Did not know it had changed.Snakebites wrote:thesack12 wrote:Pharaoh wrote:Obvious benefit about the Grant (& Wood) sign and trades...
Both guys get the larger % increases in their deals.
Signing them outright = 5% raises.
Signing with their own teams = 8% raises
Means a lower first year salary for both
Sent from my SM-A520F using RealGM mobile app
https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2019/06/why-nba-sign-and-trades-are-rare-2.html1. Players can only get full maximum salary contracts (five years, 8% annual raises) if they remain with their previous team.
Under old versions of the NBA’s CBA, a sign-and-trade deal allowed a player to sign for the true max – in terms of total years and annual raises – even though he wasn’t remaining with his previous team. That’s no longer the case.
If, for instance, the Celtics were to sign-and-trade Kyrie Irving to another club this summer, he wouldn’t be able to receive the five years or 8% annual raises that he would if he re-signed with Boston — he’d still be eligible for the same starting salary, but would be limited to four years and 5% raises, reducing the overall value of his max contract by nearly $50MM, based on current cap projections.
This is correct.
Pharoah is describing a sign and trade loophole that used to exist but no longer does.
Sign and trades are still possible but they no longer allow players to attain the extra salary increase.
Makes the Grant S&T a bit weird.
The Wood S&T I understand cause we got Ariza as a asset for a guy we weren't going to bring back
Sent from my SM-A520F using RealGM mobile app