We have 4.5 mil this off-season

Does this mean we can obtain an high priced player (lets say he makes 9 mil) via a trade for a Rocket that makes about 4.5 mil?

 

Every point that aelliott makes is absolutely valid. There is just no way that the Rox have 4.5 million left over from the Pippen deal.

The only thing I can think of is that maybe he's thinking of the speculation of the Rox getting half of Chuckys 9 million dollar contract back to sign a free agent. You know a hardship claim like the Spurs pulled off. There was speculation that the league might ok such a free agent exemption for the Rox.

 

Oh yea, by the way ... he said its called a trade exception but the money can only be used to sign a free agent. They commented that it was weird. It's only called trade exception cause the money was left over, somehow, as a result of a trade.

A trade exception cannot be used to sign free agents. That's a league rule and it can't be circumvented by anything that you write into a contract. If Feigan said that we have a trade exception and it can be used to sign free agents, then I believe that he is wrong.

The only thing I can think of is that maybe he's thinking of the speculation of the Rox getting half of Chuckys 9 million dollar contract back to sign a free agent

I didn't think about that scenario, but Barkley's plan to play the final game of the season would have killed any chance for an injury exception.

 

Free-agent Forwards *under 30* who might accept 4.5 million:

Bo Outlaw
Gary Trent (Player option)
Austin Croshere (Player option)
Ben Wallace
Rashard Lewis
Kurt Thomas
Tariq Abdul Wahad (g/f)

 

So what of the Spurs and the few million they got to alleviate the loss of Sean Elliott? I know the NBA offered them an exception. I thought they used it, and now Elliott is playing again.

 

You only get a Disabled player exception if a player is injured before Dec 1 and judged to be out for the remainder of the year or if they're injured after Dec. 1 and judged to be out the entire next season. After the kidney transplant, everyone assumed that Elliott would miss the entire season. SA was given an exception and they used it to sign Samaki Walker. The fact that he's coming back this year won't affect the exception. In the past the NBA had been pretty stingy about giving out injury exceptions, now that the Elliott situation has happened, they might get even tougher.

 

I'm skeptical along with Aelliot and Dreamshake, since this one involves base-year compensation calculations. Plus, the claim about using it for free agents is mistaken.

With that said, I can't imagine Feigan saying this without be told by the Rockets. These calculations are too difficult unless you have real contract numbers to use.

Here's some truisms:

1. Aruba: there are no fancy "weird clauses" about Augmon and Shaw being released that could apply...The new CBA is all about closing loopholes. Besides, they cleared waivers and were picked up legitimately...happens every Oct with no exceptions being granted.

2. We can trade down in salary with no restrictions, but if that happened it would mean that Portland was trading up. Being way over the salary cap, they could only trade up 15%.

3. Now for the BYC consideration.
Go to FAQ #60 guys.

if Portland trades a Bird player (or extends a rookie-scale contract), salaries used for trade calculations are less than full salary--often half as much. Say Mobley was a Full Bird player this summer. Houston could sign him to $9M...correct. But, they can't trade him for a $9m player. He ONLY counts 50% new salary towards trades. Then prevents a loop-hole that would allow a team to re-sign a Bird player to inflated dollars just to get him to another player's price tag.

So...see how BYC makes it complicated.

Now...looking at the trade: Walt and Rogers both signed in '97,,,so they are not BYC anymore. too many years went by before the trade. Cato's didn't get an extension from Portland, so he is out of the BYC mix. So, that leaves Augmon, Shaw and Gray whose cumulative salaries don't even reach $4.5m.

Thus, I'm very skeptical of Feigan, here. Let's bounce this around a little, then post to the guru.

Here's a choice quote from the Internet's reigning Capologist guru: "Don't worry if BYC seems way too complicated -- everybody, the media included, seems to get it wrong. Just know that a large percentage of trade rumors from "reliable sources" are simply not possible because of the BYC rule."

 

aelliott...Thanks for the clairification.

heypartner...Now I remember why I got away from salary cap interperatation. Much like tax preparation its gets way too lengthy, and uses way too many unnecessary words.

 

Now I do not mean to be critical of anybody but to say a person who deals with Rudy and Cd virtually everyday, has more sources than we can imagine, and whose profession is dedicated to the NBA but mostly the Rockets is ridiculous. It is one thing to say another member of the BBS has no idea what he is talking about but to say we know more than somebody who deals with them everyday is getting kind of ridiculous. He broke the Pippen story, I think he knows the details more than we do. Anyways enough of that. Anybody know if we could package this with say another 3.5 million in salary space to get one of the major free agents? I don't know if we could do a sign and trade with it, we are not trading the exception just a player or draft pick. Anyways thanks for the news and I can't wait to see what develops.

 

4.5 million...sheesh...it is a bit small, but what the hell....sign DaDakota for 4.5 million.

I can bring it, at only 5'9" I think I can be very effective at the 3 spot. Just think of the advantage I have over all those tall in shape players.

I have spent YEARS honing my skills, and it is a known fact that in my HOOD, I am by far the quickest to the Nacho Cheese Dorito bag.

Not to mention, if they put a bowl of Chocolate Chip ice Cream on the rim, I am sure I just might be able to reach it (How much are those mini trampolines anyway?)

For 4.5 million a year, I am willing to give up my place in front of the TV, although I don't want to practice, and I should be able to ride a stationary bicycle (Hills are murder) like Rodman.

SIGN ME UP !!!

DaDakota


[This message has been edited by DaDakota (edited February 08, 2000).]

 

FAQ #80 is pretty good also.

Mango

 

Hmmm...I don't see how this could be possible.

Here's the explanation of the trade exception:

73. What is the traded player exception?

The Traded Player Exception is a credit that teams may use in order to help make future trades work under the salary
cap. Teams may acquire one or more players with this exception, have up to a year after the initial trade to use the
credit, and may add together their credits from different trades (this is the only time that multiple salary cap exceptions
may be combined).

A team receives this credit when it is over the cap and makes a trade and takes on less salary than it gives up.
Whatever the salary difference is, plus $100,000, is the credit that the team may use towards a future trade. For
example, if a team trades a $2 million player for a draft pick, it then has a $2.1 million credit that it may use in a future
trade. Note that this credit can be used for trades only -- it cannot be used to sign free agents.

A couple of observations:

1. No way could there have been a $4.5 Million dollar difference between Pippen's salary and those of the players we received. Houston an Portland were both over the cap,so the salaries had to be within 15%. Are you sure that Feigan wasn't talking about Indiana's trade exception? They've still got a $4.5 million trade exception with corresponds to the difference in the salary of Antonio Davis and the salary slot for the #5 overall pick (Bender).

2. Even if we had a trade exception, it can only be used in trades. This exception doesn't apply to signing free agents.



[This message has been edited by aelliott (edited February 08, 2000).]

 

RocketSiv,

I agree. Feigan would have to have been told this to make the claim.

But, I will reinforce one thing...using it on a free agent is mistaken!!! I won't argue with his numbers. But someone got the free agent part mistaken. Either Feigan, his source, or Aruba's ears.

You can only use the money on working out trades. If Feigan got everything else right, he's the man...cause it is hard to calculate this stuff without knowing the yearly salaries of each contract. The free agent part is just a small error in my book.

Trust me RocketSiv...this is a big Internet. There are true Capologist that study ONLY the CBA and go to those meetings and talk to the lawyers, GMs and Union heads. They are 99.9% correct in their interpretations. And their Internet FAQ is the most reputable thing out there for journalists and laymen.

 

Aelliot and Dreamshake

I got a reply from the guru...note I only send him questions with there is a consensus CBA question to ask. (Let's not flood him with questions.)

In summary, he says there is no way the Rockets have $4.5m for that trade, as we speculated. He did add that the trade exception can accumulate over several trades. So, Feigan can still be right about the numbers. Are there other trade downs that we made? At very tops, mathematically we could have gotten around $2M in trade exception for the Pippen deal (15% of salary plus $100K)

Here's the email exchange, just to make you confidence up about capology:

---------------------------------------
> xxxxx wrote:

> Guru,
>
> Johnathan Feigan, a usually accurate Houston Chronicle reporter,
> reported something very questionable to many of us at clutchcity.net.
>
> He said the Rockets have $4.5M trade exception from the Pippen trade.
> We don't see how this is possible, but trust that Feigan was probably
> told this by a team source.
>
> given some facts:
> 1. Portland was easily over the cap after the trade,
> 2. thus, 15% rule must have been in effect.
> 3. that adds up to only 15% of Pippen's salary that the Rocket's could
> have "traded down".
> 4. which equals less than $2M
>
> Question:
> ...the CBA is clear here, as we see it...whenever the 15% rule
> applies...you're not going to get more than 15% plus $100K "trade
> down" for a trade exception. Correct?
>
> Is there anyway possible that that the Trailblazers where under the
> cap after the trade, thus eliminating the 15% rule?
>
> Thx
> xxxx and others at clutchcity

Hi xxxx,

Your logic is correct. Both teams were over the cap when the trade went down. The trade exception occurs when a team takes on less salary than it gives up -- another team must absorb the salary difference. But if the trade takes one team over over the cap, the 15% rule applies. Assuming Cato, et. al. add up to less than Pippen's salary, Houston's trade exception would be Pippen's salary minus their aggregate salary plus $100,000; which in effect is 15% tops as you said.

So it is incorrect to say that the Rockets have $4.5M trade exception from the Pippen trade. However, teams can add up trade exceptions from different trades, so it's possible that the Rockets have a $4.5 million trade exception as an aggregate from multiple trades, one of them being Pippen's. Have the Rockets made any other trades where they took on less salary?

I know you trust that Feagan was probably told this by a team source, but reporters often get things wrong even when given the
correct information. I had a reporter tell me that Lakers GM Kupchack insisted to him that the $2 million exception could only be used every other year. Not an infallible lot, these reporters.



[This message has been edited by heypartner (edited February 09, 2000).]

 

Not that this needs any further endorsement, but I absolutely agree with aelliott on this.

The CBA is irrevocably clear on these matters.

It has been my experience that the closer you get to the action, either through the media contacts, the actual players and their unions/organizations and maybe to a greater extent ... the agents (because they will lie to thier dying mommas for a dollar) .... the farther you get from any real understanding of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

If you wish to know anything about the CBA or it's implications on a pending situation .... ask some of your brothers/sisters here. I guarantee you we have a better knowledge base and more visible avenue of perception on this BBS forum.