The Ratliff Dilemma
Posted by GreekHouse on Monday, November 12th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
I am going to be gone this evening and so I'm delaying posting of The Nation Has Problems until tomorrow. Also, I haven't written it yet.
Instead, I thought I would pose a different kind of question to The Nation. Ratliff was included in the Garnett trade almost entirely on the basis of expiring contract. In fact, Ratliff's contract was probably necessary to complete the trade due to the NBA salary cap rules.
In the 2000-01 season, Ratliff averaged 12.4 ppg, 8.3 rpg, and 3.7 bpg—all career highs for seasons in which he played at least 50 games. He got injured in 2001-02 and only played 3 games. He rebounded and had a fantastic year in 2003-04 which earned him a monster contract with Portland. Unfortunately, he got injured again and when he was traded to the Wolves, his primary virtue was that his contract was expiring at the end of the season.
In the Wolves first couple games he looked tremendous and I posted a comment in the game thread about what the Wolves should do with him if he continues to play well. SBG commented that instead of resigning him, he might be valuable in a trade instead. He missed the next game with the flu but has come back strong in the last two games and is averaging 10.0ppg/5.5rpg/3.5bpg over 4 games and is a great compliment to Al Jeferson.
It may be jumping the gun a little bit, but if he keeps playing like this, I wonder what the Wolves should do with him. Given his history of injuries, I'd be hesitant to give him anything more than a 1-year deal. Giving him a big deal and then losing him to injury would be catastrophic to the Wolves rebuilding phase.
With that in mind, it seems like it might be a good idea to trade him. Unfortunately, due to the salary cap, no team can acquire more than 125% of the salaries that they trade away. This means that the Wolves would need to get a player (or group of players) whose salaries sum to at least $9.3 million in return for Ratliff. I'm not exactly sure how they could make that work. Any team in contention wouldn't be willing to trade another good player who is making that much. A good young player that isn't contributing to a team's playoff run wouldn't be making nearly enough.
To me, it seems like the only way to make it work would be to trade him to a team who had a good player that got injured during the season. The Wolves could then either trade for this player straight up (if he was a decent player with a few years left on the contract), or trade for somebody else who has an expiring contract plus a good, but not great prospect.
Thoughts?
Loading ...
Yeah, on further review, I doubt that they'll trade Ratliff to take on more salary. He does look pretty good out there and is a nice piece to plug in during this year of playing the young guys (as we don't really have another center).
I still think it's a good idea if we can make it work. I just think our gains from trading him would likely be minimal.
Ratliff told the coaching staff at the beginning of the season that he felt good and that he wants to be worked hard this season. From his perspective, I think he realizes that if he gets injured again that his career is over. He wants to get lots of PT and show the league that he can still compete in an effort to keep playing just a little bit longer. Basically, he has nothing to lose at this point. As a result, we've gotten to see him go all out on the court and it's been really fun to watch.
It may be jumping the gun a little bit...
Four games in? Nah...
Keep starting him, hope he stays healthy, hope he enjoys being a leader for a young team, and hope he keeps producing like he has so far. Then, at season's end, offer him a reasonable two-year deal. (He's gonna be 35 in April.) If he wants a longer contract or more money, "See ya, Theo." His salary is off the books.
Yeah, I think two years is actually reasonable. Anything beyond that would be pretty bad though.
Another option that I hadn't considered until after I finished writing this would be a sign and trade. The main problem with this is that if we waited until the season is over to trade him, he would lose a lot of value. I'm also not sure Theo would be able to make that much more from a sign and trade than he would from just a normal free agency deal with another team.