Jefferson Trade... test case

bgwizarfan · Post #1 » by **bgwizarfan** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:40 pm

So this jefferson trade is an interesting situation since it includes non-guarantees and trade bonuses...wanted to throw the example out there to make sure I'm calculating it correctly and maybe it'll help others understand the rule.

Since it's the 08-09 Salary Cap Year still, 08-09 Salaries are used, so here's what we end up with:

To SA:
Jefferson ($13,200,000)

To Mil
Oberto ($3,600,000)
Bowen ($4,000,000)
Thomas ($4,200,000)

Bowen has a trade kicker that is 15% or $300,000, whichever is less... In this case, Bowen has $4,000,000 left (that's his 09-10 salary). 15% of $4 million = $600,000, so the Trade Kicker is $300,000. Bowen's 09-10 Season, though is only 50% guaranteed ($2,000,000), so 2/3 of the kicker is added to the 08-09 season, and 1/3 to 09-10. So $200,000 added to 08-09 and $100,000 added to 09-10. (Oberto's 09-10 is also only 50% guaranteed and all 3 contracts expire after 09-10 so its evident why the Bucks did this).

From San Antonio's perspective:
Outgoing: $3,600,000 + $4,000,000 + $4,200,000 = $11,800,000
Incoming: $13,200,000

$11,800,000 x 1.25 + $100,000 = $14,850,000. So the trade is legal for SA

From Milwaukee's perspective:
Outgoing: $13,200,000
Incoming: $3,600,000 + $4,200,000 + $4,200,000 ($200,000 added for TK) = $12,000,000

$1,200,000 Trade Exception Generated for the Bucks.... and this trade is legal for Milwaukee

Anyway, that's how I break it down...I think it's fascinating because not only is a trade kicker involved, but it gets prorated differently since the years are guaranteed differently..

WiscoKing13 · Post #2 » by **WiscoKing13** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:54 pm

Since this is about the same trade i'll post it here

How early can we turn around and trade Bowen, Oberto, and Thomas?

bgwizarfan · Post #3 » by **bgwizarfan** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:55 pm

WiscoKing13 wrote:Since this is about the same trade i'll post it here

How early can we turn around and trade Bowen, Oberto, and Thomas?

If you trade them by themselves (i.e. not with other players), tomorrow if you'd like, as long as you don't trade them back to the Spurs until after July 1st.

But if you need to package more than 1 player together, you have to wait 60 days

WiscoKing13 · Post #4 » by **WiscoKing13** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:59 pm

Can we trade Oberto and Bowen togeather since they came in the same trade?

bgwizarfan · Post #5 » by **bgwizarfan** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:07 pm

nope they have to be by themselves. You can work out multi-player deals though, that get broken into smaller deals where a player is traded by himself and that is legal....my guess is though you're going to waive Oberto and Bowen immediately since theyre just 50% guaranteed.

Also I'm a little hazy on off-season roster limits... the Bucks currently have 15 guys, so it would make sense that they would have to cut 2 of those guys immediately. But I cannot recall if that limit of 15 currently exists now that the Season is officially over...

FGump · Post #6 » by **FGump** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 7:28 pm

Roster limit is 20.

Oberto and Bowen become fully guaranteed after July 1 as I recall, so they will get waived in a matter of days. No sense in even thinking about them as trade fodder.

daddyfivestar · Post #7 » by **daddyfivestar** » Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:37 pm

And then San Antonio will welcome them both back as soon as the rules allow with new deals. Hear that?

(agents and players union officials quietly clinking glasses in a toast)

So Cal Blazer Fan · Post #8 » by **So Cal Blazer Fan** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 2:09 am

bigwiz - I have the same numbers.

This one's a warmup for the Wizards/Timberwolves deal.....

bgwizarfan · Post #9 » by **bgwizarfan** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:16 am

yeah...that one shouldn't be as tough, though since Thomas' 09-10 is fully guaranteed once he waives his ETO, which he better do, so the TK would be evenly split.

Though I believe Miller and Songalia both have Unlikely Bonuses associated with their situations. No idea what they're for, but if they're for team achievements, I guess that could make things interesting (i.e. based on the trade it could become Likely for one of the players), but I'm pretty certain that wouldn't effect the salaries used for trade at all.

Another interesting detail (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that the Trade Kickers from both trades go towards the new teams (in this case, MIL and Min) luxury tax calculations for 08-09, even though the new players' salaries do not (i.e. Miller and Foye will still count for Minnesota etc). Well at least the portion added to the 08-09 season... But both of them have some leeway so it's not going to bring them over or anything. Little details like that do fascinate me, though.

LarryCoon · Post #10 » by **LarryCoon** » Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:42 pm

No, they base luxury tax on the roster as of the last day of the regular season.

bgwizarfan · Post #11 » by **bgwizarfan** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 3:35 am

right, but as you write in your FAQ about the lux tax

When determining the amount of tax a team owes, the league uses its team salary (see question number 14) on the date of their last regular season game (i.e., if a player is traded away before the end of the season, then none of his salary is taxed), with the following adjustments:

, "Any trade bonuses (see question number 83) for players received in trade after the last season game are added to the team salary. "

So that makes me believe that the Trade Bonuses are added to Lux tax salary... yet the players' new salary is not (they go with it as of 4/15/09, as you said). That's what I was trying to convey

So Cal Blazer Fan · Post #12 » by **So Cal Blazer Fan** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:11 pm

bgwizarfan wrote:yeah...that one shouldn't be as tough, though since Thomas' 09-10 is fully guaranteed once he waives his ETO, which he better do, so the TK would be evenly split.

Right, but I'm showing that the MIN-WAS deal generated a new trade exception for each team and trying to calculate those amounts took a little bit of calculation.

BTW, I'm showing that MIN generates a trade exception of $1,368,840 and WAS generates a trade exception of $1,418,440. Any confirmation or correction?

bgwizarfan · Post #13 » by **bgwizarfan** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:42 pm

I agree with your Washington one, but I don't think Minnesota gets one. Thomas' trade kicker is 15%, and when split over 2 years, his incoming trade salary for Minnesota becomes $7,415,788. if you combine that with Songalia's it's doesn't fit into the 125% +100K of outgoing for Mike Miller's salary, so I don't think a TPE is generated for Minnesota.

Without the Trade Kicker coming into play, you would have it right, but I'm pretty sure the kicker messes that up here

So Cal Blazer Fan · Post #14 » by **So Cal Blazer Fan** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:32 pm

bgwizarfan wrote:I agree with your Washington one, but I don't think Minnesota gets one. Thomas' trade kicker is 15%, and when split over 2 years, his incoming trade salary for Minnesota becomes $7,415,788. if you combine that with Songalia's it's doesn't fit into the 125% +100K of outgoing for Mike Miller's salary, so I don't think a TPE is generated for Minnesota.

Without the Trade Kicker coming into play, you would have it right, but I'm pretty sure the kicker messes that up here

Hmm...I just re-ran the numbers and it looks like you're correct. I must have made a mistake on the calculation of the 125% + $100,000 because I've got the same salary number for Thomas and the same trade kicker amount, but when I punched it in last night, I showed that Thomas and Songaila just fit into being able to be dealt for Miller. Now I see that it doesn't work by about $139,000. Serves me right for trying to do math at night.....

Thanks for the correction, bgwizarfan!

LarryCoon · Post #15 » by **LarryCoon** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:49 am

bgwizarfan wrote:right, but as you write in your FAQ about the lux tax

When determining the amount of tax a team owes, the league uses its team salary (see question number 14) on the date of their last regular season game (i.e., if a player is traded away before the end of the season, then none of his salary is taxed), with the following adjustments:

, "Any trade bonuses (see question number 83) for players received in trade after the last season game are added to the team salary. "

So that makes me believe that the Trade Bonuses are added to Lux tax salary... yet the players' new salary is not (they go with it as of 4/15/09, as you said). That's what I was trying to convey

Ah, got you. You're right -- it's counterintuitive, but it's what the CBA clearly says.

bgwizarfan · Post #16 » by **bgwizarfan** » Wed Jul 1, 2009 7:53 pm

So Cal. ... I think the Wash. one is actually $1,446,720, which is like $28K more or so... the reason is that's pecherov's salary, so they gain that extra $ on the exception if they combine Thomas and Songalia for Foye and Miller (which works under the cap) and trade Pecherov separately, than they would if they traded Thomas and Pecherov and for Miller and Songalia for Foye. Not by much obviously but still I'm sure they'd take the slighly larger one

WiscoKing13 · Post #17 » by **WiscoKing13** » Fri Jul 3, 2009 7:02 pm

quick add on question

Could the bucks make a move with kurt thomas(and another player) and make the trade pending till the 60 days is up?

Dunkenstein · Post #18 » by **Dunkenstein** » Fri Jul 3, 2009 10:21 pm

WiscoKing13 wrote:quick add on question

Could the bucks make a move with kurt thomas(and another player) and make the trade pending till the 60 days is up?

They could have a verbal agreement to make a trade aggregating Thomas and another player, but the agreement is not binding. Either team could pull out before the 60 days are up.