RealGM

?s=20

save luxury tax just to spend 4.6?

lol wut

Hey, the Rockets set to launch out of a dumpster!

Wait what. Buying a 21 2nd rounder? But....why?

huh, I didn't realize that a team could buy a draft pick. Theoretically could you buy the first pick in a draft?

Tilman's son is running things tonight. I believe!

Joshyjess wrote:huh, I didn't realize that a team could buy a draft pick. Theoretically could you buy the first pick in a draft?

No, not for cash, you have to trade something for one.

I've seen teams spend less to buy first round picks. That seems like a lot just for a 2nd rounder.

Maybe this was Rockets giving Pistons extra cash for Ariza's contract. Although I thought he had a 1.8 million dollar buyout.

Yeah is this a bizarre way to give money to the pistons for taking Ariza? That doesn’t seem like it would work

Tor_Raps wrote:I've seen teams spend less to buy first round picks. That seems like a lot just for the draft pick.

Maybe this was Rockets giving Pistons extra cash for Ariza's contract. Although I thought he had a 1.8 million dollar buyout.

Maybe Tilman is able to write of the money as a business expense. Tax code has all kinds of loopholes. Dude is a total travesty for the NBA. I wonder how long it will be until the NBA steps in. The Arizona Coyotes owner (He tried to buy the Hawks) is waiting on line 1.

[url]
[/url]

xdrta+ wrote:

Joshyjess wrote:huh, I didn't realize that a team could buy a draft pick. Theoretically could you buy the first pick in a draft?

No, not for cash, you have to trade something for one.

Normally a team will include a top 55 protected 2nd round pick - effectively nothing.

Seems like an attempt to circumvent the CBA and facilitate the Ariza deal.
Otherwise this makes no sense.

Joshyjess wrote:huh, I didn't realize that a team could buy a draft pick. Theoretically could you buy the first pick in a draft?

So over a decade ago, teams could include up to $3M in "cash considerations" for any trade they made. Then you had richer owners (see Allen, Paul) expediting their rebuilds by buying picks off of poorer owners (see Sarver, Robert). During the last CBA, the league put an end to that, placing a finite amount of "cash considerations" that they can include in all trades for any given season.

Due to these "cash considerations" restrictions, no team would ever sell the #1 pick as the player's draft rights would be considerably more valuable than the $5.6 million they could receive.

As tanking has become en vogue and the value of cheap rookie scale contracts has become more apparent, the purchase price of picks has gone up considerably. Given a $4.6M price for a 2nd round pick, which we need to make sure doesn't include any player salary dumps or other strings attached, buying late picks may no longer be a moneyball play.

JasonStern wrote:

Joshyjess wrote:huh, I didn't realize that a team could buy a draft pick. Theoretically could you buy the first pick in a draft?

So over a decade ago, teams could include up to $3M in "cash considerations" for any trade they made. Then you had richer owners (see Allen, Paul) expediting their rebuilds by buying picks off of poorer owners (see Sarver, Robert). During the last CBA, the league put an end to that, placing a finite amount of "cash considerations" that they can include in all trades for any given season.

Due to these "cash considerations" restrictions, no team would ever sell the #1 pick as the player's draft rights would be considerably more valuable than the $5 million they could receive.

As tanking has become en vogue and the value of cheap rookie scale contracts has become more apparent, the purchase price of picks has gone up considerably. Given a $4.6M price for a 2nd round pick, which we need to make sure doesn't include any player salary dumps or other strings attached, buying late picks may no longer be a moneyball play.

Thanks! Good explanation.

Warriors purchased a early 2nd round pick from Chicago a few years back for less than half this price.
Jordan Bell if that name rings a bell..

There's just no way a pick in the 50s is worth 4.6 mil..Especially when you factor in the amount of money the league has lost over the past year+.

CIN-C-STAR wrote:Seems like an attempt to circumvent the CBA and facilitate the Ariza deal.
Otherwise this makes no sense.

So the move was HOU will pay DET cash in order to take on their FRP and salary dump (Ariza)?

JasonStern wrote:

Joshyjess wrote:huh, I didn't realize that a team could buy a draft pick. Theoretically could you buy the first pick in a draft?

So over a decade ago, teams could include up to $3M in "cash considerations" for any trade they made. Then you had richer owners (see Allen, Paul) expediting their rebuilds by buying picks off of poorer owners (see Sarver, Robert). During the last CBA, the league put an end to that, placing a finite amount of "cash considerations" that they can include in all trades for any given season.

Due to these "cash considerations" restrictions, no team would ever sell the #1 pick as the player's draft rights would be considerably more valuable than the $5.6 million they could receive.

As tanking has become en vogue and the value of cheap rookie scale contracts has become more apparent, the purchase price of picks has gone up considerably. Given a $4.6M price for a 2nd round pick, which we need to make sure doesn't include any player salary dumps or other strings attached, buying late picks may no longer be a moneyball play.

I mean even before this rule change you rarely saw a top 5 pick given up just for cash. It was mostly used to snag late 1st rounders and 2nd rounders, if my memory serves.

TheBoi10 wrote:

CIN-C-STAR wrote:Seems like an attempt to circumvent the CBA and facilitate the Ariza deal.
Otherwise this makes no sense.

So the move was HOU will pay DET cash in order to take on their FRP and salary dump (Ariza)?

I mean the alternative is HOU paid $4.6million dollars for a 2nd round pick. I don't know which sounds more insane.