Knicks - What if?

[bhw326]

Lets play - What if????

Lee and Robinson play overseas for 1 year at whatever $$ amount.
Knicks retain their rights.
Knicks retender them contracts at the end of the year.
Knicks sign 2 max players.
Knicks come to terms with Nate and Lee.

Cap issue resolved skirted around.

Everone wins?

Is this possible under the CBA?

* Feedback please *

[Bac2Basics]

Even if this is possible under the CBA, the odds of it happening are microscopic.

[bhw326]

Even if this is possible under the CBA, the odds of it happening are microscopic.

I competly agree. Was just curious if it were possible though.

[Krapinsky]

This is pretty genius.

Bac2Basics.... this just in.... this is the trade thread... the odds of 98% of anything happening that is posted in this forum is microscopic.

[rpa]

I don't think it's possible for them to sign 2 max FA's AND retain the rights to Lee & Robinson. Unless the Knicks trade 1 of their 6 2010 contract guys (Curry, Jeffries, Gallo, Douglas, Hill, Chandler) they're on the hook for AT LEAST $27mil. Then you have to add in the cap holds for Lee & Robinson. Looking at Larry Coon's cap FAQ I think their cap holds will be 250% of their salary this past year (or 2x their QO's since QO's are 125% of the previous years' salary). Their cap holds combine to about $12mil. So add that $12mil onto the $27mil and you come up with $39mil. Then add in any salary from picks next year (if the Knicks were to buy a 1st rounder).

So to answer your question: no, it's not possible under the CBA.

[vincecarter4pres]

So to answer your question: no, it's not possible under the CBA.

[KooJo]

So to answer your question: no, it's not possible under the CBA.

But the Jazz think you should at least give it a shot.

[Preludepunk27]

Don't keeping Lee's and Nate's rights have a cap hold? So wouldn't that be an issue. Plus, they're not gonna sign for @$$ cheap when (hypothetically) they came back, so wouldn't you guys be through the roof in luxury tax once again. In theory this is pretty nifty but in reality I don't think your idea works as well under the CBA.

[Bac2Basics]

This is pretty genius.

Bac2Basics.... this just in.... this is the trade thread... the odds of 98% of anything happening that is posted in this forum is microscopic.

I understand that, but what he's proposing is microscopic even by realgm standards.

[gswhoops]

I think they can, actually...isn't this basically what Atlanta has going right now with Josh Childress?

[old rem]

I think they can, actually...isn't this basically what Atlanta has going right now with Josh Childress?

well..this is Have Your Cake and Eat It (and everyone elses cake) on a grand scale. Atl wasn't trying to get $30- $40 mill under cap while retaining 2 cap holds AND still having Curry/Jeffries.

[bhw326]

Don't keeping Lee's and Nate's rights have a cap hold? So wouldn't that be an issue. Plus, they're not gonna sign for @$$ cheap when (hypothetically) they came back, so wouldn't you guys be through the roof in luxury tax once again. In theory this is pretty nifty but in reality I don't think your idea works as well under the CBA.

I am not sure what the cap number would be, but I am sure it would be less than the $8-$10 Lee wants and the $4-$6 Nate wants. As far a the Lux tax, I do not think that the Knicks would care about that. They will have 2 max guys to market, a playoff team, and possibly the same bill that they are paying this year for a crappy team.

The CBA part is the question. Are there any rules that would make it not work? Mind you I do not think that realistically this will happen, like the thread reads, it is what if? Just imagine the screams of collusion all over the place if this actually happens.

[loserX]

I think they can, actually...isn't this basically what Atlanta has going right now with Josh Childress?

Note that the Hawks have not signed any free agents that they did not already have Bird Rights on...in large part because Childress still counts against the cap and chews up some of their capspace. Same thing would happen with Lee and Robinson; their holds are enough to prevent 2 max contracts from being available to the Knicks.

[kane2021]

Cant do it. You must renounce the rights of your own free agents before you can dip into the FA pool. You cant hold off and use bird right after you sign FA's. If you use cap space on another teams free agent you lose bird rights and must use raw cap to sign anyone else outside of the minimum.

[ElGrandeA]

Cant do it. You must renounce the rights of your own free agents before you can dip into the FA pool. You cant hold off and use bird right after you sign FA's. If you use cap space on another teams free agent you lose bird rights and must use raw cap to sign anyone else outside of the minimum.

I believe you are incorrect. If a team has "Bird Rights" on a player, a cap hold is set for the player. That cap hold counts against the salary cap. The only time a team will renounce the cap hold is if they need the additional cap space to bring in a free agent. I am not sure on the exact numbers, but:

Example: During 2010, the Knicks will be $15M under the salary cap. If Lee has a cap hold of $3M and Nate's $2M, then the Knicks can bring in outside free agents amounting to the $10M. If the Knicks want to spend $12M in outside free agents, they would have to renounce the cap hold of either Lee or Nate.

If the Knicks use all of the $10M in cap space to bring in a free agent or two, the Knicks are still able to resign Lee and Nate despite those signings putting them over the cap. This is what I think will happen.

[qclakers]

So to answer your question: no, it's not possible under the CBA.

But the Jazz think you should at least give it a shot.

Also I believe Kane is right, The "Bird Rights" portion of the CBA was put in for teams that were already over the cap so that they could resign their own players without regard for the cap. If you sign a free agent using open cap space then you have to renounce those rights and the player becomes an unrestricted free agent and you can only resign him using available cap space or an exception. That is why POR renounced the rights to Channing Frye and some other guy who I cant remember his name. They expected to sign Hedo or other free agent and had to renounce their rights to do so. It does not however apply to draft rights if the player has not yet played an nba game. ATL is getting away with it because the only FA's they are signing are their own.

[kane2021]

Cant do it. You must renounce the rights of your own free agents before you can dip into the FA pool. You cant hold off and use bird right after you sign FA's. If you use cap space on another teams free agent you lose bird rights and must use raw cap to sign anyone else outside of the minimum.

I believe you are incorrect. If a team has "Bird Rights" on a player, a cap hold is set for the player. That cap hold counts against the salary cap. The only time a team will renounce the cap hold is if they need the additional cap space to bring in a free agent. I am not sure on the exact numbers, but:

Example: During 2010, the Knicks will be $15M under the salary cap. If Lee has a cap hold of $3M and Nate's $2M, then the Knicks can bring in outside free agents amounting to the $10M. If the Knicks want to spend $12M in outside free agents, they would have to renounce the cap hold of either Lee or Nate.

If the Knicks use all of the $10M in cap space to bring in a free agent or two, the Knicks are still able to resign Lee and Nate despite those signings putting them over the cap. This is what I think will happen.

Bird right were created for teams to go over the cap to keep there free agents. If you have cap space then bird right matter little. What the bird rights offer a team with cap space is the ability to offer greater annual raises up to 10.5% and the ability to offer a 6th year. You must renounce your rights before you use available funds on another free agent. Bird right are so teams dont lose there free agents due to being over the cap. Not so they can add players AND keep there free agents.

[kane2021]

So to answer your question: no, it's not possible under the CBA.

But the Jazz think you should at least give it a shot.

Also I believe Kane is right, The "Bird Rights" portion of the CBA was put in for teams that were already over the cap so that they could resign their own players without regard for the cap. If you sign a free agent using open cap space then you have to renounce those rights and the player becomes an unrestricted free agent and you can only resign him using available cap space or an exception. That is why POR renounced the rights to Channing Frye and some other guy who I cant remember his name. They expected to sign Hedo or other free agent and had to renounce their rights to do so. It does not however apply to draft rights if the player has not yet played an nba game. ATL is getting away with it because the only FA's they are signing are their own.

Perfect example

[gswhoops]

I think they can, actually...isn't this basically what Atlanta has going right now with Josh Childress?

Note that the Hawks have not signed any free agents that they did not already have Bird Rights on...in large part because Childress still counts against the cap and chews up some of their capspace. Same thing would happen with Lee and Robinson; their holds are enough to prevent 2 max contracts from being available to the Knicks.

You're right, I forgot about the cap holds...

I guess it looks like NYK isn't going to be able to have it's cake and eat it too.

[old rem]

Cant do it. You must renounce the rights of your own free agents before you can dip into the FA pool. You cant hold off and use bird right after you sign FA's. If you use cap space on another teams free agent you lose bird rights and must use raw cap to sign anyone else outside of the minimum.

I believe you are incorrect. If a team has "Bird Rights" on a player, a cap hold is set for the player. That cap hold counts against the salary cap. The only time a team will renounce the cap hold is if they need the additional cap space to bring in a free agent. I am not sure on the exact numbers, but:

Example: During 2010, the Knicks will be $15M under the salary cap. If Lee has a cap hold of $3M and Nate's $2M, then the Knicks can bring in outside free agents amounting to the $10M. If the Knicks want to spend $12M in outside free agents, they would have to renounce the cap hold of either Lee or Nate.

If the Knicks use all of the $10M in cap space to bring in a free agent or two, the Knicks are still able to resign Lee and Nate despite those signings putting them over the cap. This is what I think will happen.

I'm not sure what the cap hold would be but I'd suspect it's a bit more. Anyhow.....if the Knicks big plan is to sign LeBron and Bosh at $5 mill each...hey...go for it.