12:10 p.m. update: I should’ve done the Warriors’ payroll spread sheet beyond 2010 originally, but here it is, late.

This season, the Warriors are currently over the cap with 12 signed players and Curry to come. Ellis and Biedrins account for $20m, or 34.6% of the $57.7m salary-cap figure by themselves. Add in Corey Maggette’s $9.6m, and that’s 51.2% of the cap eaten up by three players.

For 2010-’11, the Warriors are committed to $45.4m to 6 players (the above three plus SJax, Azubuike and Turiaf’s player option), not including Curry. If the cap drops to $53m, those 6 players would account for 86% of the cap space.

For 2011-’12, the Warriors are already committed to $43.89m to 4 players (Turiaf drops off), again not including Curry. Even if the cap remains at $53m–and there’s a chance it’d go lower–those 4 players would eat up 82.8% of the cap space.

In 2012-’13, the Warriors are truly in trouble and way, way out in front of almost everybody else in the league. They’ve commited $40.89m to 4 players (Ellis, Biedrins, SJax and Maggette), which would be 77.2% of cap space if we’re still using the $53m number.

If you don’t think that’s bad: Only Orlando, with Dwight Howard and Rashard Lewis and a trip to the finals, has more committed money to ‘12-13 ($50.9m) than the GSWs. And of the rest, only Philly at $39.3m alotted for four years from now (with Brand and Iguodala) is even close to the Warriors’ $40.89m total for ‘12-’13.


The vast majority of teams are committed to less than $20m committed to ‘12-13 and many are at $0 right now for that season. Some are going to get up there–Lakers if Kobe re-ups, the rush after 2010–but the point is the Warriors are in a particularly bad spot.


Unless they do a whole lot of salary-discarding (which started with the Crawford deal and must accelerate in order to make a difference), they’re committed to salary up the yin-yang for years and years… while the cap might go down and down. And they’re bad. Terrible, terrible situation, for years and years.

–Random observation as I go through these NBA economic numbers: No wonder Chris Cohan wants out. And no wonder it’s tough to get a smart businessman to pay Cohan a premium price. The Warriors are in some trouble here. Everybody in the league is in some trouble, with the Warriors’ long-term salary commitments really REALLY putting them in danger territory competitively.

—-Just a quick note on something you’ve already seen and partially digested, I’m sure…

The NBA’s new salary-cap figures for 2009-2010 were released last night (Larry Coon with the essential FAQ update) and the salient figures now are:

* The salary cap figure went down $1m to $57.7m.

* The luxury tax threshold went down a little more than $1m to $69.92m.

Neither was as big a decline as some of the doomsday forecasts, but still it’s one of the first declines in a long time.

And it came with a whammer: ESteinPN got a hold of a memo sent from the league office to every team warning about the 2010-2011 forecast.


According to the memo, due to the world-wide recession and reduction of league revenues, the league predicted that next year’s salary cap could drop all the way down to $53m or lower and the lux-tax could be in the $65m range.

That’s a significant hit, based on projections of just a few years ago, when teams were figuring on a cap number closer to the mid-60s and a potential luxury tax line in the mid-70s or higher.

That affects, of course, the teams jockeying to have space for the 2010 class of free agents, which include LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh (is that way Detroit spent its money this year on lesser lights like Ben Gordon and Charlie Vilanueva?).

The Knicks, for instance, could’ve been aiming to get $30-35m or so under the cap if the figures were normal. But with about $25m in commitments for next season (pending what they do with RFA David Lee and presuming they keep Danilo Gallinari and Wilson Chandler), the bare-bones Knicks still might only have $20-25m in cap room.

That might explain their semi-surprising decision to offer a multi-year deal to Jason Kidd. Even though he spurned it to return to Dallas, the Knicks’ offer to take on salary beyond 2010 might be a sign that Donnie Walsh understands he will have less room in 2010 than projected.

The dream of signing two max F/As might be dissipating with the recession and the lower cap number. So why not take shot at a good F/A now, when there’s more room? That might be the best Walsh can do to grease the wheels for ONE max F/A next summer.

And how does this affect the Warriors? Yes, I am always asked that and I do always ask it of myself.

Let’s go over this again: 2010-’11 cap figure is $57.7m. Lux-tax line is $69.92m.

The Warriors at this point are committed to $58.1m for 12 players, and that’s not counting draft pick Stephen Curry, who I presume they will sign since they believe he’s better than Kobe Bryant + Steve Nash.

Curry will count for another $3m or so, which pushes the Warriors’ 2009-10 commitment up to $61.1m for 13 players.

So they’re over the cap by several million. The GSWs still have the mid-level exception to give out, though the ranks of current F/As who are worth the MLE are dwindling and now we’re getting to desperation time, which is a bad time for the Warriors.

Let’s get to next year: If they DON’T acquire Amare Stoudemire, and keep the roster basically the way it is, the Warriors, by my count, have 7 guaranteed contracts (counting Curry) for 2010-’11, worth about $49m.

That means, if the cap is reduced to $50.4m, which is the low estimate of the league memo, the Warriors are ALREADY bumping into the cap figure and would be only $12-14m from the luxury tax, and we’re a year away and they’d have only 7 players signed.

That’s fiscal reality.

That, again, is a reason why I can see Cohan being interested in the Stoudemire deal, even if Stoudemire won’t commit beyond this season. Possibly ONLY if Stoudemire won’t commit beyond this season.

It could strictly be a money deal for Cohan, with a little short-term blip of excitement for whatever time Amare spends in the Bay Area, which presumably would be quite brief.

I don’t know if it’s going to happen, and I don’t know if there’s a way for Phoenix and the Warriors to figure out the proper trade value for an Amare one-year rental (VERY difficult to figure out), but I can see Cohan’s thinking:

Trading Biedrins’ long-term deal, plus Brandan Wright and Marco Belinelli (who might end up getting released next summer, anyway, mostly for cap purposes because their deals are not guaranteed past this season), would clean out the cap for 2010-’11.

But only if Stoudemire exercised his opt-out next summer and walked away, and that’s what I think would happen if this deal ever occurred.

The Warriors would lose a lot of talent. But Cohan would drop his salary-commitment down to about $39m. And 6 players.

Yes, yes, things are looking bright indeed.

Cohan’s potentially quickening sale desires could change the dynamics of a Stoudemire trade.

Basically, Cohan might have reason to trade for Stoudemire, even if Stoudemire has little interest in signing a long-term extension with the Warriors.

That scenario had generally been considered to be a deal-breaker for the Warriors, as generally discussed by Larry Riley, since it could be devastating to the long-term talent base. But if Cohan needs an instant money boost…

* Adding Stoudemire for the short-term would give the franchise a burst of fan excitement, which might translate to an up-tick in ticket sales, and that is apparently now crucial to Cohan’s immediate bottom line.

* Stoudemire, if he’s at top form, teamed with Monta Ellis, Anthony Randolph and Stephen Jackson, might even give the Warriors a shot at the playoffs–and home playoff dates are worth about $1M per game. Again, every dollar is crucial to the Cohan financial situation.

Plus, prospective buyers like to take over exciting, entertaining, popular teams.


* If Stoudemire does not sign long-term, he could leave as a free agent next summer, but that might not be a disaster in Cohan’s eyes as he readies for sale.

(Though it would be a fiasco for Warriors supporters, since it would mean trading Andris Biedrins, Brandan Wright and Marco Belinelli, possibly and more, for nothing in 2010-2011).

Stoudemire walking away as a free agent would erase enormous money from the payroll–basically, subtracting Biedrins’ long-term deal for free, and getting one year of Stoudemire as a bonus.

It would be a major talent loss, but, for Cohan and a potential buyer, it would more importantly clean the books for 2010-’11, when the Warriors would only have a handful of signed players and less than $40M committed.