# Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?



## robyg1974

The deal is for 3 yrs $12 mil--in other words, $3.6 mil in 2002-03, $4.0 mil in 2003-04, and $4.4 mil in 2004-05. Will the luxury tax-minded Bucks match this offer? Probably not. They have been stating for some time now that, one way or the other, Michael Redd will be in a Bucks uniform in 2002-03, but they were almost certainly just trying to appease their fans. No doubt they would match a more reasonable offer, but I don't see them matching this offer. Why? Because matching this offer will put them over the luxury tax threshold, and they DO NOT want to do that.

In other words, the Mavs just got themselves a HELL of a good shooter AND at an EXTREMELY reasonable price. After they match the Clips' 3 yr $6 mil offer for Wang Zhi Zhi, the Mavs will have TWO very nice and very cheap young players to trade for a big guy before the trade deadline. Here's a name to consider, a big guy who could emerge as a target by Mark Cuban if he gets off to a good start: ZYDRUNAS ILGAUSKUS. The Cavs are trimming payroll, in case anybody in here has been on the moon this summer and didn't know. But the Mavs won't (and CAN'T) make a move for another few months.

HERE'S what Dallas NOW looks like:

Starting lineup

PG Steve Nash (32 mpg)
SG Michael Finley (32 mpg)
SF Eduardo Najera (24 mpg)
PF Dirk Nowitzki (40 mpg)
C Raef LaFrentz (36 mpg)

Key reserves: Nick Van Exel (28 mpg), Michael Redd (20 mpg), Popeye Jones (16 mpg), Wang Zhi Zhi (12 mpg)

End of the bench (no PT): Shawn Bradley, Adrian Griffin, Raja Bell

Stashed on the IR: Avery Johnson, Tariq Abdul-Wahad, Evan Eschmeyer


----------



## Devestata

If you ask me, they probably won't match the offer unless they were going to start him. And I really don't see Milwaukee starting him or Allen at SF, since they have Kukoc. I say the Mavs get him.


----------



## Genjuro

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> Because matching this offer will put them over the luxury tax threshold, and they DO NOT want to do that.


I think they will be over luxury tax threshold with their current payroll, more than $54 mil. (HoopsHype).

Anyway, mathing the offer would cost them more than $7 mil. next year, and that's a lot of money when you have already a starting SG.


----------



## robyg1974

> Originally posted by <b>Genjuro</b>!
> 
> I think they will be over luxury tax threshold with their current payroll, more than $54 mil. (HoopsHype).
> 
> Anyway, mathing the offer would cost them more than $7 mil. next year, and that's a lot of money when you have already a starting SG.


Yeah, they are probably slightly over the luxury tax threshold ALREADY, but my guess is that with some manuevering before the trade deadline (again, a Keyon Dooling-for-Sam Cassell trade would work wonders for both teams), they could get below that threshold and therefore avoid losing MILLIONS of dollars (as described by NCBullsFan in his excellent article on RealGM earlier this summer). Matching the Mavs' offer, though, would ENSURE that the team has NO CHANCE of avoiding the tax and its disastrous consequences. PLUS, as you point out, the Bucks would have to match that contract dollar-for-dollar; in other words, instead of having to pay Redd $3.6 mil this year, they'll have to pay $7.2 mil for his services ($3.6 goes to Redd, $3.6 to the luxury tax).

In other words, I gotta think that Redd is a Maverick. Mark Cuban is one smart cookie!


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW

Keyon Dooling for Sam Cassell explain?


----------



## robyg1974

> Originally posted by <b>THE'clip'SHOW</b>!
> Keyon Dooling for Sam Cassell explain?


The Clippers are the ONLY team with quite a bit of cap room at the moment. This means that they are the ONLY team that does NOT have to match salaries in a trade. Sam Cassell makes nearly $3 mil more than Keyon Dooling this season--if the Clips didn't have so much cap room, this trade couldn't happen, but they DO have cap room, as you know.

The Bucks are NOT going to re-sign Sam Cassell next summer, so they need to get SOMETHING for him NOW, while they STILL CAN. When the Bucks choose to NOT match the Mavs' offer for Michael Redd, it should be a signal to all intelligent NBA fans that this team is REBUILDING and TRYING TO TRIM PAYROLL. In order to avoid the luxury tax, the Bucks need to do two things: 1) not match the Mavs' offer for Redd, and 2) dump another $2-$3 mil in payroll some way, some how.

This trade makes perfect sense for the Bucks, in other words. If they are REBUILDING, it makes sense to both trim payroll and get younger. Dooling is both younger and cheaper than Cassell, obviously. AND, like I said, this trade means that the Bucks get SOMETHING for Cassell; if they let him walk next summer, they get NOTHING.

This trade ALSO makes perfect sense for the Clippers, for a few reasons: 1) Dooling is buried on the depth chart at PG, behind both Andre Miller and Marko Jaric, so he doesn't figure into this team's plans at ALL; 2) The team needs to get rid of superfluous multiyear contracts in preparation for what figures to be a hellish summer in 2003, and Cassell's contract expires at the end of this season (he won't be re-signed), while Dooling's contract continues into the 2003-04 season; and 3) Cassell is a significantly better player than Dooling (right NOW, anyway), this team could use a veteran with "championship experience," and this team needs to actually win THIS SEASON. Cassell as a backup combo guard, on a team desperate for veteran leadership and experience? I like it, and every single Clippers fan should like it, too. At SOME point, you have to stop worrying about "the future" and actually WIN, and win NOW. AND, like I said, this team puts the Clips in a MUCH BETTER POSITION to re-sign their many key 2003 free agents, since the team will not re-sign Cassell (presumably).

So, to recap, Dooling fits into Milwaukee's rebuilding and cost-cutting plans perfectly, while Cassell gives the Clips veteran championship experience. QUESTION: What player on the Clips' current roster has ever made the playoffs? ANSWER: Nobody! Think about that for a second! This team needs a guy like Sam Cassell!


----------



## TheRifleman

You have a valid point for a trade like that, but I don't see Sam liking to be a back up to Miller.

I cannot see how the Bucks would let go of Redd...they have to be "creative" to keep him in Milwaukee.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW

I hear ya Roby.
I'm not familiar with Cassell's situation with the Bucks. As much as I love Keyon he might have to go....the only thing I can think of is trying Jaric at SG, but I don't know if he's best there. The two are complete opposites, one is big and defends, one is smaller and has great offense. I think this year will determine who stays at the clippers point (i think Jaric should be one because of his D and it all depends on Millers performance if he's re-signed). 
I am almost positive that KANDI will not stay and shouldn't be kept anyways.
YOU DO make a good point though, if the clips can save some money now with this trade that would be great, but if you don't resign Dre what then?
Sam would probably get very limited minutes too....I know he's a great shooter, he would probably be very opposed to this trade.....

Roby if you were the Clips owner were would you allocate your dough and re- sign?


----------



## Hitman

If the Mavericks get him, it will be a great coup. He is actually a far better fit, IMO, than Rashard Lewis was. He blends into an offense, plays excellent D and can nail the open 3 if you leave him to go guard Dirk, Nash or Fin. This would move the Mavs right up there with the Kings.

That said, I think the Bucks will match, as Grufield has pretty much said as much.


----------



## brazys

bucks traded glenn robinson for toni kukoc because:

*1) luxury tax*
2) chemistry
3) tim thomas minutes

so they are afraid of luxury tax (and suppose to!). so my guess is "we already let big dog away for nothing, so why we should dive into luxury zone because of reserve guard". i won't predict how it will affect bucks fans...

but it's nothing compared to watching sterling do nothing to keep his talent.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW

Please give me your opinion on whether or not the Bucks hold on to Redd...
If they let him go then the Clippers WILL get Wang...........

Everyone let me know what you think....I cant wait to find out.


----------



## robyg1974

> Originally posted by <b>THE'clip'SHOW</b>!
> Please give me your opinion on whether or not the Bucks hold on to Redd...
> If they let him go then the Clippers WILL get Wang...........
> 
> Everyone let me know what you think....I cant wait to find out.


The Mavs are looking like they won't match the Clips' offer for Wang, one way or the other. Why? Probably because Cuban has shopped the guy around all summer long, and he's found NOBODY willing to give him what he wants/needs (a decent veteran big guy) for Wang. Also because the Mavs organization apparently is not particularly impressed by Wang's chances of ever amounting to much in this league. I'm not either.

By the way, I REALLY don't think the Bucks will match that offer for Redd. Keep in mind that not only will the luxury-tax conscious Bucks have to match Redd's salary dollar-for-dollar (which means that, instead of Redd costing the Bucks $3.6 mil in 2002-03, he'll cost them $7.2 mil), this is a team that still has a chance of dumping a little more payroll (e.g., Sam Cassell for Keyon Dooling, maybe Tim Thomas and Ervin Johnson somehow to the Knicks, there are lots of possibilities) in an attempt to avoid what could be some disastrous luxury tax-related expenses.

So I will be SHOCKED if the Bucks match the offer for Redd. Although I have been shocked several times this summer by the irrational decisions of several teams, so I suppose it could happen again. Keep in mind that the Bucks have already indicated a desire to dump payroll (see the Glenn Robinson trade for details).

Wang Zhi Zhi's fate, who cares? This guy will never be a good NBA player. He's exactly the kind of cheap player that Donald Sterling likes. Donald Sterling is interested in QUANTITY (a bunch of unproven young guys) more than QUALITY. You guys need to understand why the Clips have signed Wang--they are bracing for next summer's mass exodus. Here's what the Clips' starting lineup could look like in 2003-04:

PG Marko Jaric (Andre Miller signs with the Jazz)
SG Quentin Richardson (go-to guy? ouch!)
SF Corey Maggette (Odom signs with the Pistons, Wiz, or Nuggets)
PF Chris Wilcox (Brand signs with the Heat)
C Melvin Ely (Olowokandi signs with the Spurs)

Key reserves: Wang Zhi Zhi, Keyon Dooling, 2003 draft pick(s)


----------



## RangerC

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> Wang Zhi Zhi's fate, who cares? This guy will never be a good NBA player.


Where are you coming up with this? If Wang was an American player with the same skills and potential, teams would be lining up at his door. As is, even with the language barrier and the constant interference of the Chinese government, there are tons of teams interested in this guy. He's instant offense (20+ ppg per 48 minutes last year) and has a solid all-around game. He tore it up playing for the Warriors' summer league team (Gilbert Arenas was efflusive with his praise and thought that the Warriors "had to" pick up Wang). With the dearth of good big players in the L, a 7-1 player like Wang with 3-point range and a good handle is a scarce commodity. Remember that Wang just turned 25 and has only played in 60 NBA games. Saying that he'll never be a good NBA player after just a 60 game sample (in which he showed a ton of potential) is unfounded. The Mavs aren't going to let him go for nothing, and I'm sure they wouldn't let him go at all if it wasn't that between Nowitski and LaFrenz (both locked up long-term), there's few minutes for another outside shooting PF-C.


----------



## Spell Checker

*Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?*



> Originally posted by <b>Genjuro</b>!
> Anyway, mathing the offer would cost them more than $7 mil. next year, and that's a lot of money when you have already a starting SG.


I'm sorry that would be *matching* not mathing the offer. You can thank me later

Spell Checker

P.S Redd would never be a starting 2 in this league. He is barely 6' 5"


----------



## Spell Checker

> Originally posted by <b>RangerC</b>!
> him go at all if it wasn't that between Nowitski and LaFrenz (both locked up long-term), there's few minutes for another outside shooting PF-C.


I'm sorry! It's *Nowitzki*. Maybe next time!!!

Spell Checker


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW

U N YA BOYEE GRAMMA CHECKA GOTSTA BIZZNESS TA HANDLE WIT DIS HEER 
POST..:laugh:


----------



## robyg1974

> Originally posted by <b>RangerC</b>!
> 
> Where are you coming up with this? If Wang was an American player with the same skills and potential, teams would be lining up at his door...He's instant offense (20+ ppg per 48 minutes last year) and has a solid all-around game. He tore it up playing for the Warriors' summer league team (Gilbert Arenas was efflusive with his praise and thought that the Warriors "had to" pick up Wang). With the dearth of good big players in the L, a 7-1 player like Wang with 3-point range and a good handle is a scarce commodity...Saying that he'll never be a good NBA player after just a 60 game sample (in which he showed a ton of potential) is unfounded. The Mavs aren't going to let him go for nothing, and I'm sure they wouldn't let him go at all if it wasn't that between Nowitski and LaFrenz (both locked up long-term), there's few minutes for another outside shooting PF-C.


... says the person who recently claimed that Donnell Harvey and Chris Anderson are both bigtime prospects!

If Wang was the player you seem to think he is, the Mavs would absolutely positively not even have to THINK about whether or not to match a measly 3 yr $6 mil deal! If Wang was the player you seem to think he is, the Mavs would've worked out a sign-and-trade with somebody for him! C'mon!


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> 
> 
> ... says the person who recently claimed that Donnell Harvey and Chris Anderson are both bigtime prospects!
> 
> If Wang was the player you seem to think he is, the Mavs would absolutely positively not even have to THINK about whether or not to match a measly 3 yr $6 mil deal! If Wang was the player you seem to think he is, the Mavs would've worked out a sign-and-trade with somebody for him! C'mon!


they already have a very similar player in dirk norwitski there, they dont need another, besides, this is the new luxurie tax-conscious NBA where 4 years ago, teams would be willing to throw max dollars at guys like kandiman and rashard lewis


----------



## TheRifleman

*Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?*



> Originally posted by <b>Spell Checker</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm sorry that would be *matching* not mathing the offer. You can thank me later
> 
> Spell Checker
> 
> P.S Redd would never be a starting 2 in this league. He is barely 6' 5"


Spell Checker, this is a basketball forum, not a grammar class. 

Redd only 6'5" and couldn't be a starting #2 guard in this league?

Ahem, most #2 guards are between 6'3" and 6'8"(lest we forget that Iverson was also an MVP at the #2 guard position and he is not even 6'0").


----------



## Wiggum

*Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?*



> Originally posted by <b>Spell Checker</b>!
> P.S Redd would never be a starting 2 in this league. He is barely 6' 5"


Huh...? 6'5'' is a very standard height for a shooting guard.


----------



## RangerC

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> 
> 
> ... says the person who recently claimed that Donnell Harvey and Chris Anderson are both bigtime prospects!
> 
> If Wang was the player you seem to think he is, the Mavs would absolutely positively not even have to THINK about whether or not to match a measly 3 yr $6 mil deal! If Wang was the player you seem to think he is, the Mavs would've worked out a sign-and-trade with somebody for him! C'mon!


I never said Wang was a star, just that it's asinine to say that a 7-1 player who shoots like a guard (in a league currently bereft of good big players) will never amount to anything in the NBA. BTW, a 2 million per year deal isn't as measly as it once was considering the new NBA economy (a proven big player like Keon Clark only got the exception). As far as Harvey and Anderson go, I never claimed they were cant-miss prospects, just that they weren't marginal prospects. 

NBADraft.net on Harvey : "Many thought he was the #1 HS player coming into his freshman season. Has great potential to be a very good NBA PF." This guy is just 22 and it's way too early to write him off as marginal when he hasn't even been given a chance to show his stuff in the L. Andersen was the MVP of a summer league LOADED with top prospects. I wouldn't be so quick to write these guys off.


----------



## BEEZ

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?*



> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> Spell Checker, this is a basketball forum, not a grammar class.
> 
> Redd only 6'5" and couldn't be a starting #2 guard in this league?
> 
> Ahem, most #2 guards are between 6'3" and 6'8"(lest we forget that Iverson was also an MVP at the #2 guard position and he is not even 6'0").


I cant agree with you on that one Rifleman: its more like 6' 5" to 6' 8"

here's each division's starting 2

*Atlantic Division*

Allan Houston Height: 6-6

Iverson, Allen Height: 6-0

Jones, Eddie Height: 6-6

Kittles, Kerry, Height: 6-5

McGrady, Tracy, Height: 6-8

Pierce, Paul, Height: 6-6 1/2

Sprewell, Latrell, Height: 6-7

Stackhouse, Jerry, Height: 6-6 1/2

*Central Division*

Allen, Ray Height: 6-5

Carter, Vince Height: 6-6 1/2

Davis, Ricky Height: 6-7

Hamilton, Richard Height: 6-6

Johnson, DerMarr Height: 6-9

Miller, Reggie Height: 6-7

Rose, Jalen Height: 6-8

Wesley, David Height: 6-2--but I think Courtney Alexander will take over and hes 6' 6 1/2. 

That is just the east and I still hadnt gotten out west yet. Its rare AI and David Wesley for a shooting guard to be that small


----------



## Spell Checker

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?*



> Originally posted by <b>Wiggum</b>!
> 
> 
> Huh...? 6'5'' is a very standard height for a shooting guard.


6'5" was a standard height for shooting guards but like quoted before me not really anymore. You have SG's in this league as tall as 7'0 and as small as 6'0 but the general height is 6'6"


----------



## "Matt!"

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?*



> Originally posted by <b>Spell Checker</b>!
> 
> 
> 6'5" was a standard height for shooting gurads but like quoted before me not really anymore. You have SG's in this league as tall as 7'0 and as small as 6'0 but the general height is 6'6"


Thats "guards." Better luck next time!


----------



## Jonathan Watters

6-5 is just fine for a SG. Bonzi Wells is only 6-5, and nobody is complaining about his lack of height. The real proof about Redd is in his production. He averaged a point every two minutes last season on a team loaded with scorers. He's got what it takes to be a starting SG in the NBA.


----------



## Spell Checker

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match i*



> Originally posted by <b>Matt85163</b>!
> 
> 
> Thats "guards." Better luck next time!


Well sir thank you even a "SPELL CHECKER" misses one, best believe I fixed it. 

Back on topic. I never said 6' 5: wasnt sufficient but the fact of the matter is standard height on a NBA SG is 6' 6" by the way, I honestly feel Bonzi is closer to 6'6" than 6'5, but I do understand what you are saying


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks mat*



> Originally posted by <b>Spell Checker</b>!
> 
> 
> Well sir thank you even a "SPELL CHECKER" misses one, best believe I fixed it.
> 
> Back on topic. I never said 6' 5" : wasnt sufficient, but the fact of the matter is standard height on a NBA SG is 6' 6. " * y the way, I honestly feel Bonzi is closer to 6'6" than 6'5; [however,] I do understand what you are saying. *


*




Last edited by the "Punctuation and Grammar Checker." TB#1*


----------



## Spell Checker

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks*



> Originally posted by <b>TomBoerwinkle#1</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Last edited by the "Punctuation and Grammar Checker." TB#1


TB#1 you are wild I never said I was a "Punctuation and Grammar Checker." Anyway why did you never respond to my post which was in response to yours


----------



## Tersk

*Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?*



> Originally posted by <b>Spell Checker</b>!
> 
> 
> P.S Redd would never be a starting 2 in this league. He is barely 6' 5"


You sure about that


----------



## Blazer Freak

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Mavs sign Michael Redd to 3 yr $12 mil offer sheet... will the Bucks match it?*



> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> 
> 
> You sure about that


Yeah Really..:uhoh: 

BFreak.


----------

