$42M > $24M. Les surely didn't make that trade to upgrade the roster - the Knicks had been begging teams to take Rice for months before the Rox came along. Not only was he washed up, he was still injured. In fact so much so that Les used the injury to haggle w/ the Knicks for cash considerations before the trade officially went thru.
Wasn't Ameche a "go to" player in Orlando a few years ago? He is an interesting guy, in 99 he averaged 10pts and 3 rebounds. He is from The United Kingdom, I think, which makes us almost as international as the Kings or the Mavericks. I love Glen, and consider him a friend, but he is injury prone and gives us little on defense. Cato would be a nice commodity in the eastern conference and now he is expendable. A Cuttino and Cato package would be attractive to any eastern conference team... question is which. Jim Jackson has always been a "nice" player, not known for being a great team guy and known to steal a girlfriend or two. He has killed us in years past, and reluctantly I admit he is an upgrade over Glen. Overall I think these moves position the Rockets to make a better moves, but if it doesn't occur, it will be interesting to see how it all unfolds.
One thing Amechi gives us is a bright guy and a good interview. I think he's supposed to be snappy dresser as well, but I could be wrong about that. As a basketball player...
I know. Instead of a packaging Mobley lets trade JJ to the Nets so he can be re-united with Kidd....and his woman! I know that is really in poor taste but just imaging if the possibility for a major implossion in New Jersey with those two on the same team.
The $6.5 million dollar trade exception is more valuable in a trade than Rice's expiring contract. Why? Because the team that trades for it doesn't have to take back salary, and can get luxury cap relief. To a team like a Portland or a New York, it would mean $13.0 million in savings (considering the dollar for dollar luxury tax). Plus, if we kept Rice until July 1st, we would have nothing to show for him come July 1st. We could not spend the $9 million slot next summer, because we are over the cap. We would still be left with only our $5 million middle class exception to spend. Given the projections that there will be no luxury tax next year (2004-2005), reducing payroll by dropping Rice's salary does not really help. But now we have a trade exception of $6.5 million through most of next summer. We can be a big free agent player, because we will be ahead of the sea of teams that only have the $5 million MCE to spend. A deal over seven years starting at $6.5 million adds up to a lot more than one starting at $5 million per year. The only teams that will be bigger players are teams that will be more than $6.5 million under the cap (which will be few). And the teams with payrolls that low (Utah, etc.), will probably be sorry teams, so unless they blow away our offer, we will have the advantage on them, too. As for giving up a future first round pick, that is the going rate for dumping salary of this magnitude. Hopefully, the Rockets will be a playoff team from here out, and this will be a low pick. I think it was a pretty saavy trade, if we follow up in the next year. Plus we guarantee this board will have a plethora of trade proposal threads for the next 12 months!
How far under the cap are we now? Can we spend say $3 million of the exception and not get hit with a luxury tax?
Houston chronicle: The Rockets picked up spending money by dealing veteran forward Glen Rice, then spent some of that cash by signing free agent shooter for hire Jim Jackson today. Rockets general manager Carroll Dawson said the deals were made to move the Rockets away from an expected luxury tax hit without hurting themselves and potentially strengthening the roster at small forward. "It's just so much easier to live under the cap," Dawson said. "If you can't do that, you try to live under the luxury tax (because of) the restrictions. This enabled us to get under the luxury tax and enabled us to get Jim Jackson." "Glen leaving left a hole. We had to do something. This enabled us to do both." The Rockets sent Rice, in the final season of a contract worth $9 million, to Utah in exchange for center John Amaechi, giving them a savings of $6.5 million. Having moved under the expected luxury tax threshold, they were free to sign Jackson. Chronicle file Yao Ming goes up over Sacramento's Jim Jackson for a rebound last season at Compaq Center. The Rockets signed Jackson today. The trade with the Jazz also gave the Rockets a $6.5 million trade exception, allowing them to take a player that makes as much as $6.5 million more than a player traded in any deal for the next 12 months. Though such a deal would return the Rockets to a luxury tax hit, the trade exception is considered valuable for future trades and especially when acquired after the summer free agency period because it could potentially be used in a sign-and-trade deal after next summer. The Rockets will also send the Jazz undisclosed "draft considerations" and cash, and the Rockets will receive a future second-round pick. Rice, who had been house hunting in Houston this week, said he was not ready to comment. "I'm still collecting my thoughts," he said. But Dawson said the deals were not made to move Rice, who had played for Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy for one season in New York, but to move his contract. Jackson, who will turn 33 this month, has averaged 15.5 points per game in his career, making 43 percent of his shots. He has also averaged 4.7 rebounds and 3.4 assists. Signed during the season by the Kings last season, he averaged 7.7 points, making 44.2 percent of his shots, 4.2 rebounds and 1.9 assists. Ameachi, 32, has averaged 6.2 and 2.6 rebounds per game in five NBA seasons with the Cavaliers, Magic and Jazz. He struggled badly as a free agent pickup in Utah, averaging two points and 1.5 rebounds last season.
My impressions toward this trade are generally impressive. Consider this: in a perfect world it would be us trading Rice for a first round pick, in which case we get a lottery pick (maybe as low as 1st overall, considering how much they suck) and a 9 million trade exception. But why would Utah help us? Although they won't be in contention for a long time they're still in the same conference and the rule of thumb is you never help a team in the same conference. Talent wise we're not going to be able to get much for an injury prone dino unless we package him with somebody else (eg. Cat/EG). Even then we wouldn't be able to get much. So Utah's the only team that can actually take him off our hands, hence, Amechi. For those that say we can just let Rice's contract run out, we don't know what the cap's gonna be next year, not to mention we don't even know if there's even gonna be a cap. Assuming it's the same as this year we'd still not have enough to sign anybody significant. As for Rice's outside shooting, he's streaky at best. Besides, I thought that's what we signed Pike for. In my opinion any ways, as somebody said already Jackson > Rice, especially if you consider the price.
If I read the chronicle article correctly, its a TRADE exception, meaning if we trade, say, Cuttino for somebody... their contracts don't have to match up... we're allowed to trade him for somebody that makes up to 6.5 Million more than him. (but, as we reach that 6.5 million, we would be eligible again to get hit by the luxury tax).
Until Les proves he's a Sterling, I like the move. It seems pretty likely that if you make a move that gives you 6.5 mil in trade exceptions, you are probably going to do something with it. Les and CD have made a bunch of moves in the past that I don't agree with. But, they haven't made many that make me think they are scared to spend money to win. I also love having JJ on the team. I watched a lot of Sac ball last year, and every game I saw, I mentioned how great it would be to have him on the Rockets. The guy was taking Hedo Turkoglus minutes. The Kings were CLEARLY the deepest team in the league last year, and he was great on both sides of the ball. I'm extremely unfamiliar w/ the backup center we picked up from the Jazz, but he doesn't sound promising. Bottom line to me is that it appears we are a better and deeper team right now than we were last year and it appears we aren't done dealing.
It doesn't work that way. It's a trade exception...it can not be used to sign FA's. We are still ~$5m above the cap. And IIRC, had dropped below the cap, we would have lsot part or all of the exception.
But where are we in relationship to the salary cap now? If this trade got us $3 million under the cap (random number for making a point) and we have a $6.5 million exception it sounds like we could: 1- not spend anything and play the season out $3 million under the cap 2- sign a $3 million free agent without incurring any luxury tax 3- do a $3 million or less lopsided traded without incurring any luxury tax 4- do a lopsided trade up to $6.5 million and pay luxury tax on $3.5 million Is this not right? Could the Rockets both stay under the salary cap and still make an additional trade or aquisition?
Now, I'm definitly confused (spending too much time watching MLB and NFL, I guess). The way Dawson was wording it, there seems like there's two limits... one is the salary cap, and the other is the threshold before the luxury tax is applied. We're still over the cap, but we're under the (estimated) threshold for the luxury tax. (since we're only worried about the tax, that's all that maters.) Now, how far below that threshold are we? good question. Its within 6.5 million.
You do not comprehend how it works. We are not under the cap. Had the trade exception taken us under the cap, we would have lost that portion of the exception in the amount we wnet under. IOW, you can't have it both ways...below the cap AND have an exception to the cap.
Ok... doc robert... forget what I just posted. Read GATOR's post. I forgot what an "exception" meant.
there is the salary cap which is somewhere around 42 to 43 million then there is the luxury tax threshold which i believe is somewhere between 53 and 55 million, correct me if i'm wrong. The rockets coming into today were right up against that luxury tax threshold. With the Glen Rice trade we are still about the salary cap but not as close to the luxury tax threshold.
OK... that's right. So my list should be modified. Let's say we are over the salary cap, but $2 million under the luxury tax cap. We can: 1- not spend anything and play the season out $2 million under the luxury tax cap 2- can't sign a free agent because we are over the salary cap 3- do a $2 million or less lopsided traded without incurring any luxury tax 4- do a lopsided trade up to $6.5 million and pay luxury tax on $4.5 million I guess the question is then turned into this- Can we still make a lopsided trade without going over the luxury tax? -------------------------------------------- I can't even balance my checkbook.
Thanks.... so all is not lost for those who are mad at Les and CD for being penny pinchers. We can still do a lopsided trade without going over the luxury cap. We don't have to spend the entire $6.5 million at one time.
I have the greatest respect for you, but I have a couple nitpicks. It would be 3 signings vs. Posey and two other roster-quality players (could we not at least have had one million dollar vet exception). Don't know if you took that into account. I was under the impression that a million or two could make a huge revenue difference given Les's CHOICE to remain away from luxury tax land. Sure, it's understandable to save money, but not what fans want to hear with the new arena and with Cash Cao Yao in a Rockets uniform. As for Rice, sure, you don't resign him at more than $1M, but I was under the impression there was some usefulness in letting his contract lapse, even if we couldn't pull off some SAR-type trade with his expiring contract. I was surprised to learn that JJ's 3-point shooting the last two years bested Rice, but he shot only one a game, so that may not be statistically significant. Like Rice, JJ is old and will be only a stopgap and not a long-term cog (like Posey could have been, but I must resist urge to digress). Standing pat also does not lose you a mid-first pick (let's face it, we can't expect to be lower than 18th this year, and that's without injuries). There's international gold there for those who know what they're doing. And now we can't use the subsequent year's first as a bargaining chip either. The trade exception is the key, and it had better be used well, or we just worsened our situation today.
