serious. Being a capologist sounds like a great job...

As you or someone said, it comes down to the trade factor. I would prefer not to take the risk, but if he continues to do what he did last year and doesn't get injured, he would be a very tradeable commodity in a few years , when there is no place for him here.

Anyway, sounds like we might be discussing a moot point, since I saw a different thread where Duhon is signing an offer sheet with the Raps.


----------



## Divine Spammer (Jul 11, 2005)

foul_balls said:


> Anyway, sounds like we might be discussing a moot point, since I saw a different thread where Duhon is signing an offer sheet with the Raps.


This is something I really don't understand.
Can't the team slide a bit from the MLE? 
Look at the Knicks. They are signing players 24/7 when they are way over the cap. I'm not saying it's good, and I know the knicks have much deeper pockets, but can't the Raps give a bit more? Like $1M more?


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

Divine Spammer said:


> This is something I really don't understand.
> Can't the team slide a bit from the MLE?
> Look at the Knicks. They are signing players 24/7 when they are way over the cap. I'm not saying it's good, and I know the knicks have much deeper pockets, but can't the Raps give a bit more? Like $1M more?


Teams over the cap only have the MLE to spend on free agents that aren't their own. The only other way to sign additional players is in sign-and-trade deals. So no, the Raptors can't spend more than they have unless they make trades for restricted free agents. You can typically spend to whatever your budget is on your own restricted free agents, which is why so many teams are capped way out.

Edit: you can always sign players for the minimum salary, which has been around ~$400k in the past but could be a little more with the new CBA, I'm not sure.


----------



## Divine Spammer (Jul 11, 2005)

Why can't they sign them both? 
Calderon+Duhon with MLE, and with Bonner they slide a bit because he's our player. I know this is called the "Larry Bird Rule", right? 

BTW, I know you can always sign players for minimum, but I didn't know it's such a low amount. 
I thought it's more like... One Milion Dollar!


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

Divine Spammer said:


> Why can't they sign them both?
> Calderon+Duhon with MLE, and with Bonner they slide a bit because he's our player. I know this is called the "Larry Bird Rule", right?
> 
> BTW, I know you can always sign players for minimum, but I didn't know it's such a low amount.
> I thought it's more like... One Milion Dollar!


I'm not that great at capology so if I make a mistake here someone please correct it.

The Bird right applies to players who have been with your team for three years. In that situation you can sign them for any amount regardless of your cap situation.

In Bonner's case, he's a second-round pick who's only been with our team for a year, but we have extended a qualifying offer to him. So while we can match most offers he gets up to the MLE, we can't exceed the MLE. And since we've already spent approx. $1.5M on Calderon, if Matt gets an offer that either exceeds our budget for him or exceeds the amount we have remaining of our MLE, we can't keep him.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

You can continue signing additional player, as many as you like i think, as long as they aren't for more than the vet min (or somewhere thereabouts). You can only match (restricted non bird) players, if above the cap, for the amount of the MLE that you have left. The big thing here would be- did Calderon even take part of the MLE or did he just get a minimum deal, has this been anounced?


----------



## ansoncarter (Dec 22, 2004)

Babcock indirectly said we used some of the mle on Calderon. (Someone asked him about affording both Duhon/Bonner. He said we probably couldn't and mentioned the Calderon signing)


----------



## charlz (Jun 9, 2003)

vigilante said:


> Good logic :greatjob:


classic avtar vigi - LOL


----------



## Divine Spammer (Jul 11, 2005)

Thanks for your explanations, Speedy and SkyWalker. 

I hope we'll see both in TO. 
We were a lot smarter if we knew how much of our MLE was spent on Calderon. 
I think we'll see Matt in ACC, because the Bulls will probably match the offer for Duhon.


----------



## Benis007 (May 23, 2005)

^^

Agreed. 

BUT - you gotta give reeespect to Babs for the move considering that the Bulls still need to sign Curry and Chandler. I think Chicago is more worried about losing C & C before they worry about Duhon.


----------



## Benis007 (May 23, 2005)

*Slam Article*

Bonner in Limbo

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Basketball/NBA/Toronto/2005/08/10/1166749-sun.html


----------



## Turkish Delight (Mar 17, 2004)

I really want to see Bonner in a Raptors uni next season, but if I had to choose between him and Chris, I'd take the PG. As it stands, we already got Bosh and Charlie at the 4. Bonner would be struggling to find a lot of playing time on this team. If we do sign Duhon, I think they can squeeze him in at the PG spot, and give either Calderon or Rafer some time at the SG position. Then again, Babcock may have a deal pending on this signing, and if we do get Duhon, maybe Rafer will be on his way out shortly afterwards.


----------



## GuelphRaptorsFan (Apr 9, 2003)

I would agree that there is an apparent logjam at PF if I thought we had any Cs that would eat up significant minutes. Since we really don't, I suspect we're going to have to load up a PF and use them to shore up C. That being the case, I think Bonner is more valuable than Duhon. But I could easily be biased by my firm belief there's no way Chicago won't match the offer for Duhon.


----------



## Divine Spammer (Jul 11, 2005)

Turkish Delight said:


> As it stands, we already got Bosh and Charlie at the 4. Bonner would be struggling to find a lot of playing time on this team.



GRF's right, and I want to remind you-

You still don't know what Charlie's value will be next year. 
When you sign Matt, you know you get a guy who gives hustle and long-range shooting off the bench. Hopefully he'll even develop a bit. 

I hope Charlie will silence all the ESPN smart asses, but we can't be sure he'll do it.


----------



## foul_balls (Jun 25, 2004)

Divine Spammer said:


> GRF's right, and I want to remind you-
> 
> You still don't know what Charlie's value will be next year.
> When you sign Matt, you know you get a guy who gives hustle and long-range shooting off the bench. Hopefully he'll even develop a bit.
> ...


I don't agree in one respect, that Bonner helps out with the C problem. Bonner is a PF/SF. Villanueva, at least, was a center/forward in college and has played the position. I like Bonner and having him AND a guard would be ideal, but I'd rather have another guard if it were not possible. 

Would you guys prefer Bonner/Cook or Bonner/Jay Williams over Duhon? I don't know yet...I still might pick Duhon, who can push Rafer to be better.


----------



## GuelphRaptorsFan (Apr 9, 2003)

> I don't agree in one respect, that Bonner helps out with the C problem. Bonner is a PF/SF. Villanueva, at least, was a center/forward in college and has played the position. I like Bonner and having him AND a guard would be ideal, but I'd rather have another guard if it were not possible.


I would agree that you can't play Bonner at C, but you can have Bonner play minutes at PF and allow another PF to slide over and play minutes at PF. If you have a small guard on the roster instead of Bonner, you can't do that.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

GuelphRaptorsFan said:


> I would agree that you can't play Bonner at C, but you can have Bonner play minutes at PF and allow another PF to slide over and play minutes at PF. If you have a small guard on the roster instead of Bonner, you can't do that.


Sure we can- bring in Pape and slide Charlie to 5. bring in Charlie and slide Bosh to 5, etc.


----------



## charlz (Jun 9, 2003)

SkywalkerAC said:


> Sure we can- bring in Pape and slide Charlie to 5. bring in Charlie and slide Bosh to 5, etc.


exactly


----------



## foul_balls (Jun 25, 2004)

GuelphRaptorsFan said:


> I would agree that you can't play Bonner at C, but you can have Bonner play minutes at PF and allow another PF to slide over and play minutes at PF. If you have a small guard on the roster instead of Bonner, you can't do that.


Yeah, I should have explained myself better. The teams that I can think of that played 2 PF's are

Detroit - Wallaces (both who can be considered almost C's)
Phoenix - Amare and Marion (Marion is undersized but probably the most athletic and best defensive SF in the league (in terms of steals, blocks and defensive rebounds)
NY - Thomas and Sweetney (very poor combo last year)

I don't have stats but IMO, I don't remember Bonner defending alot of PF's last season. I remember him often trying to fight through screens or running around screens to try to defend SF's. (Maybe someone can dig up some obscure stat on defence, like time played defending opposing PF?)

So, I don't believe a tandem of Bosh+Bonner, Villanueva+Bonner can defend the interior enough like a combo of Bosh+CV, Bosh+Sow or CV+Sow possibly could. Bonner reminds me of JYD in one respect; he would be weak on interior defence like JYD.


----------



## GuelphRaptorsFan (Apr 9, 2003)

Right, but all those guys were here last year. From a PF/C point of view, we're in the same place we were last year, although we are swapping a rookie (Villanueva) for a veteran (Marshall), so we probably lose minutes there, at least initially. So losing Bonner's minutes at PF would mean we'd have to rely more on the centers we do have, 'cause our PFs would have to play more minutes at PF.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

GuelphRaptorsFan said:


> Right, but all those guys were here last year. From a PF/C point of view, we're in the same place we were last year, although we are swapping a rookie (Villanueva) for a veteran (Marshall), so we probably lose minutes there, at least initially. So losing Bonner's minutes at PF would mean we'd have to rely more on the centers we do have, 'cause our PFs would have to play more minutes at PF.


Well we are also expecting Hoffa to play almost twice as many minutes, as well as Pape Sow.


----------



## GuelphRaptorsFan (Apr 9, 2003)

> Well we are also expecting Hoffa to play almost twice as many minutes, as well as Pape Sow.


That would explain the difference, as I am not expecting that.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

vigilante said:


> Well we are also expecting Hoffa to play almost twice as many minutes, as well as Pape Sow.


Yeah, I'm thinking 20 minutes for Baby.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

SkywalkerAC said:


> Yeah, I'm thinking 20 minutes for Baby.


So Hoffa means baby? I thought Nene meant baby. Which is it?


----------



## Benis007 (May 23, 2005)

Hoffa means suck


----------



## charlz (Jun 9, 2003)

speedythief said:


> So Hoffa means baby? I thought Nene meant baby. Which is it?


Nene does mean baby - can we get a translation for Hoffa over here?


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

speedythief said:


> So Hoffa means baby? I thought Nene meant baby. Which is it?


Nene means baby; Hoffa IS Baby.

It's funny cause it's true.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

I'm pretty sure Nene doesn't mean baby.. maybe its different in Brazil than it is in Portugal.

And Baby is Hoffa's nickname.. because he has a babyface..


----------

