RealGM

YIKES I think his cap hold is higher than presumed.

We've been using a figure of $10.5mil. But I checked the asterisk on Larry Coon and didn't catch this one detail

Larry Bird, except when coming off rookie scale contract At least the average salary 150% of his previous salary*

Footnote says....

* Not to exceed the player's maximum salary, based on years of service (see question number 11). If the difference in salary between the last two seasons of the player's contract exceeded $4 million, then the percentage is based on the average salary in the last two seasons of the contract.

Well Lee's cap % hit is not to exceed Maximum Salary based on yrs of service using 25% of the new $56.1mil projected figure. Since Lee is only a 5th year player he's entitled to $14.025mil.<-----Pay attention to that figure here's where it gets dicey....Before we gave Lee $7mil this year he had a QO of $2.7mil(2009-2010) and a salary of $1,788,033(2008-2009). Now if you take either of those two figures his QO or his 2008-2009 salary and subtract it from $7mil you will have a bigger difference than $4mil... but let's use both for this example

Link to Lee and Nate's QO's ---------> QO's

~$7,000,000
-$2,700,000
$4,300,000

or

~$7,000,000
-$1,788,033
$5,211,967


For the record I don't think his QO salary pertains here because it would have been a 2009-2010 salary not qualifying as "last 2 seasons" or the difference would have been bewteen $2.7 and $1,788,033.....

but with example given both figures are greater than $4mil. Well you know what that means according to Larry Coon's breakdown above? You have to take the average of the last 2 seasons....

2009-2010/$7,000,000 + 2008-2009(Sal)$1,788,033=$8,788,033/2=$4,394,017 *

^^^^^^The figure in bold is not

Larry Bird, except when coming off rookie scale contract At least the average salary 150% of his previous salary*

Therefore

The other LC rule applies which is....

Larry Bird, except when coming off rookie scale contract Below the average salary 200% of his previous salary*

Lee's $7mil * 200% comes to $14mil just right under $14.025mil

Bye Lee


Now you may be thinking Oh no why did you go on such a witch hunt for this info. Well I didn't. I read this article from Sheridan and thought he was wrong and wanted to verify the info

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/post/_/id/30/barring-trade-knicks-roster-will-have-seven-keepers-after-july-1


Funny thing is I'm pretty positive he applied the same 200% rule to Duhon and No Sharrington except they make At least the average salary and have the past 2 seasons... so their hits should be 150%

Anyway check out this article from Sheridan

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/14992/the-knicks-secret-weapon-the-unlikely-bonus

He has to be wrong because his new deal is a new contract right? It's not a continuation or is this to be understood as concurrent contracts with one team? But then again how could you create that big of a difference on one existing contract between 2yrs?

We need Kos to verify this. I see a technicality here

what is so special about david lee?

Do you live off making negative threads?

Seriously bro, relax yourself.

lol

TheBluest = Mike Francesa ?

Does it make a difference? Either way his cap hold is less than 1 max slot right?
So we renounce everyone but Lee. Sign one max(LeBron), then try and sign another(Bosh). If the other max agrees to sign then we renounce Lee and sign the max F.A. If no other max F.A wants to come to NY, then we still have Lee.

Childs2Dudley wrote:Do you live off making negative threads?

Seriously bro, relax yourself.

I think Lee's situation is the biggest thing going as of now until the Playoffs are over but what did you think of the last link? Because if you clicked on it you would have saw I ended the post on a positive note. Lee's situation requires a little bit of detail of explanation. I'm not sure if Sheridan is right concerning his hold.

Isn't it pretty much a sure thing that they're renouncing his rights which would make his cap hold and this thread meaningless?

nykfan42 wrote:Isn't it pretty much a sure thing that they're renouncing his rights which would make his cap hold and this thread meaningless?

yup

Just trollin.

I didn't bother reading this mumbo jumbo.. so what's your final verdict?

knicksfan5494 wrote:I didn't bother reading this mumbo jumbo.. so what's your final verdict?

That this thread is a waste of internet space. It's been said a million times that the Knicks are renouncing Lee to avoid the cap hold. They HAVE to if they want to retain him and sign an impact player. I don't know why I'm even posting this nonsense of a thread.

Thread was too complex for them!

I see what you're getting at...will check out the article another time.

Could someone explain to me why we need to retain David Lee's bird rights when we have so much cap space this offseason that we can sign him to any contract we want outright without having to worry about his cap hold?

Bluest should change his name to Darkest, most of his scenarios involve despair and cars being burned and max contracts to Chris Duhon and JR Giddens.

aq_ua wrote:Could someone explain to me why we need to retain David Lee's bird rights when we have so much cap space this offseason that we can sign him to any contract we want outright without having to worry about his cap hold?

For sign & trade purposes.

pennyspree wrote:Does it make a difference? Either way his cap hold is less than 1 max slot right?
So we renounce everyone but Lee. Sign one max(LeBron), then try and sign another(Bosh). If the other max agrees to sign then we renounce Lee and sign the max F.A. If no other max F.A wants to come to NY, then we still have Lee.

This.

I think his cap hold was an issue when we didn't have the 2nd max slot but now, why does it matter? Anyways, we don't have to renounce anyone until we are ready to sign free agents. At the very least, we'll have the moratorium period to determine if we need to renounce him or not. What am I missing Bluest or Stutter?