Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 163
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,208
    Quote Originally Posted by mouseslept View Post
    The phrase "hard capped" doesn't exist in the CBA, it comes from other sports and in "everyday NBA language", it means "you can do nothing more than trade or sign min contracts in empty roster spots" and "only a part of the MLE can be used, all other exceptions are wiped out" . It is what happens if a team exceeds the apron (4% over the lux tax threshold). No sign and trades either or "Gilbert Arenas rule".
    Wrong

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Wrong
    sure you are! I never am when it comes to the CBA.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,208
    Quote Originally Posted by mouseslept View Post
    sure you are! I never am when it comes to the CBA.
    Riiiiiight.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    113,499
    Quote Originally Posted by mouseslept View Post
    All that said, there might be contending teams which may benefit out of the league reducing the cap limits.

    -The Celtics are a team which will be paying the lux for the next season, but then, they have Hayward's contract expiring which will get them into stellar financial situation thereafter and will have three 1st round picks this summer while they are only looking to add a clutch big in order to end up with a roster which can challenge the best of the competition for a title.

    -The Bucks are also in a very good financial position. They have a mostly secured roster with only the contracts of Sterling Brown and Pat Connaughton to renew this season, which are expected to be cheap and will have a projected to be 18th-19th 1st round pick coming from Indy in order to replace the rumoured to retire Korver. They can easily end up under the lux tax while retaining the entire roster and could perhaps take advantage of the situation and upgrade the roster further if they trade one out of their two clutch point guards (Bledsoe or Hill) for valuable return.
    tatum getting the max will hurt the celtics as well... he wont take less than the max and they still need a big.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    113,499
    there has to be something to get out of a bad contract coming up because of the virus... on top of that the sixers have the ability to trade embiid or simmons rather easily for a ton.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    tatum getting the max will hurt the celtics as well... he wont take less than the max and they still need a big.
    One could describe the financial condition of the Cs (as well as the Bucks), as being absolutely stellar!

    The Cs will be paying the lux tax for the 20-21 season, but have Hayward's contract expiring and three 1st round picks, they won't be threatened by even thinking of the lux tax for five seasons after and will not be concerned about the repeaters tax either in the near or longer future. A long term sustainable core with lots of assets, any GM's "dream team". Given the age of their star core, they are "locked" to be title contenders for as long as the eye can see.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    there has to be something to get out of a bad contract coming up because of the virus... on top of that the sixers have the ability to trade embiid or simmons rather easily for a ton.
    Why? Because the Sixers, the Nets , GSW and the Lakers (after extending Davis) are screwed? Nothing can make the rest of the teams happier! They won't be paying to finance their problems.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    34,170
    If they keep the tax line steady then the Celtics can get under the cap by getting Hayward to opt out and sign a big long term contract the way that Horford did last year. After that they use their own and MILís 1st rounders to salary dump Kanterís $5M salary and Poirierís $1.4M buyout. Even if those 1sts arenít used in salary dump deals, you deal them back to high seconds so you can save a couple million on salary.

    By keeping Hayward at 3 years theyíd line him up to expire the same year as Kemba. Then they can pursue a max free agent to play with Tatum/Brown for the future.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by hugepatsfan View Post
    If they keep the tax line steady then the Celtics can get under the cap by getting Hayward to opt out and sign a big long term contract the way that Horford did last year. After that they use their own and MILís 1st rounders to salary dump Kanterís $5M salary and Poirierís $1.4M buyout. Even if those 1sts arenít used in salary dump deals, you deal them back to high seconds so you can save a couple million on salary.

    By keeping Hayward at 3 years theyíd line him up to expire the same year as Kemba. Then they can pursue a max free agent to play with Tatum/Brown for the future.
    The Cs have absolutely no reason to avoid the lux tax this season, they are better off to let Hayward expire and then see if they will renew his contract at a lower salary or release him, depending on how the picks will develop and how soon they'll be ready to contribute to the team.

    With three picks in the 1st round, and the ability to use the MLE and add a talented big on the cheap (Christian Wood perhaps?), the Cs will hardly need to make any move mid-season.

    What may work for them, is if they trade the two later picks for one higher in the ladder, perhaps a deal with the Bucks which would have the Bucks drafting at No.26 and no.30 and the Cs picking at No.18 in return, would suit both sides just fine if the Cs consider the three picks to be too many to handle.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    59,840
    All teams are affected the most on this because this isn't something anyone could have planned for. NBA teams don't look at their operations year by year. They look 5-6 years down the line, and a cap drop was not anticipated. We're going to see what teams are really set to succeed.

    There is one guy out there I can think of that teams need to be scrambling to do what they can to get Sam Hinkie on board for a consulting role. His ability to find players was pretty darn good, and teams that are going to be in the tax will need the help of filling out a roster with cheap players.

    On the other parts here, the NBA and NBPA need to work together on a cap smoothing program here. Hopefully the players learned their lesson last time ownership showed them and advised on a cap smoothing program. I hate to sound calloused saying this but there's a reason owners have MBA's and doctorates in things like business and finance while always "winning" negotiations with players. Many players don't have degrees and didn't go back to finish a degree, and owners know they can pull fast ones over on players because of that.

    I laid out an idea for what the NBA could do to improve this potential issue. Offer a one time amnesty, 3 year cap smoothing, 1 year tax layoff. But I doubt players end up going with something like that because sorry, they are ****ing dumb. Potential max contract players in the 2021, 2022 offseason will push for not having that because they will "lose" money on a contract like that, rather than look at all the FA's that will get basically **** contracts this off season. Reminds me of when the cap boom of 2015 happened, and the warning was given if the cap goes up like that, someone will join a super team, and there wouldn't be as much cap space available the following year. And what happened? KD went to the GSW and so many stupid contracts were signed, then the following year only 3-4 teams had significant cap space and players got screwed.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    59,840
    Quote Originally Posted by hugepatsfan View Post
    If they keep the tax line steady then the Celtics can get under the cap by getting Hayward to opt out and sign a big long term contract the way that Horford did last year. After that they use their own and MILís 1st rounders to salary dump Kanterís $5M salary and Poirierís $1.4M buyout. Even if those 1sts arenít used in salary dump deals, you deal them back to high seconds so you can save a couple million on salary.

    By keeping Hayward at 3 years theyíd line him up to expire the same year as Kemba. Then they can pursue a max free agent to play with Tatum/Brown for the future.
    From Hayward's standpoint that doesn't make a ton of sense. Yes it helps Boston, but he'll likely end up making less over 3 years, than to play on his PO next year then signing a 2 year deal off that.

    I'll be honest that I think watching the Gordon Hayward situation will be an interesting one. I think you can make a compelling case for him to stay with Boston, but I do think there is a very compelling case for him to move on and go elsewhere.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    All teams are affected the most on this because this isn't something anyone could have planned for. NBA teams don't look at their operations year by year. They look 5-6 years down the line, and a cap drop was not anticipated. We're going to see what teams are really set to succeed.

    There is one guy out there I can think of that teams need to be scrambling to do what they can to get Sam Hinkie on board for a consulting role. His ability to find players was pretty darn good, and teams that are going to be in the tax will need the help of filling out a roster with cheap players.

    On the other parts here, the NBA and NBPA need to work together on a cap smoothing program here. Hopefully the players learned their lesson last time ownership showed them and advised on a cap smoothing program. I hate to sound calloused saying this but there's a reason owners have MBA's and doctorates in things like business and finance while always "winning" negotiations with players. Many players don't have degrees and didn't go back to finish a degree, and owners know they can pull fast ones over on players because of that.

    I laid out an idea for what the NBA could do to improve this potential issue. Offer a one time amnesty, 3 year cap smoothing, 1 year tax layoff. But I doubt players end up going with something like that because sorry, they are ****ing dumb. Potential max contract players in the 2021, 2022 offseason will push for not having that because they will "lose" money on a contract like that, rather than look at all the FA's that will get basically **** contracts this off season. Reminds me of when the cap boom of 2015 happened, and the warning was given if the cap goes up like that, someone will join a super team, and there wouldn't be as much cap space available the following year. And what happened? KD went to the GSW and so many stupid contracts were signed, then the following year only 3-4 teams had significant cap space and players got screwed.
    You start with the wrong assumption "All teams are affected"

    Read this: https://nba.nbcsports.com/2020/05/09...ll-be-lowered/

    the key phrase in the text is:

    "The luxury tax generally rises and falls with the salary cap. A lower luxury-tax line could burden many teams and produce a tremendous advantage for the teams with lower payrolls."

    There is going to be no "lux tax smoothening", simply because only five or six in the most teams are in trouble, but all the rest will be dancing on their grave!

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    59,840
    Quote Originally Posted by mouseslept View Post
    You start with the wrong assumption "All teams are affected"
    No I don't. Take a moment to read why I say that.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    No I don't. Take a moment to read why I say that.
    I did and suggested for you to read the NBC (very well documented) article which fully contradicts your position.

    If a voting among the governors would happen with "smoothening the cap" as a subject, the result would be 24-6 (best case scenario) against.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    59,840
    Quote Originally Posted by mouseslept View Post
    I did and suggested for you to read the NBC (very well documented) article which fully contradicts your position.

    If a voting among the governors would happen with "smoothening the cap" as a subject, the result would be 24-6 (best case scenario) against.
    No my position is all teams are affected because no team plans on a cap reduction.

    Now you are shifting to what I hope would happen rather than the reality. Of course no owner would want this because it would mean money out of their own pocket to stave off a huge cap reduction or 'borrowing' against the future earning of the league to offset spending more now. Owners are smart guys that understand this stuff and wouldn't do it. But if I had a seat at the table of both sides I would be arguing the benefits of it. Also that article doesn't indicate anything against cap smoothing being defeated to that level.

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •