bwgood77 wrote:tdjm wrote:Going to post a PSA to everyone who's proffering up big sign and trades for Love.
The *only* compelling reason Cleveland has to move on from Love is to avoid slamming head first into an enormous luxury tax bill. Not only does the luxury tax cost you a **** load of money, but it sets you up for danger of reaching the repeater tax, and it also costs you all of your exceptions (if you're in the tax, say goodbye to your MLE, BAE etc.)
Bledsoe would not be included in a Love S&T. Neither would both Morris twins. Cleveland would very clearly rather keep their 19 mil star PF, instead of doing a deal like Tucker + Morris twins which would cost them 18.5 million anyways.
Big sign and trades are a thing of the past, since you can no longer sign and trade players to teams over the cap (for example, the sign and trade the Suns did with Nash to the Lakers is no longer legal, as of 2014).
Moreover, Love would get the same amount of money signing with the Suns outright in free agency that he would with a sign and trade. From the cbafaq:
"Teams benefit because they can get something in return for players they would otherwise lose to free agency. For players the benefits are limited. Under previous CBAs a player who qualified could receive a full Bird contract and go to the team of his choice, which encouraged the player to seek a sign-and-trade once he decided to play elsewhere. Under the current CBA a player receives the same contract via sign-and-trade (four years, 4.5% raises) that he could get by signing with his new team directly, and can receive a larger Bird contract only if he stays with his previous team. In addition, it is much simpler for the player to sign directly with his new team, as a sign-and-trade has to be agreed to by three parties rather than two"
The Suns would be able to outright sign Love if they renounced all their cap holds (except Knight) and traded Tucker. This would be rather easy to do, for the record. If Love wants to sign in Phoenix, Cleveland can do very little about that (Dwight wanted to sign in Houston, LAL was powerless to stop that).
Now, a more realistic sign and trade might be something like the following:
Tucker + CLE 2016 first to Cleveland
Love to Suns
Cleveland gets a roleplayer that could thrive next to Lebron (3&D wing who can cover multiple positions), who doesn't break the bank. Their 2016 first returning means they can trade their 2016 first to improve, or their 2017 first since it's no longer Stepien prohibited.
The Suns don't have to waste time finding a Tucker suitor, and add a first option player.
--
If Love wants to come to Phoenix, Cleveland is taking whatever they can and moving on.
Nice post. Would Cleveland hit the repeater tax this next year? I'm not sure Gilbert cares, but if they don't hit the repeater tax this next year, wouldn't the cap likely huge cap increase the following year prevent the repeater tax? I'm not entirely familiar with where they have been with their cap and stuff the past couple of years, but since Kyrie and Love came on recently, it seems that they would have only possibly hit it this year, and then next year.....I thought the repeater tax kicked in after more than two years, but I am not familiar right now with the specifics.
SURELY, there is a provision that prevents teams from going over the cap significantly a season before the "INCREASED" cap and therefore avoid the repeater penalty.
If a team is significantly over the cap a season prior the increased salary cap, it should carry over to the first season of the increased cap right?... this isnt the normal cap rise of X% every year... this is more like XX%, a special provision needs to be considered. There are many teams that followed the rules to avoid repeater tax that will be disadvantaged by those teams that are so willing to play repeater tax only to be bailed out by the new cap increase.
