[NY Daily News] Nets may waive Padgett

I dont know man, probably because everybody is hatin on me in the "Yao named NBA 3rd team".. all I was trying to say is Shaq deserves the thing because of his past (I know it has none to do with this season, but he still gets respect from everybody)... everybody went crazy on me...

 

I always thought that TEs could not be combined but they could be split up. In other words, from our standpoint we could take the $4.2 and split it up to acquire multiple players.

From New Jersey's perspective they are trading salary for salary and they just have to stay within the 125% plus $100k rule. From our standpoint we are trading our trade exceptions for the players, which is legal. And then in a separate transition we are trading Stro away for essentially nothing, which generates a new TE to us.

Isn't this what happened in the McGrady deal. Didn't Orlando look at the transaction one way and we looked at it another way but both sides complied with the CBA.

On a side note, NJ was wanting to send us Marc Jackson and their 2 first rounders for Swift if all the information out in the media was correct. I don't think they would be willing to send out AW along with ZP to get this deal done. We could probably get them to work a S&T for Padgett plus a re-signed Jacque Vaughn and their 2 first rounders that would generate the same TE to us. Then we've got 4 picks in the draft to make deals with or get young talent to fill a need.

 

Rockets really need youth. Too many old players in the team. I would love to see these players go: Juwan, Wesley, Bowen.

Keep Alston to become a backup PG. Bring in Spanoulis and if he is as good as everyone says then he could be our starting PG. I would rather take Spanoulis than Mike James because of age. What if Spanouils turns out to be the next Parker?? If signing of Mike James jepordizes signing of Spanoulis then i say forget getting James. We can pick up many decent 3 point shooters from lottery and free agency to fill the SG position.

Also Padgett fit perfectly for the rox off the bench. He was a total threat from the 3 point line and thats what rox exactly need, a shooter. He will be a decent backup for tmac. From what i remember from last year he was knockin down 3s all the time when needed and he fit good with the system.

My projections:
Yao/Mutombo
JHO/Stro - or we pickup a PF in draft and trade JHO or Stro for a SG.
Tmac/Padgett
Draft/Head/Frahm - if we dont pickup a pf in draft
Spanoulis/Alston

I think Rox need 3 new players (2 shooters at SG or SF n 1 defender at SG or SF) with their draft and free agency or trade. Rox dont need PF that bad since JHO and Stro can atleast do a decent job.

 

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#69

69. What is a non-simultaneous trade?

In some cases, teams have up to one year to acquire the replacement player(s) to complete a trade. These trades are considered non-simultaneous trades. In a non-simultaneous trade, a team can only acquire up to 100% plus $100,000 of the salary it gives up (as opposed to 125% plus $100,000 in a simultaneous trade). A trade in which more than one player is traded away can only be simultaneous; non-simultaneous trades are allowed only when a single player is traded away (although teams can sometimes find ways to configure multi-player trades as multiple single-player trades which are non-simultaneous).

Here is an example of a non-simultaneous trade: a team trades away a $2 million player for a $1 million player. Sometime in the next year, they trade a draft pick (with zero trade value itself) for a $1.1 million player to complete the earlier trade. They ended up acquiring $2.1 million in salary for their $2 million player -- they just didn't do it all at once, or even necessarily with the same trading partner.


In the above example, after the initial trade of the $2 million player for the $1 million player, it was like the team had a "credit" for one year, with which they could acquire up to $1.1 million in salaries without having to send out salaries to match. This credit is often referred to as a Traded Player exception or a trade exception, but be aware that the CBA uses the name "Traded Player exception" to refer to the entire exception which allows teams to make trades above the salary cap (including simultaneous trades, non-simultaneous trades, and base year compensation).

There are some common misconceptions about non-simultaneous trades. For one, teams cannot use a Traded Player exception to sign free agents; it can be used only to acquire existing contracts from other teams. For another, teams cannot combine a Traded Player exception with other exceptions (such as the Mid-Level exception or the 125% plus $100,000 margin from another trade) in order to trade for a more expensive player. For example, a team with a $1 million Traded Player exception cannot combine it with their $2 million player to trade for a $3 million player (see question number 72 for more information on combining exceptions).



Here is a more complicated example of a legal non-simultaneous trade: a team has a $4 million Traded Player exception from an earlier trade, and a $10 million player it currently wants to trade. Another team has three players making $4 million, $5 million and $7 million, and the teams want to do a three-for-one trade with these players. This is legal -- the $5 million and $7 million players together make less than the 125% plus $100,000 allowed for the $10 million player ($12,600,000), and the $4 million player exactly fits within the $4 million Traded Player exception. So the $4 million player actually completes the previous trade, leaving the two teams trading a $10 million player for a $5 million and a $7 million player. From the other team's perspective it's all just one big simultaneous trade: their $4 million, $5 million and $7 million players for the $10 million player.


Again, non-simultaneous trades are not available when a team trades away multiple players (aggregates). Let's say a team has a $4 million player and a $5 million player, and uses the Traded Player exception to trade for an $8 million player. Even though they trade away more salary ($9 million) than they receive ($8 million), the fact that they aggregated the two players means they do not gain a Traded Player exception. However, it is sometimes possible to reorganize these trades so that players technically are not aggregated. A good example of this occurred in 2004 when Houston traded Steve Francis, Cuttino Mobley and Kelvin Cato to Orlando for Tracy McGrady, Juwan Howard, Tyronn Lue and Reece Gaines. As a single trade, it could only be simultaneous since multiple players were moving each way. However, Houston was able to reorganize the trade into three separate trades. In one trade, they acquired McGrady and Gaines for Mobley and Cato. In another trade, they acquired Howard and Lue using an existing Traded Player exception from their earlier Glen Rice trade. That left them trading Francis essentially by himself for nothing, which generated a new Traded Player exception in the amount of Francis' base year value. From Orlando's perspective, it was a single, simultaneous three-for-four trade.

Teams can consume only part of a Traded Player exception, in which case they can still use the remainder in a future trade. For example, if a team trades a $4 million player for a $2 million player, they gain a $2.1 million Traded Player exception. If they later trade a draft pick for a $1 million player, they still have $1.1 million remaining to acquire more players and complete the trade (until one year from the date of the original trade).


Also see question number 20 for more information on the availability and use of this exception.

20. How do exceptions count against the cap? Does being under the cap always mean that a team has room to sign free agents? Do teams ever lose their exceptions?

If a team is below the cap, then their Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and/or Traded Player exceptions are added to their team salary, and the league treats the team as though they are over the cap. This is to prevent a loophole, in a manner similar to free agent amounts (see question numbers 29, 30, 31, 32). A team can't act like they're under the cap and sign free agents using cap room, and then use their Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and/or Traded Player exceptions. Consequently, the exceptions are added to their team salary (putting the team over the cap) if the team is under the cap and adding the exceptions puts them over the cap. If a team is already over the cap, then the exceptions are not added to their team salary. There would be no point in doing so, since there is no cap room for signing free agents.
So it is not true that being under the cap necessarily means a team has room to sign free agents. For example, assume the cap is $49.5 million, and a team has $43 million committed to salaries. They also have a Mid-Level exception for $5 million and a Traded Player exception for $5.5 million. Even though their salaries put them $6.5 million under the cap, their exceptions are added to their salaries, putting them at $53.5 million, or $4 million over the cap. So they actually have no cap room to sign free agents, and must instead use their exceptions.

Teams have the option of renouncing their exceptions in order to claim the cap room. So in the example above, if the team renounced their Traded Player and Mid-Level exceptions, then the $10.5 million is taken off their team salary, which then totals $43 million, leaving them with $6.5 million of cap room which can then be used to sign free agent(s).


Starting January 10 of each season, the Mid-Level, Bi-Annual, Larry Bird, Early-Bird and Non-Bird exceptions begin to reduce in value. For example, if there are 180 days in the season, then these exceptions (if they are still unused) reduce by 1/180 of their initial value each day starting January 10. If a team uses their $5 million Mid-Level exception on February 1, then the exception is actually worth $4,361,111.


The Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and Traded Player exceptions may be lost entirely, or the team may never receive them to begin with. This happens when their team salary is so low that when the exceptions are added to the team salary, the sum is still below the salary cap. If the team salary is below this level when the exception arises, then the team doesn't get the exception. If the team salary ever drops below this level during the year, then any exceptions they had are lost.

For example, with a $49.5 million salary cap, assume it's the offseason, and a team has $41 million committed to salaries, along with a Mid-Level exception for $5 million, a Traded Player exception for $2.5 million, and an unrenounced free agent whose free agent amount is $2 million. Their salaries and exceptions total $50.5 million, or $1 million over the cap. What if their free agent signs with another team? The $2 million free agent amount comes off their cap, so their team salary drops to $48.5 million. This total is below the cap so the team loses its Mid-Level and Traded Player exceptions.

There is logic behind this. The whole idea behind an "exception" is that it is an exception to the rule which says a team has to be below the salary cap. In other words, an exception is a mechanism which allows a team to function above the cap. If a team isn't over the cap, then the concept of an exception is moot. Therefore, if a team's team salary ever drops this far, its exceptions go away. The effect is that a team may have either exceptions or cap room, but they can't have both.

 

I don't think the Nets would consider that... Who knows, but I think they would do a SS for Padgett and Nachbar. Now I know there are not a lot of people that would want Boki back (besides Yao), but we could definitely use Padgett and this way at the very least, we get SS contract off the books a yr early.

 

Admittedly I don't get to see a lot of Rocket games, but my brain tells me that Boki is way better than Bowen. Could I be that wrong? I'm not saying that either of them is that good, but the are league guys (yah! ) who will be around for awhile.

 

Everybody wasn't going crazy on you. You were arguing some points and a bunch of other people disagreed with you. That's what happens on a message board. Get over yourself.

 

Going by this example, I think the Stro for 3 trade can be applied with the exact same rationale. Here's the pieces involved.

We'll use next year's salaries according to hoopshype:

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/houston.htm
http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/new_jersey.htm

Stromile (5.4 mill)
4.2 mill TE
1.67 mill TE

For

Antoine Wright (1.57 mill)
Scott Padgett (1.8 mill)
Zoran Planinic (1.54 mill)

From New Jersey's point of view it's a simple 3 for 1. Outgoing salaries are 4.91 million and incoming salary is 5.4 million. It's well within 125% + 100K, so that's totally kosher.

From our end, just like in the Mcgrady deal where "In another trade, they acquired Howard and Lue using an existing Traded Player exception from their earlier Glen Rice trade." we are aquiring Wright and Padgett for our 4.2 million TE, and in another separate deal, getting Planinic for our 1.67 million TE. In my mind, the same logic applies to all of these deals.

And just like how, "That left them trading Francis essentially by himself for nothing, which generated a new Traded Player exception in the amount of Francis' base year value." would totally match up with trading Stromile essentially for himself and generating a new Traded Player exception in the amount of his salary (since I'm pretty sure he's not a BYC player).

Going by how Coon describes the Mcgrady trade, it seems like we can do this Stro for 3 trade the exact same way.

 

m_cable -

Do you have me on ignore?

 

I keed, I keed.

 

I dont think it was that way m_cable..they were really going crazy on me.. I just said SHaq gets a free pass for 1st team because of his experience and team success and I got bashed by everybody on that thread .. I got called a Dumba$$, and Idiot, a r****d, a low IQ guy...etc. there were even some rumors about Yao stealing my GF

 

but why did I go back to rookie again ??

 

I dont think that we really need a 4 that can shoot outside jumpers and 3's....this is not a necessity in becoming a contender for a ring. If we can somehow get james....he would be the 3 point shooter that could help greatly.

 

Give me a break. You also said that Yao was a joke. That he basically sucked defensively. And you said the same kind of stuff about Luther (that he sux, should be in the nbdl etc). So don't EVEN DARE play the "Everyone is picking on me. Why don't they give me respect" card. Maybe people will respond to you a little better once you give up this jerky, *******-ish, "because I say so" posting style. Grow up.

Well I'm not Clutch, so I'm not going to speak for him. But are you even sure you were a member?

 

holy crap, u memorized all the crap I said.. .. damn m_cable, u must be something... but still, I was just saying my opinion.. I dont like people over-rating Luther and I dont like people sayin SHaq is no good and Yao can defend better.. that's all..

I am positive.. I am sure I was a member...

 

somebody mentioned the infamous "QPR calculator".. any ideas of what's that ??I hope it's not anything scary...

 

Well, when you're putting up somewhere near 10 posts a day, and you've probably had 2 dozen in the last 3 days whining about your member status, it can't be good.

This is not a democracy. Clutch's law rules. You screw up under his standards, deal with it. If you did something, I don't know, nor particularly care.

There are finally a few GARM threads where there's some decent hypothetical talk and analysis in the offseason, and it's not so pleasant when membership complaints get in the way.

 

What's the difference rookie or member, why get hung up about it? I think the difference between a rookie and a member is breaking the 200 post mark so I think there is some problem with your post counter or they have changed the rules.

You know that if you donate to Clutch's tipjar you end all that and become a Contributing Member don't you?

 

Padgett is a scrub.