Schroder's gone

[bstein14]

^championship?^
Thats a little extreme I'd say

Yeah more like first time in the 2nd round in nearly 20 years... but still solid.

[uncleoswald]

How is 4 years at $62 million undesirable for a big wing that can shoot, handle, and defend but you would've been good with 3 years and $60 million for a short, streaky combo guard that doesn't defend? What world are we living in?

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

3/45 for Schroder, not 3/60. NAW can't handle and Schroder is an average defender.

[DetroitSho]

Stay with me. I'm talking about Monk. You said you're disappointed we didn't get Monk. Which means you would've been good to pay a flawed player $20 million a year, but you're happy to not have paid the guy with the more coveted skillset less. I'm truly baffled by that logic.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[Crymson]

The way Crymson was talking it sounded like he knew more- that even with that we were below the cap.

I don't mean this at all to sound condescending, but it very much appears that I do know more. Teams can't simply operate above the cap by way of cap holds. The salary needs to actually be on the books. Cap holds are placeholders, nothing more; they do not count against actual team salary, and actual team salary is all that matters in this scenario.

Think about it: if teams could operate above the cap with cap holds alone, it would open the door to wacky situations in which teams used cap holds for that purpose, then ended up with total salaries equaling less than the salary cap after renouncing those cap holds.

[Snakebites]

The way Crymson was talking it sounded like he knew more- that even with that we were below the cap.

I don't mean this at all to sound condescending, but it very much appears that I do know more. Teams can't simply operate above the cap by way of cap holds. The salary needs to actually be on the books. Cap holds are placeholders, nothing more.

Think about it: if teams could operate above the cap with cap holds alone, it would open the door to wacky situations in which teams used cap holds for that purpose, then ended up with total salaries equaling less than the salary cap after renouncing those cap holds.

That’s why we have a salary floor, too. To prevent such things.

I think you’re mistaken here.

[Crymson]

That’s why we have a salary floor, too. To prevent such things.

I think you’re mistaken here.

That's not the purpose of the salary floor, which exists as a parity-enforcing mechanism. I can 100% guarantee you that I'm correct. Only actual team salary matters in this scenario, and cap holds are not included in team salary. Cap holds are placeholders whose purpose is to prevent teams from circumventing the cap by using cap space and then using Bird rights to re-sign their own free agents.

This is a minor point, but the salary floor wouldn't prevent the scenario I've outlined above, which I included in the first place only to reference something that could happen if cap holds could be used in that fashion but actually doesn't happen because that isn't permissible.

[Snakebites]

That’s why we have a salary floor, too. To prevent such things.

I think you’re mistaken here.

That's not the purpose of the salary floor, and I can 100% guarantee you that I'm correct. Only actual team salary matters in this scenario, and cap holds are not included in team salary. Cap holds are placeholders whose purpose is to prevent teams from circumventing the cap by using cap space and then using Bird rights to re-sign their own free agents.

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2025/06/24/detroit-pistons-nba-offseason-trajan-langdon/84340194007/

Please read the later part of this. It explains how renouncing free agents to generate cap space would have worked.

At the outset we had two options:

1) Operate with cap space by renouncing our cap holds. We could have generated up to 17 million in space this way. We’d have lost the ability to go over the cap to resign our players.

2) Keep those holds in place and act without cap space. We still would have had 14 million to spend in the form of the exception.

[Crymson]

Please read the later part of this. It explains how renouncing free agents to generate cap space would have worked.

At the outset we had two options:

1) Operate with cap space by renouncing our cap holds. We could have generated up to 17 million in space this way.

2) Keep those holds in place and act without cap space. We still would have had 14 million to spend in the form of the exception.

You've misunderstood option #2.

As I said: cap holds are placeholders whose purpose is to prevent teams from circumventing the cap by using cap space and then using Bird rights to re-sign their own free agents. Cap holds occupy cap space. If you'd like to use the cap space that those holds occupy, you've got to renounce them. That's scenario #1.

Scenario #2 describes the front office re-signing Schroder and/or THJ over their cap holds to salaries equal to or greater than the amount necessary to reach the cap, which would have gained the Pistons access to the NTP-MLE. That's the scenario described in the article here:

The Pistons have a straightforward path toward bringing back their veterans. They have Bird rights for Hardaway and Early Bird rights for Schröder, meaning that they can re-sign them without needing cap space. If they go that route, they can offer the non-taxpayer mid-level exception to Malik Beasley starting at $14.1 million per season.

I've spent a lot of time learning the CBA. Trust me on this one. I'm not speaking as an amateur.

[Snakebites]

Please read the later part of this. It explains how renouncing free agents to generate cap space would have worked.

At the outset we had two options:

1) Operate with cap space by renouncing our cap holds. We could have generated up to 17 million in space this way.

2) Keep those holds in place and act without cap space. We still would have had 14 million to spend in the form of the exception.

You've misunderstood option #2.

As I said: cap holds are placeholders whose purpose is to prevent teams from circumventing the cap by using cap space and then using Bird rights to re-sign their own free agents. Cap holds occupy cap space. If you'd like to use the cap space that those holds occupy, you've got to renounce them. That's scenario #1.

Scenario #2 describes the front office re-signing Schroder and/or THJ over their cap holds to salaries equal to or greater than the amount necessary to reach the cap, which would have gained the Pistons access to the NTP-MLE. That's the scenario described in the article here:

The Pistons have a straightforward path toward bringing back their veterans. They have Bird rights for Hardaway and Early Bird rights for Schröder, meaning that they can re-sign them without needing cap space. If they go that route, they can offer the non-taxpayer mid-level exception to Malik Beasley starting at $14.1 million per season.

I've spent a lot of time learning the CBA. Trust me on this one. I'm not speaking as an amateur.

It appears to me that the deal we agreed to with Levert was structured with both possibilities in mind, as it looks like it fits into the non-taxpayers MLE. My guess is it was originally agreed to with the thoughts that they wanted to keep their sign and trade (or just resigning) options open. And those resignings would not have needed to go up to the cap necessarily. We'd have gotten use of the 14.1 mill non-taxpayers exception if we were less than that amount of money below the cap with our guys resigned.

Of course, now with the recent news that THJ is also gone (which hadn’t happened/ I hadn’t seen yet when I made the first post) and Schroder is being signed outright without a sign and trade, option 2 is now fully closed to us anyway. Reed and Levert will simply be signed into cap space/room exception.

[Crymson]

It appears to me that the deal we agreed to with Levert was structured with both possibilities in mind, as it looks like it fits into the non-taxpayers MLE.

That's correct. Reed's contract could also have fit into the BAE.

My guess is it was originally agreed to with the thoughts that they wanted to keep their sign and trade (or just resigning) options open.

Yep, exactly.

And those resignings would not have needed to go up to the cap necessarily. We'd have gotten use of the 14.1 mill non-taxpayers exception if we were less than that amount of money below the cap with our guys resigned.

The NTP-MLE is available only to teams that are at or above the cap.

Of course, now with the recent news that THJ is also gone (which hadn’t happened/ I hadn’t seen yet when I made the first post) and Schroder is being signed outright without a sign and trade, option 2 is now fully closed to us anyway. Reed and Levert will simply be signed into cap space/room exception.

Reed and LeVert can both be taken into cap space. The Pistons could clear a maximum of $19.4 million with the incomplete roster charges expunged. They total out to a little less than that.

[DetroitSho]

The way Crymson was talking it sounded like he knew more- that even with that we were below the cap.

I don't mean this at all to sound condescending, but it very much appears that I do know more. Teams can't simply operate above the cap by way of cap holds. The salary needs to actually be on the books. Cap holds are placeholders, nothing more; they do not count against actual team salary, and actual team salary is all that matters in this scenario.

Think about it: if teams could operate above the cap with cap holds alone, it would open the door to wacky situations in which teams used cap holds for that purpose, then ended up with total salaries equaling less than the salary cap after renouncing those cap holds.

Wacky things like Keith Van Horn being traded years after he retired? Like literally signing a contract from his couch just for the salary to be included in the trade? Or the fact that Vernon Maxwell, who had been retired close to a decade, having been discussed as being the "sacrificial sign and trade lamb" prior to it being Van Horn?

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[Crymson]

Wacky things like Keith Van Horn being traded years after he retired? Like literally signing a contract from his couch just for the salary to be included in the trade? Or the fact that Vernon Maxwell, who had been retired close to a decade, having been discussed as being the "sacrificial sign and trade lamb" prior to it being Van Horn?

That loophole was closed in the 2011 CBA. If a player didn't finish the season on the roster, he's ineligible to be used in a sign-and-trade.

[Canadafan]

Reed and LeVert can both be taken into cap space. The Pistons could clear a maximum of $19.4 million with the incomplete roster charges expunged. They total out to a little less than that.

Ok, so if that's how we used our capspace, then how did we acquire Robinson with just sending over Fontecchios $8million contract?
And then what else is available to us to spend?

[Crymson]

Ok, so if that's how we used our capspace, then how did we acquire Robinson with just sending over Fontecchios $8million contract?

By sign-and-trade. Fontecchio's salary falls into a tier ($8.3m - $33.1m) whereby via the Expanded TPE, the Pistons could take in $8.5m more salary than they sent out. Robinson's first season is for about $14.3m, so it fits.

And then what else is available to us to spend?

In all likelihood -- barring something unexpected still coming of the Schroder deal -- only the Room MLE and minimum contracts.

[Canadafan]

Ok, so if that's how we used our capspace, then how did we acquire Robinson with just sending over Fontecchios $8million contract?

By sign-and-trade. Fontecchio's salary falls into a tier ($8.3m - $33.1m) whereby via the Expanded TPE, the Pistons could take in $8.5m more salary than they sent out. Robinson's first season is for about $14.3m, so it fits.

And then what else is available to us to spend?

In all likelihood -- barring something unexpected still coming of the Schroder deal -- only the Room MLE and minimum contracts.

Thank you!
I never knew that about or ecen knew about the expanded TPE. Fantastic!
And that means Reed and Levert fit into our $19mil cap space perfectly. It all makes sense now, thanks
So now we can use around $8mil from our Room exception to target 1 player or we can break it up into 2 players even.
BackupPF and basically a vet mentor type for a 3rd string PG being our main needs.

[Crymson]

Thank you!
I never knew that about or ecen knew about the expanded TPE. Fantastic!
And that means Reed and Levert fit into our $19mil cap space perfectly. It all makes sense now, thanks

Happy to help! Ask anytime; I love cap stuff.

So now we can use around $8mil from our Room exception to target 1 player or we can break it up into 2 players even.
BackupPF and basically a vet mentor type for a 3rd string PG being our main needs.

Unlike the NTP-MLE and the TP-MLE, the Room MLE can't be split; it can be used on only one player.

It's still possible (I've got no idea at the likelihood) that the Pistons pay the Kings a pittance to make the Schroder deal into S&T to earn a $14m TPE, which would establish them as an over-the-cap team and remove access to Room MLE. But that's all theoretical at this point; and it would mean sacrificing the Room MLE, which can almost certainly be used, for a TPE, which requires an opportunity (to take on a player making $14m or less, in this case) and could easily go unused if no such opportunity presents itself.

[bstein14]

Room Exception for Al Horford (same agent as Duncan Robinson) would be the best case scenario. I know he pretty much is being linked to the Lakers or Warriors at this point. I'd also take Mo Wagner with the room exception instead he's be a solid pickup that was teammates in college with both Duncan Robinson and LeVert but I kind of can't see him leaving his brother in Orlando. 6'11" and 36% from deep last year but only 30 games played coming off a significant injury.

Veteran Ball handler's at the minimum to be a 3rd string PG?
CoJo
Westbrook
Lowry
Patty Mills
Dinwiddie
Delon Wright
Cameron Payne
Monte Morris
Ben Simmons
Fultz

[BadMofoPimp]

Would rather have Schroder at that contract instead of Levert. Not sure what happened in negotiations. Maybe he wanted a shot at starting with the Kings alongside Lavine.

[DetroitSho]

Would rather have Schroder at that contract instead of Levert. Not sure what happened in negotiations. Maybe he wanted a shot at starting with the Kings alongside Lavine.

You just answered your own hypothesis. Wanting a player back at a certain dollar amount over another means nothing when you can't give him the role he seeks.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[edmunder_prc]

Schroder and Beasley brought a lot of energy to the team and they will be missed.

Ivey will need to play a lot better and Levert will need to be the 6th man, combo guard off the bench. I have more faith in Ivey being a solid starter than Levert being in the 6th man conversation.

Schroder's up tempo, big baller energy hasn't been replaced. But if he didn't want to play the 6th man role nothing Pistons could do.