PDA

View Full Version : When did there become a "ghost cap" rule?



NYSpirit1
11-29-2011, 07:44 PM
Hollinger mentioned this here:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7292666/nba-chris-paul-knicks-highly-unlikely


Even if the Knicks got rid of everybody else and just had those two on the roster, the 10 "cap holds" for minimum salary players would occupy another $5 million in salary cap space.

I created a separate thread to talk about this rule in general.

Does ESPN just make stuff up? The Heat got rid of all their players except Wade and Chalmers (who had like a 700,000 salary) in 2010 and signed James and Bosh and THEN after they got Miller and Haslem. He acts like it's impossible for a team to clear their entire roster to do this. The Heat even TRADED Michael Beasley for nothing, who went on to average over 20 points per game.

There was never any cap hold that disallowed teams from having 2 players on their squad in the offseason and adds 5 million to the payroll in the process. It makes absolutely no sense. And the Heat would have never been able to put that team together if there was. He also fails to mention that the Hornets have no leverage and no team is going to shell out the house for someone who, A. won't sign an extension and B., wants to be in New York. Thirdly, as you saw, LeBron, Wade and Bosh took 20-30 million less each to play together.

Hollinger's an idiot. I think some writers and columnists hate the notion of superteams, and start making up their own rules because of it.

bholly
11-29-2011, 07:55 PM
This has been a rule for a long time, and was covered in depth when the Heat were affected by it last year. Read the last CBA or Larry Coon's FAQ (CBAFAQ.com).

NBAkYD
11-29-2011, 07:55 PM
It's not worth trying to figure out these things. The Knicks'll figure out a way to get Paul

RevisIsland
11-29-2011, 07:57 PM
Cap holds have been around for a while, they're bigger in this CBA, but the heat had to deal with them too.

sjoerdje
11-29-2011, 07:57 PM
-

DerekRE_3
11-29-2011, 08:01 PM
You can relinquish the bird rights to a player if you want to avoid a cap hold. The downside to that is you can't re-sign an expiring player if you are over the cap, unless you use a salary exception like the MLE.

bholly
11-29-2011, 08:05 PM
You can relinquish the bird rights to a player if you want to avoid a cap hold. The downside to that is you can't re-sign an expiring player if you are over the cap, unless you use a salary exception like the MLE.

He's talking about the 'ghost' roster holds, ie charges to your salary cap when you're below the minimum roster size.

If you have less than 12 people on your roster, for every guy less than 12 you get charged the rookie minimum (~$490,000 last year and the next two years) towards your cap figure. So if the Knicks clear everyone but Stat and Melo then they'll have 10 of these counting against their cap, ie $4.9m. As they sign guys to fill the spots, the roster holds disappear.

The exact same thing happened with Miami last year, the original poster just didn't understand it at the time so doesn't remember it happening, and now thinks Hollinger is making it up to hate on the Knicks.

daleja424
11-29-2011, 08:07 PM
as others have said...this has always been the case. it is there to prevent you from using all your cap space on a couple guys and then exceeding the cap to fill your roster.

bholly
11-29-2011, 08:09 PM
There was never any cap hold that disallowed teams from having 2 players on their squad in the offseason and adds 5 million to the payroll in the process. It makes absolutely no sense.

It doesn't disallow anything. You can go down to 0 players if you want. It's just that for every space under the minimum roster size of 12, you have a 'hold' which essentially is just an amount charged towards your cap figure.

It makes perfect sense. The point is to prevent people from signing one or two guys up to the amount of the cap, and then being allowed to go over the cap to fill out their roster. This system just forces you to take into account that you're going to need to sign more guys when signing the first few - it forces you to leave some cap room for filling out the roster rather than just going over the cap.

It really did play a big role in the Miami thing last year - they were affected by it in the same way and it was widely reported on. You're just making yourself look ignorant by calling Hollinger out for mentioning it.