Extending Oden and/or Przybilla?

[Pippen-33]

With both our centers able to sign extensions this offseason, do you think KP would be interested in extending either and for how much? I know its a risk since both are coming off injuries but could be a good idea to lock them up before there is a bidding war for them.

Oden would probably want to sign a contract similar to Bynum - high dollars but only for 3years incase he busts out.(3Year/$36M)

Przybilla would probably want more long-term security unless he wants to start for a contender. Something along the MLE(5Year/$33M)

Thoughts?

[Zyme]

oden wont extend. All his injures have depress his values so much. But a 3 yr/35 for oden would be really tempting. Way above his value.

[Wizenheimer]

easier one first: I doubt Portland would give Przybilla a 5 year deal. Keep in mind that Joel will turn 31 before next season begins. An MLE level deal is probably about right. I'm just don't know how big a priority keeping Przybilla on the roster is for Blazer management. But if przybilla is willing to do something along a 4 year/20-25 million deal where the 4th year is a team option, I'd guess the Blazers would go for it.

Oden is a much tougher call. The Oden that was leading the NBA for a while this season in total rebound rate, defensive rebound rate, and blocked shots rate, as well as ranking 4th in offensive rebound rate is probably a max level player or close. But unfortunately, the alter-ego to that Oden spends a lot of time rehabbing in a swimming pool.

I would guess the Blazers would still be willing to continue the high reward/high risk investment with Oden and give him a sizable salary, but would insist on an early team option, likely after 3 years. Whether or not oden would agree to that I don't know

[Wizenheimer]

oden wont extend. All his injures have depress his values so much. But a 3 yr/35 for oden would be really tempting. Way above his value.

I don't really agree that oden wouldn't extend.

If he does so this summer, it will be a contract under the terms of the current CBA which will almost certainly be better for players then the new CBA, which will be what governs contract terms the following season.

[Pippen-33]

If I were KP I would probably do try to extend both this offseason. You have to believe the worst is over for Oden and Przybilla and both come back relatively healthy next season.

Oden at 3Year/$36M and Przybilla at 4Year/$24M would be good for both parties.

[Norm2953]

If I were Portland, I'd work to extend Oden to a fair extension for with the
potential for a lockout and the uncertainty of what the CBA will be, it
would behoove Oden and his agent to be reasonable.

As far as JP is concerned, he will be coming off a major knee injury. I'd
wait and see about him for would retain our bird rights to him and I
would find it hard that any team would be willing to outbid Paul Allen
if push comes to shove. JP's knee injury is more serious than Greg's.

[DaVoiceMaster]

Can you still do a contract with incentives? If Oden plays in 62 games a season, he makes A amount, if he plays in 72 games, he makes B amount, if he plays more than 25 minutes in those 62 games, he gets C amount, if he plays 30+ minutes in those 72 games, he gets D amount, etc.???

It's a difficult contract to write, but basically I'm just wondering if they can do an incentive based contract for 5 years with a team option after 3 years, player option after 4 years or something?

[d-train]

I'll bet my house Przybilla won't get a contract extension this summer. He has a $7.4 million player option for another season and you can be assured he will squeeze that last $7.4 million out of the best contract he will ever get. After he collects the final year on his current deal he will be lucky if he makes $7.4 million the entire balance of his basketball career.

Its possible Oden might get an extension offer but I think it's more likely he and the Blazers will agree he should play out the 2010/11 season and then negotiate a contract. That would be the only thing that would make sense since he hasn't been healthy enough to show his worth.

[d-train]

oden wont extend. All his injures have depress his values so much. But a 3 yr/35 for oden would be really tempting. Way above his value.

I don't really agree that oden wouldn't extend.

If he does so this summer, it will be a contract under the terms of the current CBA which will almost certainly be better for players then the new CBA, which will be what governs contract terms the following season.

I don't think we will see the players signing a new CBA that gives them a lesser share of the NBA pie. The size of the pie might change. It will change along with the health of the economy but who can predict the future health of the economy?

[blazers73]

I don't think we will see the players signing a new CBA that gives them a lesser share of the NBA pie. The size of the pie might change. It will change along with the health of the economy but who can predict the future health of the economy

I think the players will be sharing less pie. Right now I think they get 57% of all revenues and are subjected to virtually no risk. Even idiots like Arenas still made money this year. Did he collect all his contract money? No but he still made money, and he's an idiot. On the other hand less than half the NBA teams made money. Meaning a majority of owners lost money. They assume all the risk. Things will change. I think players will get 50% of all revenue next year. When one side has everyone making money and the other side has a majority losing money, things will change. Even when the economy was good, a fair share of owners lost money. Some like Cuban are just rich and it is a presige thing. Others aren't so lucky.

[JD45]

I doubt either will get an extension.

I would be in favor of making a modest offer ($6 or $7 mil) to Oden that would protect him if he is injured and be great value for the Blazers if he is not. But, I doubt they play it that way.

No way the Blazers should extend Przybilla. I really like Joel, for both his attitude and production. But the reality is that he is 31 and has been just as injury prone as Oden. Over his 10year career, Joel has played in 82 games one time. And he missed at least half the season in 4 of those years. He has averaged only 52 games per season for the entire 10 years.

[Blazinaway]

I doubt either will get an extension.

I would be in favor of making a modest offer ($6 or $7 mil) to Oden that would protect him if he is injured and be great value for the Blazers if he is not. But, I doubt they play it that way.

No way the Blazers should extend Przybilla. I really like Joel, for both his attitude and production. But the reality is that he is 31 and has been just as injury prone as Oden. Over his 10year career, Joel has played in 82 games one time. And he missed at least half the season in 4 of those years. He has averaged only 52 games per season for the entire 10 years.

+1, I agree with a try at a modest Oden offer, no thx on Pryz with that injury he had until we know he's fully recovered and that won't be till next season.

[d-train]

I don't think we will see the players signing a new CBA that gives them a lesser share of the NBA pie. The size of the pie might change. It will change along with the health of the economy but who can predict the future health of the economy

I think the players will be sharing less pie. Right now I think they get 57% of all revenues and are subjected to virtually no risk. Even idiots like Arenas still made money this year. Did he collect all his contract money? No but he still made money, and he's an idiot. On the other hand less than half the NBA teams made money. Meaning a majority of owners lost money. They assume all the risk. Things will change. I think players will get 50% of all revenue next year. When one side has everyone making money and the other side has a majority losing money, things will change. Even when the economy was good, a fair share of owners lost money. Some like Cuban are just rich and it is a presige thing. Others aren't so lucky.

The talent is only getting 57% percent, which means the no-talents are getting 43% of the talents money. Those no-talents skimming 43% off the talent should be thankful they are getting anything. Sure, the talent has to give the no-talents something for the stadiums and other infrastructure that is needed to put on an event. But, nobody buys a ticket to watch the no-talents. And, it's not necessary for the no-talents to have their salaries artificially capped by non market forces.

[cucad8]

Can you still do a contract with incentives? If Oden plays in 62 games a season, he makes A amount, if he plays in 72 games, he makes B amount, if he plays more than 25 minutes in those 62 games, he gets C amount, if he plays 30+ minutes in those 72 games, he gets D amount, etc.???

It's a difficult contract to write, but basically I'm just wondering if they can do an incentive based contract for 5 years with a team option after 3 years, player option after 4 years or something?

We could guarantee extra years based on games played as well. Incentives can definitely be included. Pendergraph's contract was written that way, where after playing 10 games this season, next season was guaranteed, and if he plays in half the games next season, the following season is guaranteed. I can see Portland trying something like that. I'd try to go as long as possible with him,personally. With a team option. 5 year deal, with team options after year 3 and maybe a mutual option after year 4 or something? It's a tough call. I think 3 years is an easy risk to take on him. We could get great value on his contract. For greg, getting an extension now gives him great long term security in case he continues to get injured, and might be worth taking slightly less money now.

As for Joel, I can't see a 6 million a year extension for him for 4-5 years. I think next year could easily be his last year as a Blazer. I think after that, we could see the team looking for an option of someone more of a 4-5, who could play alongside both Greg AND LMA.

[Soulyss]

The easiest way to do it is give Oden good perceeved value, but make the last couple of years team options unless playing time goals are met.

5 yrs 60 Million with Year 4 & 5 being guaranteed based on playing time...

if oden plays in 90% of his games over the first three years (can miss 8 1/2 games a year, which is about what Roy is averaging) the 4th year gets guaranteed, if he plays in 90% through the forth year, the 5th year gets guaranteed. If he misses those, they are Team options in those years.

[blazers73]

The talent is only getting 57% percent, which means the no-talents are getting 43% of the talents money. Those no-talents skimming 43% off the talent should be thankful they are getting anything. Sure, the talent has to give the no-talents something for the stadiums and other infrastructure that is needed to put on an event. But, nobody buys a ticket to watch the no-talents. And, it's not necessary for the no-talents to have their salaries artificially capped by non market forces

You made a wrong assumption. NBA players do get 57% of the revenue. But the "no talent" owners don't get the other 43%. The NBA and owners employ thousands of workers directly and indirectly that are included in that 43%. From doctors, medical staff, coaches, and security to vendors and parking lot attendants. And most importantly sexy dancers/cheerleaders, and I sure wouldn't call that no talents skimming from the talents.

LeBron and NBA players certainly have talent or resources in demand. No argument there. But to say NBA owners and business people don't have talent or resources in demand is ..well.. naive. Luckily Paul Allen was quite talented in starting a company called microsoft to be able to amass his wealth and buy the Blazers. If I were to invest in a business, work my butt off and at the end of the year lose 20 million, while Arenas still made 5 million or so, well I might be a bit disapointed. That is the risk/reward of a business owner. But when a majority of those owners are losing money year after year, there is little reward and thus no reason to risk anything. Would you want to lose money every year? No. Why on earth would the non ultra rich Cubans/Allens want to lose 20 million year after year? You either change the business so you make money or you go out of business and then nobody makes money.

[d-train]

The talent is only getting 57% percent, which means the no-talents are getting 43% of the talents money. Those no-talents skimming 43% off the talent should be thankful they are getting anything. Sure, the talent has to give the no-talents something for the stadiums and other infrastructure that is needed to put on an event. But, nobody buys a ticket to watch the no-talents. And, it's not necessary for the no-talents to have their salaries artificially capped by non market forces

You made a wrong assumption. NBA players do get 57% of the revenue. But the "no talent" owners don't get the other 43%. The NBA and owners employ thousands of workers directly and indirectly that are included in that 43%. From doctors, medical staff, coaches, and security to vendors and parking lot attendants. And most importantly sexy dancers/cheerleaders, and I sure wouldn't call that no talents skimming from the talents.

LeBron and NBA players certainly have talent or resources in demand. No argument there. But to say NBA owners and business people don't have talent or resources in demand is ..well.. naive. Luckily Paul Allen was quite talented in starting a company called microsoft to be able to amass his wealth and buy the Blazers. If I were to invest in a business, work my butt off and at the end of the year lose 20 million, while Arenas still made 5 million or so, well I might be a bit disapointed. That is the risk/reward of a business owner. But when a majority of those owners are losing money year after year, there is little reward and thus no reason to risk anything. Would you want to lose money every year? No. Why on earth would the non ultra rich Cubans/Allens want to lose 20 million year after year? You either change the business so you make money or you go out of business and then nobody makes money.

You are the one making an incorrect assumption. I didn't forget about anyone getting a piece of the 43% when I labeled them no-talents. All the people doing the jobs you listed including the owners are the no-talents. The talent the NBA peddles is basketball. People buy tickets and related products because the talent of the players is a valuable commodity. As a matter of fact, the value of basketball talent in the entire equation is so overwhelming it is believed that an artificial cap must be placed on the amount of money that can be paid to players or else the NBA would spend itself into oblivion.

As to the financial condition of the NBA owners, the only way they can lose money is if they are incompetent and should lose money. Each owner is responsible for the business model that either makes a profit or generates a loss. And, the so-called losses only amount to paper losses from deferred earnings when they sell their franchises.

The only change that should be made to the CBA is the artificial cap placed on the market value of player talent should be removed. It is an unnecessary financial gift to owners that unjustly inflates the value of their franchises.

[BlazersRizing]

wish it was possible to give Oden almost an entirely incentive based contract. games played.

honestly I've never heard of incentive based deals in the NBA, have in baseball though.

but Idk about giving Oden a Bynum-like contract extension. that's too risky at this point.

[d-train]

The size of Oden's contract will be determined by the RFA offers he could get from other teams. His entire contract above the minimum salary can be incentives if that is the best deal Oden can get. The reason you won't see that type of deal is because Oden will not need to make those negotiation concessions.

[Agenda42]

The only change that should be made to the CBA is the artificial cap placed on the market value of player talent should be removed. It is an unnecessary financial gift to owners that unjustly inflates the value of their franchises.

The salary cap protects the quality of the product. Without a salary cap you'd end up with 2/3 of the teams in the league being the Pittsburgh Pirates or the Kansas City Royals.