The Harpring situation
There's been a lot of questions all summer about the financial implications of Matt Harpring's status. To the best of my understanding, here's the breakdown. For starters, Harpring's $6.5 million salary for 2009-10 became fully guaranteed midway through last season.
Although there were injury provisions in his contract, they were all related to Harpring's surgically repaired right knee. He missed exactly zero games for knee-related reasons, so his salary became guaranteed after the Jan. 31 game in Portland.
Harpring's salary also will continue to count against the Jazz for salary cap/luxury tax calculations. The NBA requires a one-year waiting period before teams can look ahead to relief if a player suffers a career-ending injury.
Because Harpring played in last season's playoffs, that waiting period extends all the way through this season. Since this is the final year of his contract, there's no future relief that could be obtained.
Where things get interesting is the insurance issue. For those who were unaware, NBA teams are allowed to insure their players' contracts and collect in the event of a season- or career-ending injury.
Jazz general manager Kevin O'Connor declined to comment earlier this summer when I asked about Harpring and insurance. So I went to somebody from outside the organization who deals with these issues daily and could speak generally on the subject.
Although the person had no direct knowledge of Harpring's situation, he guessed that his contract was insured. The NBA requires teams to carry insurance for the top five salary commitments they have on their roster.
Heading into last season, Harpring was the Jazz's No. 5 salary commitment after Deron Williams, Andrei Kirilenko, Carlos Boozer and Mehmet Okur.
(Some teams opt not to insure players entering the final year of their contracts, believing that there's little reason to do so. A player has to miss a minimum of 41 games as a result of the same injury before insurance even kicks in.)
From this explanation, you'd have to believe the Jazz have insurance on Harpring. My biggest question has been whether the Jazz face any kind of exception when it comes to Harpring as a result of the microfracture surgeries he's had on his knee.
It turns out - - and I don't think I've seen this written anywhere before - - that the insurer is allowed to make 15 league-wide exceptions each season.
The exceptions are even more specific that just a certain player. They can apply only to a certain injury involving a certain player. For example, the insurer can make an exception for Player A's back or Player B's knee, but has only 15 total for the league.
From experience, it was further explained that with so few exceptions, the insurer typically uses them on players with max or near-max contracts. Harpring's four-year, $25 million contract seemingly wouldn't fall into this category.
Granted, this is all the analysis from somebody outside the organization, but I think it's reasonable to assume the Jazz will be able to collect 50 percent to 75 percent of the $6.5 million that Harpring is set to make.
Of course, not having Harpring means things can only get more expensive in one respect for the Jazz.
Even with Harpring, the Jazz had just 13 players under contract. That's the league minimum, which is one reason why they might want to keep him on the roster. But it leaves them with 12 available players to start the season.
The Jazz will have options to explore in training camp and could add a player - - like Ronald Dupree or Goran Suton - - on a minimum contract. Even a minimum contract, though, would cost the Jazz double dollars given their luxury-tax situation.
Which means the Jazz are going to have to ask whether it's worth adding a minimum-contract player who could cost them upwards of $2 million, in the case of a veteran like Dupree.
--Ross Siler
Although there were injury provisions in his contract, they were all related to Harpring's surgically repaired right knee. He missed exactly zero games for knee-related reasons, so his salary became guaranteed after the Jan. 31 game in Portland.
Harpring's salary also will continue to count against the Jazz for salary cap/luxury tax calculations. The NBA requires a one-year waiting period before teams can look ahead to relief if a player suffers a career-ending injury.
Because Harpring played in last season's playoffs, that waiting period extends all the way through this season. Since this is the final year of his contract, there's no future relief that could be obtained.
Where things get interesting is the insurance issue. For those who were unaware, NBA teams are allowed to insure their players' contracts and collect in the event of a season- or career-ending injury.
Jazz general manager Kevin O'Connor declined to comment earlier this summer when I asked about Harpring and insurance. So I went to somebody from outside the organization who deals with these issues daily and could speak generally on the subject.
Although the person had no direct knowledge of Harpring's situation, he guessed that his contract was insured. The NBA requires teams to carry insurance for the top five salary commitments they have on their roster.
Heading into last season, Harpring was the Jazz's No. 5 salary commitment after Deron Williams, Andrei Kirilenko, Carlos Boozer and Mehmet Okur.
(Some teams opt not to insure players entering the final year of their contracts, believing that there's little reason to do so. A player has to miss a minimum of 41 games as a result of the same injury before insurance even kicks in.)
From this explanation, you'd have to believe the Jazz have insurance on Harpring. My biggest question has been whether the Jazz face any kind of exception when it comes to Harpring as a result of the microfracture surgeries he's had on his knee.
It turns out - - and I don't think I've seen this written anywhere before - - that the insurer is allowed to make 15 league-wide exceptions each season.
The exceptions are even more specific that just a certain player. They can apply only to a certain injury involving a certain player. For example, the insurer can make an exception for Player A's back or Player B's knee, but has only 15 total for the league.
From experience, it was further explained that with so few exceptions, the insurer typically uses them on players with max or near-max contracts. Harpring's four-year, $25 million contract seemingly wouldn't fall into this category.
Granted, this is all the analysis from somebody outside the organization, but I think it's reasonable to assume the Jazz will be able to collect 50 percent to 75 percent of the $6.5 million that Harpring is set to make.
Of course, not having Harpring means things can only get more expensive in one respect for the Jazz.
Even with Harpring, the Jazz had just 13 players under contract. That's the league minimum, which is one reason why they might want to keep him on the roster. But it leaves them with 12 available players to start the season.
The Jazz will have options to explore in training camp and could add a player - - like Ronald Dupree or Goran Suton - - on a minimum contract. Even a minimum contract, though, would cost the Jazz double dollars given their luxury-tax situation.
Which means the Jazz are going to have to ask whether it's worth adding a minimum-contract player who could cost them upwards of $2 million, in the case of a veteran like Dupree.
--Ross Siler
5:10 PM
| 
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home