Does Orlando Have to use its MLE?

orlandomike · Post #1 » by **orlandomike** » Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:29 pm

Does Orlando Have to use its MLE?

It seems like we are on the verge of making a move that wont improve the team but will strap us contractuarily for 3 more years. Sometimes the best move isnt to move at all and just go with the rookie and hope others will improve.

glennathan · Post #2 » by **glennathan** » Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:42 pm

orlandomike wrote:Does Orlando Have to use its MLE?

It seems like we are on the verge of making a move that wont improve the team but will strap us contractuarily for 3 more years. Sometimes the best move isnt to move at all and just go with the rookie and hope others will improve.

I agree with you and disagree at the same time. I agree we should not contractuarily lock ourselves down for 3 years on a player that may not help, but if we go on rookies and other players who are not as experienced then we may wind up doing worse then we did last year. If the right person comes along do what it takes to get them here even if it means going over the tax by 2 or 3 million per year. Spend the money to get magette and spend the little extra to get dooling. after that then I think we should fill in with SL players. BTW we still got the VLE we can spend on J-WIll.

drsd · Post #3 » by **drsd** » Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:43 pm

No. It's an exception. Not an obligation.

The only contractual obligations from the CBA are a collective team-wide pay rate and a minimum roster requirement.

The minimum team salary is 75% of the salary cap. A team must have 12 players on its active roster, although it can have 11 for up to two weeks at a time.

MitchellUK · Post #4 » by **MitchellUK** » Tue Jul 8, 2008 5:55 pm

In addition to the first two replies, we can also split the MLE amongst as many players as we like, and the length of the deals are separately negotiated with each player. We could split it two ways, signing a back up point guard on a two year deal, and another big man on a three year deal.

Ultimately, what the MLE does is allow teams who are over the cap limit (like we are) to sign players for more than the league minimum. If the MLE was not there, each summer one or two free agents would get ok contracts with the teams who were under the cap, and the rest would all have to sign for the absolute league minimum.

spinedoc · Post #5 » by **spinedoc** » Tue Jul 8, 2008 6:17 pm

We don't have to use it of course, but we sure do need to. I went along with the song and dance at the deadline without a move to improve the club, hoping that we would at least use the mle to address those issues in the summer then. Now it doesn't even look like we are that willing to resign the marginal guys that we had from last year. I'm hoping that we are just waiting for the dominoes to fall and then make our move rather than putting a band-aid on things. Patience is a virtue I suppose, all we can do is wait.

mhectorgato · Post #6 » by **mhectorgato** » Tue Jul 8, 2008 7:56 pm

Here's who is under contract right now:

Jameer
Lee/Reddick/Bogans
Hedo
Lewi$/Cook/Battie
Dwight/Auggie/Gortat

That's 11 players under contract.

What happens if Jameer gets hurt?

Dooling would help in that regard. But if Dooling (don't need MLE) is starting because Jameer's injured, who subs for him?

We don't have to use it, but we need to.