a note about basketball
I was reading an article in today's "Denver Post" about my hometown Denver Nuggets, and, lo and behold, it was awful. It was grossly inaccurate, it lacked a meaningful point, and I would have to say it's part of what fans the fires of ill-informed "fans" deluging the sports section and the radio with inane opinions that would destroy our team's chances of competing. So yeah, I don't like most of our writers in general, but this was particularly bad. I wrote the guy an angry email about it, and thought I'd copy it down here.
Dear Mr. Dempsey,
I just wanted to let you know that your article in today's paper contains substantially inaccurate information. You discuss the NBA salary cap in conjunction with its luxury tax. While these two provisions of the collective bargaining agreement are related to one another, they are not tied to the same dollar amount, as your article alleges. The salary cap is tied directly to league revenues from the previous season, while the luxury tax threshold (a substantially higher number) is also affected by median team payroll, among other factors. Thus, the Nuggets, along with the majority of NBA teams, are over the cap next year, were over the cap in 06-07, and will likely be over the cap in future seasons, unless we lose substantial assets (as in the "rebuilding" phase of the late 90s).
This means the tax burden on the Nuggets (and on Stan Kroenke) will be much lower than your article suggests, even if they don't trade Camby for role-players. That said, the reason NBA owners want to avoid paying the luxury tax is because of how this money is disbursed. The tax collected from all paying teams is evenly divided among all non-paying teams, and with teams like the Knicks $60,000,000 over the tax threshold last season, the difference between being $1 under the line and $1 over the line (and so losing your share of other teams' taxes) can be a several million dollar hit for a team owner. Some light reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nba_salary_cap
I personally believe that the Nuggets lack the depth to be able to afford to trade Camby for less-than-equal value. Championship-winning teams are based around continuity--the same players playing together for several seasons, and learning each others' games. When I go to a Nuggets game and take in the sea of baby-blue jerseys (all bought in the last three seasons for $60 each), I wonder who really believes the Nuggets can field a championship-caliber team without a championship-caliber payroll. Although the Spurs are a great example of a team that can win big without ending up in tax territory, they also have been able to use past success to re-sign their starts (Duncan, Ginobili) for less than they would make on the open market (remember Ginobili turning down the Nuggets' offer in 2004?) and also to acquire veterans (Brent Barry, Michel Finley) at bargain prices, because those players value winning. Building a Finals-ready team from the ground up, as we have been doing since the 2003 draft, means we don't get those kind of breaks. So if we have to suck it up and pay the luxury tax because of one overvalued contract--Kenyon Martin's, but remember the desperation the team was feeling at the time we signed him--that we can't trade away, the team should be thankful most of our money is going to pay good players who still play for us (Jalen Rose, Chris Webber, and Michel Finley each were paid over $15 million last year by a team other than their current one).
Camby is a bargain at under $10 million per season, and since the Nuggets are over the salary cap, we could only take on $12,600,000 in salaries in return for him. When marginal centers like Chris Kaman and Adonal Foyle are making around the same money as Camby, and when the Nuggets don't have a young backup primed to replace him, trading Marcus would be the biggest mistake this team has made since trading our other Defensive Player of the Year, Dikembe, in the prime of his career.
Sincerely,
Sam Stromberg
"If nothing changes, the Nuggets are due to pay around $76 million in salary next season, minus free agents Steve Blake and DerMarr Johnson, as well as forward Jamal Sampson, whose contract expired after last season.
Last season's salary cap was $53.135 million. It will bump up a few million in July, but the Nuggets stand to be over the limit, meaning they would have to pay a dollar for every dollar they are over."
Dear Mr. Dempsey,
I just wanted to let you know that your article in today's paper contains substantially inaccurate information. You discuss the NBA salary cap in conjunction with its luxury tax. While these two provisions of the collective bargaining agreement are related to one another, they are not tied to the same dollar amount, as your article alleges. The salary cap is tied directly to league revenues from the previous season, while the luxury tax threshold (a substantially higher number) is also affected by median team payroll, among other factors. Thus, the Nuggets, along with the majority of NBA teams, are over the cap next year, were over the cap in 06-07, and will likely be over the cap in future seasons, unless we lose substantial assets (as in the "rebuilding" phase of the late 90s).
This means the tax burden on the Nuggets (and on Stan Kroenke) will be much lower than your article suggests, even if they don't trade Camby for role-players. That said, the reason NBA owners want to avoid paying the luxury tax is because of how this money is disbursed. The tax collected from all paying teams is evenly divided among all non-paying teams, and with teams like the Knicks $60,000,000 over the tax threshold last season, the difference between being $1 under the line and $1 over the line (and so losing your share of other teams' taxes) can be a several million dollar hit for a team owner. Some light reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
I personally believe that the Nuggets lack the depth to be able to afford to trade Camby for less-than-equal value. Championship-winning teams are based around continuity--the same players playing together for several seasons, and learning each others' games. When I go to a Nuggets game and take in the sea of baby-blue jerseys (all bought in the last three seasons for $60 each), I wonder who really believes the Nuggets can field a championship-caliber team without a championship-caliber payroll. Although the Spurs are a great example of a team that can win big without ending up in tax territory, they also have been able to use past success to re-sign their starts (Duncan, Ginobili) for less than they would make on the open market (remember Ginobili turning down the Nuggets' offer in 2004?) and also to acquire veterans (Brent Barry, Michel Finley) at bargain prices, because those players value winning. Building a Finals-ready team from the ground up, as we have been doing since the 2003 draft, means we don't get those kind of breaks. So if we have to suck it up and pay the luxury tax because of one overvalued contract--Kenyon Martin's, but remember the desperation the team was feeling at the time we signed him--that we can't trade away, the team should be thankful most of our money is going to pay good players who still play for us (Jalen Rose, Chris Webber, and Michel Finley each were paid over $15 million last year by a team other than their current one).
Camby is a bargain at under $10 million per season, and since the Nuggets are over the salary cap, we could only take on $12,600,000 in salaries in return for him. When marginal centers like Chris Kaman and Adonal Foyle are making around the same money as Camby, and when the Nuggets don't have a young backup primed to replace him, trading Marcus would be the biggest mistake this team has made since trading our other Defensive Player of the Year, Dikembe, in the prime of his career.
Sincerely,
Sam Stromberg
posted by sam at
4:26 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home