dockingsched wrote:Dr Aki wrote:
now what would the lakers be doing?
- offering deng an extension, which is allowed on July 7th (and not before, though negotiations should've already began), the 2nd anniversary of signing his deal with the lakers
- waiving and stretching deng, as per the waive and stretch provisions detailed in the CBA
lakers wouldn't be doing anything that is listed:Examples of conduct considered to be circumvention include:
A team owner allowing a player to invest in a business or investment fund controlled by the owner or a friend of the owner.
A team executive assisting a player in obtaining a product endorsement.
Any "under the table" promises for a future contract (see question number 30).
A team's arena renting retail space to a player on the team.
A team selling a sponsorship to a business in which a player has an interest.
A team hiring a player's relative or business partner as an employee.
A team owner allowing a player the use of his private plane.
A company affiliated with a team's owner making a home available to one of the team's players.
only the last point offers any relevanceWhenever a contract is signed, extended, renegotiated or otherwise amended, the team, player, and player's agent must certify, under penalty of perjury, that there are no side agreements or understandings of any kind relating to:
Any future contract, or future extension, renegotiation or amendment of the player's current contract.
Any outside compensation, investment, business opportunity or anything else of value furnished to the player or any other person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting on behalf of the player.
The intent of these rules is to ensure that the only agreement from which either the player or the team can benefit is the current, signed player contract. The rules extend to sponsors, business partners and other team affiliates, and to player agents, representatives and family members.
of which none of it is contrary to an extend and stretch.
here, when the lakers open talks on a contract extension:
- is there another future contract being agreed to? no
- is there another extension being agreed to? no
- is there going to be a renegotiation or amendment? no
and the extension benefits one person - deng, by giving him an additional chunk of money
the contract is going to specify, that the lakers will extend deng for ($$XX million dollars, with [<14.3] millions dollar guaranteed.
i'm sure you've read the pincus article from last year, including a nice little quote by larry coonGiven the value of money, why would Deng be willing to defer his earnings over six additional seasons?
To entice Deng, the Lakers probably have to offer a partial guarantee over the extension to make it worth his while.
"If Deng takes a buyout from the Lakers, his income tax burden will be dependent on his state of residence," sports accountant Robert Raiola of PKF O'Connor Davies said. "It's not easy to predict his take-home pay after taxes, especially with proposed tax-code changes by President Trump."
"Depending on Deng's savviness as an investor, an additional $3 million in salary from the Lakers paid out over 11 years may be more than the net he would earn under his existing contract paid out over five years," Raiola continued.
Part of that computation is that Deng would be able to double-dip, eligible to sign with another team next season at a salary worth at least $2.4 million.
A three-year extension with $3 million in total guaranteed might be enough enticement, which is a judgment call the Lakers would have to make.
If so, paying that additional salary to Deng over 11 years is a better investment for the Lakers than sending an immediate $3-5 million in a trade to another team as part of a salary dump.
"It's clever," said one Western Conference general manager. "I wish I thought of it."
Giving Deng additional money could also help the Lakers ensure the league doesn't close the loophole in the CBA, according to Larry Coon, salary-cap expert and author of the CBA FAQ.
"The league's General Prohibition on Circumvention prohibits any transaction that's intended to defeat or circumvent the CBA's intent. ...Certainly, if there were no salary guarantees, the league would nix the extension as a blatant attempt to circumvent the rules. On the other end of the spectrum, a fully guaranteed extension easily would pass league muster, but it would be of no benefit to the Lakers. Somewhere between these two extremes is the tipping point—the point at which the league would allow the transaction."
aki, deleted your initial part about the unguaranteed deal since it really doesn't apply, its an already existing contract.
regarding the rest of your post, yours is a fair argument and interpretation, but i think what supersedes everything is that the extension would only be signed by Deng if there was already a side agreement in place that he was going to be waived. there is no way he signs that extension unless that side agreement was already in place, so they won't be able to deny it.
now, you mention that the extension only benefits Deng, but of course that isn't true otherwise the Lakers wouldn't do it. the benefit of the extension is that its completed in conjunction with the side agreement that Deng also be waived. This results in a benefit that i believe the league will shoot down immediately because it seems like a clear circumventing of the intention of the rule.
ultimately we'll have to wait in see, but im pretty confident that it wouldn't be allowed because the way the CBA is written is that it details what is allowed, not in a way to detail what isn't allowed. this action isn't specifically allowed, and i believe its clearly against the intention of the rule.
Here's the kicker, the NBPA would kick up a stink about it as well.
Refusing this extension would:
1. Limit a players ability to earn more money
2. Prevent a player's movement (signing for a second team)
3. Set up a more intense fight at the next CBA fight, which is in 2020-21 I think
The league's got to pick its battles, this is one case study where the players would be all for (not least the VP of the NBPA)
