Minimum team salary

[Y-Knot]

It's been reported that the tabking Sixers are north of 8M under the minimum team salary. Do they have any incentive to spend that money? If so how and when do they have to do it under the CBA before its just bonus money for the current roster.

[nodeal]

Incentive:
Commish might get mad if they dont get over the min. Obvious tanking cant make the league happy.
Bringing in extra salary should lead to picks/prospects two birds with one stone. Pretty sure this is hinkies plan.

Reason not to spend:
Players get a bonus check, that might lead to player loyalty. Especially the young players.

How:
Sign players or trade for additional salary. The sooner they do it the better.

The team payroll refers to the monies actually paid. For example, if a team trades a player midway through the season his salary comes off the team salary, but the money actually paid while he was a member of the team counts toward the team payroll.

When:
End of the season, Not much can be done to get over the min after the trade deadline though.

I think the penalty will be changed in the future to something more severe. Something like a reverse tax.

[DBoys]

It's been reported that the tanking Sixers are north of 8M under the minimum team salary. Do they have any incentive to spend that money? If so how and when do they have to do it under the CBA before its just bonus money for the current roster.

"Do they have any incentive to spend that money?"

Nope, not really. In the "worst" case scenario (if we can call a lower payroll a "worst" case for an owner with a bad team to be in), they will end up paying the minimum team salary, to the exact penny. There is no further penalty for falling below the minimum, and the sky will not fall should they reach the minimum team salary by this means.

In fact, if a team wants to pay only the minimum, having salaries that are below it, and then tossing bonus checks to the teams players at year's end, is the most practical solution. It doesn't require a team to intentionally bloat salaries, and they won't end up wasting any money by accidentally paying more than the minimum. In addition, it rewards all of the players that played on that team, beyond their contracts. Everyone ends up happy.

[Y-Knot]

Thanks. If Sixers wind up with a top 4 pick and NOLAs pick at 6-7, he could be a genius.

[Scoot McGroot]

Incentive:
Commish might get mad if they dont get over the min. Obvious tanking cant make the league happy.
Bringing in extra salary should lead to picks/prospects two birds with one stone. Pretty sure this is hinkies plan.

Reason not to spend:
Players get a bonus check, that might lead to player loyalty. Especially the young players.

How:
Sign players or trade for additional salary. The sooner they do it the better.

The team payroll refers to the monies actually paid. For example, if a team trades a player midway through the season his salary comes off the team salary, but the money actually paid while he was a member of the team counts toward the team payroll.

When:
End of the season, Not much can be done to get over the min after the trade deadline though.

I think the penalty will be changed in the future to something more severe. Something like a reverse tax.

They could just make you ineligible to receive luxury tax distribution payments and revenue sharing payments, just as if you were over the luxury tax. For essentially all teams this would be more than enough to persuade them to get above the floor.

[DBoys]

They could just make you ineligible to receive luxury tax distribution payments and revenue sharing payments, just as if you were over the luxury tax.

For essentially all teams this would be more than enough to persuade them to get above the floor.

"They could just make you ineligible to receive luxury tax distribution payments and revenue sharing payments, just as if you were over the luxury tax. "

1 No, they cannot. The rules are set and do not allow this.
2 The rules will remain as is, until there's a new CBA.
3 The league's "penalty" is already specified - you pay the difference. That's all.
4 An "added penalty" for those who want to have one, is that with a lower payroll, a team is likely to be less competitive and draw fewer fans.
5 Lower attendance is its own financial downside for a team; plus, failing to adequately perform in your market can impact eligibility for revenue sharing.
6 But none of that is tied to spending, only to revenue generated. So if a team can draw fans while spending far below the floor, they are free to do so all they want.

"For essentially all teams this would be more than enough to persuade them to get above the floor."

Persuade? No one cares. They'll end up paying the minimum in salaries, one way or the other, which is what the CBA requires. Not sure why some want to imagine that there are further penalties - or that anyone would really care - for a team being below the floor. Frankly, if your team will suck, it's much smarter from a business sense to avoid bloated salaries and long term obligations, as you rebuild, and it's in the best interest of the league that their teams make smart business decisions.

[Scoot McGroot]

They could just make you ineligible to receive luxury tax distribution payments and revenue sharing payments, just as if you were over the luxury tax.

For essentially all teams this would be more than enough to persuade them to get above the floor.

"They could just make you ineligible to receive luxury tax distribution payments and revenue sharing payments, just as if you were over the luxury tax. "

1 No, they cannot. The rules are set and do not allow this.
2 The rules will remain as is, until there's a new CBA.
3 The league's "penalty" is already specified - you pay the difference. That's all.
4 An "added penalty" for those who want to have one, is that with a lower payroll, a team is likely to be less competitive and draw fewer fans.
5 Lower attendance is its own financial downside for a team; plus, failing to adequately perform in your market can impact eligibility for revenue sharing.
6 But none of that is tied to spending, only to revenue generated. So if a team can draw fans while spending far below the floor, they are free to do so all they want.

"For essentially all teams this would be more than enough to persuade them to get above the floor."

Persuade? No one cares. They'll end up paying the minimum in salaries, one way or the other, which is what the CBA requires. Not sure why some want to imagine that there are further penalties - or that anyone would really care - for a team being below the floor. Frankly, if your team will suck, it's much smarter from a business sense to avoid bloated salaries and long term obligations, as you rebuild, and it's in the best interest of the league that their teams make smart business decisions.

Oh good lord. Obviously this CBA is locked up. It was a hypothetical suggestion to the previous posters concern that something should be done.

But thanks for several pages as to why I would be wrong if what I said was said as if it could be done unilaterally immediately, and wasn't a hypothetical to a future CBA.

[DBoys]

You were the first in this thread to say your thoughts were intended to theorize about some new CBA down the road, and you didn't say it until after I had replied. Mind-reading a shift in context shouldn't be a requirement to converse without getting snarkiness in response imo.

[Scoot McGroot]

You were the first in this thread to say your thoughts were intended to theorize about some new CBA down the road, and you didn't say it until after I had replied. Mind-reading a shift in context shouldn't be a requirement to converse without getting snarkiness in response imo.

I think the penalty will be changed in the future to something more severe. Something like a reverse tax.

[nodeal]

I was the 1st to say a more severe penalty could be written in the future(future CBAs). No reason to state why I think it will happen. The penalty could be changed to something as simple as you pay the difference, but to all the players in the league not just to the players on your team.

As for PHI I dont believe they will finish far under the min. Sam Hinkie wont waste an asset like that.

[Three34]

This board needs a sense of humour adjustment, I reckon. Here's a monkey on a pushbike.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqqPNY6Mx6s[/youtube]

[Dunkenstein]

This board needs a sense of humour adjustment, I reckon. Here's a monkey on a pushbike.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqqPNY6Mx6s[/youtube]

Can't you ever be serious? We're discussing weighty issues here. Issues that could affect the future of mankind as we know it. And by the way, we spell it "humor" here in America, the home of the NBA, you bloody Brit!

[bondom34]

Can't you ever be serious? We're discussing weighty issues here. Issues that could affect the future of mankind as we know it. And by the way, we spell it "humor" here in America, the home of the NBA, you bloody Brit!

Don't you know everything's funnier with a British accent?

[HartfordWhalers]

Stripes?

What sort of monkey wears stripes.

[Three34]

I see what this situation calls for. Same monkey, different tune.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKNvofzMsG0[/youtube]

[HurricaneKid]

So assuming the 76ers stay this far below the min and the 8M is simply paid out to its players how does this affect the 9% set back and the players incomes (just a one time bonus for 2013-14?)