[ClutchFans] BimaThug: Houston Rockets Salary Cap Update

YOUR ADMITTING THERE RIGHT! YOUR ADMITTING THERE RIGHT! ALEXANDER NEVER PAID TAX AND NEVER WILL! ROCKET NO CAN GET SUPERSTAR AND NO CAN PAY TAX!

 

Why am I not the least bit surprised by this post, CH? :grin:

 

Hahahahahahahahhahahaha.

My expert Analysis on this post.

 

Bima,

I have been saying the exact same thing you have for over a year.

I believe they will try to get someone, but not being able to, will squeeze like hades to get under the tax.

I also don't think their targeted players are as many as folks think on here, maybe as low as 2.

So, I expect, given the odds that they will try to get under the tax line like they always do.

And don't worry, you are welcome on the side of "right" any time you like.

Carl, however, has to keep himself on the side of "Johnson" which he is so enamored with and is not welcome.



DD

 

DD, please don't tell me that you foresaw Les shelling out this much money for Luis and Kyle AND signing a guy like Brad Miller to almost the full MLE. "Wanting to get below the tax threshold" is not some revelation on your part. Any idiot (including both of us) can say that and be right.

Also, for as much (unwarranted and irrational) criticism as Les gets for never having paid the tax, this would mark the first season in which Les would actually have to part with some significant assets in order to accomplish this feat.

My disagreement is not so much with you as it is with leebigez, who has nothing but "haterade" for Les on the tax issue.

I honestly think that Les will be (relatively) DISAPPOINTED if he ends up avoiding the tax, because it will mean that he lost out on adding another star player to the Rockets.

 

Because hi quality humans make hi quality posts. Low qwality humans, on the other hand, ignore reality and believe in fantasies of Spanoulis' greatness.

Back to your post. a few thoughts:

(1) I took a look at Hoopshype's salaries list, and did a VERY rough estimation of tax to be paid if everyone stays at the same salary level.. Seems like teams will pay a total of about $80 mil in tax under such a scenario and the tax distribution is about $2.6 mil per team.

Chances are the number will be lower since t's more likely for teams currently over the limit to get closer to or below the limit than it is for them to take on further salary.

(2) It seems that even after shedding Jeffries, they will need to shed more than just Taylor (making less than $800K) to get under the threshhold. After trading Andersen, I think they are still about $8.5 mil over (and this is without accouting for non-guaranteed deals for Harris and Johnson) and Jeffries only makes $6.88 mil. Am I missing something?

 

I think you are correct here, but I also think that Les knows what the owners are planning regarding the CBA, they will leave themselves an out, they always do, so any tax hit, I would expect to be relegated to this year only.

Why am I not surpised that a "Van Gundier" nuthugger would exaggerate to try to make a point?

Nuthugging, and making jokes about nuts and genetalia is what you do.....it is who you are.....you go girl !

DD

 

Sorry for derailing the thread, Bimathug.

Just want to make one quick observation: I've made jokes/puns about multiple things (as have many others). Somehow, some people seem to focus on, obsess and get sensitive over those relating to certain topics.

Anyhow, I'd rather talk about something other than how some people would "rate" the quality of my jokes. Nothing more on this from me. Back to regularly scheduled discussion.

 

always a good read BT
cut clear

 

C'mon company man,lol. I just tell it like it is as petey greene would say. Bima, i get lazy and in my wording and just spit it out how i feel about situations. You my friend, have the gift of gab and make the natives feel at ease :grin: . I don't hate on les and the tax issue and i was very surprised that they coughed up that kind of money to lowry of all people. Just as i said before in an earlier post, i think or was hoping the rockets could've have landed the sessions/hollins deal vs miller and lowry deals which would have saved the team money big time. In regards to les and the tax issue, I'm always into the show me type of mindset. While people were patting les on the bat in the offseason, he has been clear he will pay for a special player and special team, not average on both fronts. Les will put the order down to get under the tax with this current squad. Now, if they can land granger or iggy which are upgrades, then fine, but until he proves it, i doubt the team will pay tax and thats not a bad thing. Why pay tax on a 50 win 5 seed with no shot?

I'm taking sig request for you. Even if i wrong and i may well be, its all in fun anyway like the sig bet with my man durvasa.

 

I think the number may be around $7.1M (maybe a bit more) after the non-guaranteed contracts are removed. But the fact remains that another salary (in addition to Jeffries's) will have to go. Jermaine Taylor is the likely choice, unless the Rockets can make a minor move to shed that extra bit of salary. This all assumes that the Rocket don't add anyone at the end of the year like they did with Harris and Johnson, so that $7.1M figure may be higher. Dumping Jeffries is going to be a b*tch, though.

What "out" are you talking about? The owners are the ones who supposedly WANT the luxury tax as a control on player salaries. The players union would be DELIGHTED if there was some "out" that encouraged owners to spend more on player salaries. There is no one-time "Amnesty Rule" (as in the last CBA) that would really help the Rockets, either, since there won't be a single player on the 2011-12 roster that Les would want to waive solely for tax relief. While I believe the owners are eventually going to win out in the end on the next CBA, NOBODY knows what it will look like.

 

You are right about the numbers, I think it's around $7.5 mil, meaning Jeffries + an under $1 mil contract would do it.

Who/what exactly gets involved in such a tax-relief move probably depends on a number of factors, like who is in the rotation, how the team is doing, how the Knicks are doing (affecting 2011 pick), and what teams still have cap room/trade exception to take a guy for 1/2 a season. Too early to anticipate.

One scenario I am thinking about is that Taylor might actually be the "asset" used to dump Jeffries if he's playing fine in limited minutes but the team thinks he's replaceable. The one example I had in mind was Maynor+Harpring to Oklahoma City. Maynor, playing well in a backup role, was sent with Hapring (earning close to $7 mil, but 80% insured). OKC ate $1.4 mil of Hapring's salary + about $800 Maynor made. Utah saved the $2.2 mil in salary and $7.8 mil in tax money. (I don't believe cash was involved).

Rockets can structure something that is essentially economically identical by including some cash if Jeffries is owed less than $3 mil at the deadline.

 

i am thinking jeffries case might be different from hapring. jeffries is still a serviceable player, or a solid bencher in an exaggerated way. trading him to a team with cap space and needing a big to enforce its front line is feasible. plus, his contract will be expired at the end of this coming season. well, hapring was injured and is one step away from retirement. to shed his contract from the cap, jazz definitely had to add an asset to compensate whoever takes him.

 

An out like they had with the last CBA, the Michael Finley type of out, or that teams over the cap have 5 years to get under it.

Something like that. The owners will leave themselves an out.......at least I think they will.

DD

 

The "Michael Finley type of out" IS the Amnesty Rule. Again, I don't think that would help the Rockets next year, as there is no "Michael Finley-type" player on the roster for next year who the Rockets would want to part with (maybe Brad Miller if he's totally washed up).

The "5 years to get under the cap" thing would be if there were a hard SALARY CAP put in place. Something like that would obviously be a necessity, since several teams (like the Lakers) could not possibly comply with an immediately imposed hard cap. But we are talking about the LUXURY TAX, here.

I still don't understand what you mean by "an out" for Les under the new CBA. The non-tax-paying owners sure as hell aren't going to vote to abolish the luxury tax. Hell, I bet Les doesn't want to abolish it either. I've heard Daryl Morey speak about how he wishes there were a hard cap (which the luxury tax almost accomplishes) so that the more well-run teams could more easily outpace their rivals.

 

I mean that teams that are OVER the tax will not have to pay Lux tax for the next 5 years to give them time to get UNDER it.

Thus, if the Rox do pay the tax, I believe it is a one year aberation.

DD

 

Battier,jeffries,taylor,and hayes are viable players to get traded to get under the tax. The cavs could swap battier and tayor for parker and that would basically put the rox under the tax and give them an asset in parker. The clippers are another team with capspace who could take on one of the expirings. The kings still have cap space and could use a vet to go along with the youth for 1 yr. The large number of teams with capspace and no big summer will make it easier to move players in the last year of their contract.

 

That will not happen, my friend. Maybe there is some minor relief for some of the teams who would otherwise be stuck in luxury tax hell for years. But nothing so drastic as completely eliminating the luxury tax for all teams for an extended period of time (to the extent that the luxury tax continues to exist in place of a "harder" cap).

First of all, a Battier/Taylor for Parker trade would still leave the Rockets about $3.5M over the tax threshold. What do you do then? Trading Hayes isn't enough to get all the way below the tax. It would have to be Hayes and Jordan Hill or Hayes and Patrick Patterson. Frankly, it wouldn't even be worth it. And you'd still find the same problem trading Jared Jeffries, although at least they could take back some salary in that trade. But your plan doesn't exactly work. $3.5M is not "basically under the tax".

As far as "dumping" Battier on a team like the Kings or the Clippers (a little salary may need to come back), I think you (surprise!) underestimate the value that Morey places on Shane. His leadership is immeasurable and his defense is stellar. They likely won't want to just dump him. And I don't think many other teams will value Battier highly enough to part with assets in the process of taking on his salary.

Like Scola and Lowry, I think the Les absolutely loves Shane. He has been a face (A face, not THE face) of this franchise for the past four seasons, has become actively involved in the community and in charitable organizations around town. That love may translate into Les being willing to pay some tax to keep Shane if necessary (just like he's willing to "overpay" for Luis and Kyle). It may be irrational (although I'm not saying that it is), but it very well could play out that way.

 

The Rockets would be under the cap with Battier/Taylor for Parker. You are just making that up.

Bima's update says we already had $81.65 mil in salary before the Andersen trade and the luxury tax is $70.307 mil. We lose the $2.5 mil, and we are still at nearly $80 mil.

$81.65 mil (team salary) - $2.5 mil (Andersen)= $79.15 mil

$79.15+ $2.86 mil(Incoming Parker)= $82.01 mil
$82.01 mil - $7.35 mil (Outgoing Battier) - 0.78 mil (Outgoing Taylor) = $73.88 mil.

 

Great post, Bima. I think folks sometimes discount the influence Les has on the organization now that Morey is the GM. You may be right about Shane. You certainly are right abut Luis and Kyle. Alexander made it clear that we were going to retain them, and retain them we did, despite the high cost. While I haven't heard a flat statement of support for Shane similar to what we heard about the other two guys, I can see how you'd have that impression. Battier is one of the faces of the franchise. I hope he ends up working for the Rockets in some capacity down the road, after his playing career is over. Having said that, if the right deal were to come along that would clearly benefit the team, I suspect Les would be willing to wave goodbye.