I know many in the media are reporting that we can sign Mo and keep our Middle Class Exception to use on free agents. I can see why everyone keeps repeating it. But this is inaccurate. Our exceptions count as salary. You cannot be under the cap and have exceptions. They are mutually exclusive. Coon's FAQ complicates this even more. The FAQ is confusing this issue, imo. If we sign Mo to more than the MCE, then that means *by definition* that we reduced our salary obligations (exluding exceptions) by the combined amount of our exceptions. The moment that happens you lose your exceptions for a year. Look at it this way: The exceptions are meant to aid teams who are above the cap. They are not just coupons for every team to cash. You're not supposed to have cap room *and* exceptions. The league adds up your salary and adds the exceptions to that to determine your cap hit. After adding your unused exceptions to salary obligations, if that total is still below the cap, then your exceptions go away and convert to real cap space. If you are not under the cap when adding your exceptions to salary, then you do not get any cap space. Exceptions and cap space are mutually exclusive. You do not get both. And in our case, that means we cannot have capspace to spend on Mo *and* retain our exceptions. Either Mo is signed to capspace and we lose our exceptions, or Mo signs for an exception.
I thought you could go under the cap, but if you go more than 7 mil, I think, you lose it. I thought this was the reason we didn't renounce Hakeem. ------------------ T-Pooh and BahDakota went up the hill, to make a bet on a Forward. When it all came down, they were nowhere to be found. Now they should be drawn and quartered.
Does it matter? If we sign Mo, would we need the exception? ------------------ The time for logic and reason has come and gone. It's homer time now. Believe.
Colby, no, that is the confusion I'm addressing. Exceptions always count against the cap, unless they are taken away from you. Coon's FAQ and even the CBA overcomplicates this point. What you do is count exceptions as salary. Add them to your salary obligations, always. If that sum ever falls below the cap, you lose your exceptions. You cannot be under the cap and retain exceptions. I can post the raw CBA text, and we can discuss it if you want to see it, but this is really ugly lawyer writing. Confused Prognosticator--what do you mean that a sweet $4.5m exception would not matter?
If we were able to sign Mo, it means that we have somehow gone under the cap, which means that there has beena resolution concerning Hakeem Olajuwon. If we resign Olajuwon, that means that our line-up is generally set for next year. What's the point of having the exception? We won't use it on anyone because there's no one to use it on who would make a serious impact. If we resign Olajuwon, the MCE is excess baggage. Now, if Olajuwon bolts, then we might need the MCE, but I don't really see a player out there worth $4.5 million a year. ------------------ The time for logic and reason has come and gone. It's homer time now. Believe.
HcrispeeP/Colby, Actually, in a way you are both right. The true answer is ..... it depends. eg. Lets say you are over the cap by $3.4 mil (counting exceptions as HP says) to loose the exceptions altogether you would need to fall more than $3.4 mil under the cap. The point is,it depends on where a team is relative to the cap counting their exceptions. In the Rocks case they are well over the $49 mil ($42.5 cap + $7.0 mil in various exceptions they possess) cap. This is primarily due to A-Large-One's cap hit. This is the trick of the whole deal. We simply cannot sign Hakeem. If we do we fall under the cap and loose the $4.5 mil exception. The trick is to agree to terms with Hakeem and cut all other deals simultaniously. A single player's deal is not mutually exclusive relative to a team's cap. Teams can manipulate the cap through multiple concurrent deals (i.e. trades, mass signings, etc.) ------------------ "Mongo don't know! Mongo only pawn in game of life."
ROCKET!! It does not depend. You cannot have capspace and exceptions, period. Further, I am unaware of any deals that happen concurrently WRT the salary cap as one atomic deal other than free agent sign-n-trades. Trades involving multiple players is not the same as signing multiple free agents. You cannot say that I am going to sign Dream, use capspace on Mo', and sign Marc Jackson to the MCE all because they are sitting at a table together using pens at the same time. The moment you declare capspace to use on Mo', you lose your exceptions. There is no MCE to use on Jackson or any other free agent. Tolpatcsh, In the case we don't get Dream, my thread title still holds. [This message has been edited by crispee (edited July 30, 2001).]
HP, Yes, but reread my previous post. The point is..... If you go under the cap including the exception, then you go way under the cap. Again, the example, if you are $3.4 mil over the cap (with all exceptions - lets say $7.0 mil in exceptions as the Rocks currently have) and then you fall $.1 mil under - you actually fall $7.1 mil under the cap. However, this is contingent upon not previously using said exceptions for signings. If they have been used then they directly hit against the cap. ------------------ "Mongo don't know! Mongo only pawn in game of life."
I hope the rockets have good lawyers that can translate the implications in plain language cause I know me and the basketball coaches' heads are spinin. ------------------ He's very popular, Ed. Sportos, Motorheads, Geeks, Sluts, Pinheads, Dweebies,Wonkers, Richies, they all adore him.
Correct. At $3.4m over the cap you are including exceptions as salary, because you still have them. The moment you fall to $.1m, you no longer have the exceptions, so their cap hit is extinguished, thus immediately making you $7.1m. This part is not accurate, imo, and is the whole reason for the misunderstanding in the media. Your wording makes it sound like you still get the exceptions. It is more accurate to say, "Unused exceptions always count as salary towards the cap. If you go under the cap, you lose your unused exceptions for a year, and thus their cap hit is extinguished."
HP, That is exactly what I am NOT saying. Again, the same example... * $3.4 above the cap (includes exemptions committed and uncommitted) * You have $7.0 mil in exemptions * You renounce a player that drops you $.1 mil below the cap ($42.5 mil) * You have used (committed) a trade exemption (again, assuming you had one) valued at $2.0 mil previously to sign a FA By falling below the cap ($.1 mil as stated), you would actually be $5.1 mil under the cap. The committed $2.0 mil hits your cap space. You loose your $5.0 mill in exemptions and only have $5.1 mil to spend. You do not have your other exemptions and the cap space. Clearly, we are in violent agreement here. ------------------ "Mongo don't know! Mongo only pawn in game of life." [This message has been edited by ROCKET!!! (edited July 30, 2001).] [This message has been edited by ROCKET!!! (edited July 30, 2001).]
ROCKET!! here's another scenario similar to yours. Say our salary obligations, unsigend free agents hits, and hits for unsigned first rounder add up to $33m. And our exceptions add up to $7m. That is a $40m total cap hits. If the cap for that year is $40m, then we would have all our exception, but no cap room. However, if the cap for that year is $40.1m then we would be $7.1m under the cap, but have no exceptions. Gene Peterson Visualize this: Imagine a bar chart: stack up all your salary hits vertically and then place exceptions on top of that. Then draw the salary cap horizontally across the grid. If the column of salary hits and exceptions goes above the salary cap line, then you are not under the cap, and you get your exceptions. If the column of salary hits and exceptions is below the salary cap line, then remove your exceptions from the stack, and the remainder is how much cap room you have. If the latter is true, you don't get your exceptions back for a year. how about that visualization? Maybe Dave or Achebe can draw it. Throughout the year, your salary hits might go up or down, and you might convert exceptions to salary, and you might add more exceptions via trade exceptions and disability exceptions, but you always come back to adding everything up versus the salary cap line. And you always return back to the fact that you cannot have capspace *and* exceptions at the same time.
OK...my previous post came before I saw this. I knew we were close to "violent agreement," but just didn't understand the whole "it depends" part.
HP, There may be another scenario that you might be thinking of, it is possible.... Lets say the Rocks have $8.0 mil in exceptions over the cap Their current payroll is $59.4 For CBA purposes their total cap hit would be $67.4 Now, lets say the Rocks have Hakeem at the end of his contract and his cap hit is $17.0 mil. Lets also say the Rocks do not want to resign him (they renounce him) In this scenario, the Rocks new cap number becomes $42.4 mil. They fall $.1 mil under the cap by renouncing Hakeem's cap hit to the actual $42.5 mil max cap. They lose all exceptions by falling under the cap, but their total cap nuber is actually reduced $25.0 mil in renouncing Hakeem in this instance..... $17.0 mil for renouncement $8.0 mil for falling under the max cap This is why I said it depends. The two examples (this one and the one above) illustrated two different scenarios depending on where you are relative to the cap. Again, violent agreement. ------------------ "Mongo don't know! Mongo only pawn in game of life." [This message has been edited by ROCKET!!! (edited July 30, 2001).]
HP, Anyway, as we are in agreement.... This goes directly to the point of mutual exclusivity. All deals should/will be consumated at the same time thus preserving the exceptions for further use (meaning we do not fall below the cap). ------------------ "Mongo don't know! Mongo only pawn in game of life." [This message has been edited by ROCKET!!! (edited July 30, 2001).]
OK, now we don't agree anymore....lol. new contracts are not consummated at the same time. I see nothing in the CBA about that. You can re-assign contracts to new teams as one big trade, even among 3 or 4 teams at once, but those are moving "Assigned Player Contract," not signing free agents to new contracts.
HP, I've got my mind wrapped around trades right now...sorry. By the by....explain |o| to me. Other than the obvious d@mn reference. ------------------ "Mongo don't know! Mongo only pawn in game of life."
HP, I've got my mind wrapped around trades right now...sorry. By the by....explain |o| to me. Other than the obvious d@mn reference. Personally, I would be amazed if the Rocks can remain above the cap this year. I don't see a way. Sorry for the double post. My bad! Editing back and forth. ------------------ "Mongo don't know! Mongo only pawn in game of life." [This message has been edited by ROCKET!!! (edited July 31, 2001).]
