Aren't raises supposed to be limited?

User avatar
Garf
Sophomore
Posts: 171
And1: 1
Joined: Oct 22, 2010

Aren't raises supposed to be limited? 

Post#1 » by Garf » Sat Sep 14, 2013 7:21 am

Maybe it's something I got wrong all along, but I had the impression that unless it's rookie scale (i.e. fixed) or minimum player salary exception (again, fixed and length limited to 1-2 years), raises should be limited (most commonly to 4.5%) and possibly even constant throughout the years:http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q54

Now I see this:

Ricky Ledo $544,000 $816,482 $947,276 $1,015,696 signed via cap room (non-minimum 1st year)
Gal Mekel $490,180 $816,482 $947,276 signed via cap room (minimum but 3 years)

How come? Is it only because these are not "other team's free agents" thus no rules whatsoever apply?
Join my CBA-simulating fantasy game here
answerthink
Junior
Posts: 325
And1: 10
Joined: Aug 12, 2009
Contact:

Re: Aren't raises supposed to be limited? 

Post#2 » by answerthink » Sat Sep 14, 2013 1:30 pm

No player can make less than his applicable minimum salary in any season.

The minimum salary for a one-year veteran in 2014-15 is $816,482, for a two-year veteran the following season is $947,276, and for a three-year veteran the season after is $1,015,696. Since these numbers are greater than raises of 4.5% of the salary in the first season of their contracts, the minimums take precedence. See Q16.

The minimum player salary exception doesn’t limit raises as you suggest. It states that a contract can only be for up to two years in length and must provide for the minimum salary in each season (with no bonuses of any kind). Thus, as you suggest, neither of these players were signed with the minimum player salary exception.
User avatar
Garf
Sophomore
Posts: 171
And1: 1
Joined: Oct 22, 2010

Re: Aren't raises supposed to be limited? 

Post#3 » by Garf » Sat Sep 14, 2013 3:28 pm

Thanks! That answers one half of my question.

The other half was my guess that - if using cap space - you can only deviate from the limits listed in the first sentence of Q54 when dealing with your own free agents. When dealing with other teams' free agents, it seems to me that you have to stay within the 4.5% range. Correct?

Bonus question: in the same situation, can the raises vary over multiple seasons?
Join my CBA-simulating fantasy game here
answerthink
Junior
Posts: 325
And1: 10
Joined: Aug 12, 2009
Contact:

Re: Aren't raises supposed to be limited? 

Post#4 » by answerthink » Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:49 pm

Your guess isn’t correct, unfortunately. Raises are limited in accordance with the first sentence of Q54, and the only exceptions are listed in the chart below it. Cap space wouldn't allow you to exceed the maximum amounts listed.

Bonus question: Yes, raises (and declines) can vary so long as they remain within the limits of the paragraph above. For example, a contract can call for a y/y raise equal to 4.5% of the first year amount in year 2, a y/y raise equal to 2.5% of the first year amount in year 3, and a y/y decline equal to 4.5% of the first year amount in year 4.
User avatar
Garf
Sophomore
Posts: 171
And1: 1
Joined: Oct 22, 2010

Re: Aren't raises supposed to be limited? 

Post#5 » by Garf » Sat Sep 14, 2013 5:36 pm

I think I got it now. So all raises from year x to x+1 must be within +/-7.5% of year 1 salary (LB/EB), or +/-4.5% (pretty much all other cases), unless minimum salary is higher.
Join my CBA-simulating fantasy game here
answerthink
Junior
Posts: 325
And1: 10
Joined: Aug 12, 2009
Contact:

Re: Aren't raises supposed to be limited? 

Post#6 » by answerthink » Sat Sep 14, 2013 6:01 pm

Yep. You got it.

There are exceptions to these basic rules though (including, but not limited to, first round picks, Arenas contracts, and players who are signed-and-traded).

Return to CBA & Business