prohibition on buying more than one pick?

[clydewally]

There are multiple teams willing to pay $3 million for a first round pick. Can a team buy more than one pick from another team to make its offer more attractive?

For example, can a team offer the Twolves $3 million for the 23rd pick in the first round and $2 million for the 26th pick in the second round in order to win the bidding for the 23rd pick in the first round?

[loserX]

I don't know if it's expressly prohibited, but $3M is the most that can be sent in any trade.

I am quite sure that the league would view two purportedly separate trades of a draft pick for cash within the space of the same draft as a blatant attempt to skirt the CBA (which it would be)...and I suspect the league would kill the trade.

"The team" could always buy picks from different teams, of course. Nothing against that.

[FGump]

As LoserX notes, it would obviously be an attempt to skirt the rules. And simultaneous deals for cash between two teams, along with paying an exorbitant and inexplicable $2M for a scrub pick, are BOTH actions that would send up red flags in the league offices.

[Malinhion]

I don't see how the league could invalidate the transaction if there were two different types of consideration being sent for each $3m.

The league can't invalidate trades for being "unfair" because otherwise they would have stopped the Gasol-Gasol trade.

What if the team waited five minutes until the next pick came up, then traded? Arguably the circumstances have changed and they could say that their guy came off the board and they had to make a move.

No team is gaining a particular advantage by paying $5m for picks instead of $3m.

[levinsonesq]

...although this is not the Roger Goodell Football League, I'm pretty sure the league and Stern would characterize this as skirting the CBA rules.

The league would have to go substance over form - if not, the $3mil limit has no teeth.

[loserX]

I don't see how the league could invalidate the transaction if there were two different types of consideration being sent for each $3m.

The league can't invalidate trades for being "unfair" because otherwise they would have stopped the Gasol-Gasol trade.

What if the team waited five minutes until the next pick came up, then traded? Arguably the circumstances have changed and they could say that their guy came off the board and they had to make a move.

No team is gaining a particular advantage by paying $5m for picks instead of $3m.

It's not that it's "unfair", it's that it's a blatant attempt to skirt the spirit of the CBA. $3M is the most that can be sent in a trade; making two "separate" trades with the same team and sending more than $5M in cash is a shell game that isn't going to fool anyone.

The Gasol trade may have been one-sided but there was no attempt to circumvent any rules. And if you think Stern won't step in to stop a trade that tries to violate the spirit of the CBA, you're wrong. Remember when he quashed the first attempt at a Kidd-to-Dallas trade when Jerry Stackhouse shot off his mouth about being bought out and returning to the Mavs?

[Malinhion]

So how long do you think it would have to be between trades to not be viewed as a circumvention?

[Dunkenstein]

So how long do you think it would have to be between trades to not be viewed as a circumvention?

To judge what the league would consider circumvention, I'll paraphrase White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, when asked just how angry Obama was after seeing Gen. Stanley McChrystal's remarks in Rolling Stone, "You know it when you see it."

[Malinhion]

So how long do you think it would have to be between trades to not be viewed as a circumvention?

To judge what the league would consider circumvention, I'll paraphrase White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, when asked just how angry Obama was after seeing Gen. Stanley McChrystal's remarks in Rolling Stone, "You know it when you see it."

Okay, let's say this happens during the draft:

Team A has picks 5, 10, and 20.

Team B has pick 30.

Team B is looking to get a small forward. The guy they want is available at pick 6, but there are some other SFs available. During the 6th pick, they buy pick 10 from Team A. That SF gets picked up at the eighth pick. With the 10th pick, they select a center.

Fast forward to pick 19. Team B still wants a SF. Their second and third choice are on the board, and they know they can get their hands on at least one if they buy pick 20. Due to the change in circumstances, Team B buys pick 20, thinking that both guys have fallen and neither will make it to them at pick 30.

[loserX]

So how long do you think it would have to be between trades to not be viewed as a circumvention?

To judge what the league would consider circumvention, I'll paraphrase White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, when asked just how angry Obama was after seeing Gen. Stanley McChrystal's remarks in Rolling Stone, "You know it when you see it."

Okay, let's say this happens during the draft:

Team A has picks 5, 10, and 20.

Team B has pick 30.

Team B is looking to get a small forward. The guy they want is available at pick 6, but there are some other SFs available. During the 6th pick, they buy pick 10 from Team A. That SF gets picked up at the eighth pick. With the 10th pick, they select a center.

Fast forward to pick 19. Team B still wants a SF. Their second and third choice are on the board, and they know they can get their hands on at least one if they buy pick 20. Due to the change in circumstances, Team B buys pick 20, thinking that both guys have fallen and neither will make it to them at pick 30.

The league will still see that as two trades made on the same day with the same team, for total cash exceeding the limit. And good luck convincing them otherwise. Team B should just avoid the hassle and buy a pick from a different team.