New York Knicks Forum Resources - Knicks CBA/Stats/Info/Links

Post #141 » by **NoLayupRule** » Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:14 pm

Brewers exception is basically useless since he was on a near min contract, right?

means were able to offer an exception for a near min contract, which isnt exciting for almost any team ... unless its a "potential" player on a team adverse to the lux tax yet close to it

DeJuan Blair or Thabeet or Ivan Johnson or someone like that

spaceballer · Post #142 » by **spaceballer** » Fri Jun 21, 2013 2:55 pm

NoLayupRule wrote:Brewers exception is basically useless since he was on a near min contract, right?

means were able to offer an exception for a near min contract, which isnt exciting for almost any team ... unless its a "potential" player on a team adverse to the lux tax yet close to it

DeJuan Blair or Thabeet or Ivan Johnson or someone like that

You are correct, the Brewer exception is worthless. It's exact value would be 2yr Vet minimum salary+100K.

The Knicks used a minimum salary exception to sign him, and the Thunder used a minimum salary exception to accept him in trade. Minimum salary exceptions can be used either to sign a free agent or to accept a player in trade. Both teams were over the cap, so neither had more than the minimum salary exception to use on him.

Despite the fact that his contract looks "near-min" instead of of "exactly min," his contract is "exactly min."

When a vet with many nba years signs with a team, his minimum salary is dependent on how many years he's been in the NBA. However, his cap hit is set at that of the minimum salary for a 2yr vet, regardless of how many extra years he's been in the NBA.

Thus, while his salary is $1,069,509, his actual cap hit was $854,389 (the Vet Min for a 2yr player). So, at most, the amount of money that his exception could be used to take back would be 2yr Vet Min of $854,389 + $100K takeback bonus.

Basically, it's just a vet min. And any player with more than 2 yrs in the NBA would already have a Vet min contract that pays more than that.

In sum, the exception is worthless. Since a vet min contract probably pays more than the exception. And you can't combine the exception with other players to trade for a more expensive player.

Post #143 » by **NoLayupRule** » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:15 pm

spaceballer wrote:You are correct, the Brewer exception is worthless. It's exact value would be 2yr Vet minimum salary+100K.

The Knicks used a minimum salary exception to sign him, and the Thunder used a minimum salary exception to accept him in trade. Minimum salary exceptions can be used either to sign a free agent or to accept a player in trade. Both teams were over the cap, so neither had more than the minimum salary exception to use on him.

Despite the fact that his contract looks "near-min" instead of of "exactly min," his contract is "exactly min."

When a vet with many nba years signs with a team, his minimum salary is dependent on how many years he's been in the NBA. However, his cap hit is set at that of the minimum salary for a 2yr vet, regardless of how many extra years he's been in the NBA.

Thus, while his salary is $1,069,509, his actual cap hit was $854,389 (the Vet Min for a 2yr player). So, at most, the amount of money that his exception could be used to take back would be 2yr Vet Min of $854,389 + $100K takeback bonus.

Basically, it's just a vet min. And any player with more than 2 yrs in the NBA would already have a Vet min contract that pays more than that.

In sum, the exception is worthless. Since a vet min contract probably pays more than the exception. And you can't combine the exception with other players to trade for a more expensive player.

thanks baller,

another question

Im under the impression that sign and trades are not allowed in the new CBA

however there is this discussion about Bledsoe and other guys who are FAs.

is there a limit to the salary size that can be traded in a sign and trade or was it just extend and trade that was thrown out?

spaceballer · Post #144 » by **spaceballer** » Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:43 pm

NoLayupRule wrote:thanks baller,

another question

Im under the impression that sign and trades are not allowed in the new CBA

however there is this discussion about Bledsoe and other guys who are FAs.

is there a limit to the salary size that can be traded in a sign and trade or was it just extend and trade that was thrown out?

Sign-and-trades are still allowed as long as the team receiving the sign-and-trade player ends up below the Apron (Luxury tax + $4M) after the trade is completed, and commits to staying under the apron for the rest of the season (even if it means forgoing the use of MLE's, BAE's, bird rights for other players, etc.).

The Knicks are over the apron, and probably won't be able to shed enough salary to be below the apron after taking back any sizable sign-and-trade contract of consequence. So the Knicks are not a destination for a sign-and-trade contract.

The Knicks may still be the originator of a sign-and-trade contract, regardless of salary situation, assuming any of the Knicks free agents (like copeland, prig, JR) require a sign-and-trade contract to get to their new team due to cap issues (unlikely). In that case, the Knicks would be able to take back non-free agents from other teams (players already on contracts, not sign-and-trade contracts) in return for sign-and-trading the JR/prig/copeland/etc. Not happening.

As for Bledsoe, he still has a year left on his contract. So teams aren't going to be doing an extend and trade. They would be trading for his contract, and then engaging in extension talks directly with Bledsoe after he's been traded to them.

The Bledsoe case would be like the Harden case. Where the Thunder traded Harden to the Rockets prior to the extension deadline. And then the Rockets engaged in separate extension talks with Harden after he was on their roster, cutting it close to the extension deadline. Stern warned the Thunder and the Rockets that they were not allowed to discuss with Harden prior to the trade whether or not he would sign an extension with the Rockets, since that would violate the prohibition against extend-and-trades.

So any team that trades for Beldsoe must do so before the extension deadline, so that they can privately conduct extension talks with him. And they must trade for him without a guaranteed extension, and without even broaching the likelihood of an extension. They are NOT trading for him with an extended contract, like in the Melo case where Melo signed an extend-and-trade agreement.

Extend-and-trades are not allowed. You have to trade for a player while he's on a contract and then separately hope that he signs an extension with you before the extension deadline. His signing an extension or not may not be a part of the trade discussions. He can't sign a contract extension contingent with his being traded, nor can he be traded contingent on his signing an extension.

Sign-and-trades are allowed, but with drastically more restrictive measures. For a team over the apron like the Knicks, they're not a destination for sign-and-trade contracts.

Post #145 » by **NoLayupRule** » Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:16 pm

excellent

thanks for clarifying that so well

seems like Kmart and Smith are the only players on this squad that have any sign and trade value and truthfully Id like them both to stay

however if S&Ting Kmart or Smith gets us something of good value Im willing to entertain it

spaceballer · Post #146 » by **spaceballer** » Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:48 pm

NoLayupRule wrote:excellent

thanks for clarifying that so well

seems like Kmart and Smith are the only players on this squad that have any sign and trade value and truthfully Id like them both to stay

however if S&Ting Kmart or Smith gets us something of good value Im willing to entertain it

I don't see S&T of either of them to be realistic.

Teams that do have cap space to offer JR Smith more money won't need to do a sign-and-trade. Teams over the apron (or that would be after taking him) won't be allowed to accept him in a S&T. So only targets for a S&T are teams that will be over the cap but under the apron.

And the amount that the Knicks can offer JR in a S&T is constrained by what the Knicks are able to pay him. So that means he would be making equal or less money than he can make on the Knicks.

I don't see JR going to a capped out team and wanting to be paid less money than he can make on the Knicks. Remember, sign and trades require the consent of 3 parties (both teams and the player), so he can't be forced. If he does leave, it will be for MORE money. That means it would be beyond the Knicks' ability to S&T him. You gotta have the money (cap room or bird exceptions) to do the "sign" portion of "sign-and-trade."

And in the case of KMart, since he's only been with the Knicks for a yr and the Knicks are capped out, the most money that the Knicks can offer him in a sign-and-trade would be the non-bird exception of 120% of what his last salary was. And since he made Vet Min, that's not a lot of money. He could get paid more by signing directly with a team with cap space to go above Vet Min instead of doing a sign-and-trade with the Knicks for 120% of Vet Min.

I suppose KMart might agree if no one else is willing to offer him more than Vet Min, and he wants to go to a capped out (but also under the Apron) contender for a miniscule 20% extra above vet min, and that contender is also willing to hardcap themselves to the apron and lose future flexibility and also trade assets for KMart. Doubtful.

Post #147 » by **NoLayupRule** » Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:24 pm

wouldnt we be able to offer Kmart the full mini midlevel in a sign and trade?
I agree thats its unlikely that they depart in this way however

spaceballer · Post #148 » by **spaceballer** » Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:36 pm

NoLayupRule wrote:wouldnt we be able to offer Kmart the full mini midlevel in a sign and trade?
I agree thats its unlikely that they depart in this way however

No, you can't use the taxpayer or non-taxpayer MLE to do a sign and trade.

Post #149 » by **NoLayupRule** » Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:44 pm

gotcha

thanks

new CBA is very limiting

riter · Post #150 » by **riter** » Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:39 am

Lawyers are snakes. even my sister who is a partner at a law firm admits this. But they know what they're doing.
This CBA stinks-I'm starting to believe the head guy who got canned for the BS he's been pulling. Fisher and them boys got jobbed---and even if I'm mistaken, I know one thing for sure, the Knicks tried to make a play for a championship and this new CBA is fu*king us up the a** for our troubles. this really sucks.

Rasho Brezec · Post #151 » by **Rasho Brezec** » Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:45 am

The CBA is great, it makes for better parity when you can't rely on rich owners paying for GM's dumb decisions.

riter · Post #152 » by **riter** » Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:43 pm

you must hate the knicks. I don't care if you can prove this CBA is manna from heaven. it's getting in our way of improving our team and I hate it.

Rasho Brezec · Post #153 » by **Rasho Brezec** » Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:58 pm

Above all, I like teams being on equal terms. If I wanted to watch a boring sport where money rules everything, I'd watch baseball or soccer.

Post #154 » by **GONYK** » Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:34 pm

Rasho Brezec wrote:Above all, I like teams being on equal terms. If I wanted to watch a boring sport where money rules everything, I'd watch baseball or soccer.

It's not boring if the Knicks win every year

MKCATL · Post #155 » by **MKCATL** » Mon Jun 24, 2013 5:48 pm

I love this CBA, It pays to have flexabilty on your roster and it sort of prevents us from getting into a Isiah Thomas scenerio. It's gonna make teams think real good and hard about certain players and contracts.

Post #156 » by **Capn'O** » Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:49 pm

How the hell do we acquire Millsap? That is my FAQ. He would be my #1 target and it's not close.

Post #157 » by **GONYK** » Mon Jun 24, 2013 11:52 pm

Capn'O wrote:How the hell do we acquire Millsap? That is my FAQ. He would be my #1 target and it's not close.

We don't

Post #158 » by **Capn'O** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 12:37 am

GONYK wrote:
Capn'O wrote:How the hell do we acquire Millsap? That is my FAQ. He would be my #1 target and it's not close.

We don't

I reject that answer, good sir!

jp007 · Post #159 » by **jp007** » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:54 pm

can we trade Amare to a team that has not use the amnesty like LAL its looking like Dh12 will be out can we get under the cap and sign and trade for howard then send ,pick the 24 for the lakers. if amare is not healthy for them they could always use the amnesty clause on him, Paul will come off the book and they will be able to make a run at lebron in 2014?

Post #160 » by **GONYK** » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:56 pm

jp007 wrote:can we trade Amare to a team that has not use the amnesty like LAL its looking like Dh12 will be out can we get under the cap and sign and trade for howard then send ,pick the 24 for the lakers. if amare is not healthy for them they could always use the amnesty clause on him, Paul will come off the book and they will be able to make a run at lebron in 2014?

No, they can't

The player had to be on your team before the new CBA