S&T Wally?

LeQuitterNotMVP · Post #1 » by **LeQuitterNotMVP** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:45 pm

I saw a trade idea recently that had us using Wally in a S&T, where he gets about $13 million this year, and then has another unguaranteed years.

I wonder why this hasn't really been brought up. It allows us to acquire two high-salary players without having to trade Z. Wally would most likely accept the move, as he would get far more money out of it than if he were to just sign a regular deal.

So what does everyone think about this idea? Why has it not really been brought up that much? We could possibly get Shaq AND J-rich or VC without trading Z.

gocavs23 · Post #2 » by **gocavs23** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:53 pm

Well i'm no salary cap expert... but I don't think your idea is even possible. We are over the cap as is... I don't know where this 13 million dollars is going to come from.

LeQuitterNotMVP · Post #3 » by **LeQuitterNotMVP** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:39 pm

Do we have his bird's rights? Or no?

Post #4 » by **TheOUTLAW** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:41 pm

I am not positive, but I'd think that we still have Szczerbiak's Bird rights.

LeQuitterNotMVP · Post #5 » by **LeQuitterNotMVP** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 10:42 pm

I think you have the rights if the player has had at least 3 years under a single contract, so I don't see why we couldn't S&T Wally then. It would only benefit us IMO.

gflem · Post #6 » by **gflem** » Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:16 pm

I dont believe we would have bird rights, and we then can only sign him for enough to bring us up to the salary cap which I believe we are over even if Ben retires. Thats why it was important to get something for him at the deadline. Now his contract is gone and we will get nothing for it.

LeQuitterNotMVP · Post #7 » by **LeQuitterNotMVP** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:49 am

gflem wrote:I dont believe we would have bird rights, and we then can only sign him for enough to bring us up to the salary cap which I believe we are over even if Ben retires. Thats why it was important to get something for him at the deadline. Now his contract is gone and we will get nothing for it.

Larry Coon wrote:LARRY BIRD EXCEPTION -- This is the best known one. Players who qualify for this exception are called "Qualifying Veteran Free Agents" in the CBA, and this exception is a component of the Veteran Free Agent exception. This exception allows teams to exceed the salary cap to re-sign their own free agents, up to the player's maximum salary. The player essentially must play for three seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. This means a player can obtain "Bird rights" by playing under three one-year contracts, a single contract of at least three years, or any combination. It also means that when a player is traded, his Bird rights are traded with him, and his new team can use the Bird exception to re-sign him. These contracts can be up to six years in length. A player can receive raises up to 10.5% of the salary in the first season of the contract. This exception is known as the Larry Bird exception because the Celtics were the first team allowed to exceed the cap to keep their own free agent, and the player happened to be Bird.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

Not sure why we wouldn't have his bird's rights. I'll take it over to the CBA board.

gflem · Post #8 » by **gflem** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:04 am

If I am reading that correctly then we do have bird rights. I was under the impression that since he was traded they were lost. He would have to agree to any s&t, but as someone stated he could probably get more in a s&t. thanks for the correction.

Post #9 » by **Three34** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:13 am

Bird rights go with you when you're traded. The key sentence there is:

The player essentially must play for three seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent.

And Wally has never in his career changed teams as a free agent.

So, yes, you have full Bird rights.

LeQuitterNotMVP · Post #10 » by **LeQuitterNotMVP** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:08 am

gflem wrote:If I am reading that correctly then we do have bird rights. I was under the impression that since he was traded they were lost. He would have to agree to any s&t, but as someone stated he could probably get more in a s&t. thanks for the correction.

How could he get more? Would he really not agree to get $10+ million for doing almost nothing?

DowJones · Post #11 » by **DowJones** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:43 am

I guess it's possible, but Wally would have to agree to it and we would have to take back a REALLY long and bad contract to get it done.

stycool24 · Post #12 » by **stycool24** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:03 am

Why would any team with a right mind trade for WALLY, if he makes 13 million a year. They would have to be plain (Please Use More Appropriate Word) to do that. He is on a huggeee decline. Teams will be interested in trading for Big Ben because he might retire before the season starts.

They could probably find better expiring contracts than Wally. There is a 100% possibility that this wouldn't happen. Even if you want this to happen, you have to keep wally until the trade deadline, pay the luxury tax of 13 mill and then try to trade him. This makes 0 sense.

Post #13 » by **TheOUTLAW** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:21 am

To be honest, none of what you said it true. While I think it is unlikely to happen but I could definitely see a team doing this if they had a contract longer than 1 year that they really wanted to move. Sure it isn't likely, but to say there is a 100% chance of it not happening is just wrong.

bcortell · Post #14 » by **bcortell** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:38 am

Is there a way we can S&T wally with a one year contract that's not guaranteed? Like we sign him for 13 mil but only 2 mil guaranteed, then trade him to Washington for Jamison, MJ, and #5. They then buy him out for only 2 mil. I feel like that can't happen, but does anyone have some solid info about it?

LeQuitterNotMVP · Post #15 » by **LeQuitterNotMVP** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:41 am

bcortell wrote:Is there a way we can S&T wally with a one year contract that's not guaranteed? Like we sign him for 13 mil but only 2 mil guaranteed, then trade him to Washington for Jamison, MJ, and #5. They then buy him out for only 2 mil. I feel like that can't happen, but does anyone have some solid info about it?

If a player is in a S&T, the contract must be for three years and the first year must be guaranteed.

I'm also not saying the Cavs should just S&T Wally for any random player. He would be packaged with Ben for Shaq and J-Rich, or Chandler and VC, etc. etc.

eyejayem · Post #16 » by **eyejayem** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:42 am

Why not sign him to the contract like they said no guarunteed past 2010. And make the buy out maybe 3 or 4 mil that we send in cash with his contract and promise to resign him once bought out. That way we can resign him for maybe 3 or 4 mil and then he gets the full MLE that he would have signed with any other team, but he does it while making us better. thats taking one for the team.

mg · Post #17 » by mg » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:52 am

Yes, the Cavs have Wally's bird rights and they can also sign and trade him. It must be a 3 year contract but only the first year has to be guaranteed. Actually the first year can be partially guaranteed and the player bought out similar to Keith Van Horn in the Jason Kidd trade last year. It's a loophole they haven't closed yet. It would be free money for Wally so I don't see why he wouldn't do it if the Cavs find another team that wants to dump a player they like for capspace.

No offense to Wally. I respect what he did for the Cavs this season but there's no way I want to see him on the team next year after the way he choked in the playoffs against Boston last year and Orlando this season. Knowing Mike Brown he would have Wally right back in the rotation when he should only be 10th man at best.

bcortell · Post #18 » by **bcortell** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:58 am

mg wrote:Yes, the Cavs have Wally's bird rights and they can also sign and trade him. It must be a 3 year contract but only the first year has to be guaranteed. Actually the first year can be partially guaranteed and the player bought out similar to Keith Van Horn in the Jason Kidd trade last year. It's a loophole they haven't closed yet. It would be free money for Wally so I don't see why he wouldn't do it if the Cavs find another team that wants to dump a player they like for capspace.

No offense to Wally. I respect what he did for the Cavs this season but there's no way I want to see him on the team next year after the way he choked in the playoffs against Boston last year and Orlando this season. Knowing Mike Brown he would have Wally right back in the rotation when he should only be 10th man at best.

So we can S&T him with a partially guaranteed 1st year. Is there a certain percentage that has to be guaranteed or any other restrictions?

mg · Post #19 » by mg » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:22 am

^^That part I don't know, it's probably in the CBA somewhere and NBA capologists have the info, but my educated guess is there probably is a certain percentage that must be guaranteed. Looking for clues, Sasha's contract is only partially guaranteed for about 30% this season so that might provide a guideline for the minimum percentage to be guaranteed for a non guaranteed contract. Maybe the guaranteed amount just depends on whatever the agent/team work out?

Post #20 » by **Three34** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:34 am

The first year of a sign and trade has to be fully guaranteed, and this thread is indicative of exactly why that is.

Sasha's contract is only partially guaranteed for about 30% this season so that might provide a guideline for the minimum percentage to be guaranteed for a non guaranteed contract.

Most contracts can be as much as 0% guaranteed if the player and team agree. However, the first year of a sign and trade is an exception to that rule.