RealGM

The Knicks have prepaid half of the contract(nearly6mm) It would seem to me that they would have an unfair advantage if they tried to use it as an asset(as a money-savings instrument to another team) when weighed against other ending contracts--what is in the salary cap about this--is he not trade-able? Would the other team have to repay the Knicks the 6mm if he was traded + the kicker?

Curry has a 11.2 million option for next season which he is most likely going to exercise.
The Knicks are trying to trade him but that will not happen for obvious reasons (he sucks, is injured, etc).Eddy Curry has a $60 million contract, $4.5 million mansion and a $6,000-a-month personal chef.

LeeShane wrote:Curry has a 11.2 million option for next season which he is most likely going to exercise.
The Knicks are trying to trade him but that will not happen for obvious reasons (he sucks, is injured, etc).Eddy Curry has a $60 million contract, $4.5 million mansion and a $6,000-a-month personal chef.

I am pretty sure the option was this season. I think a team will only trade for Curry at the deadline. Not only is the team getting no production for the money, but they also lose a roster spot(although he could be bought out). At this point even rebuilding teams want to get a look at what they have.

BRIGGS wrote:The Knicks have prepaid half of the contract(nearly6mm) It would seem to me that they would have an unfair advantage if they tried to use it as an asset(as a money-savings instrument to another team) when weighed against other ending contracts--what is in the salary cap about this--is he not trade-able?

No, he's perfectly tradeable from a CBA standpoint. It may be an "unfair" advantage from a purely financial standpoint but it's not an illegal one.

BRIGGS wrote:Would the other team have to repay the Knicks the 6mm if he was traded + the kicker?

No. The contract is an agreement between the team and the player; the acquiring team in your scenario would owe Curry what is left on his contract and nothing else to anyone.

If the Knicks agreed to prepay part of Curry's contract, that was their decision and there's no reason they should be compensated for it if they trade him.

There was actually specific verbage put into Currys contracr (presumably by Currys team at the time of the contract signing) that allows for Curry to request his salary in lumps up front). This is not something that is normally done and I believe there are actually provisions that would prevent this upfront paying from happening. While im pretty sure that wasnt the intent at the time, it actuallu may turn out to be the one good thing to come out of the whole Curry mess.

In fact its been reported that the knicks can actually pay 80% of his salary up front.

moocow007 wrote: There was actually specific verbage put into Currys contracr (presumably by Currys team at the time of the contract signing) that allows for Curry to request his salary in lumps up front).

Much like Curry himself.

Thanks for the info, moocow. I would personally be interested to hear someone talk about the NBA contracts where the distributions are different than the typical pay-outs, like Deng's annuity.

Kobe gets 70% of his annual salary up front on September 1st every season. Fun fact.