# Malik Rose is he worth the money



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

i've watched the guy several times and while he gives good minutes...i think he is vastly overpaid. Do you agree?


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

7 yrs / 42 million (signed in July '02)? That does strike me as overpaid.

Put M-Rose on any other team (minus a Tim Duncan) and you have a slightly better version of Alan Henderson. But the guy does play D well and grabs boards pretty well for guy his size.



VD


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Vin Diesel</b>!
> 7 yrs / 42 million (signed in July '02)? That does strike me as overpaid.
> 
> Put M-Rose on any other team (minus a Tim Duncan) and you have a slightly better version of Alan Henderson. But the guy does play D well and grabs boards pretty well for guy his size.
> ...


For a guy his size is what suprises me...he really has no solid position and doesn't have the athletic ability of a Kenyon Martin(another tweener)..i guess he is TD's buddy. don't get me wrong i love his effort and i guess that is why the Spurs are playing well. I just think if you need the bucks to make Duncan hang around...that isn't the way to do it.


----------



## tenkev (Jun 12, 2002)

I disagree. I love his intangibles. He works hard all the time, he is a good passer for a big man, and he is the right type of character guy for this team.


----------



## Lakers6010 (Mar 18, 2003)

Only reason becuase they payed him so much is becuase Spurs didn't wanna see Rose in Laker in


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

Malik is a lot like the JYD's, Eduardo Najera's, etc of the league. They flat out hustle. They rebound, dive for loose balls, scrap, defend, and hustle.

They are guys that every team needs. The Bulls had a great one in Rodman in the later 90's. Malik Rose might be a little overpaid, but he is an integral part of the Spurs.


----------



## (-) 0 † § I-I () † (Jun 11, 2002)

*I think*

This guy is hard to value , because his numbers and sometime his gamee doesnt look overwhelming , but his guy is someone I would pay that money. He is a crazy hussler, veteran, leader and can score when he needss too.


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

That's a lot of CA$$H.. But the Spurs truely appreciates the way he has come along & his noticeable improvements. He's physical, rebounds, plays the post well & he can make his shots. He's undersized at the 4, but like E.Brand and Charles Barkely his hard work makes up for it, making him very effective. I have to admitt he holds his ground well against Shaq, he won't stop him...who can?, but the key is making bigger players work and earn their shots. I say Malik deserves the Fund$ :yes:


----------



## Lakers_32_4ever (Dec 30, 2002)

I think trying in todays world deserves some kind of money. mad dog wouldnt even be in the nba if he didnot hustle. hustlers deserve everything they get,


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

*Why Spurs-Pistons is the league's next great rivalry starting THIS YEAR*

First of all, let's take a look at the contract that Malik Rose signed during the 2002 offseason. His contract provides a starting point to the argument that the Spurs and Pistons will be the top two NBA teams over the next 3-4 years.

We've been having a discussion about whether or not Malik Rose is worth what the Spurs gave him during the summer of 2002. A player is worth whatever the market is willing to pay, so is Malik Rose worth 7 yrs $42 mil? Well, keep in mind that $42 mil over 7 yrs averages out to $6 mil/yr. Also keep in mind that he does not just get $6 mil every single season. He will get paid more money during the final year of that contract than in any other year of that contract, and he will get paid LESS money during the FIRST year of that contract than in any other year of that contract.

An NBA contract is allowed to go up a MAXIMUM of 10% per year (this is to prevent teams from deferring money the way that Jerry West did with Shaq when the Lakers pried Shaq away from Orlando). That means that this is approximately what Malik Rose is getting during each season of this 7 yrs $42 mil contract:

Year One (2002-03): $4.5 mil
Year Two (2003-04): $5.0 mil
Year Three (2004-05): $5.5 mil
Year Four (2005-06): $6.1 mil
Year Five (2006-07): $6.7 mil
Year Six (2007-08): $7.4 mil
Year Seven (2008-09): $8.1 mil

What happened with Rose is that the best offer that he could get from ANYBODY was the full MLE, which was $4.5 mil last summer. The Spurs considered him to be an integral part of their championship plans--and they were right, in case you haven't noticed--so they gave him what the market had determined he was worth, which was, again, the full MLE. Another team could've made him that same 7-year $42 mil offer, but why would he take that offer from another team? He liked playing for San Antonio, and San Antonio was willing to pay him what the market had determined he was worth. It worked out perfectly.

What happened with Malik Rose (and with many other players last summer) provides us a glimpse into the future. Those of you who don't understand why guys like Gilbert Arenas and Michael Olowokandi aren't going to get contracts starting at $8-$9 mil need to understand that the MARKET determines a player's worth. The MARKET determined that Malik Rose was worth 7 yrs $42 mil, so that's what he got. The market will determine that Arenas and Olowokandi are each worth a starting salary of $6.0-$6.5 mil, so that's exactly what they'll get. Let's say that Denver both gives them 7 year deals starting at $6.5 mil. This is what they'll each get per season in this scenario:

Year One (2003-04): $6.5 mil
Year Two (2004-05): $7.2 mil
Year Three (2005-06): $7.9 mil
Year Four (2006-07): $8.7 mil
Year Five (2007-08): $9.6 mil
Year Six (2008-09): $10.6 mil
Year Seven (2009-10): $11.7 mil

Total: 7 yrs $62 mil

You'll notice that this is pretty much what guys like Bonzi Wells, Raef LaFrentz, and Rashard Lewis got last summer. There is a reason why they got this--the MARKET determined that this was what they were WORTH.

By the way, if you think that either Arenas or Olowokandi will turn down a GUARANTEED 7 yrs $62 mil, you're nuts.

Some teams are foolish and give guys more than what the market is willing to pay. These teams ultimately suffer--their luxury tax penalty is harsher than it would be if they were financially responsible, and their bloated payroll ultimately severely limits what they are able to do because of the salary cap (and other teams' unwillingness to take on overpaid players).

A handful of teams understand how to play the luxury tax-salary cap game properly, and those teams are positioning themselves for longterm success. In fact, two of those teams--San Antonio and Detroit--are ALREADY enjoying an enormous amount of success. Look for a San Antonio-Detroit NBA Finals rivalry to evolve STARTING THIS YEAR and to continue for THE NEXT 2-3 YEARS for this reason. Denver and Utah are two more teams that are playing the game properly, so look for both of these franchises to emerge as San Antonio's primary challengers for Western Conference superiority a few years down the road. [In the meantime, of course, the Spurs will DOMINATE.]

The vast majority of teams have killed themselves by overpaying for talent. These teams will suffer as a result, and the suffering doesn't necessarily end anytime soon. It will take YEARS for these teams to catch up with San Antonio and Detroit. There are also a few teams that have been bypassed by the Spurs this year in the West (Sacramento, Dallas, and the Lakers) and who will only be able to sit back and watch with envy as the Spurs get EVEN BETTER this summer (remember, the Spurs have cap room, and these teams do not) and WIDEN THE GAP between themselves and everybody else EVEN MORE.

[BY THE WAY, I am not suggesting here that the Kings, Mavs, and Lakers (as long as they have Shaq, that is--I explained a few weeks ago why Shaq may be playing his last season in L.A., but I won't get into that again here) cannot compete with the Spurs right now. They clearly ARE competing with the Spurs right now. But they aren't BETTER than the Spurs right now--no team has been better over the past three months than the Spurs--and they certainly won't be better this time NEXT year, that's for sure. MAYBE one of these three teams manages to beat San Antonio and go on to win the NBA Finals this year. This could obviously happen. But that doesn't really invalidate my argument. The Spurs are STILL in a much better position for longterm success than the Kings, Mavs, or Lakers. If one of these three teams is able to win the title next season, they will be defying the odds. And the Spurs will be the OVERWHELMING favorite to win it all next season. They are the favorite THIS year, too, but the majority of NBA fans are still obsessed with a) the Kings-Lakers rivalry and b) the Mavs brilliant play during the first two months of the 2002-03 regular season. The Kings-Lakers rivalry and the fact that it continues to get the bulk of media/fan attention only makes a Spurs 2003 championship EASIER, not HARDER. All the pressure is on the Kings and the Lakers. Most of you guys think I'm nuts here, but 2-3 months from now, you'll realize what's up.]

The following teams are severely limited in what they can do because they lacked the vision that the management/ownership teams in San Antonio and Detroit clearly had during the last several seasons:

1 Sacramento (overpaid for Webber, Bibby)
2 Dallas (overpaid for LaFrentz, Tariq Abdul-Wahad, Shawn Bradley)
3 Lakers (overpaid for Devean George, Shaq's contract is awful)
4 Minnesota (overpaid for Joe Smith, Marc Jackson, etc.)
5 Portland (at least their owner is a multibillionaire)
6 Houston (overpaid for Maurice Taylor, Kelvin Cato, Glen Rice)
7 Phoenix (overpaid for Penny Hardaway, Bo Outlaw, Googs)
8 Golden State (overpaid for Dampier, Fortson, Jamison, B. Sura, C. Mills)
9 Seattle (overpaid for Jerome James, Calvin Booth, V. Potapenko)
10 Memphis (overpaid for Michael Dickerson, Lorenzen Wright)
11 New Jersey (overpaid for Mutombo, Kittles)
12 Philly (overpaid for any number of players)
13 Indiana (overpaid for Croshere, Mercer)
14 Boston (the Vin Baker trade is an abomination)
15 Orlando (Grant Hill's contract is killing this team)
16 Milwaukee (overpaid for Tim Thomas, J. Caffey, A. Mason, E. Johnson)
17 New York (who ISN'T overpaid here?)
18 Atlanta (overpaid for Alan Henderson, Ratliff, Abdur-Rahim)
19 Chicago (overpaid for Rose, Eddie Robinson)
20 Toronto (again, who ISN'T overpaid here?)
21 Miami (overpaid for Brian Grant, Eddie Jones, Anthony Carter)

That's 21 of 29 NBA teams there, fellas!

That leaves eight teams. Four of these eight teams are already playing the luxury tax-salary cap game properly:

22 San Antonio
23 Detroit
24 Denver
25 Utah

Denver is 3-4 years away from challenging for a title, and Utah will be good with Andre Miller (who they'll get this summer for Gilbert Arenas/Michael Olowokandi money, maybe even slightly less) and Elton Brand (who they'll max out either this summer or the next summer) but probably not good enough to knock off San Antonio.

There are two other teams out there with a chance to start playing the luxury tax-salary cap game really successfully this summer, if their management/ownership teams have the necessary vision:

26 Washington
27 New Orleans

Now I THINK that both of those franchises are going to do it the RIGHT way, but I'm not sure, you never know. And both franchises are still quite a ways behind San Antonio and Detroit, plus they do not have anywhere NEAR the cap room that Denver and Utah will have. Washington won't have ANY cap room if Jerry Stackhouse wisely chooses to NOT opt out of his current contract, while New Orleans won't have any cap room after they re-sign PJ Brown. Look for these teams to emerge as major free agency players during the summer of 2004, however. Rasheed Wallace is one of the names that will be available, I'm not sure off the top of my head who else will be available (if anybody knows, please tell me).

Then, of course, you have:

28 Cleveland
29 Clippers

These two teams aren't hampered by longterm contracts, but their present management/ownership teams clearly lack the vision and/or the desire to ever get it done. These are obviously the two worst franchises in the NBA, and don't expect things to change anytime soon.

So yeah, look for an NBA Finals rivalry of Spurs-Pistons to emerge STARTING THIS SEASON and to continue for 2-3 years after that. Seriously! These are the two teams to beat in their respective conferences this season, and they WILL ONLY GET BETTER over the next few seasons because of how brilliantly their management/ownership teams have played the luxury tax-salary cap game!

BELIEVE IT!


----------

