[ClutchFans] Houston Rockets Salary Cap Update (Updated: 3/2/2011)

If the proposed amnesty rule (which in this case--unlike in 2005--involves both SALARY CAP and luxury tax relief) is eventually part of the new CBA, then I think some additional provisions should be put in place to reward the teams that opt not to use it.

Like others have said, why should a team like Houston (which has carefully managed its cap situation the past few years) and Indiana (which has endured years of mediocrity specifically in order to clear the decks in 2011 with planned cap room) be left in a similar cap situation to other franchises that have been much more poorly run? It's simply not fair and counter to much of what the two sides are purporting to accomplish.

Here are some initial thoughts I have to at least partially alleviate the sting to the better-run franchises and to make the amnesty provision a little more fair:

--RE-ORDER THE 2012 NBA DRAFT BASED ON WHO USES THE AMNESTY PROVISION:

Any team availing itself of the amnesty provision automatically has its 2012 pick (whether that team owns it or not) go to the "back of the line" of either of two groups: (1) lottery picks and (2) non-lottery picks. Any team owning the pick of a team that uses the amnesty provision AS OF JUNE 30, 2011 should be granted an additional compensatory pick, either (1) starting at #15, for teams owning another team's lottery pick, in order of worst record of the team using the amnesty provision or (2) starting after the last "first round pick", for teams owning another team's non-lottery pick, in a similar fashion.

For example, if all NBA teams finished with the season with the same records as they had in 2010-11, and if Minnesota (the team with the league's worst record) was the only lottery team to take advantage of the amnesty rule, then the Wolves would "slot in" at #14, the Rockets would move up to #13, and so on; and the NBA draft lottery would attribute the odds of winning in a similar fashion. Assuming that the Wolves do not win the lottery, the Clippers (who own Minnesota's 2012 pick) would end up picking (in addition to their own pick, if they still own it) at #14 (Minnesota's pick) and also no lower than #15 (a compensatory pick based on Minnesota having the worst record). Similarly, if the Pacers were the only playoff team to take advantage of the amnesty rule, they would pick at #30 (or later, depending on the number of compensatory "lottery" picks).

The biggest problem with my proposal is that it could allow a team like Minnesota to say, "F you" to the Clippers and stick them with a potentially lower lottery pick; but even then, the "re-ordering" (i.e., being moved to the back of the line) would be known BEFORE the 2011-12 season is even played. Minnesota wouldn't want to purposely lose AFTER using the amnesty provision, especially if it doesn't help them in any way. I could however, see a couple of teams owing picks using this system to screw over other teams; but the compensatory picks should at least partially soften this blow. For example, the Knicks could screw over the Rockets by using the amnesty rule, potentially catapulting their pick from the "early non-lotto" range all the way down towards the end of the first round. The Rockets would then have to take that pick plus a compensatory pick (~#29? + ~#34?) in lieu of a higher pick (~#19?).


--SIMPLY OFFER COMPENSATORY PICKS IN 2012:

A simpler--albeit less influential--way to reward teams for not having to take advantage of the amnesty rule is to offer them compensatory picks after the lottery selections, in order of 2011-12 record from worst to best; and these teams would not be obligated to trade those picks pursuant to a prior obligation to trade "their own pick", giving those teams more flexibility to trade other future picks next season without worrying (as much) about the Stepien rule (which says that teams cannot be without a guaranteed first round pick in consecutive future drafts).

For instance, if the only teams not to use the amnesty rule are the Clippers, Houston, Indiana, Sacramento, Minnesota and Washington, then those teams would get to select at picks #15-20 in the 2012 NBA Draft. The Rockets (who owe a top-14 protected 2012 pick to New Jersey) would NOT have to relinquish that pick . . . plus, since they would be guaranteed to get the pick, Houston could use that pick in trades without regard to the Stepien rule.


--AWARD "SPECIAL TRADE EXCEPTIONS" TO TEAMS NOT USING THE AMNESTY PROVISION:

Another reward to teams not availing themselves of the amnesty provision--which could possibly be combined with one of the alternatives above--is to award to each such team a "special trade exception" in the amount of [the average salary of the players waived under the amnesty rule???] that CAN be combined with player salaries OR used as "additional cap space" in trades.

The players union would probably LOVE this idea (since it would promote more spending on player salaries). The owners (at least those from the less-well-run teams) . . . not so much.

 

Nice thought. I would note, however, that you simply further reward the teams that have already traded away future first rounders. You can't punish the teams to which those future picks have been traded. And how is that fair to the other teams? Hence, the preference for both re-ordering the draft and giving other teams compensatory picks. Not an exact science, to be sure!

 

DD, xiki - you are both correct.

I guess no good deed (running a team with a fairly clean cap situation) goes unpunished.

 

That's what the league's salary FLOOR is for: to prevent cheapskates like Sterling (and now the Maloofs) from stripping down payroll to ridiculous levels. If a team has a team salary below that threshold, it has to cut a check to the league for the difference. Hell, you saw that in effect at this year's trade deadline, when Sacramento traded for Marquis Daniels's injured corpse just so that it could (barely) make the minimum team salary mandated by the league.

The amnesty rule benefits those most who try to "out-spend" other teams for players. There is no converse "amnesty" for the cheapskates like Sterling. I'm fairly certain that a minimum team salary will continue to be a part of the next CBA.