GATER (and others) - I think there is some ambiguity on trading your $4.2 mil TPE. In using the TPE now (as opposed to simultaneously when the original deal was made) - you can only take back the $4.2 mil + $100K. On the surface, it looks like the most James could be given is a deal starting at $4.3 mil. I does not say anywhere that a player cannot be added to the TPE - it only says that you cannot do player + TPE in exchange for the usual 125% 100K - because this would be combining 2 exceptions. It means that the salary taken back has to be exactly the salary being sent out $100K. For example - if the deal is Luther Head ($1.048 mil) + TPE ($4.2 mil) then you can take back no more than $5.248 mil + $100k... or $5.348 mil. If Toronto were to sign MJ to a 5 year deal, starting at $5.348 mil with 10.5% raises per annum - it gets James the kind of contract he wants AND it gets him in Houston. $5.348 $5.909 $6.471 $7.033 $7.594 Total = $32.355 mil. It's possible that he agrees to something where he gets 0% raises in the last years, that the 5th year is a team option, etc... shaving the number back down towards $30 mil, or in reality, $24 mil since the team could not extend it to the 5th year.
You can't aggregate salaries with the exception like that. It's the main reason why these exceptions are so hard to use, and aren't facilitating trades left and right: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#69
Wow if thats true that really opens up some avenues i dont like trading lu-lu but we could quite possibly package the other Te from what you make it sound like and we would be right their! But are you 100% sure about this!
And according to Larry Coon's #72... It does NOT say that the $5 mil player and TPE cannot bring back a player making exactly $6,350,000 - because that IS allowed. I agree that it conflicts with the wording you quoted in #68 - so I checked the CBA itself, and nowhere does it say that you can't aggregrate the TPE with a player - what it does says is you can't use exceptions in aggregate. There's a world of difference.
Why in the world would you include a TPE in your scenario in the first place. By trading the $5M player and meeting the 125% + $100k rule, that trade can be done without the TPE. Plus, the team that trades the $6.35M player will generate a $1.35M TPE from THAT trade. Right?
I'm sure it's just an oversight. The way I've always understood the traded player exception to work is that you can't aggregate it with anything. Which is why they aren't a bigger part of the nba landscape.
I feel like we have no choice but to go after Mike James...whether it's the best thing for the team or not. We have to have another scorer.
I'm afraid you're mistaken on this one. TE's are like gold. Forget about the 125% rule for a moment & look at it straight up. If you have 2 TE's available to you for $3 mill & $5 mill each, you can only use one at a time. For example: Team "A" has a player that makes $13 mill a year & you have a player that makes $5 mill a year. You can not combine the 2 TE's ($3 mill + $5 mill) with the player ($5 mill) to arrive at the $13 mill salary. You'll have to pass on this deal. However, Team "B" has a player that makes $10 mill a year. In this case, you can send the player ($5 mill) & the $5 mill TE to Team "B" & complete the trade for the $10 mill player. The 125% rule makes it so that you don't have to match salaries exactly. Unless the rules have changed, that's how I understand it.
This is the heart of the matter. I have seen intelligent posters say you can't do this because you can't aggregate the TE with anything. I have seen intelligent posters say you can do what you describe as long as you don't use the 125% +/- 100K (aka "assigned player exception"). I've read the CBA and I've e-mailed Coon. I still don't know what the correct answer is.
I can't post a thread yet.... http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2006/07/shane_battier_a.html Justice' latest Shane love rant.... Enjoy! Yuck...
He talks about him in the latest entry on his blog. Like we already will have him. The Dallas papers say the Mavs will get him, they have offered more, and it is just about how long the Dallas contract will be, not the amount.
If James for some reason doesnt pan out, I think we should look at Flip Murray. He played nicely alongside LeBron this season and I think he could be a nice scoring threat for the Rockets.
That was in response to what this has to do with James. That ought to clear it up a little, besides I can't post the thread, Gater - you do it!
Of course, in the example above, the comparison is sort of moot. The point is that sometimes teams DO get creative an actually make multiple smaller tradesand and announce them as one, etc, to take advantage of certain rules. Suppose its a $3 mil player and $3 mil exception. If the letter of the law is applied, it means that the TPE + 100K is the singular exception that may be used and that the usual TE (125% +100K) cannot be used. If it's dollar for dollar (or close to), then it appears to me that the criteria have been met so that 2 exceptions are not being used in aggregate.
That seems to make sense. The trade exception is technically a "non simultaneous" trade. Back when you acquired the trade exception, you would instead had the option to add to the trade package in place by sending out a $5 million player, and receiving a $10 million player in exchange, in lieu of obtaining a $5 million trade exception. So to have a rule that allows a "non simultaneous" trade, you should be able to do the same thing for up to a year later.
