[ClutchFans] BimaThug: Houston Rockets Salary Cap Update

what is this marketing for the masses crap? Noone in houston outside of the clutchfans nerds gives a rats ass about the luxury tax nor should they. You think les told morey to go make all the clutch members salary cap-conscious geeks happy and let the media know about their intentions of going into tax territory? So that they can sell a more tickets? Are you kidding me?

Do you think it's financially responsible to dish out mle's every year stromile swift style so that we can have a payroll of "pretty good players going into their prime"? Thats a load of horse manure. Pretty good players going into their prime usually get overpaid - more than a mle type deal. Go back to these last few years and tell me which players we "missed out" on by letting another team sign them. I mean just name one!

 

Not me, posters on this board. The conept is the rockets shouldnt dump shane or jeffries because it will hurt the rox chances to get iggy or granger. I contend the rox can salary dump shane or jared along with taylor and still have enough players to get iggy or granger if its possible. Those teams if they want to deal their star players will want expirings,young players, and picks. I'm not saying this is how it will happen, but here is an example. I'm doing this off salary memory, so give me a break.

Jeffries,taylor,cash, and the rockets pick in 2012. That move gets the rockets under the cap.

Battier,ariza,patterson,and the knicks 2012 for granger or iggy.

Why would the rockets do either trade? The first trade gets them under the cap and the 2nd trade gets them a star player and upgrades the position. Why would the clipps do the first trade? They can absorb the salary, get money and a first rd pick. Why would indy or indy give up their best player? They're going nowhere fast with those guys, they get a young wing who can come off the bench or start for mle money. They also get a 7m+ expiring good guy,a first rd lotto pick, and the knicks 1st rd pick.

How does it look now?
Brooks/lowry
martin/chase
iggy or granger/chase
scola/hill/hayes
yao/miller

Is that a better team than previous? Yes. Is it a championship team? Dont know, but neither is the current squad.

 

I don't think you finished typing this out. Doesn't say what team and for whom you are trading with.

 

The first trade keeps the Rockets over the luxury tax. The Clippers can only get $3 mil in cash considerations to cover $7.7 mil in salaries(Jeffries $6.9 mil + Taylor 0.8 mil ). The Rockets 2012 1st round pick costs them $4.7 mil. If they had bought a 1st round pick, it would cost only $3 mil.

$4.7mil for a pick vs $3 mil pick. Clippers GM might be bad, but I don't think they want the right to overpay for a late 1st pick by nearly $2 mil, when the usual cost is $3 mil. If they don't have the 2 roster spots, they will also have to buy out Jeffries, Taylor, or their other players.

It's a lose/lose trade for everybody involved.

 

IMHO there is a difference with the way you and Bima view things. Bima's talking about the team's willingness to pay, while you are insisting the team will do whatever it takes to get under the cap as long as it won't hurt the team.

Those two are not mutually exclusive, as The Rockets may be willing to pay the tax but its also understandable they'd rather not pay it. What Bima is saying is that barring some magical trade thats lopsidedly in favor of us, the Rockets will be paying the tax next year. However, I think its also fairly obvious that the Rockets will also be doing everything in their power to make that magical trade happen so they won't have to pay. Its not like DM said "We'll pay the lux tax even if we don't have to!?!?!" lol.

Finally, just because Les got some $$$ doesn't mean he's obligated to spend it. Saying "he made money off insurance" doesn't mean he has to spend it on picks. Its 100% his own prerogative, so it doesn't take away from les at all.

 

Have the Rockets ever mentioned collecting insurance on Yao? The NBA insurance company can exclude 14 players each year and that list changes annually. Do we even know if Yao was covered these past couple of seasons?

 

I'm trying to get what youre saying,lol. Let me start with the clippers trade that would basically get the rox under the cap.

The clippers payroll is at 47m or a 58m possible cap. The rockets are at 77m if i'm not mistaken. The clippers really have 0 reason to help the rockets other than to get picks and talent. They can absorb jeffries and taylor's deal for nothing. Hypothetically and looking back last year when ok city took the burden of harprings contract that cost utah maynor. The pick and cash were just sweetners. This would get the rox down to right at 70m on a 69.8 lux tax threshold.

The 2nd trade involved getting a star. I like both iggy and granger as players and both would upgrade the wing. Iggy makes 12m and granger 10m. Since both teams are over the cap, the salaries have to be within 25%. In a nutshell, iggy will cost u 9m in salary and granger 7.75. So in short,shane,trevor,patterson and the knicks pick in 2012 for iggy and say battie is real even in terms of money. Indy deal would be pretty close to the philly deal.Shane,patterson or hill and the knicks pick in 2012 for granger fits money wise also.

I'm not saying any of this will happen, i can see the outline if given the chance.

 

I see you working there, leebigez. But I think BetterThanEver's point is that the Clippers would still have to pay the SALARIES of Jeffries and Taylor. That's not "nothing". Yes, the trade may work under the salary cap; but the Clippers need a financial incentive to make that trade. BetterThanEver's point is that, if that trade is made this offseason, the dollars just don't add up for the Clippers. Now, if the Clips add no salary before February, a trade like that might work at the February trade deadline. I haven't checked the numbers, though.

And, in response to DD's "OH PLEASE" with a million exclamation points replying to my point about avoiding the tax leading to getting Chase Budinger, I ask, "OH PLEASE WHAT???" Chase was the THIRD pick purchased in that draft by Les. Do you honestly think that, if Les had paid the luxury tax in 2008-09, Les still would have bought THREE picks? Remember, the bill for that tax would have come the week after the draft, so also look at it from a cash flow perspective as well. One or two picks, maybe. But probably not three. Feel free to disagree with me on that. But I think you're being a bit naive (especially for someone who calls Les's willingness to pay the tax "BS") regarding how willing Les would have been to spend on a third pick after being stuck paying tax.

 

The Lux tax might have hindered his ability to buy a pick, but I think the insurance money he got was a much greater influence on the team buying the picks.

That money was directly added to the bottom line.....

I am not saying they should pay the tax, I am just pointing out that they always "SAY" they are going to pay it, and scramble like mad to avoid it.

But to your point about buying picks, the fact that they thought they might have to pay the tax this year probably stopped them from getting any extra 2nd round picks.

My only point is that Les is a nice owner, but he is not on the level of a Mark Cuban who will take on salary to try to win, year in and year out.

I am looking at the team's actions, not listening to their words.....

DD

 

Didn't the Rocket buy picks in years past, either soley with cash or with cash+future picks, even when there was not an insurance payout?

I think that's how they got the picks that ended up being Landry, Newley, Leunen, etc.

 

My point was not that paying the tax (while still getting insurance money) would have prevented the Rockets from buying ANY picks. It was that, because the Rockets were so much more in the black from avoiding the tax, they were more willing to buy a THIRD pick. If they pay the tax, a good chunk of that insurance money goes to pay the tax, IMHO. Then, there is far less "allocated" to buying picks. Maybe they still buy the rights to Taylor (who they appear to have had pegged as a early to mid-20s type of talent). Maybe they even shell out for Llull's rights (as a nice talent to stash overseas). I also think that David Andersen may have been at least discussed with Atlanta as an option at center (with the known cost being cash and a future pick) prior to the draft. But I just don't see them buying a THIRD pick if they had paid the tax.

The fact that you don't see the connection, frankly, surprises me.

 

Of course I see it, but it is moving the football.....and not germaine to what we are talking about.

I don't want them to pay the tax either, unless they get a superstar player.....

We are actually on the same page, I am only saying....don't listen to Morey when he pats Les on the back for his willingness to pay the tax, or buy the picks.....it is 100% marketing for the masses.

DD

 

Alexander also isn't the billionaire Cuban is. A very large chunk of Alexander's wealth is tied up in the perceived market value of the Rockets, probably somewhere around half a billion dollars. That's wealth on paper, unless he sells the team. That's not wealth sitting around in securities, bonds, and bank accounts, wealth he can tap into rather easily and spend, if he were of a mind to do so, as Cuban can. Les is certainly rich, but he's pretty far from Cuban rich, DD. I don't think it's a good comparison. As you put it, he's not on that level, but it is a different level entirely from the one you're speaking of.

 

I agree, but that money tied up in the franchise's value is accessible as he can borrow against it, or leverage it in multiple ways.

I like Les as the owner, think he is great. I also like Morey, a lot.

There really is no quarrel here at all, other than me trying to say...follow what they do, and not listen so much to what they say.

DD

 

It is one thing for an owner to be generous enough to spend money to win, but to actually go into debt is a bit unrealistic, no?

 

Let's put it this way, I'd be stunned if Morey hurt the team in order to get under the tax.

 

In fairness to DD and leebigez on this point, it wouldn't be Morey behind any such hypothetical move. It would be Les.

 

Exactly my point, it has never been Morey, it has always been Les, I think Les gives Morey a budget and they do the best they can under that budget.

The fluffy talk notwithstanding.

DD

 

Let's put it this way, I'd be stunned if Les hurt the team in order to get under the tax.

 

A few things:

1. Who buys season tickets on the basis that the Rockets are or are not paying tax? If it's a PR/marketing move, I am not sure how effective you can reasonably expect it to be if we are just talking about cash. It doesn't seem like anyone here particularly cares, for example.

2. To me, the "we're going all in" or "we plan on paying tax" talk really translates to "We plan on using our expiring contracts as part of a package to get a significant talent upgrade, and we are not afraid to pay tax to do it." What they are selling is the potential for a talent upgrade (and the fact that they have assets to do it), which we can reasonably expect to make a difference to fans thinking about buying tickets since it affects the quality of the team and the fan's experience.

[Edit: Note that the team is not promising that they will for sure get that upgrade. Any rational person would know that they can't guarantee, say, Granger or CP being available (let alone available to the Rockets). They are promising, however, to try to do it without consideration of the tax consequences.]

3. So, are the Rockets really trying to be misleading when discussing the willingness to pay tax? I don't think so if we understand their statements in the proper context.

I mean, I'd feel cheated if someone good is legitimately "gettable" and the Rockets declined solely because of the tax. However, will anyone feel particulary happy about the Rockets keeping their promises if couldn't land a talent upgrade (CP, Anthony, Granger, Iggy, etc.) and decides to just keep Jeffries on the roster for the hell of it instead of dumping him for a modest price like a late first round pick?


I really don't see why people insist the Rockets are lying and getting agitated about it.