RealGM

This is with no changes and an Ayton max. I saw it listed somewhere else so I thought I'd put here so people can see projected tax and when they come up with trades, see how tax changes and decide how much tax you feel Sarver is willing to pay:

Devin Booker..................$33,833,400
Chris Paul......................$28,400,000
Mikal Bridges..................$21,000,000
Jae Crowder...................$10,183,800
Landry Shamet.................$9,500,000

Dario Saric......................$9,240,000
Cameron Payne................$6,000,000
Cameron Johnson..............$5,887,899
Torrey Craig.....................$5,121,951

Ayton...........................$30,500,000

Cap Holds
Two Year Vet Minimum........$1,811,516
Two Year Vet Minimum........$1,811,516
Two Year Vet Minimum........$1,811,516

Rookie Minimum...............$1,004,158
Rookie Minimum...............$1,004,158
_______________________________________
.................................$167,109,914


$18.1 million over a Luxury Tax Threshold/Line of $149 million.

Luxury Tax Calculator

Non-Repeater

Taxable Amount
$18,109,914

Tax
$38,857,221

Salary Plus Tax
$205,967,135

/photo/1

Some interesting S&T rules I didn't know that David Nash explained on the above podcast with the Timeline guys.

I will not that all the teams with cap space to totally absorb his contract (teams that could have signed him to a max outright, these things do not apply).

But to teams over the cap, S&Ts are complicated. Here is what he mentioned:

Due to BYC (Base Year Compensation) rules, we can only accept $19.1 million back in salary in a S&T.
The team receiving him has to send out at least $24.3 million in salary to match their incoming salary within the certain %

Any team getting him cannot go over the apron in the season which I believe they said was $155 million.

Of course those first two points make a S&T seem impossible. But I believe I may have been mistaken that another player can be traded with Ayton in a S&T (though I have still seen conflicting information on this). However it doesn't seem like simply adding a player like Craig into the deal completely solves the problem. I will have to inquire frurther on this.

I also am not sure I can think of a player who was S&T'd to a team going out with another player....sure multiple players come back but I can't recall one where another player or players went out with the player who was S&T'd....so I want to further verify this.

BYC is a REAL pain in the ass but the reason it was created makes total sense. It just annoys me that it's relevant to us.

bwgood77 wrote:Some interesting S&T rules I didn't know that David Nash explained on the above podcast with the Timeline guys.

I will not that all the teams with cap space to totally absorb his contract (teams that could have signed him to a max outright, these things do not apply).

But to teams over the cap, S&Ts are complicated. Here is what he mentioned:

Due to BYC (Base Year Compensation) rules, we can only accept $19.1 million back in salary in a S&T.
The team receiving him has to send out at least $24.3 million in salary to match their incoming salary within the certain %

Any team getting him cannot go over the apron in the season which I believe they said was $155 million.

Of course those first two points make a S&T seem impossible. But I believe I may have been mistaken that another player can be traded with Ayton in a S&T (though I have still seen conflicting information on this). However it doesn't seem like simply adding a player like Craig into the deal completely solves the problem. I will have to inquire frurther on this.

I also am not sure I can think of a player who was S&T'd to a team going out with another player....sure multiple players come back but I can't recall one where another player or players went out with the player who was S&T'd....so I want to further verify this.

I am not an expert by any means but another reason S&T may not be an option is that based on the CBA (Section 8 (e) (1) (ii)) the new contract must not be more than 4 years long. Since in Ayton's case the length of the contract was the dealbreaker in last year's negotiations, I doubt that he would be ok to sign a shorter contract just to join another team.

bokonon wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:Some interesting S&T rules I didn't know that David Nash explained on the above podcast with the Timeline guys.

I will not that all the teams with cap space to totally absorb his contract (teams that could have signed him to a max outright, these things do not apply).

But to teams over the cap, S&Ts are complicated. Here is what he mentioned:

Due to BYC (Base Year Compensation) rules, we can only accept $19.1 million back in salary in a S&T.
The team receiving him has to send out at least $24.3 million in salary to match their incoming salary within the certain %

Any team getting him cannot go over the apron in the season which I believe they said was $155 million.

Of course those first two points make a S&T seem impossible. But I believe I may have been mistaken that another player can be traded with Ayton in a S&T (though I have still seen conflicting information on this). However it doesn't seem like simply adding a player like Craig into the deal completely solves the problem. I will have to inquire frurther on this.

I also am not sure I can think of a player who was S&T'd to a team going out with another player....sure multiple players come back but I can't recall one where another player or players went out with the player who was S&T'd....so I want to further verify this.

I am not an expert by any means but another reason S&T may not be an option is that based on the CBA (Section 8 (e) (1) (ii)) the new contract must not be more than 4 years long. Since in Ayton's case the length of the contract was the dealbreaker in last year's negotiations, I doubt that he would be ok to sign a shorter contract just to join another team.

Well I don't think he has a choice. I am not sure if he even took the QO if another team could sign him for 5 years next summer.

It's too bad Duffy didn't know that the Suns would have done a 4 year offer if true, because maybe they would have accepted that with 8 year raises. They really had nothing to lose at that point unless they thought the Suns would change their mind after another year.