ImageImageImage

UTA Pick - exact wording on protections

Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks

shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,291
And1: 19,304
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

UTA Pick - exact wording on protections 

Post#1 » by shrink » Tue Dec 1, 2009 9:30 pm

Our UTA pick probably has one of the most complicated protections ever. I posted recently to Larry Coon that it may be a counter-example he was looking for that pick protection couldn't increase any year, and he was kind enough to reprint the exact wording, which I assume he got from the league office with his connections. Since its so confusing, I thought it might be valuable to post the wording here, if any other posters were as nerdy as me, and wanted to re-visit it as we get later in the season.

Note that this is evidence that the pick turns into a second rounder + cash in 2014.

LarryCoon wrote:Yep -- it's one hell of a trade description, but it does exactly what you said:

Utah conveys to Philadelphia Utah’s own first round draft pick in the first Draft, commencing with the 2009 Draft, in which such pick is not a “Protected Pick” (as defined below).

However, if: (i) Utah would be required to convey to Philadelphia its own 2009 first round draft pick pursuant to the foregoing, and (ii) Utah is entitled to receive New York’s own 2009 first round draft pick pursuant to the terms of the February 19, 2004 trade between Utah and Phoenix and the January 5, 2004 trade between Phoenix and New York (the “Utah/Phoenix and Phoenix/New York Trades”), then Utah shall convey to Philadelphia the more favorable of its own 2009 first round draft pick and New York’s 2009 first round draft pick.

Further, if:
(x) Utah has not previously conveyed a first round draft pick to Philadelphia pursuant to the terms of this trade,
(y) Utah would be required to convey to Philadelphia its own 2010 first round draft pick pursuant to the terms of this trade, and
(z) Utah is entitled to receive New York’s own 2010 first round draft pick pursuant to the terms of the Utah/Phoenix and Phoenix/New York Trades, then Utah shall convey to Philadelphia the least favorable of its own 2010 first round draft pick and New York’s 2010 first round draft pick. If Philadelphia does not receive a first round draft pick from Utah pursuant to the foregoing in any of the Drafts from 2009 through 2013, then Utah’s obligation to send a first round draft pick to Philadelphia shall be extinguished and Utah shall instead convey to Philadelphia Utah’s own 2014 second round draft pick and pay to Philadelphia the sum of $1,150,000 in cash on or before July 15, 2014. (Korver – Giricek, 12/29/07)

The following first round picks are “Protected Picks”:

Draft Picks
2009 1 – 22
2010 1 – 15
2011 1 – 17
2012 1 – 16
2013 1 – 16
User avatar
revprodeji
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 22,388
And1: 8
Joined: Dec 25, 2002
Location: Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought
Contact:

Re: UTA Pick - exact wording on protections 

Post#2 » by revprodeji » Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:00 am

Why cant we get the more favorable of the uta/ny pick?
http://www.timetoshop.org
Weight management, Sports nutrition and more...
VelvetPancakes
Ballboy
Posts: 44
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 10, 2009

Re: UTA Pick - exact wording on protections 

Post#3 » by VelvetPancakes » Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:44 am

Trying to find something explaining the 'more favorable' language, but can't. anybody else? I imagine that one of the 'however, if' or 'further, if' clauses are good for us.
User avatar
Vindicater
General Manager
Posts: 7,948
And1: 423
Joined: Apr 11, 2004

Re: UTA Pick - exact wording on protections 

Post#4 » by Vindicater » Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:49 am

so wait? we get the utah pick at 16 or higher next year?

Thats awesome, I was always under the impression it was 18 or higher
"That's why the last two years weren't guaranteed," Walsh said. "Either way, he knew it could have happened either way."
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,291
And1: 19,304
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: UTA Pick - exact wording on protections 

Post#5 » by shrink » Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:52 am

VelvetPancakes wrote:Trying to find something explaining the 'more favorable' language, but can't. anybody else? I imagine that one of the 'however, if' or 'further, if' clauses are good for us.


In 2009, both the NYK and the UTA picks had protections .. let's say they were both Top 22.

If the NYK pick turned out to be 23 and the UTA pick turned out to be 26, so both were eligible for trading, they'd keep the more favorable one .. the 23.

This season, with the NYK pick unprotected and the team doing so horribly, there is little chance its worse than UTA's AND UTA is worse than 15. Fortunately, much of this language is going away, and we'll just watch the protections at the end of the year.

Right now, UTA is 10-7, and if the season ended today, we'd get the 20th pick.

CHA has turned its season around, and is 7-9, and that'd equate to the 16th pick.
User avatar
Vindicater
General Manager
Posts: 7,948
And1: 423
Joined: Apr 11, 2004

Re: UTA Pick - exact wording on protections 

Post#6 » by Vindicater » Thu Dec 3, 2009 1:16 am

The NBA is confusing

NO more trades or free agency I say. Just a draft!
"That's why the last two years weren't guaranteed," Walsh said. "Either way, he knew it could have happened either way."
cpfsf
General Manager
Posts: 8,834
And1: 1,126
Joined: Apr 10, 2008
Location: sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell
 

Re: UTA Pick - exact wording on protections 

Post#7 » by cpfsf » Thu Dec 3, 2009 1:39 am

Here's how I interpreted it. We're going to get Utah's pick and we're going to get Charlotte's pick. If you tell me anything different that means your a communist who should be blacklisted.
Image

sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell sam mitchell

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves