Shawne's Options - With Errors

  Earlier this week, DB.com capologist David Lord urged me to do some checking on Shawne Williams’ contract situation, believing that the Mavs’ true thoughts on the newly-acquired kid would be revealed by their subtle actions. Well, my mistake; The newspaper out-hustled me with a Sunday item mentioning that the Mavs intend to beat  this week’s deadline by picking up their fourth-year option on Shawne for about $2.4 million. But my turtle’s pace isn’t the only potential error here. There is also the question of whether Williams would’ve been restricted or unrestricted.

  And there is also the question of whether the Mavs just did what we might call “Pulling a Moe Ager.’’

But the paper writes that had the Mavs declined the option, they would have had restricted rights on him next summer.

  Now, while we respect the paper’s hustle on the story (especially while I busied myself eating a second hot dog instead of asking around, like D-Lord has instructed), we are quite certain that the restricted part of this story is absolutely incorrect.

   According to D-Lord (with whom, on cap issues, one does not mess) and according to Art XI Sec 4 Para (a) Sub-para (i) of the CBA  (got it?), if the Mavs had failed to exercise that option:

·         Shawne would have become fully unrestricted, with all teams having an equal shot at him.

·         The Mavs also would NOT have had Bird rights on him.

·         If they wanted to keep him at that point, they would have had to use a veteran exception capped at the option amount, a minimum-salary exception, or the MLE or BAE.

·         And on the plus side, they would not have been forced to pay him for another year (at 2.4M) if he didn't make progress to justify it. 

  Instead, Shawne Williams is a Mav for the 2009-10 season. Which leaves at least one more question for the Triangle of Trust:

  Is that a good thing?

  Do any of the positives here justify paying Shawne $2.4M for the ‘09-‘10 season? Or is that such a sizable overpayment that they could have easily kept him anyhow next summer and for less money? We are talking about a 12^th man here, right? Are we sure we know what we’re committing to here?

  We wish we had the confidence to say that this signing means there clearly must be promise in Williams. While we are optimistic about his presence as one of Dallas’ LIBBs (Lightning-In-A-Bottle Boys), we’ve seen nothing yet in his short time that establishes this as an obviously advantageous move. … though management obviously sees it, having grabbed the brass ring of leverage on this situation.

  Remember that a year ago, the Mavs exercised the same sort of option on Ager – inexplicably, we thought at the time, in that he had never shown a thing to that point except for his penchant for taking a long time to tie and re-tie his shoes rather than join younger teammates for early pre-game warm-ups.

  Ager, of course, didn’t show a thing after getting the re-upped deal, either. Nor did he show a thing after being given a fresh start in NJ following his inclusion in the Kidd trade.

  In the end, the wasted pick on Ager was matched by a wasted pile of money on Ager.

  Now, the Mavs roll the exact same dice on Shawne Williams. … and we can only hope that in terms of dollars, sense and talent, he ends up paying more dividends than did Moe Ager.

920pm oct 26 2008