Re: Trade Talk (Part Eleven): 2022 Offseason Edition

[babyjax13]

Getting worse when you have a contending window is never a viable option. You yourself admit every name is worse than Dlo. I rest my case.

Getting worse depends on the periphery moves, too. For example...let's say D'Lo goes but you can swap Anderson for one of these guys, then use your full MLE on another player INSTEAD of resigning D'Lo and having only the taxpayer MLE. I think it would be pretty easy to turn Russell leaving into something lateral instead of getting worse, with an outlier possibility of getting better depending on what MLE deals are out there.

1. Continuity matters. The more players you replace in a given year the more time it takes to rebuild it.

2. We don’t have a ton of trade assets to work with. Moving Anderson to get a PG around 10 mil now creates a need of another PF using the MLE and the guys available for 10 are probably not as good. Dlo is also relatively young with the possibility of improvement. Some of the guys on your list are older and more prone to serious injury. But, even accepting your premise we now need to use the MLE to replace Anderson, lost Dlo for nothing, and had the opportunity cost of not being able to keep Dlo and Anderson and use the MLE on someone new.

3. I am not 100% sure Dlo on a 30 mil puts us in the tax before we use the MLE. I cannot find good number about our current salary this year and next year after all our recent moves are factored in.

I'm on board with everything you are saying, I just don't think it would spell the end of Minnesota being a contender if they decided the opportunity cost of say - offering a max contract - was too high, and I think there would be ways to recover or mostly recover. But I think they are going to come to a reasonable agreement when the time comes. The Wolves will be really good and D'Lo will want to be a part of that, and want to be in a place where he is set up to succeed as an individual player, as well.

[old school 34]

Getting worse depends on the periphery moves, too. For example...let's say D'Lo goes but you can swap Anderson for one of these guys, then use your full MLE on another player INSTEAD of resigning D'Lo and having only the taxpayer MLE. I think it would be pretty easy to turn Russell leaving into something lateral instead of getting worse, with an outlier possibility of getting better depending on what MLE deals are out there.

1. Continuity matters. The more players you replace in a given year the more time it takes to rebuild it.

2. We don’t have a ton of trade assets to work with. Moving Anderson to get a PG around 10 mil now creates a need of another PF using the MLE and the guys available for 10 are probably not as good. Dlo is also relatively young with the possibility of improvement. Some of the guys on your list are older and more prone to serious injury. But, even accepting your premise we now need to use the MLE to replace Anderson, lost Dlo for nothing, and had the opportunity cost of not being able to keep Dlo and Anderson and use the MLE on someone new.

3. I am not 100% sure Dlo on a 30 mil puts us in the tax before we use the MLE. I cannot find good number about our current salary this year and next year after all our recent moves are factored in.

I'm on board with everything you are saying, I just don't think it would spell the end of Minnesota being a contender if they decided the opportunity cost of say - offering a max contract - was too high, and I think there would be ways to recover or mostly recover. But I think they are going to come to a reasonable agreement when the time comes. The Wolves will be really good and D'Lo will want to be a part of that, and want to be in a place where he is set up to succeed as an individual player, as well.

I want to see DLo on the court & see how he works &/or continues to evolve his game under Finch's coaching. If all goes well...maybe we talk extension post trade deadline...think that's a reasonable compromise on both sides?

Here's where Dane Moore has us cap wise & he's normally pretty close?

Read on Twitter

?t=L1RcM_ARy4s8qgYzvrOgag&s=19


Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

[winforlose]

1. Continuity matters. The more players you replace in a given year the more time it takes to rebuild it.

2. We don’t have a ton of trade assets to work with. Moving Anderson to get a PG around 10 mil now creates a need of another PF using the MLE and the guys available for 10 are probably not as good. Dlo is also relatively young with the possibility of improvement. Some of the guys on your list are older and more prone to serious injury. But, even accepting your premise we now need to use the MLE to replace Anderson, lost Dlo for nothing, and had the opportunity cost of not being able to keep Dlo and Anderson and use the MLE on someone new.

3. I am not 100% sure Dlo on a 30 mil puts us in the tax before we use the MLE. I cannot find good number about our current salary this year and next year after all our recent moves are factored in.

I'm on board with everything you are saying, I just don't think it would spell the end of Minnesota being a contender if they decided the opportunity cost of say - offering a max contract - was too high, and I think there would be ways to recover or mostly recover. But I think they are going to come to a reasonable agreement when the time comes. The Wolves will be really good and D'Lo will want to be a part of that, and want to be in a place where he is set up to succeed as an individual player, as well.

I want to see DLo on the court & see how he works &/or continues to evolve his game under Finch's coaching. If all goes well...maybe we talk extension post trade deadline...think that's a reasonable compromise on both sides?

Here's where Dane Moore has us cap wise & he's normally pretty close?

Read on Twitter

?t=L1RcM_ARy4s8qgYzvrOgag&s=19


Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Using this as a road map, if Dlo made 30, we would be 12 plus under before extending Nowell or Naz. If using the MLE puts you into the tax you only get the tax payer MLE correct?

[babyjax13]

I'm on board with everything you are saying, I just don't think it would spell the end of Minnesota being a contender if they decided the opportunity cost of say - offering a max contract - was too high, and I think there would be ways to recover or mostly recover. But I think they are going to come to a reasonable agreement when the time comes. The Wolves will be really good and D'Lo will want to be a part of that, and want to be in a place where he is set up to succeed as an individual player, as well.

I want to see DLo on the court & see how he works &/or continues to evolve his game under Finch's coaching. If all goes well...maybe we talk extension post trade deadline...think that's a reasonable compromise on both sides?

Here's where Dane Moore has us cap wise & he's normally pretty close?

Read on Twitter

?t=L1RcM_ARy4s8qgYzvrOgag&s=19


Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Using this as a road map, if Dlo made 30, we would be 12 plus under before extending Nowell or Naz. If using the MLE puts you into the tax you only get the tax payer MLE correct?

I think you have the option of using the regular MLE but you would be hard-capped afterward. Tagging Scoot who might be able to answer if they have time:

.

Scoot, someone in the NBA needs to hire you as a CBA guru. If you can answer this, thank you!

[winforlose]

I want to see DLo on the court & see how he works &/or continues to evolve his game under Finch's coaching. If all goes well...maybe we talk extension post trade deadline...think that's a reasonable compromise on both sides?

Here's where Dane Moore has us cap wise & he's normally pretty close?

Read on Twitter

?t=L1RcM_ARy4s8qgYzvrOgag&s=19


Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Using this as a road map, if Dlo made 30, we would be 12 plus under before extending Nowell or Naz. If using the MLE puts you into the tax you only get the tax payer MLE correct?

I think you have the option of using the regular MLE but you would be hard-capped afterward. Tagging Scoot who might be able to answer if they have time:

.

Scoot, someone in the NBA needs to hire you as a CBA guru. If you can answer this, thank you!

Pretty sure using it all hard caps you. So I guess at that point the question is moot. Same with the BAE and sign and trade. Something tells me before 2026 we are all going to know the ins and outs of these rules by heart

[Scoot McGroot]

I want to see DLo on the court & see how he works &/or continues to evolve his game under Finch's coaching. If all goes well...maybe we talk extension post trade deadline...think that's a reasonable compromise on both sides?

Here's where Dane Moore has us cap wise & he's normally pretty close?

Read on Twitter

?t=L1RcM_ARy4s8qgYzvrOgag&s=19


Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Using this as a road map, if Dlo made 30, we would be 12 plus under before extending Nowell or Naz. If using the MLE puts you into the tax you only get the tax payer MLE correct?

I think you have the option of using the regular MLE but you would be hard-capped afterward. Tagging Scoot who might be able to answer if they have time:

.

Scoot, someone in the NBA needs to hire you as a CBA guru. If you can answer this, thank you!

Not sure on what the specific question is here, but using even a penny over the taxpayers MLE would constitute using the non taxpayers MLE, and would hardcap the team at the apron, which is a little under $157m this year. They could use the non taxpayer MLE if it did not take them over the apron, and they don’t go over the apron at all the entire season.

While it says “taxpayer” or “non-taxpayer” it’s really the apron that determines the two, so technically, a team can use the non taxpayer MLE and still be a taxpayer.

[winforlose]

Using this as a road map, if Dlo made 30, we would be 12 plus under before extending Nowell or Naz. If using the MLE puts you into the tax you only get the tax payer MLE correct?

I think you have the option of using the regular MLE but you would be hard-capped afterward. Tagging Scoot who might be able to answer if they have time:

.

Scoot, someone in the NBA needs to hire you as a CBA guru. If you can answer this, thank you!

Not sure on what the specific question is here, but using even a penny over the taxpayers MLE would constitute using the non taxpayers MLE, and would hardcap the team at the apron, which is a little under $157m this year. They could use the non taxpayer MLE if it did not take them over the apron, and they don’t go over the apron at all the entire season.

While it says “taxpayer” or “non-taxpayer” it’s really the apron that determines the two, so technically, a team can use the non taxpayer MLE and still be a taxpayer.

It is my understanding that using either the MLE or BAE will hard cap a team. The same way they are hard capped by accepting a sign and trade. Is this correct? Also, how do the hard cap and bird rights interact with one another? Can a hard capped team still use bird rights or is the cap absolute?

[Scoot McGroot]

I think you have the option of using the regular MLE but you would be hard-capped afterward. Tagging Scoot who might be able to answer if they have time:




Scoot, someone in the NBA needs to hire you as a CBA guru. If you can answer this, thank you!

Not sure on what the specific question is here, but using even a penny over the taxpayers MLE would constitute using the non taxpayers MLE, and would hardcap the team at the apron, which is a little under $157m this year. They could use the non taxpayer MLE if it did not take them over the apron, and they don’t go over the apron at all the entire season.

While it says “taxpayer” or “non-taxpayer” it’s really the apron that determines the two, so technically, a team can use the non taxpayer MLE and still be a taxpayer.

It is my understanding that using either the MLE or BAE will hard cap a team.

Correct. But to be more specific, using the non-taxpayer MLE would hard cap a team. Using the taxpayer MLE would NOT hard cap a team. Using the BAE hard caps a team. Receiving a player via S&T hard caps a team.

The same way they are hard capped by accepting a sign and trade. Is this correct? Also, how do the hard cap and bird rights interact with one another? Can a hard capped team still use bird rights or is the cap absolute?

The hard cap is absolute and cannot be crossed for any reason whatsoever. Even if you were under the minimum roster limit, you would have to clear space under the hard cap to fill the required spot. Nothing at all allows you to cross the hard cap IN that season.

[winforlose]

Not sure on what the specific question is here, but using even a penny over the taxpayers MLE would constitute using the non taxpayers MLE, and would hardcap the team at the apron, which is a little under $157m this year. They could use the non taxpayer MLE if it did not take them over the apron, and they don’t go over the apron at all the entire season.

While it says “taxpayer” or “non-taxpayer” it’s really the apron that determines the two, so technically, a team can use the non taxpayer MLE and still be a taxpayer.

It is my understanding that using either the MLE or BAE will hard cap a team.

Correct. But to be more specific, using the non-taxpayer MLE would hard cap a team. Using the taxpayer MLE would NOT hard cap a team. Using the BAE hard caps a team. Receiving a player via S&T hard caps a team.

The same way they are hard capped by accepting a sign and trade. Is this correct? Also, how do the hard cap and bird rights interact with one another? Can a hard capped team still use bird rights or is the cap absolute?

The hard cap is absolute and cannot be crossed for any reason whatsoever. Even if you were under the minimum roster limit, you would have to clear space under the hard cap to fill the required spot. Nothing at all allows you to cross the hard cap IN that season.

Thank you. That was very helpful.

[winforlose]

Using this as a road map, if Dlo made 30, we would be 12 plus under before extending Nowell or Naz. If using the MLE puts you into the tax you only get the tax payer MLE correct?

I think you have the option of using the regular MLE but you would be hard-capped afterward. Tagging Scoot who might be able to answer if they have time:

.

Scoot, someone in the NBA needs to hire you as a CBA guru. If you can answer this, thank you!

Not sure on what the specific question is here, but using even a penny over the taxpayers MLE would constitute using the non taxpayers MLE, and would hardcap the team at the apron, which is a little under $157m this year. They could use the non taxpayer MLE if it did not take them over the apron, and they don’t go over the apron at all the entire season.

While it says “taxpayer” or “non-taxpayer” it’s really the apron that determines the two, so technically, a team can use the non taxpayer MLE and still be a taxpayer.

One last question. What if the sign and trade takes a team above the Apron? Is the team forced to reduce salary to get back down below or is it allowed to stay above just not make any further moves?

[Scoot McGroot]

I think you have the option of using the regular MLE but you would be hard-capped afterward. Tagging Scoot who might be able to answer if they have time:




Scoot, someone in the NBA needs to hire you as a CBA guru. If you can answer this, thank you!

Not sure on what the specific question is here, but using even a penny over the taxpayers MLE would constitute using the non taxpayers MLE, and would hardcap the team at the apron, which is a little under $157m this year. They could use the non taxpayer MLE if it did not take them over the apron, and they don’t go over the apron at all the entire season.

While it says “taxpayer” or “non-taxpayer” it’s really the apron that determines the two, so technically, a team can use the non taxpayer MLE and still be a taxpayer.

One last question. What if the sign and trade takes a team above the Apron? Is the team forced to reduce salary to get back down below or is it allowed to stay above just not make any further moves?

Then they can’t complete the sign and trade and it’s voided. They cannot cross the hard cap even for a second, and have to be under at the completion of whatever triggers the hard cap.

It is my understanding that using either the MLE or BAE will hard cap a team.

Correct. But to be more specific, using the non-taxpayer MLE would hard cap a team. Using the taxpayer MLE would NOT hard cap a team. Using the BAE hard caps a team. Receiving a player via S&T hard caps a team.

The same way they are hard capped by accepting a sign and trade. Is this correct? Also, how do the hard cap and bird rights interact with one another? Can a hard capped team still use bird rights or is the cap absolute?

The hard cap is absolute and cannot be crossed for any reason whatsoever. Even if you were under the minimum roster limit, you would have to clear space under the hard cap to fill the required spot. Nothing at all allows you to cross the hard cap IN that season.

Thank you. That was very helpful.

Happy to help!

[Biff Cooper]

We used the Non-Taxpayer MLE to sign Anderson. For those interested, this is different than the Room MLE or the Taxpayer MLE.

We currently sit at $7.56M under the luxury tax line with 11 roster spots and 2 two-way players left to sign. If we use the BAE, we would be hard capped for the season at the apron level ($6M over the luxury tax line or $13.56M over where we currently sit). Probably not a big deal unless we are trying to trade DLo at the trade deadline while taking on an extra $6M of salary.

Filling out our roster, we have 4 roster spots plus 2 two-way spots. Let's say we don't care about the luxury tax:

*two way $86,946
*two way $86,946
*BAE $4,105,000
*Vet Min $1,836,090 (note: we also still have $1,709,512 of the MLE, but is less than the vet min number)
*Vet Min $1,836,090
Total = $0.4M into the luxury tax.

If we wanted to stay out of the luxury tax, we could always hold off on signing the 15th roster spot until we know we need it, and by then, we would likely have saved $0.4M off the minimum salary.


http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q20

[winforlose]

We used the Non-Taxpayer MLE to sign Anderson. For those interested, this is different than the Room MLE or the Taxpayer MLE.

We currently sit at $7.56M under the luxury tax line with 11 roster spots and 2 two-way players left to sign. If we use the BAE, we would be hard capped for the season at the apron level ($6M over the luxury tax line or $13.56M over where we currently sit). Probably not a big deal unless we are trying to trade DLo at the trade deadline while taking on an extra $6M of salary.

Filling out our roster, we have 4 roster spots plus 2 two-way spots. Let's say we don't care about the luxury tax:

*two way $86,946
*two way $86,946
*BAE $4,105,000
*Vet Min $1,836,090 (note: we also still have $1,709,512 of the MLE, but is less than the vet min number)
*Vet Min $1,836,090
Total = $0.4M into the luxury tax.

If we wanted to stay out of the luxury tax, we could always hold off on signing the 15th roster spot until we know we need it, and by then, we would likely have saved $0.4M off the minimum salary.


http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q20

I check a few days ago and can confirm that two way deals do not impact the cap or tax. Also, a good reason to use the BAE and hard cap ourselves this year is that next year we are almost certainly going to be a high tax team. Between Dlo, Naz, Nowell extensions, Spagnola coming over and tax payer MLE we will not be able to use BAE anyway. Might as well do it now and secure the best available player.

The downside is that using the BAE requires us staying at 14 players until after contracts are pro rated. If we don’t use the BAE we could tap into the buy out market when it happens mid season and get a 15th sooner (potentially better player.) It is gamble either way.

[Wolveswin]

Russell + Reid for Simmons anyone?

Gobert
Towns
McDaniels
Edwards
Simmons

Best defense in NBA?

[moss_is_1]

Hopefully we'll get news and official clarification tomorrow once the deal is official. If we are creating a TPE, or if not then we may use the BAE. Unless they don't like much that's left and are going to wait it out and see if anyone else is bought out, or someone looks good in SL.

[PeeDee]

Russell + Reid for Simmons anyone?

Gobert
Towns
McDaniels
Edwards
Simmons

Best defense in NBA?

We need Dlo's shooting more than Simmons' defense imo. Not to mention Simmons' back and brain injuries.

[old school 34]

Hopefully we'll get news and official clarification tomorrow once the deal is official. If we are creating a TPE, or if not then we may use the BAE. Unless they don't like much that's left and are going to wait it out and see if anyone else is bought out, or someone looks good in SL.

There's a few teams already with more players than roster spots (besides OKC)...where you have the potential of a few other Roby type waivers coming...so something definitely to keep a look out for? And once trade is official & assuming the TE is there that we expect...that would allow us to get in on a player like that if we feel good about the fit.

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

[moss_is_1]

Hopefully we'll get news and official clarification tomorrow once the deal is official. If we are creating a TPE, or if not then we may use the BAE. Unless they don't like much that's left and are going to wait it out and see if anyone else is bought out, or someone looks good in SL.

There's a few teams already with more players than roster spots (besides OKC)...where you have the potential of a few other Roby type waivers coming...so something definitely to keep a look out for? And once trade is official & assuming the TE is there that we expect...that would allow us to get in on a player like that if we feel good about the fit.

Sent from my SM-G973U using RealGM mobile app

Yeah there's a couple guys on OKC I would like to trade for if anything(Bazley, Kenrich Williams). Otherwise someone like Trey Lyles would be solid. Just if we get too close to the lux I'm not sure any of those guys are worth going over for.

[winforlose]

Russell + Reid for Simmons anyone?

Gobert
Towns
McDaniels
Edwards
Simmons

Best defense in NBA?

We need Dlo's shooting more than Simmons' defense imo. Not to mention Simmons' back and brain injuries.

Agree, plus I am pretty sure we cannot add Simmons based on KAT’s extension. Although, if the nets would do this, I would try and make it a 3 way trade and see if a better PG is available for Simmons. I would gladly take Fred VanVleet and a throw in for Simmons.

[Klomp]

Agree, plus I am pretty sure we cannot add Simmons based on KAT’s extension.

There is a limit to the number of designated players a team can have on its roster at a time. A team can have up to two designated rookies (who received a longer rookie scale extension) and up to two designated veterans (who received higher than the 30% maximum salary) at any time. However, only one designated rookie may have been acquired from another team in a trade.


As has been stated multiple times, the rule here only involves players traded for. The Nets traded for Ben Simmons. That is why a Durant deal cannot involve trading for Bam Adebayo. Both Simmons and Adebayo are both on "designated rookie" extensions. Both would have been acquired via trade.