Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 29
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3

    Discussion: Clippers can technically sign a max free agent, in addition to paul

    under the nba cba, and bird rights and things of that matter, if the clippers trade jordan and butler away, and recieve 0 salary in return, they will have enough to sign a player like dwight howard, al jefferson or any other free agent(s) looking for max money

    theoretically, they could go out and sign either howard, or a combo of jefferson+ oj mayo

    the catch is, chris paul cannot sign with them until AFTER the free agent is signed

    if the clippers move both butler and jordan, they will free up 18 million in cap space

    then would then sign the free agents they want

    then after all that, even if they are over the cap, they can resign paul to a max deal, because they own his bird rights

    if paul is resigned before tho, they cannot sign anyone because they would be over the cap


    just something to think about. i dont know why the clippers havent considered this already. bird rights are a gift to be used, given to us by the cba

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,395
    No. They would have done it by now, there has to be a reason why they haven't done it.
    Texans Time is here!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    28,250

    Discussion: Clippers can technically sign a max free agent, in addition to paul

    Oh

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,164
    How are they trading Jordan and Billups and not getting any cap in return?

    Serious question, not familiar with this.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pittsbruh
    Posts
    72,101
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownBears22 View Post
    How are they trading Jordan and Billups and not getting any cap in return?

    Serious question, not familiar with this.
    this would be my question too.

    the teams they'd be trading them to would have to be well under the cap so that they wouldn't have to match salary. i guess they'd give up a future pick. thing is, no team under the cap is gonna be targeting billups, and i don't someone would just take on jordan's huge salary without shedding some of their own

    while it may technically be possible for them to get enough room (i'm not doing the math) it's not gonna happen. if that was their goal we'd be clear of it by now
    Hello

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,759
    The team's free agents continue to be included in team salary. This charge is called the "free agent amount," which is a form of cap hold. There may not be enough money available under the cap to sign another team's free agent, because the team's own free agents are taking up all its cap room.
    Why do free agents continue to count against team salary?

    It closes a loophole. Teams otherwise would be able to sign other teams' free agents using their cap room, and then turn their attention to their own free agents using the Bird exception. This rule restricts their ability to do that. It uses the player's current status (type of free agent, whether coming off a rookie contract, and previous salary) as a rough guideline to predict the amount the player is likely to receive in his next contract, and sets that amount aside in the form of a cap hold.
    even with all this being said , there's no way they can trade butler and jordan without taking salaries back .
    Basketball is like war in that offensive weapons are developed first, and it always takes a while for the defense to catch up.


    Red Auerbach

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRamForPrez24 View Post
    this would be my question too.

    the teams they'd be trading them to would have to be well under the cap so that they wouldn't have to match salary. i guess they'd give up a future pick. thing is, no team under the cap is gonna be targeting billups, and i don't someone would just take on jordan's huge salary without shedding some of their own

    while it may technically be possible for them to get enough room (i'm not doing the math) it's not gonna happen. if that was their goal we'd be clear of it by now

    exactly, tradign those players, either together, or separately to another team, while getting only draft picks or trade exceptions in return


    i think the gm's are aware, but its a big risk, considering you are giving up 2 valuable players, without having a guarentee that you will get the player you want via free agency

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    9,772
    OP, you're wrong.

    Free Agents have what's called a 'cap hold', which is essentially an amount that counts towards the team's cap figure until they sign a contract, or the team 'renounces' them (which means they also lose their Bird rights and can't go over the cap to re-sign them later).

    Chris Paul's cap hold is $18,668,431, which means he counts that much towards the Clippers' cap even before they sign him.

    People on here (and elsewhere) come up with the exact same plan every year. The reason teams don't do it isn't because they didn't think of it, it's because it doesn't work.


    Edit: Leprechaun beat me to it.
    Last edited by bholly; 07-01-2013 at 08:07 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,671
    That's crazzzy so they can possibly steal an agent?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by bholly View Post
    OP, you're wrong.

    Free Agents have what's called a 'cap hold', which is essentially an amount that counts towards the team's cap figure until they sign a contract, or the team 'renounces' them (which means they also lose their Bird rights and can't go over the cap to re-sign them later).

    Chris Paul's cap hold is $18,668,431, which means he counts that much towards the Clippers' cap even before they sign him.

    People on here (and elsewhere) come up with the exact same plan every year. The reason teams don't do it isn't because they didn't think of it, it's because it doesn't work.


    Edit: Leprechaun beat me to it.
    oh ok, im sorry, i had completely forgot about that factor. i thought only restricted free agents were recorded as a cap hold

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    9,772
    The best they possibly could do, in terms of signing a new max-level guy, is to dump everyone else and get CP3 and/or the new guy to take a slight paycut. Obviously we're talking about Dwight as the third.
    Blake + CP3's max + Dwight's max + 9 roster-size holds for having less than 12 players = $59,995,728.
    That's likely to be above the cap level (projected to be $58.5m), so they can't do it without paycuts - they can do it with a slight paycut to get under the limit though. Of course they'd have a supporting cast of almost all min guys, too.
    Obviously, though, while it's possible, it isn't going to happen, because nobody's taking on the rest of their roster for nothing.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    12,381
    It's called a cap hold.


    "Blake Griffin. You are nothing more than a high school bully!"

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    West Covina CA
    Posts
    18,829
    I've brought this up many times around here as a sort of pipe dream. When realism kicks in, it's not even the best way to do things and thats ignoring the fact it would be nearly impossible. I think the fact you don't hear the team talking about trying to do this tells you how risky and unrewarding this process would be. Say they did dump DJ, Butler and Bledsoe for nothing...they still couldn't offer Howard a max deal and CP3 would have to take less than the max to make it remotely worth it. Clippers would end up with something like CP3, Blake, West or Jefferson, Crawford, Bullock and a bunch of scrubs. They are better off adding a piece or 2 to what they already have. They have already filled their one glarring need which was at coach. Of course most of PSD thinks VDN=Doc and the Clipps are no better.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    9,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Cracka2HI! View Post
    Of course most of PSD thinks VDN=Doc and the Clipps are no better.
    Man, a few of you Clipps guys really seem to have a complex about this stuff. The overall view, as far as I've seen, is that Doc is a huuuuge improvement over VDN. I don't think I've seen a single person disagree with that. I feel like you guys must just see one or two idiots say something that everyone else ignores and take it as some sort of mass persecution.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6,574
    Lol at OP thinking he found a loophole in the CBA that nobody thought of yet

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •