don't get what you are talking. let's say a team is still 3 mil under the cap. the team wants to sign a fa. what the max the team can offer?
What do you mean by still. Assume a salary cap of $50 million. If a team had $38 million in committed salaries and the signs a $9 million player, they have $3 million left to offer. In order to sign that $9 million player, they had to renounce their salary exceptions. This would've been a similar scenario to Charlotte, having used most of their space to resign Okafor. Conversely, if a team entered the offseason with $47 million in committed salaries, they have 2 options -- use their mid level exception (~$5.5m) or use the $3 million in cap space. Obviously, most people in the 2nd scenario would use the exception. However, there are some scenarios where the team would rather have the cap space, as it is more versatile (can be used to accept salary in trades).
exactly what i said. cats used their cap space for landry. that's the max they can offer unless cats want to go with MLE and forfeit its cap space. if cats had gone with MLE, its cap space would be gone too. i don't know why the other poster said i was wrong.
The simplified version of calculating cap room is: Room under the Cap = The Cap - (salaries due + exceptions) If you are $3m under the cap following that calculation, then the team can spend up to $3m plus the money reserved for exceptions, but you forego the use of the exceptions (you rescind them). The exceptions merely convert to pure cap room spending money. If you are not under the cap following that calculation, then you have to rescind exceptions to get under. Why would a team do that? Well, one answer is because pure spending money has no restrictions. For instance, MLE's must be for at least 2 yrs and not used in SnTs. The whole point of adding exceptions to salaries due is to prevent teams from saying to one player that they only have $3m to spend, because they want to reserve their full MLE for someone else. You can't do that. There is no double dipping. You can't have cap room one day, spend it, then say the next day, now I have exceptions for being over the cap.
I didn't think I was disagreeing. I was more trying to clarify. You said: <i>it's very rare a team which still has 3 mil under the cap use MLE before spending 3 mil</i> Your wording seemed off to me. What I thought you were describing is not "rare," it is impossible. That is, if they spend the $3m, that don't have an MLE.
Well, I cannot see your viewpoint. The conspiracy you are suggesting is collusion. imo, that is a fireable offense, as it puts the owner in jeopardy to get penalized severely. Say a trader for a large bank trades the bank's assets based on insider information and gets caught. The bank will get penalized, and the bank would fire the trader. same applies here. If what you said were true (illegal collusion to control the market based on insider information) and Les found out, he needs to fire Morey, come clean with David Stern, and hope Stern doesn't invalidate Landry's contract. Morey would forefeit any guaranteed salary in his contract for breaking league rules. do you now see my viewpoint?
