Lux Tax at $69.9mm. League says prepare for $61mm next year

[Jollay]

These cosmetic moves whether we get rid of Ridnour now or next year are minor. Jennings development is NOT going to be determined by Ridnour's presence on the roster for one year, and we are NOT going to significantly improve the state of the Bucks by getting rid of him a year early.

You don't think Ridnour being on the roster effects Jennings? So you think Ridnour would get zero minutes then I'm assuming? Please explain to me how Sessions/Jennings would get their needed development (i.e. learning through playing time), with Ridnour on the roster. In fact, give me the minute breakdown at PG if Ridnour is back.

Maybe Jennings plays alot, maybe Jennings plays a little.

Maybe the coaches want to keep Ridnour for a while until they get a better sense of how much Jennings can contribute this year. Training camp can be a useful thing for that.

Maybe Redd isn't ready right away, and Ridnour starts with Sessions. Maybe we have an injury. Maybe Jennings' minutes go from hardly any to start the season to 20mpg at the end. Maybe Ridnour doesn't play any, 0mpg, and is purely injury insurance.

Why not just wait and see? All I know is we can plausibly live through Ridnour being on the roster, in fact that might well be worth 5.5 million dollars.

He does have some NBA pg experience and is a smart guy--I see that as something that might help Jennings.

[LUKE23]

If Childress was an old man or I was convinced Alexander would be better than Childress I would agree. Given how Childress is also young and I'm not convinced Alexander will be better, I'd sign off on the deal above without hesitation.

That doesn't really matter, because we can keep both. Hawks have no leverage here because they don't even want Childress nor can afford to keep him. Throwing in Alexander would basically just be a favor by the Bucks. He still is an unknown in year 2. He had better not be included in a Childress deal.

[europa]

You'll be upset with Hammond. I'll be happy with Hammond. Same old same old.

If the Bucks can deal for Childress without including Bowen or Thomas, then I'd be fine with keeping Alexander. But if the choice is including one of those players or including Alexander and having the ability to drop around $4.5M in salary with Bowen and Thomas, I'm dealing Alexander. Plus, Alexander would become expendable with Childress on the roster so it's possible he'd be traded at some point anyway. Given how I believe Childress is a rather huge upgrade over Alexander and given the fact he's also a young player, I'm fine with dealing him now.

[LUKE23]

You'll be upset with Hammond. I'll be happy with Hammond. Same old same old.

If the Bucks can deal for Childress without including Bowen or Thomas, then I'd be fine with keeping Alexander. But if the choice is including one of those players or including Alexander and having the ability to drop around $4.5M in salary with Bowen and Thomas, I'm dealing Alexander. Plus, Alexander would become expendable with Childress on the roster so it's possible he'd be traded at some point anyway. Given how I believe Childress is a rather huge upgrade over Alexander and given the fact he's also a young player, I'm fine with dealing him now.

I don't view young players as "expendable" regardless of the depth chart. Regarding Childress being young, he'll be 26 and in year 6 I believe. That isn't "young", that is middle aged for the NBA.

But my point remains, Hawks have no leverage. If they say "we want Alexander", Bucks can just say "no, we know you're not bringing Childress back anyway, so we're not going to include one of our young players".

[europa]

I consider 26 to still be young in the NBA but whatever. If you had told me last year the Bucks could have traded the 8th pick for Josh Childress I would have made the deal then. After seeing Alexander for one year, I have no reason to alter my opinion now. You want to hang onto him. That's fine. I'll trade him for a player upgrade, especially if that player is young and has the potential to get even better which i believe Childress does.

But I think we can end the debate at this point. We know where the other stands on this.

[MajorDad]

with respect to ridnour - i can't see the bucks being able to trade him. Realistically, his contract is of more value than he is. So for a team to take his contract off our hands, they are going to want to give us somebody in return who does not have an expiring contract. and the bucks won't be able to handle a trade where we accept salary back. With the NBA scaling back it's payroll even more next year, i have to believe more teams will want to hold onto their draft picks including their second round picks. I have to believe second round picks will be playing a lot more than aging vets. So i highly doubt a team would be willing to include draft picks in any deal for Ridnour either.

and it's been quoted in a post earlier in this thread, you already have 13 teams who appear to be over the cap already this year. While Ridnour's contract may be expiring, what team has enough room in their budget this year to pick up ridnour's salary without going over the cap? Portland? Portland may send Blake to the knicks as part of acquiring lee. but they probably want to give playing time to Bayliss over acquiring Ridnour.

I'm sorry but i don't know of any GM who would be stupid enough to give up an expiring contract to obtain ridnour's expiring contract. Think about it. would you give up an expiring contract to obtain Ridnour? face it, we're stuck with him. and we might not be able to sign sessions or childress of illy because of it.

[fam3381]

Put together a spreadsheet to simplify things...comments welcome.

http://www.brewhoop.com/2009/7/8/941519 ... ap-numbers

[LUKE23]

Is Bowen $4.0M or $4.1M until he's waived? I've seen different numbers in different places.

[paulpressey25]

If Hammond can figure out how to add Childress, Ramon and Ersan while not giving up Potsie and Kurt Thomas, I would say he's had an excellent offseason.

But his options would have been 100x greater if he had acted sooner on this stuff.

[LUKE23]

If Hammond can figure out how to add Childress, Ramon and Ersan while not giving up Potsie and Kurt Thomas, I would say he's had an excellent offseason.

But his options would have been 100x greater if he had acted sooner on this stuff.

I'd change that to adding those three while not trading Alexander, and also moving Ridnour and having Bowen/KT gone, I will like the offseason quite a bit. Childress for me wouldn't make or break it, I like him, but not at five years. But I definitely want Sessions/Ersan back and Ridnour/Bowen/KT gone.

[carmelbrownqueen]

If Hammond can figure out how to add Childress, Ramon and Ersan while not giving up Potsie and Kurt Thomas, I would say he's had an excellent offseason.

But his options would have been 100x greater if he had acted sooner on this stuff.

I modified this because I don't see Kurt Thomas/Bruce Bowen as members of this team at the beginning of the season.

[europa]

If Hammond can figure out how to add Childress, Ramon and Ersan while not giving up Potsie and Kurt Thomas, I would say he's had an excellent offseason.

But his options would have been 100x greater if he had acted sooner on this stuff.

I modified this because I don't see Kurt Thomas/Bruce Bowen as members of this team at the beginning of the season.

Me neither. I'd say they're the most likely players to be removed. Ridnour's next. I'd then put Elson, Alexander, Bell and maybe even Gadz in the next group.

[Badgerlander]

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/50187702.html
Bucks are over cap but under tax level

The National Basketball Association announced the salary cap for the 2009-'10 season on Tuesday night, establishing it at $57.7 million.

The tax level has been set at $69.92 million, and any team which exceeds that figure will pay a $1 tax for each dollar it exceeds the level.

Those numbers represent a reduction from 2008-'09, when the salary cap was $58.68 million and the tax level was $71.15 million.

The new salary cap and tax level went into effect at 11:01 p.m. (Milwaukee time) Tuesday, when teams became eligible to sign free agents and make trades. A moratorium period had been in effect since July 1.

Bucks general manager John Hammond has emphasized that the team will not exceed the luxury tax, even though it is over the cap level with a payroll estimated at $64.9 million. Four players account for more than $40 million of that total - Michael Redd ($17.04 million), Andrew Bogut ($10 million), Dan Gadzuric ($6.75 million) and Luke Ridnour ($6.5 million). Bogut is in the first year of a five-year, $60 million extension he signed last summer.

If the Bucks waive Bruce Bowen, they will realize a $2 million savings and could be between $6 million and $7 million under the tax level.

After trading Richard Jefferson to San Antonio as part of a three-team deal last month, the Bucks were able to gain some flexibility regarding roster moves. They picked up the expiring contracts of Bowen and veteran Kurt Thomas from the Spurs, and they also obtained 22-year-old power forward Amir Johnson from the Detroit Pistons.

The Bucks are still looking to make a deal and remain interested in 26-year-old forward Josh Childress, a restricted free agent whose rights are owned by the Atlanta Hawks. They also are seeking to sign their own restricted free agents, power forward Ersan Ilyasova and point guard Ramon Sessions.

Childress must decide by July 15 if he wants to opt out of his contract with Olympiakos in Greece and return to the NBA. He played last season for the Greek team in the first year of a three-year, $20 million deal.

Olympiakos also could play a role with Ilyasova, who is debating whether to remain in Europe or return to the NBA. Olympiakos is seriously interested in the Turkish player and has made a two-year offer worth more than 6 million euros ($8 million), according to a source. Ilyasova played the past two seasons in Spain with Barcelona, which reached the Euroleague final four during the past year.

Ilyasova was a 2005 second-round pick of the Bucks and played in 66 games with Milwaukee during the 2006-'07 season.

It looks like Ersan's pricetag just went up.

[LUKE23]

I don't think the Bucks will get into a bidding war. Ersan will make less in the NBA than Europe, and he knows that. It's about whether he wants to take the NBA step or not.

[europa]

I agree with Luke. I think Ilyasova takes $2M a year from the Bucks or goes back to Europe. How badly he wants to return to the Bucks and live here in the states with his wife could be the determining factors.

[Bernman]

Lots of teams in trouble with that number..not just the Bucks.

Two wrongs don't make a right, babs.

And most of the other teams you're referring to are far superior to the Bucks in their prospects for next season, so they can justify paying extra for their success. I'm sure some also have their team well structured so they need not worry their pretty little heads. The Bucks still have to shop for some essentials so they don't starve.

This actually wasn't a bad outcome, as PP asserted. Of course some homers like Paul were expecting it to be 71 because that would have made the Bucks' moves more defensible....but you can't be under the influence of the dissonance.

I'm more worried about the projection next season because that would put the kiebash on pooling those expirings w/ prospects for an impact veteran. And we certainly can't be using them in deals for Josh freakin' Childress. Might have to hold onto Ridnour now.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

Removing Mo's contract saved the team $26M over the next three years. Whether you want to admit that or not, that is saving money.

No it did not - Hammond is spending the absolute highest amount each season that he is allowed to spend, and when you factor in expensive coaching and front office personnel, he's spending a lot more than what was already lined up with the team he inherited. Removing Mo only means that we have guys like Ridnour, Lue, Allen, Elson, Bogans, Jones, Stoudamire, Thomas, Bowen, Johnson in his place.

Kohl saves no money at all throughout this process. The only appropriate evaluation therefore is whether our talent level is higher or lower than it reasonably would have been with no moves made, and realgm collectively voting on the draft picks.

[europa]

Of course some homers like Paul were expecting it to be 71 because that would have made the Bucks' moves more defensible....but you can't be under the influence of the dissonance.

Not sure why you feel compelled to take a shot at another poster. We had some reports previously which predicted $71M for the luxury tax. It wasn't a figure made up by some "homers" who want to defend Hammond.

[pilprin]

Europa, why the chubbie over Childress? Is he really that much better than Luc or Alexander? Don't get me wrong, if we can get him and not screw ourselves with Sessions and Ersan, then go get him. For example if we can trade Bell for him...do it.

I'm just not sure he is worth all the screwing around to make it happen.

[paul]

This actually wasn't a bad outcome, as PP asserted. Of course some homers like Paul were expecting it to be 71 because that would have made the Bucks' moves more defensible....but you can't be under the influence of the dissonance.

WTF was that you idiot? My estimations throughout the past few months came directly from what GAD had posted over that period and I never at any point definitively said it would be $71m, are you calling GAD a homer?

How unnecessary was that?