BTW, does anyone know when t-opts have to be exercised? (just as an example) Could the Rockets trade Cato for Chicago's Miller and then t-opt him for cap? Achebe, Nope. Chicago isn't allowed to trade Miller unless they first exercise the option year clause. Here's the applicable rule from the CBA: Article VII, Section 8 item (c) A Team cannot trade any player after the NBA trade deadline occurring in the last Season of the player's Contract, or after the NBA trade deadline occurring in any Season that could be the last Season of the player's Contract based upon the exercise or non-exercise of an Option or Early Termination Option. ------------------
aelliott, Are you saying that USA Today gets yearly salaries from the NBA league office? Rockets make a point of never publishing those. Those are confidential, imo. Can you point us to the statement of authenticity by USA Today? Bender's statement (as I recall) says she collects them throughout the year from articles which mainly only name the total compensation. That's what we see most of the time in signing announcements. If a USA today did list real numbers, I don't think she would have ever started her table. Just like if the media reported about the CBA correctly, Coon wouldn't have felt a need as much to publish the FAQ Her cato and mobley numbers are from me with cc.net's joint confirmation based on the original Feigan articles, not USA Today. She gave me a thank you email. Now I could be wrong about them, because there could be a bonus in there, or the starting salary could be higher with less raise, and then RealGM would be wrong as well. The Rocket's never post the salary info. Feigan is our best man, and he only gave us a total compensation number. The Carlos Rogers salary that she gives over time is proof of that. She cannot be mathematically correct on $2.3m and the $13.3m. Oh,,,there is one very convoluted way that reminds me of Occam's Razor,,,that makes her close this year but still leaves her wrong since 1998. Carlos's contract might not be guaranteed this year, so the bonus in my table would be compressed to 4 yrs. Aelliott, Bender is wrong sometimes. With Rogers, she is definitley wrong from 1998-2001, or her Total Compensation number is wrong all along. She reports that the numbers are not accurate and cannot be, but she is good about making changes if you can give her a newpaper article and sound math. Because of that, Davo decided to just start tracking himself. imo, Bender's numbers are generally as off as cc.net, but we can make changes faster. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited April 24, 2001).]
Benders Statement of Accuracy As you can see, the Internet is feeding her information. She gets most from the NBA Daily News--as you can see in her tops links. She encourages people to send her newspaper articles, which usually just state total pay. I always accompany that with math for each year that assumes the max raise, and tell her how I got the raise. She has always used it. This is why we need Davo's site, and this is why we should contribute to it. He is more accessible that Bender. So, as for my contribution, I consider Bender's number for Roger's way off base, maybe by as much as $1.1m next year. And I have provided two tables of math. One with a maximum raise of 20% and one with a lessor raise but a max bonus spread over time. pick your favorite table. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited April 24, 2001).]
Aelliott, Davo and NIKE Bender has even uglier numbers for Walt. imo, we cannot use her Walt numbers. Are you guys interested in trying to agree on something. Aelliott, your 12.5% raise on Walt is incorrect math. You cannot apply a raise percentage on a previous year, because that would constitute a compounded interest formula (which is against the rules of the CBA). Walt's Salary Scale with a 4th Yr at $4,250,000 Ooh, I made a math mistake, but fixed it. Here are the salaries for Walt if we are to believe '99-00 numbers by Bender, like Aelliott thinks we should. The raise is a strange 7.14285714285714 repeating fraction, but if gives us a nice and clean starting salary of $3.5m and raises of $250K <pre><font face="courier"> $3,500,000 + raises of $250K $3,750,000 $4,000,000 $4,250,000 $4,500,000 This is too aesthetic not to be correct! </pre></font> The Other Calculations using Bender's Numbers are Probably Wrong Using 12.5% simple interest, Bender's number of $4,250,000 for 00-01 would never happen. I provide the 12.5% calculation below. Walt's Salary Using Bender's $3.750m base Bender's numbers for Walt use a 3% simple interest raise if we are to believe her original starting salary. She has him starting at $3,750,000 with an NBA Daily News brief stating the contract "rumored to be 5 yrs for $20m". The math for raises to equal $20m over 5 years is this: <pre><font face="courier"> $3,750,000 $3,875,000 $4,000,000 $4,125,000 $4,250,000 </pre></font> See, her starting salary and next year's salary cannot both be correct. And notice she has him making $3m one year on her salary pages??????, which is totally wrong (as you can't ever go down in salary). Her numbers are all over the place. In fairness to Davo, she had Walt at $3,750,000 in 1999-00, which requires his calculations. But she had him at that price in 1997-98 as well, which can't both be correct. imo, that starting salary is bogus, and applying 12.5% raise to it for next year is not only further inaccuracy, but against the rules of the CBA for no compounded interest. The math is simple. You must understand, raises do not flex. So, when you know the total compensation, there can only be ONE starting salary per raise percentage you use, thus all other years fall into a linear progression. If Aelliott wants to apply 12.5% to Walt's salary numbers this year, then we really have to plug in one starting point base salary. Walt's Salaries with 12.5% raises <pre><font face="courier"> $3,200,000 base with $400,000 raise $3,600,000 $4,000,000 $4,400,000 $4,800,000 </pre></font> As we can see, Aelliott is not off by much THIS YEAR, but that's because he got lucky with a compound interest formula, note how the 4th years and all other years diverge greatly with Bender. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited April 24, 2001).]
Can you point us to the statement of authenticity by USA Today? Bender's statement (as I recall) says she collects them throughout the year from articles which mainly only name the total compensation. That's what we see most of the time in signing announcements. If a USA today did list real numbers, I don't think she would have ever started her table. Just like if the media reported about the CBA correctly, Coon wouldn't have felt a need as much to publish the FAQ HP, Here's the first paragraph of Patricia Bender's 2000-2001 salary page: "The basis of this information comes from USA Today (12/8/00) [they rounded to the nearest $10,000], but I have changed/adjusted a number of players' salaries concerning information I know (lots of Mavs salaries, 1st round draft picks from the past 3 seasons, minimum, ...)." http://www.dfw.net/~patricia/misc/salaries01.txt ------------------
Note she says there that she uses her Mavericks numbers over theirs. And also that they got "Rookie Scale Numbers" wrong. How could they do that??? It is all rumor and leaks, as she says in her Contract page, http://www.dfw.net/~patricia/contracts I'd still like to see how USA Today got their numbers? I'm willing to bet they scraped that from RealGM who got it from Bender...in a viscious circle. If you look through the NBA New Daily's she reposts, you'll see that whats gets reported is Total Compensation, at the time of signings, not yearly. This proves once again that the media and Patricia disagree, and further the USA Today apparently gave her no reason to adjust Roger's total contract, which cannot be correct with the yearly, as I've shown. She's said in the past that she is hoping someone else would make this easier for her; the USA Today did. But not accurrate enough to report her beloved Mavs' very well. So, did they get our Rocket's correct??? We don't know. I don't see how we can trust yearly salaries when teams don't give them out, yet at the same time question Bender's total contract numbers which is more frequently reported. Roger's numbers are messed up for sure. But we do have solid numbers showing Walt will be paid $4.5m. So you can back him off of $4.75m [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited April 24, 2001).]
here's the USA Today Report http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nba/salaries00.htm One guy, 'eh, versus a hobbyist who is a valued member of a major bball research association. If you look at that and several other sites before this, you will see this one sportswriter is cutting and pasting. You should check some of his CBA explanation. Not very good. No one here is adding Carlos up correctly. $1.9 start with 100K increments does not add up to $10m!! It adds up to $10.5M. This shows they are all just borrowing from each other. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited April 24, 2001).]
heypartner-It looks like you're right on for Carlos (though, it may not affect our cap, since it seems we have a team option). As far as contract length, in the article I noted, they also gave contract length/amount, and did say 5/13.3 for Los, as well as 5/20 for Walt. Trust those to be accurate. heypartner-What would Walt's contract be like if it is assumed a 5 million dollar end year, like the Chronicle claims? ------------------ "That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.
NIKE, RealGM and the Chronicle seem to be using the same numbers. Bender and USA Today disagree, as they shows $4.25M for this year, which I've proven must mean $4.5m for next year. The RealGM and Chronicle final numbers together with the Total Numbers mathematically work out to be a raise of $500K per year. Like this: <pre><font face="courier"> '98 3,000,000 '99 3,500,000 '00 4,000,000 '01 4,500,000 '02 5,000,000 ---------------- $20,000,000 </pre></font> That represents a raise of 16.667%, which was definitely allowed in the previous CBA. So, it is all a matter of who has the correct starting salary between Bender/USA Today or RealGM/Chronicle. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited April 24, 2001).]
