Re: Daivs, Hunter, Payton & the Playoffs

[Kim <kimmalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

it's curious with Hunter - there are 3 different versions I can find of how he's signed, which could affect any answers. Pat Bender actually lists an option for '05, which would be a 3rd year. I thought it was 1 and an option, which would mean it's not really a matter of already signed for 2. I sent an email to the Cs asking for clarification. 

As to the 3 year thing *shrug* yeah, it looks bad when players pan out, but how many 2nd rounders really do so worth tieing up future guaranteed money vs ending up as borderline journeymen. Hell, how many first rounders do. With the salary cap and luxury tax, that million or so you have to commit to by the 3rd year can loom a lot larger than its strict dollar value in its effect on other moves. I agree that some cases are worth going for 3 years but still don't buy the why would you ever go for 2 argument, since that still leaves you early Bird rights, which should be more than enough for most 2nd rounders.

And yes, BTW, don't know how much, but Wyc etc HAVE definitely spent more peripheral money on things like scouting than Gaston did. Just the fact that you periodically see mention in the news of people scouting overseas or being considered as an overseas scout for the Cs proves that. Cutting a lot of revenue not tied to players salaries (i.e. that they didn't have to account to anyone for) was something that started with ML's tenure and which Gaston got nearly a pass on through henchmen keeping very very quiet about. The one good thing Pitino unquestionably did was got us the practice facility, because there is no way on earth it happens without his insisting upon it as part of his price to come and try to entice some customer revenue for Gaston.

Kim

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Piotrowski <markp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Mar 1, 2004 11:34 AM
To: Celtics <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Daivs, Hunter, Payton & the Playoffs

<snip>
2.  Hunter's contract -- In reference to DJessen pointing out that 
Hunter will be a Rest. FA after next season and we may be in the 
position Detroit (Okur) and San Antonio (Ginobili) are in trying to 
sign 2nd rounders who panned out, Snoopy said:

> You have to remember the situation when we got him--we had--back
> then--enough big men that Hunter was not realistically going to see 
> playing
> time this season at all.  His excellent play in training camp got him 
> the
> contract he now has.  Back then, Vin Baker was looking like comeback 
> player
> of the decade, and the team that went to the playoffs was pretty much 
> the
> same--Danny didn't start decimating the roster until just before the 
> start
> of the regular season, by which time it was too late to think of Hunter
> getting a three year contract.  Even as late as January, there was no 
> sign
> that hunter would see anything more than periodic garbage time this 
> year.

But the thing DJessen was pointing to was that -- especially as more 
and more college seniors and international players who WILL pan out 
slide to the 2nd round, having been displaced by *upside* high 
schoolers and 18-year old International players -- why would you ever 
not sign a 2nd round pick to a 3rd year if you're going to sign them to 
2?

The MOST you risk losing is maybe the $1 million of that 3rd year if 
they don't pan out.  One of the things that Wyc, et al. said when they 
bought the team that brought me the most hope -- but of which I have no 
idea if they are doing or not -- is that while all teams are restricted 
by the salary cap (speaking i think about Baker, especially) and while 
they may not pay the luxury tax or be owners who overspends for talent 
like Mark Cuban, that there are plenty of things they could and would 
pay for that would improve the team: scouting, looking for 
international talent, upgrading facilities.  I guess I see the gamble 
of $1 million for a player like Hunter breaking out -- and therefore 
being able to keep him w/ Bird Rights after his 3rd year -- as not only 
a wise business investment (as wise as resigning McCarty), but one of 
those little things that GM/ownership can do to improve the team long 
term.  I hope they don't repeat this "mistake" in the future.

<snip>