# Mo PETE SIGNS OFFER SHEET! Raps have 15 days to match



## rapsfan4life (Apr 10, 2004)

http://tsn.ca/nba/news_story.asp?ID=91284&hubName=nba

Well we knew new orleans was making a move and now has but we really know nothing about the money situation, and naturally we need that info. I say match if reasonable but how much is it is the question.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

Interesting. This will test Babcock's mettle. Either Peterson is a piece that we need to retain, or he will refuse to overpay for him and allow him to walk. Either way, it is going to affect the so-called culture of this franchise. Peterson is one of only three players on the team (with Vince and Alvin) to have been part of the franchise for a long time.


----------



## DINOSAUR (Sep 20, 2003)

Yahoo 



> The Hornets did not release the amount of the offer, citing club policy. Peterson's agent, Rob Pelinka, said the deal was worth $15 million over three years.


So 15 mill/3 years

I say match it, it's a little to much for MoPete, but the offer sheet is for only 3 years which isn't to long.

Does anyone know by how much a team must match an offer sheet by? Or can we just match it by offering the same thing?


----------



## TOballer (Aug 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DINOSAUR</b>!
> Yahoo
> 
> 
> ...


u have to at least offer the same thing...i guess u could offer more but that just wouldnt make sense.


----------



## Turkish Delight (Mar 17, 2004)

*Hornets Sign Peterson to Offer Sheet*

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1841365

The deal is said to be about 15 million over 3 years.. Look at what words Peterson had to say.. 


"I'm excited about the opportunity to play for New Orleans," Peterson said Friday night in an interview with The Associated Press. "After Toronto didn't show a lot of loyalty, I feel like New Orleans is giving me a fresh start with a first-class organization."

Well we really are in a bad position now.. We could have probably got Rafer for less money, and because of that Peterson's agent thinks Mo Pete deserves as much as him.. We surely wont be able to match that..


----------



## Mike1155 (Apr 9, 2004)

Where does it leave the Raptors if they walk away from Peterson? Would they be able to replace him?


----------



## Junkyard Dog13 (Aug 9, 2003)

Don't match, 5 mill/season for a guy like Mo Pete is too much, Murray is making what 4 mill he is I believe in last year of his contract replace mo with him.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

bye bye MoPete

You guys should give him a nice appaluse when he does come back though. He's done just about everything the team asked of him, and really stepped up during the record-setting season of injuries 2 yrs ago.


----------



## charlz (Jun 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Junkyard Dog13</b>!
> Don't match, 5 mill/season for a guy like Mo Pete is too much, Murray is making what 4 mill he is I believe in last year of his contract replace mo with him.


Let him go - that is too much money. Give his minutes to RMJ, Rose, Murray.

is the 3rd year an option?

I think you can do alot more with 3 mill per year. His defense and durability are tempting - but his night life and lack of commitment flies in the face of what Toronto is trying to do.


----------



## Turkish Delight (Mar 17, 2004)

Lack of commitment? What are you talking about? He had a good season.. Don't just look at the stats sheet.. It's not his fault he was apart of KO's coaching system. He was just stuffed in the corner pockets all game.. Plus you look at everyone else on the team, all their numbers dropped.. Mo Pete may not be worth 5 million, but he is definately worth more than what the Raptors offered him, and if Rafer gets that much, I think Mo Pete's salary shouldn't be too far off..


----------



## Slasher (Jul 11, 2003)

> Originally said by <b>Morris Peterson</b>!
> ``I'm excited about the opportunity to play for New Orleans,'' Peterson said Friday night. ``After Toronto didn't show a lot of loyalty, I feel like New Orleans is giving me a fresh start with a first-class organization.''


Sounds like he doesn't even want to be picked up by Toronto.


----------



## madman (Oct 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Slasher</b>!
> 
> 
> Sounds like he doesn't even want to be picked up by Toronto.


true. I was hoping we would resign him but i guess no matter what he is going to New Orleans. 

Good luck Mo playing in the west and in the hardest division


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

he probably will be a bench player 

pg-baron
sg-west
sf-mashburn


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

5 million a year for him? ya sure it's good compared to the other contracts signed this summer but he isn't even a starter. who wants a 5 million dollar a year bench shooting guard? we already got one lol no thanks.


----------



## KeonBackinTO (May 26, 2003)

The Raptors need to resign him, it will be a total short sighted idea not to resign him. 

It may be a little much for a player like him, but when you think about we aren't going to get anyone better for that price most likely. And the deal is only 3 years.

Here's why the Raps need to sign him to this deal. 

1. The Raps don't need cap space, with Jalen and VC on the books for at least 3 more years the Raps won't ever be under the cap til there done. So letting him walk is useless in that aspect.

2. We will lose depth. Not right now, but eventually in 2 years. Murray isn't going to come back, and the Raps won't be able to get a player like Mo Pete for any cheaper.

3. If they do get a player like Mo Pete it will be for MLE, and it will hurt future salary cap space. Since it will prolly be 4 or 5 year contract in 2 years. And the Raps need to use the MLE in a better way the next 2 years.


----------



## EBP2K2 (Jun 23, 2003)

5 mil for mo? jebus...

Babcock and Michell just may be comfortable going with Murray this season.... whatever mo pete does, murray can do except taking charges..


----------



## CrimsonShadows (Jun 12, 2003)

Murray's Game is just awful. I have been watching raptors rewind on RapTV and in the first 20 games where he wasn't on the bench the guy was just garbage. His shot selection is worse then Kobe's (and since his not kobe they don't even hit the rim). He is invisible on D, hands of stone when dribbling, and runs the floor like a 60 old man.

I think benching him was the only thing to do, since whenever he is on the floor it is an adventage for the other team. If we don't sign back Mo Pete we should give his minutes to RMJ and keep Murray on the bench where he belongs. But if we trade Vince, then we should play him as much as possible and the Lottery is ours.


----------



## lucky777s (Nov 13, 2003)

It was reported that the Hornets were only offering 2 years guaranteed plus a team option.

Not exactly a huge sign of confidence in Mo. Most FA's are getting 5 and 6 year deals guaranteed.

That shows that Mo's value is really not that high around the league. Hornets are scared that Mash may not be able to play at all this year

The Raps would be hit hard with luxury tax if they match this deal. At least 3 mill would have to be paid to the league for Peterson this year since the Raps should be over the 55 mill tax threshhold. That means Mo really costs the Raps 8 mill.

Someone told me that the tax actually works out to a 3:1 ratio because the team also loses out on payments from the league as well. That would mean Mo could cost MLSE over 14 mill this year (5 in salary and 9 in tax and lost payments). If that's true it would be insane for the Raps to match.

Surprised Babs didn't work out a sign and trade with NO for a second round pick that would have seen Mo get a cheaper contract.


----------



## charlz (Jun 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jcintosun911</b>!
> Lack of commitment? What are you talking about? He had a good season.. Don't just look at the stats sheet.. It's not his fault he was apart of KO's coaching system. He was just stuffed in the corner pockets all game.. Plus you look at everyone else on the team, all their numbers dropped.. Mo Pete may not be worth 5 million, but he is definately worth more than what the Raptors offered him, and if Rafer gets that much, I think Mo Pete's salary shouldn't be too far off..


Mo Pete's lack of commitment has been well cronicled.
He came in to camp on a contract year out of shape (by his own admission).


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

:wave:


----------



## KeonBackinTO (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>blowuptheraptors</b>!
> :wave:


I dont understand this. Mo Pete wasnt junk and was the best perimeter defender on team, i have no ideawhy you are happy since the Raps will waste MLE on similar type player in 2 years, when Lammond is gone, instead of using it a position they need if Mo was still here.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

I wish Petrson all the best, he was a good defender on the perimeter and took a charge as good as or better than anyone in the league. 

His problem was he was not a true small forward and did not have the guard skills to play the big guard position. I am hoping that this may allow us to pickup a long (6'8" - 6'9") young player and let him develope into a guy to run the floor and play solid "D" along side Bosh for the future.

I can't think of anyone that was undrafted of who played in the NBDL last year, I am sure there is someone for cheap, they can take Milts spot on the roster!


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

I don't like it, but they should match.

As much as Mo doesn't impress us, he is pretty much impossible to replace.

With Vince's injury history- well, I personally don't want to see Dion Glover play 35mpg for a month...

Wing FAs that we might pick up for min =
Veterans on last legs:
Steve Smith
Stacey Augmon
Bryon Russel

OR
Unproven bench player:
Brandon Amstrong (Nets have his Bird rights, really strange that you can have Bird rights for a guy you hardly ever played)
DerMarr Johnson (raw athlete)

I'm guessing that Wes Person has or will go for more than the Raps can pay.

You could also go a little bigger, and play Roger Mason some more. 
SSFs=
Darvin Ham, Calbert Cheaney, even Robert Horry. (At some point the cap space and MLEs will run out and some good players will sign for league minimum.)

There are also some undersized SFs like Rodney Buford and Tremaine Foulkes.

I think its a big drop off from MoPete.


----------



## KeonBackinTO (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>The Mad Viking</b>!
> I don't like it, but they should match.
> 
> As much as Mo doesn't impress us, he is pretty much impossible to replace.
> ...


I agree. And the Raps will have to use the MLE when Lammond leaves on a player in MO's position. It will cut into the cap space after Jalen is gone, and always takes away from getting a player at another position.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

there are many interesting stories to come out of this offer, i really don't know where to start.

in my opinion, you absolutely keep morris peterson for that kind of money. how does it help to let him walk? the length is hardly crippling since we're already well over the cap for the next three seasons. so by process of elimination, is it that we have another player in front of whom mo is standing? in my opinion, no. 

listen, there have been many threads written on this already, dating back several months (years?) i'm sure, so it's probably not all that worthwhile to bring up the same points again. suffice it to say that given the raptors current situation- in pretty much every respect- morris peterson should be matched. if you're looking to not pay the luxury tax, alright- there's one reason to give him his walking papers. but frankly, i think that may be the only one, and it's not something that i can truly support on its own.

he's young, athletic, experienced (relatively) and (by all accounts) classy towards the media... which brings up the more important point (imo):

what does he really mean by the "lack of loyalty" statement? that could be interpreted in many ways, and none of which can be seen favorably from the standpoint of the toronto raptors. it's just blind speculation, granted, but i think he may be saying it like that simply because he'd prefer to play in new orleans and doesn't want the contract matched by the raps- in that case the "loyalty" would be serving as the irrelevant PR excuse. that's fine in my world, but then why raise such a specific criticism? what's more, i don't know whether morris peterson is truly the kind of man who'd cite a problem like that if it held no substance. so what is he really talking about?

it's a mystery because how would you then read what babcock's been saying publicly? we've been hearing "we sincerely want mo back - and they know that" for weeks already, but the loyalty/commitment issue would directly oppose such claims. either someone's full of it (and it's possible) or there's a severe problem regarding our lines of communication in toronto... _again._

this summer has been interesting, but to this point i don't think i can say that i've agreed with any of our major transactions. if morris peterson walks for that contract, it'll be bad enough from my point of view- if the actual *handling* of his restricted free agency is compounding the problem, then i'd pretty much suggest that this summer has been a relative disaster... at least to this point.

sure, the raptors may yet turn it around- the moves we see as "unpopular" now may in fact be blessings in disguise down the road- but i don't know whether they have my full support in pursuing their new "vision", "mission" and "direction", primarily because it just seems like more of the same myopia.

peace


----------



## lucky777s (Nov 13, 2003)

Look, we have to make SOME changes.

Our team is basically the same as last year, we might not have a first round pick this year, and if we do sign MoP our salary will be locked in at over 60 million next year.

We are at 55 right now without MO. The only contract coming off our books is Marshall, but his 4.5 is more than made up for by the 10% raises that every other player under contract is getting.

So basically if we sign Mo at 5 mill the Raptors will not be able to use their MLE next year and we are stuck with the exact same team once again. MLSE is not going up to 65 million in salary.

Most people on this board refuse to let anyone go.

Carter - no way
Marshall - we need him too much
MoP - our best defender, have to keep him
Bosh - untouchable

Well guess what? Those are the only assets we have that anyone would want and give us value for.

This team is at best a bottom seed in the East (by record, who knows how the divisions will work out).

We have to make changes. Mo has shown ZERO signs of any upside. Give MasonJr his shot.


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lucky777s</b>!
> 
> 
> We are at 55 right now without MO.



that's not true at all the hoops hype salary page is way off. montross's contract is off the books aswell so whatever.


----------



## lucky777s (Nov 13, 2003)

Look up the facts before you say something isn't true.

Here, I will hold your hand.

JR - 14.5
VC - 12.5
AW - 5.8
LM - 4.8
DM - 4.5
Rafer 4.0
CB - 3.0
Arauj 2.0
-----------------
Total 51.1 million for 8 guys !!!

plus we have to round out our bench with minimum guys

RMJ - 1
JM - 1
MB - 1
Milt - 1
??? - 1
------------------
Thats 56.1 million for 13 guys WITHOUT MOP!!!

Add in MoPs 5 mill and we are OVER 60 million in salary and paying luxury tax.

Note that there is no mention of Montross in that list.

As I said in my last post Marshall is the only contract expiring this year, but that money is more than made up for by the raises in our other contracts so it results in ZERO savings for next summer.

We have to make some changes.


----------



## TOballer (Aug 29, 2003)

remember that theres no hockey next season...so MLSE can spend most/all of its money on the raps...some of the contracts will expire next season anyways, so IMO money isnt that big of an issue rite now.


----------



## -inVINCEible- (Jul 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TOballer</b>!
> remember that theres no hockey next season...so MLSE can spend most/all of its money on the raps...some of the contracts will expire next season anyways, so IMO money isnt that big of an issue rite now.



im pretty sure there will be hockey

someone will cave in, thats a fact


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lucky777s</b>!
> Look, we have to make SOME changes.
> 
> Our team is basically the same as last year, we might not have a first round pick this year, and if we do sign MoP our salary will be locked in at over 60 million next year.
> ...


there are several things here that jump out at me. first, (imo) it is not that "people" refuse to let _any_ of those players go. rather, it's more likely that "people" are rightfully hesitant to see players of value (such as the aforementioned) released for nothing. i don't mind moving anyone provided it helps team (pardon the cliche), and that would absolutely include mo peterson- i mean, who are we kidding? 

the fact is, we are saddled with the contracts we already have. can we blame morris peterson for the fact that alvin williams has another 3 years on his deal? will allowing morris peterson to effectively disappear help to eliminate that albatross "from the books"? he would only be the goat, and the perceived benefit would be a mirage... at best.

we have to play with the cards we're dealt. considering all factors, i don't think letting morris peterson walk for anything short of an unreasonable contract is wise. i don't think the 3 year/$15 million offer sheet is unreasonable- in fact, i would almost consider it market value. it's a shame that matching would preclude the raps from subsequently trading him to new orleans but those are the breaks- and he likely wouldn't be seen as "untradeable" elsewhere. more importantly, letting him walk leaves us in the same position, if not worse. i have yet to see an argument strong enough to convince me that mo should be free to leave. 

in my opinion, restricted free agency was conceived to protect teams in situations precisely like these. i think we keep peterson, regardless of how little we think of him, because it helps not at all to play without him. 

peace


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

To be honest, how we move with Mo should mesh with the direction of the club. If they are going with the present, with VC or a similar player through trade, you keep Mo as an asset and depth.

If they go for youth because of the Vince situation, I let him go on a free, save the money and let the kids play and improve. 

Babcock should have an idea which direction he's going to take, in deciding to match or not.


----------



## djmyte (Jun 10, 2002)

Raps will match. With the signing of Rafer they obviously feel they can compete and losing Mo for nothing wouldn't help the cause.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

I agree with matching the offer. We are stuck in cap hell for the next few seasons, so as long as we don't sign him to a contract that runs beyond the summer when Jalen's expires, I'm fine with that. It's not like we can get a better player in free agency with what little we have left. Might just as well keep him and hope he improves under Mitch.


----------



## Dathomieyouhate (Jun 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>lucky777s</b>!
> Look up the facts before you say something isn't true.
> 
> Here, I will hold your hand.
> ...


those are numbers are way off pal we're under 50 is all i know

rafer 3.5 


you the new gm? never new you had the salary figures


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

face it dathomie, you just got pwned by lucky777s!


----------



## Mike1155 (Apr 9, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>lucky777s</b>!
> Look up the facts before you say something isn't true.
> 
> Here, I will hold your hand.
> ...


WOW. The Raptors gotta be one of the worst bang for the buck teams in the league. All that money just to miss the playoffs.........:uhoh: 

You gotta wonder how much MLSE is going to put up with that. Why would they or any owner pay 60 million for basically the same team that finished in the draft lottery last year?


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Dathomieyouhate</b>!
> those are numbers are way off pal we're under 50 is all i know
> 
> rafer 3.5
> ...


According to HH, we're at 54.2, but yes, Rafer is 3.5.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Wasnt this same overpaid team 3 games out of the playoffs and was sitting comfy at the 5th spot until the injury bug struck


----------

