Ryan Anderson’s contract would be useful right about now. Or even still giving up Melton and having Knight’s contract to flip. But, of course, luxury tax savings. Which is why Shumpert isn’t being sign and traded for any big contract. Look for cheap, vet minimum types that Tilman is willing to pay.
What I don't understand is if large expiring contracts alone are such valuable trade assets, why do people always expect teams to buyout large expiring contracts like Iguodala thereby completely wasting such a valuable trade asset?
Yo OP! Thanks for the video... I hadn't seen that before. But on the real. I agree 100% about House and Shump. Was just talking about this the other day with my pops about how there can't be much of a market for Shump at this point. It just doesn't make sense. I'd let him walk... Rather see those minutes go to House or even more 3-guard lineups with Rivers. I'm interested to see what we do with the MLE money, if anything.
Do not resign Shumpert! Do not add insult to injury. Rockets, do at least one positive thing this offseason: dump chump!
I'm pretty sure the NBA changed the rules regarding NG contract after 2016-17 season, so that, under the current CBA, only the guaranteed portion of a player’s contract counts for outgoing salary purposes in a trade. Applies to all contracts signed after July 1, 2017 So your scenario would not be valid, as the incoming 6 million (for memphis) would not be within 125% Iggy's 17 million contract. However, Memphis & Shumpert would still have incentive to agree to such a trade even if Shumperts contract was 13.2million. Memphis would save 4million in salary and also get at least a couple 2nd round picks, while Shumpert has 13 million reasons to agree. edited to add: Interesting info, I wasn't aware of this either(part about 1st year), which makes part of post moot.
Large expiring contracts by themselves do not by themselves hold much value as evidence by your Iggy example and the numerous other transaction this offseason in which we've seen teams include picks to trade their expiring contracts for cap space. The value or rather usefulness of a large expiring contract is in its use for salary matching purposes for teams over the cap. Another value of large expiring contract is in relation to large multi year contracts. IE... if both players value is equivalently bad relative to their contract, the expiring one is valuable relative to the long term one.
Only guaranteed money counts for salary matching purposes. S&T has to be 3 years , fist fully guaranteed. For Iggy it takes $12,788,889 guaranteed to match the 17m. 125%+/- 100k.
The problem with signing him in the hope to trade him is that MDA will play him over House. And you might have to to show he can play.
S&T has to be a minimum 3 year deal , first fully guaranteed. In an agreed to S&T you could immediately aggregate salary. If its not an immediate S&T that he has agreed to , you are waiting 90 days or December 15th , (whichever comes first I believe).
Short answer - He wouldn't. Long answer - Who's offering him more than the minimum ? No one (we assume) so he'd take that windfall , probably get bought out at some point and then pick his next destination on that minimum deal.
Think the salary the rockets would need to send out in order to take in Iggy's 17,185,185 is actually 13.748,000 (give or take a few thousands). 13.748 x 125% = 17,185,000. So trade would have to be shumpert's 13.2 + ???
The real value is the ability to take on 125% of his contract value without giving up any other player(s). You just have to , as you said , attach other assets to that contract. Without the financial vehicle (Contract) , you gotta give up other players.
The player isn't in the teams plans and isn't going to play much if at all. He's stuck in limbo … you are going to pay him anyway , pay him less to leave than paying him the full amount and holding him hostage. Most teams in this situation aren't fighting for playoff position so the player helping another team win doesn't hurt them.
If you "dump the chump" …. you threw away that first round pick you sent to dump Knight. Retain him via bird rights and use him as an asset …. He never has to show up at the Rockets facility. Just use the contract.
Obviously you are right …. I must have put something in the calculator wrong when I did it. So Shump below 13.2 + XX reaching 13.748.
Yeah b Yeah but if someone is willing to give you even a future second for him down the line then wouldn't buying out be a total waste? Also you could trade for longer term contracts and get even more assets.
Even if he stayed on the roster until the trade deadline or was moved again .. he's getting 5x his market value to do that. Even if that were to happen - stay on the roster until the trade deadline or just before - It's highly likely he gets bought out at that point …. after which he goes where he wants. And that also depends upon Memphis - do they want to take on salary in place of him or let him expire and have that space below the cap ? Let him expire and they have $70.6m+ under the cap next offseason. Would you be taking back salary in that situation ? That's almost enough for 2 max FA's. That's why a trade for another player that expires and makes less makes so much sense.
I understand buying him out at the deadline but suggesting they should do so now is nothing but wishful thinking. Memphis is one of those teams that would barely make the salary floor, his salary to production means absolutely nothing to them. Plus salary cap means nothing to them. They never sign outside stars. It's beginning to be apparent for teams that cap room for the Memphises and Orlandos and Detroits aren't worth nearly as much as it is for the bigger teams in the league. For tanking teams, it's smart to take on longer bad contracts in exchange for draft capital like Brooklyn did in years prior. That's how they got Jarrett Allen, DLo, and Caris Levert. I just found it hypocritical when people would overhype big expiring contracts in our team as prime trade assets while expecting other teams to just throw away theirs for absolutely nothing. TLDR: I've always found the idea of buyouts useless. All it actually does is save the owner money and oftentimes, this is happening on teams with small payrolls anyways. Better to use the contracts to get something in return.
