Rasheed's Deal Is Three Years

According to an NBA source Rasheed Wallace was given a three-year deal, earning $5.8 million in the first year with the mid-level exception.

The final year of the deal is a player option.

4 months ago Roy_Hobbs 36 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Interesting...

That differs from the two years that were previously reported.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

by Roy_Hobbs on Jul 8, 2009 10:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm

Me no likey as much. That third year ain’t gonna be too fun…

by Big_Easy on Jul 8, 2009 10:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Neither will the 2nd.

by wondahbap on Jul 9, 2009 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ditto

That puts a bit of a damper on the great news.

by Stu on Jul 8, 2009 10:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Really?

Would you rather have let our major F.A. signing slip away? I’m fully on board with the third year. I’m glad the front office isn’t repeating last season’s mistakes.

Or to put it into perspective, McDyess got a partly guaranteed third year from San Antonio. Besides, Wallace is one of the better basketball minds, and will have value for that alone in his final year.

by The Walker Wiggle on Jul 8, 2009 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh really?

Exactly the same deal was offered to Posey last year, and now all of a sudden signing Wallace is a genius move, and missing on Posey is a mistake. I fail to follow the logic.

by kozlodoev on Jul 9, 2009 1:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Posey left for 4 years and $25 mil. How is that the same? Boston did not want to pay luxury tax on his signing and offered him the MLE for 2-3 years.

by fiorelladad on Jul 9, 2009 3:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, and they are offering the same to Wallace this year — 2-3 years starting at the MLE.. So apparently, an identical move last year was a mistake. This year it is brilliant. Go figure.

By the way, the mentioned 4 years and 25 million start at the MLE and offer max increases each season. It adds up to 25 in he end.

by kozlodoev on Jul 9, 2009 3:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rasheed Wallace is a better player...

He’s more talented than Posey, plays two much more important positions as a F/C and he impacts the rotation in a much different way then Posey would…the contracts are barely scratching the surface of this argument…

…also, one of the principle reasons they did not sign Posey last year was to have flexibility – that flexibility just landed then Rasheed Wallace – the superior player – a move they may not have made if they were already holding an MLE contract on the books while paying dollar-fo-dollar lux tax….

Stop acting like finances don’t matter – they do…

by BillfromBoston on Jul 9, 2009 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i dont think sheed plans to play for 3 more years...but i think he wanted that option

by celticinorlando on Jul 8, 2009 10:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree. He plays 2 more yrs max, the 3rd year option was just a little more incentive to get him to sign.

Don't Trade Rondo!!!

by RJ87 on Jul 8, 2009 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He'll play all 3 years. You think he's going to give away about $6 million when he realizes he NEVER make that much money again.

by wondahbap on Jul 9, 2009 12:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

3rd year...

Nobody walks away leaving $6M sitting on the table.

by Title 18 on Jul 9, 2009 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Larry Bird Did

"I don't come to play, I come to WIN"--Larry Bird
"Criminally Negligent Officiating"--Tommy Heinsohn

by TrueGreen on Jul 9, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Reminds me of Blazing Saddles.

Nice touch, TrueGreen, invoking Larry Bird. It made me think of the time Sheriff Bart shames the townspeople of Rock Ridge with, “You do it for Randolph Scott.”

by no kidding on Jul 9, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

sorry, it was, "You'd do it for Randolph Scott."

by no kidding on Jul 9, 2009 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

makes more sense

I thought it would come down to offering a 3rd year with a player option. Was surprised at the initial announcement of a 2 year deal

At least with the 3rd year, if he picks that up, it expires the same year as KG’s

by slamtheking on Jul 8, 2009 10:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

ya doesnt bother me with 3 years if it was any longer then i would have a problem with it.

by adesilva on Jul 8, 2009 10:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I dont have a problem with the third year.

I doubt he wants in that long anyways.

by Marqui on Jul 8, 2009 10:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I called it from the start

the third year was our final sweetener if it was needed. Apparently it was needed. So what, it changes nothing, it is still a two year run with Sheed.

The third year has good value as an expiring chip. Imagine if we had an expiring mid level deal this summer to package with something like Scal and Walker. Thats not a bad package to offer a team looking to clear cap and it fetches you a 10 mill-ish player in return.

by Nut from NH on Jul 8, 2009 11:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Not surprised, but this hurts with the cap and luxury tax going down

What is that 3rd year worth around 7 or 8 million? That’s a nice sweetener. Good chance we end up having to buy him out 2 Summers from now for let’s say 5 million, so in a way the contract looks like first yr 5.8 mil
                                 second yr 6.6 mil (guesstimating)
                                                    5 mil buyout
                                                  —————————-
                                                   17.4 mil

So basically he’s making about 8.7mil a yr, which makes the deal less appealing to the C’s with the lower salary cap and luxury tax, but necessary b/c they needed to get someone. I still would have gone after Artest from the jump.

Danny, say it ain't so? We love Powe!

by johnnyrondo on Jul 8, 2009 11:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I just hope in the third year, Wallace isn’t hanging around like Theo Ratliff did: not playing, but cashing the checks.

by no kidding on Jul 9, 2009 12:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

3rd year

way worry about the third year this year is the most important one ,thats what we wanted him for in the first place

by wopp22 on Jul 9, 2009 12:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Meanwhile Doc starts a full-blown center controversy--

saying Sheed and Perk will fight it out in camp and how much easier Sheed will make Rondo’s job:

http://bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view.bg?articleid=1183761&srvc=sports&position=1

by clover on Jul 9, 2009 3:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Who Said There IS A Controversy

Why is it so impossible for a Celtic player or management-type to speak candidly or ask a question to himself out loud? Why can’t he discuss some implications of a major signing (which are all good)? The controversy is here. I haven’t even read about a so-called controversy in the media. I haven’t read any comments on this from Perk or Wallace. Perhaps Wallace will set up the controversy at the press conference today. I personally like to here the implications that come along with the Wallace signing. It’s interesting to me. And what Doc says also makes an awful lot of sense. Why don’t we let the “controversy” start before discussing it. It’s the same with the Danny-Doc-Rondo stuff. It’s no big deal to Rondo. It’s no big deal that Doc mentions or considers starting Wallace over Perk (which probably won’t happen). Doc should be considering stuff like this. That’s his job.

"I don't come to play, I come to WIN"--Larry Bird
"Criminally Negligent Officiating"--Tommy Heinsohn

by TrueGreen on Jul 9, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't worry; be happy!

For those who want to compare ’Sheed’s three years to Posey’s 4, remember the height-skill ratio and who we’re talking about. James Posey is a 6’8" forward with decent athletic ability and a capable three who has never been more than an average starter, quality bench contributor. ‘Sheed? A 6’11" sweet-shooting forward-center with a capable low-post game who depends more on his basketball IQ and skill set than his athletic ability. He’s averaged more than 12 and 7 year in and out for half a decade and has done so as a starter and primary contributor on championship caliber teams.

Even if ‘Sheed begins to slow down, I imagine he’ll still be 10 and 5 off the bench against scrubs for three more years and there’s always the chance that his career is rejuvenated by joining a 60+ win team with a shot at the title and peopled with stars (and friends) that he respects.

by CeltMick on Jul 9, 2009 7:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Doc's comments were dumb

I HATE that third year for Sheed. I HATE it.

by rickyfan3.0... on Jul 9, 2009 7:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Two quick points

All I said was me no likey as much. I’d still do the deal. Just not as excited about it.
The Posey analogy, as previously posted, is not an accurate one. He is also younger.
Still, I’m on board, if for no other reason than it has become a ridiculously competitive market, and you have to step up against the others.

by Big_Easy on Jul 9, 2009 8:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This is what I meant too

when I said it puts a bit of a damper on the great news. Like you, I still like the signing; it’s just not as much of a coup as it was before.

by Stu on Jul 9, 2009 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Considering my newly found disrespect for the Celtics FO

This doesn´t surprise me on iota.

by Casperian on Jul 9, 2009 10:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Kind of dampens things a bit.

We better sign Baby. I think some team needs to go after Lamar Odom. He’s ripe for the picking and that’ll screw with the Lakers. DETROIT CALLING?!?!?

by The Real Large James 2 on Jul 9, 2009 12:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Just to keep things in perspective, Sheed will be the same age AFTER his 3 year contract (37 that Grant Hill will be once this season begins and a healthy Grant Hill at 37 would help out just about any team in this league, who’s to say the same won’t apply to Rasheed?

by SayHello2MyRaefLaFrentz on Jul 9, 2009 3:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs