BYC issue

[Macedonianbull]

According to Coon's FAQ, a player becomes a BYC player in two cases ..

1)When the team is over the salary cap, and uses LB or EB exceptions to re-sign the player who in turn receives more than a 20% raise.

2)The team is over the salary cap and extends a rookie's scale contract with the player receiving more than a 20% raise.

Does it mean that, if the Team X is $1 million below the salary cap and re-signs it's own FA to a starting salary of lets say, $10 million - that player isn't a BYC player?

[Dunkenstein]

No.

[loserX]

No, because the team is using that player's Bird rights to go over the cap.

An example of when it would NOT come into effect is this year's case of Andre Iguodala. Philadelphia is well under the cap this off-season, and so does not need to use Iguodala's Bird rights to go over the cap to re-sign him (nor are they extending his rookie contract, it's a new deal). Therefore unless circumstances change, Iguodala will not be BYC this coming year.

[Macedonianbull]

Well, then there is problem with semantics in Coon's cap.

Also, if the team wants to extend Iguodala with maximum raises, they have to use his Bird rights, right?

[bgwizarfan]

Well, then there is problem with semantics in Coon's cap.

Also, if the team wants to extend Iguodala with maximum raises, they have to use his Bird rights, right?

thats wrong...first off, theyre not going to "extend" iguodala. He'll be re-signed if they choose to retain him.

the raises has nothing to do with it. It's all about the 1st year. If the Sixers have $13 mil in cap room, then they can sign him to a contract worth $13 mil in the 1st year with 10.5% raises (the max raise) and not have to use Bird Rights. I would need to take a look at their specific situation to really know - remember Iguodala will have a maximum cap hold, and they never did trade Andre Miller so I'm not sure if they will have that much cap room in reality anyway

[Dunkenstein]

Well, then there is problem with semantics in Coon's cap.

There is no problem with the "semantics in Coon's cap." The problem is in the faulty logical conclusion you made. Larry never discusses teams below the salary cap in the section on BYC in his FAQ.

For a player who gets a raise of more than 20% to not be a BYC player his entire first-year salary must be paid using only cap room, not just the $1M of cap room you used in your example. If a team has to use an exception to give one of its player a raise greater than 20% he automatically becomes BYC, even if the team is under the cap at the time.

[bgwizarfan]

-= original quote snipped =-


There is no problem with the "semantics in Coon's cap." The problem is in the faulty logical conclusion you made. Larry never discusses teams below the salary cap in the section on BYC in his FAQ.

For a player who gets a raise of more than 20% to not be a BYC player his entire first-year salary must be paid using only cap room, not just the $1M of cap room you used in your example. If a team has to use an exception to give one of its player a raise greater than 20% he automatically becomes BYC, even if the team is under the cap at the time.

it should be noted that it's only if the player is an Early Bird or Larry Bird free agent (which i know you know...just for Mac's benefit here). So when the Wizards re-signed DeShawn Stevenson last summer, he went from making the minimum to over $3 million (obviously greater than 20%), but since he was a Non-Bird Free Agent, and not an Early Bird or Larry Bird Free Agent, he wasn't BYC. The other case is obviously Rookie Scale Extensions, in which BYC will always kick in as long as its a greater than 20% raise in the 1st year of the extended term and the team isnt using cap room

[Macedonianbull]

Stevenson was re-signed using the midlevel exception, and therefore is irrelevant to this conversation.

[bgwizarfan]

Stevenson was re-signed using the midlevel exception, and therefore is irrelevant to this conversation.

well i was trying to help you out, but whatever. he's irrelevant cuz he was a Non-Bird Free Agent, not cuz they signed him with the MLE. Even if they used the Non-Bird Exception, it doesn't matter... the fact that he was a Non-Bird Free Agent immediately eliminates him from BYC regardless of what the Wizards then chose to sign him with.

The MLE is irrelevant, you are correct, because a team would never choose to use the MLE to re-sign an Early Bird Free Agent, since they can always just use the EB Exception instead, so it plays no role. The point with Stevenson was to show that it has to be an Early Bird or Larry Bird.

[bgwizarfan]

and just for full disclosure, in my read, the CBA says nothing about having to use the Larry Bird or Early Bird Exception on the Larry Bird or Early Bird Free Agent.. so a team theoretically could use the Mid-Level Exception on their Early Bird Free Agent (even though that would be very stupid) and the player would still be BYC. At least that's how i see it - the "accordance with sections 1 and 3 there" i think mean that you can't go over the maximum allowed by those exceptions.... but whatever, here's the passage:


in Article 7, Section 8:

(i) For purposes of the Traded Player Exception, a player shall be subject to a Base Year Compensation in the event that the Team Salary of the player

[FGump]

The rules say that he is Base Year if he was Bird/EB eligible, got a 20%+ raise, and now when the trade is going to happen, his team is at/over the cap. And his Base Year status can be erased by certain triggers, in which case it doesn't return even if the above criteria are again all in place at a later date.

So it really doesn't matter what a team uses to sign the player. It can be Bird/EB, or it can be an exception (and in an incredibly rare scenario unlikely to ever occur, it can even theoretically be cap room itself).