The size of the salary cap will not go down

Cool. Let's sign Shane Battier to a max contract.

 

revenue x Players' BRI = salary cap. If BRI isn't agreed upon, how is it possible that the cap number gets resolved already. I don't believe it.

 

Yeah, I just saw that when Larry Coon tweeted it a few minutes ago (although he said that there were other factors yet to be determined that may affect that figure). I suppose I stand corrected.

This WILL, however, create a serious problem when it comes to determining the % of player salaries that will need to be put in escrow, since I think the odds of player salaries exceeding their agreed-upon % of BRI will be fairly substantial in either/both of the first two years of the new CBA, especially if you raise the team salary cap minimum. I don't know if the players union has ever had to cut a check to the league, and I'm not even sure if that was possible under the old CBA. This could end up being a major sticking point before the new CBA can be finalized.

 

LarryCoon Larry Coon
Yes, so if you resolve one, it should help RT @seanonlyskin: how can they settle on a cap without the BRI? aren't the two things linked?

LarryCoon Larry Coon
...you resolve the other. @seanonlyskin

 

Actually, that is incorrect. If that were true, it would mean that there was a hard cap. The NBA has a soft cap system, meaning that the salary cap is determined at a lower number but that teams can exceed that number to sign players, subject to an escrow of a % of salaries, with the escrowed amount going to one party or the other based on a final determination of BRI.

Under the old CBA, the salary cap was (basically) equal to the following:

51% of projected BRI (NOT 57%) minus projected $ of player benefits, divided by 30

Just wanted to clear that up to avoid any confusion.

 

Last year's salary cap was at 58 mil. Assuming we go from there, going down from 52 to 50% BRI(the difference currently) would mean we're looking at a cap from 56.8 to 59.2 mil range. They're not THAT far apart.

I believe since the start of the negotiations it has always been reported that the cap wouldn't be much different. Just a lot of the extra crappy contracts from teams way over the cap would lop off a ton of money. As long as the cap is much harder, the cap itself is quite fine.

 

This is true, but so much depends on how effective the new luxury tax scheme is with the big spenders.

If the big money owners truly cut down their payrolls, then you are right. Player salaries will level off a bit across the board, and there need not be such a disparity between the salary cap (< 51% of BRI under the old CBA) and total player salaries payable by the league (57% under the old CBA).

However, if those big money owners throw caution to the wind and keep spending (quite possible, although it will be moderate in comparison to prior spending), then player salaries may quickly exceed the agreed-upon percentage of BRI.

Unless the union agrees to a SUBSTANTIAL increase in the percentage of player salaries placed in escrow, I think the potential lack of disparity between the salary cap maximum and the maximum guaranteed percentage of BRI going to players could create a major problem. One I think the owners will raise as a roadblock to any final agreement on the new CBA.

 

Bima, I'm kind of assuming the new tax is a big hinderance to excess spending. If only because the smaller market owners have been harping hard on the subject. Also, I think the recent trend of heavy spending is somewhat related to aging superstars on big market teams. For example, Cuban will spend like crazy as long as Dirk is still in his prime. But when Dirk retires, Cuban will hold back like every other owner with a crappy team to rebuild.

 

No, maybe under Dawson but this is Morey's team.

 

Perhaps. A lot may also hinge on whether current contracts are "grandfathered" in like under the last CBA. For instance, assuming that the new maximum player salary will be substantially equal to the former max (if the salary cap doesn't change), will a guy like CP3 or Howard still be able to get (100+X)% of his prior salary under his next contract? Since it now looks like sign-and-trade deals may be carried over to the new CBA, this could become a major factor in overall player salaries.

 

If the Rockets use the amnesty clause on Hasheem Thabeet, does that mean the Rockets have around 14 million of cap room to play with if the cap is 58 million? That would get them in the running for Gasol and Nene.

 

Potentially, yes.

The number will be dependend on whether or not D-Mo comes over and whether we renounce Chuck's bird rights (though there may be changes as far as cap holds are concerned).

Using last years rookie scale, cap hold numbers and a 58mil cap, the Rockets would have between 9.6mil and 14.7mil cap space, should they use the amnesty clause on Thabeet (not counting Blakely & Cousin).

Also forget what I said about the Knicks not having enough cap space to sign Howard next off-season. I forgot Billups contract was only partially guaranteed. Oh well.

 

First off, until the new CBA is ratified and signed into effect, I can "suppose" all I want. So YOU suck it!

On the prior escrow system, yeah, I thought that was the case. If the union wants the same type of "we never cut the league a check ever" rules, then it will HAVE to agree to a much larger escrow percentage of player salaries. There just isn't any way around that. For the players to refuse to give on that point would be lunacy, IMHO.

By my estimates, assuming just as HMMMHMM has, I get the Rockets to somewhere around $12 million or so in cap room. That could be enough to get a guy like Nene. Of course, this amount will be prorated based on the actual number of games played next season, although the second year salary should be in line with this figure, adjusted for permitted annual salary increases.

HMMMHMM, don't forget that (barring a change in the old rule) D-Mo's rookie scale slotted salary continues to count against the Rockets' salary cap DURING THE OFFSEASON so long as the Rockets retain his rights. THIS is why so many foreign guys go early in the second round, besides the lack of guaranteed contracts. Teams don't want to have to carry the scale amount on their caps each summer. Go look at Portland's cap situation from a year or two ago, when they had 2-3 first round draftees playing overseas.

Still, though, unless Nene is ready to sign on the dotted line (a big "if", regardless of your opinion of him as a potential Rocket), I just don't see Morey using the amnesty on a young prospect with one year left on his deal. Seems to me that Thabeet holds more value as either/both (a) an expiring contract in trades (especially with supposedly relaxed salary-matching requirements in the new CBA) or (b) a prospect who can be developed under McHale's tutelage.

Also, don't forget that Les still has to pay Thabeet's full salary and that the Rockets would only get 75% cap relief. Unless Thabeet is replaced with a very good player, the Rockets' team payroll would go up without any corresponding benefit to the team competitively.

Personally, (again, unless Nene wants to sign), I'd rather just do the following:

(1) Either re-sign Chuck Hayes on the cheap or see if Hayes will take a lucrative ONE-YEAR deal;

(2) Consider spending up to the MLE (remember, if Thabeet isn't cut and if Hayes re-signs, the Rockets will be over the cap and able to use the MLE) on the best free agents, including amnesty cuts;

(3) Try to convince those same free agents/amnesty cuts to take the minimum, offering them a potentially large role in the Rockets' offense, etc. (of course, Morey will try to do this prior to offering the MLE); and

(4) Gear up for trades next season and/or for 2012 free agency, still having the amnesty in their back pocket to use later if necessary.

 

You're right. I always forget that rule.

Has this been confirmed yet? I've read different reports. First it was 75%, then it sounded to me like you'd be able to get 100% relief.

If it's 75%, then the Rockets indeed would at most have a little over $12mil in cap space, should they amnesty Thabeet.

 

Right on cue. Ha!

<!-- http://twitter.com/HowardBeckNYT/statuses/131417774768668672 --><div id='embedly_twitter_32620852' class='embedly_twitter'><style type='text/css'> #embedly_twitter_32620852{background:url(http://a1.twimg.com/profile_background_images/11518370/NYTbldgnight.jpg) #C6E2EE; padding:20px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 p{background:#fff;padding:10px 12px 0px 12px;margin:0;min-height:48px;color:#000;font-size:18px;line-height:22px;-moz-border-radius:5px;-webkit-border-radius:5px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .embedly_tweet_content{background:#fff;padding:10px 12px 10px 12px;margin:0;min-height:48px;color:#000;font-size:18px !important;line-height:22px;-moz-border-radius:5px;-webkit-border-radius:5px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 p span.metadata{display:block;width:100%;clear:both;margin-top:0px;height:40px; padding-bottom: 12px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 p span.metadata span.author{line-height:15px;color:#999;font-size:14px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 p span.metadata span.author a{line-height:15px;font-size:20px;vertical-align:middle} #embedly_twitter_32620852 p span.metadata span.author img{float:left;margin:0 10px 0 0px;width:48px;height:48px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 p a {color: #1F98C7; text-decoration:none;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 p a:hover{text-decoration:underline} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .embedly_timestamp{font-size:13px;display:inline-block;margin-top: 5px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .components-above span.embedly_timestamp{font-size:10px;margin-top: 1px;line-height:12px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 a {color: #1F98C7; text-decoration:none;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 a:hover{text-decoration:underline} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-screen-name {font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-full-name {padding-left: 4px; color: #999; font-size: 12px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-actions{margin-left: 10px;font-size:13px;display:inline-block;width:250px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .components-above span.tweet-actions{font-size:10px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .controls{line-height:12px!important} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-actions a {margin-left:5px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-actions a b{font-weight:normal} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .components-above span.tweet-actions a b{vertical-align:baseline;line-height:12px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .components-above .tweet-text{font-size:13px;vertical-align:baseline} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-image {float: left; width: 40px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-user-block-image {float: left; width: 48px; height: 48px} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-row {margin-left: 40px; margin-top: 3px;line-height: 17px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-user-block {margin-left: -40px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .stream-item {padding-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 12px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .simple-tweet-image img {margin-top: 4px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .simple-tweet-content {margin: 0 0 13px 0px; font-size: 14px; min-height:48px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .in-reply-to-border {border-color: #EBEBEB; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 0 0;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .in-reply-to-text {margin-left: 4px; padding-left: 8px; padding-right: 10px; color: #999; font-size: 12px;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-actions i {background: transparent url(http://a2.twimg.com/a/1306889658/phoenix/img/sprite-icons.png) no-repeat;width:15px;height:15px;margin:0 4px -3px 3px;outline: none; text-indent:-99999px;vertical-align:baseline;display:inline-block;position:relative;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-actions a.retweet-action i {background-position:-192px 0;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-actions a.reply-action i {background-position:0 0;} #embedly_twitter_32620852 .tweet-actions a.favorite-action i {background-position:-32px 0;} </style><div class="embedly_tweet_content"><div class="components-middle"><p><span class='metadata'><span class='author'><a href='http://twitter.com/HowardBeckNYT'><img src='http://a2.twimg.com/profile_images/1616622886/Photo_on_2011-10-31_at_23.27__2_normal.jpg' /></a><strong><a href='http://twitter.com/HowardBeckNYT'>@HowardBeckNYT</a></strong><br/>Howard Beck</span></span> For those who asked re amnesty: Have reconfirmed that 100% of player salary will come off cap. (But remember, all agreements are tentative)<br/><span class='embedly_timestamp'><a title='Tue Nov 01 17:10:13 +0000 2011' href='http://twitter.com/HowardBeckNYT/status/131417774768668672'>Nov 01</a> via web</span><span class="tweet-actions"><a href="https://twitter.com/intent/favorite?tweet_id=131417774768668672" class="favorite-action" title="Favorite"><span><i></i><b>Favorite</b></span></a><a href="https://twitter.com/intent/retweet?tweet_id=131417774768668672" class="retweet-action" title="Retweet"><span><i></i><b>Retweet</b></span></a><a href="https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?in_reply_to=131417774768668672" class="reply-action" title="Reply"><span><i></i><b>Reply</b></span></a></span></p></div></div></div>

 

Hey that was my idea!

 

This is such crap. Do you think that Daryl Morey, Sam Presti and Larry Bird are secretly burning in effigy all the other crap GMs who were NOT prudent and did NOT plan for maximum salary cap flexibility in 2011 and 2012?

Congratulations, dude. Way to think somewhere-outside-the-center-but-still-completely-within-the-box! :grin:

Yeah, ideally (and barring any "better" cap alternative), I'd like to see Les and Morey approach Chuck with the proposition that they would grossly overpay for him for one year, with the wink-wink understanding that he would immediately re-sign with them again in July 2012 for the league minimum. Of course, I doubt Chuck would agree to that. Also, I would hate to get "Boozer-ed" by Chuck a year later.

Unfortunately, a Nick Collison-type contract is not doable and was only done under some rare circumstances that happened to exist at the time for OKC.

Still, it may be worth a shot. The fans love Chuck here. He may be willing to do the "honorable" thing and take the money now, giving up future earnings later.

 

I think Chuck is a little more loyal than Boozer.