FireMorey wrote:youngcrev wrote:FireMorey wrote:Isn't the problem not the money but the fact that they don't have anything on the books to match salary in a trade? You can go over the cap with trades so that shouldn't be the issue. I think it's just if they signed a max guy, they wouldn't just be able to trade picks for a guy like Butler. And they literally have no salaries on the books to match Butler.
You can use cap space to absorb salary. Clearly they couldn't absorb his salary and still have enough to sign a guy like PG though
Does absorbing salary in trades when under the cap count the same as signing outside free agents? That you can go over the cap with your own free agents but can't go over with outside. Does that apply to trades when you're under the cap as well? If so, that's really stupid.
For example, if the Sixers were over the cap right now, they could trade for Butler as long as they matched salaries within a percentage.
But if they were under the cap they wouldn't be allowed to trade for Butler if it put them over the cap? That seems completely illogical, that a team that was over the cap would have more trade freedom than a team under it.
That's how it works. If they want to stay over the cap, then they could potentially trade for both if they have enough matching salary, but they can't go under the cap to sign one, and then trade for the other.