RealGM

If a team is $4 mill under the cap, can they sign a FA for the amount they are under the cap as well as the MLE? Or would they be exclusive of one another, i.e. they'd use their cap space of $4 mill and then sign a MLE $5.5 mill guy.

Neither. That team can either renounce all their cap holds and use the cap space (and unused exceptions count as cap holds), or they can keep them and forego the cap space. You can't have both. If you could, then everyone would.

Sham wrote:Neither. That team can either renounce all their cap holds and use the cap space (and unused exceptions count as cap holds), or they can keep them and forego the cap space. You can't have both. If you could, then everyone would.

I think you're right Sham, but IMO, on the cap hold part, they don't necessary have to renounce ALL their cap holds, if they have small cap hold like GS had with Ellis, you can keep it, as long as you have cap room between your total including this cap hold and the salary cap.

Said GS was at 40M, with Ellis' cap hold at 1M, they did not need to renounce it, and start from 40M, using cap room to re-sign him, they were able to start from 41M, use all the cap room up to the salary cap, then re-sign Ellis by going over using Bird rights.

Don't remember exactly who they sign last between Ellis and Biedrins, but I am pretty sure they worked like that for one of their contract, ending nearly under the tax threshold.

Would they have big cap holds, GS needed to renounce to get enough cap room to sign other F.A., but would also have to use cap room to re-sign them if they did not have keep their Bird rights.

You're dealing with a very specific example there, one that's cropped up like twice, and I was talking in general terms.

D21 wrote:I think you're right Sham, but IMO, on the cap hold part, they don't necessary have to renounce ALL their cap holds, if they have small cap hold like GS had with Ellis, you can keep it, as long as you have cap room between your total including this cap hold and the salary cap.

Said GS was at 40M, with Ellis' cap hold at 1M, they did not need to renounce it, and start from 40M, using cap room to re-sign him, they were able to start from 41M, use all the cap room up to the salary cap, then re-sign Ellis by going over using Bird rights.

Don't remember exactly who they sign last between Ellis and Biedrins, but I am pretty sure they worked like that for one of their contract, ending nearly under the tax threshold.

Would they have big cap holds, GS needed to renounce to get enough cap room to sign other F.A., but would also have to use cap room to re-sign them if they did not have keep their Bird rights.

First they they renounced all their cap holds for players no longer playing for the team, leaving only Biedrins's and Ellis's cap holds. This put them far enough under the salary cap to sign Maggette. Then they signed Biedrins. Then they signed Ellis.

Sham wrote:You're dealing with a very specific example there, one that's cropped up like twice, and I was talking in general terms.

My intention was just to add this case for Jimmy103.
I knew you were talking in general terms, I should have added it more clearly.
I did not want to imply that your answer was incorrect

The general rule of thumb is this. You are either operating as an "over-the-cap" team and getting annual exceptions (MLE< BAE), or you are operating as an "under-the-cap" team in which case you don't get them. It's always an either-or regarding those annual exceptions: cap room to spend, or annual exceptions.

So when a team signs a player USING CAP SPACE, you are guaranteed they didn't get exceptions that year. Or, on the other hand, if they signed a player using MLE money, they won't be able to sign someone for a deal using cap space that season.

FGump wrote:So when a team signs a player USING CAP SPACE, you are guaranteed they didn't get exceptions that year. Or, on the other hand, if they signed a player using MLE money, they won't be able to sign someone for a deal using cap space that season.

Suppose a team just under the cap uses its MLE to sign a player which takes them over the cap. Later in the season they trade a $6M player to another team using the other team's TPE and this trade leaves them $3M under the cap with a $6M TPE. Couldn't they use the $3M cap room to sign another player, saving the TPE for a later date?

The TPE itself eats up cap room.

FGump wrote:The TPE itself eats up cap room.

Right. So it's more efficient to use the TPE than the cap room. Thanks.