So if a team wanted to trade either of them as an expiring contract they could not use itto get a 15 million dollar a year player.
They don't count $15M for the purpose of a trade if that's what you mean. They count $8.3M but once we've used our cap space you can trade them and take back up to 150% of their outgoing salary. So, theoretically you could trade them for a player making just over $12M.
I would say practically speaking, their contracts make it more difficult to trade than a normal 8/8/8 player because there are plenty of cheap owners, hence limiting their market value. This issue also becomes more problematic next year, since any team that trades for Lin/Asik has to pay $7mil over cap number. At minimum $4mil if the Rockets include $3mil in the trade. For this offseason, actual salary payment would be 2yr/$20mil total, which isn't too bad. However,
That should not be the question. The question is whether he's worth it or not.... I don't think he is.
What was the point of this part of the labor agreement (the disparity of the cap hit if the Knicks matched)? Was it to make player movement more difficult?
Yes and Luxury taxes were a part of that. The owners originally wanted a hard cap to create parity in the league and so that there wouldn't be such an imbalance and leverage for bigger market teams. Also with a harder cap, teams would have lesser chance in building more super teams. But the final agreement was a soft cap, but a new luxury tax that included a repeater tax. The Knicks were already over the cap, so all they could do was match, but the deal was poisoned pilled had they done it. Not only does that $15 million apply, but it costs even more with all the additional tax penalties and repeater tax that would come through had the Knicks continued to stay over the luxury tax. Players like Lin, Novak, and Hickson's early bird rights also had to be settled in court since they were all picked up off waivers.
