Premium Member Diesel Posted July 31, 2003 Premium Member Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 Does this sound like something to knock the socks off of Knight. I've heard this rumor and am only now giving it my attention but it's not bad: JT(SNT) to Indy for Tinsley/Harrington. It makes sense... in one way. It gives us a SF and a PG. Tinsley/Dion/Harrington/SAR/Theo. The other thing is that JT and Oneal are good friends. A Backcourt of JT and Freddie Jones could be dynamite in the open court. JT could get a 6 year 55 million dollar deal. I tend to believe this might be a deal.... Harrington is cheap. I put Dion in as SG but that could easily be DJ or Diaw... Or JJ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lascar78 Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 Isn't there a good reason that IND pulls Tinsley off the court everytime it's a key playoff game? I mean they brought Timmy Hardaway back just because they didn't trust Tinsley to run their team come playoff time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 I thin Shareef is the only one in that lineup that had averaged double figure scoring last year.That looks like a really trashy starting lineup to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traceman Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHORO44 Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 I don't like it. To be honest I'd like to see this lineup: JT DJ Diaw Reef Theo I'd entertain trading Nazr for Foyle or Kurt Thomas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB21 Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 ....a third team that is under the cap and is capable of absorbing some salary gets involved. Once JT signs a deal, he becomes a BYC player. Atlanta will only be able to take back half of what his contract will be. To make this work, the above has to happen. If a deal were to consumate, Utah would likely be a team that the deal would run through. Tinsley would very likely go to Utah in any deal as well. I don't see anything happening with that though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 31, 2003 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 Dude go back to the Larry Coon book of CBA... JT is not a poison pill player. He can be SNTed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB21 Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 75. Can a free agent be signed and immediately traded? Under no circumstances can a team sign and then trade another team's free agent. But there is a special rule that allows teams to re-sign their own free agents for trading purposes, called the sign-and-trade rule. Under the sign-and-trade rule, the player is re-signed and immediately traded to another team. This is done by adding a clause to the contract which stipulates that the contract is invalid if the player's rights are not traded to the specific team within 48 hours. A sign-and-trade deal can be made even with players that have been renounced. However, a sign-and-trade deal cannot be made when the player was signed using the Mid-Level, $1 Million or Disabled Player exception. Sign-and-trade deals are only allowed if the contract is for three years or longer (however, only the first season of the contract must be guaranteed). One complication with sign-and-trade deals is that the signed player can immediately become a BYC player (see question number 72 for more information on BYC), so it's the player's BYC value that must be used when determining whether the trade is allowed. So it's the player's BYC value that must be used when determining whether the trade is allowed. Again, a third team that is under the cap will have to get involved. If JT signs an extension starting at $7 million, the Hawks will only be able to take back $3.5 million in a sign and trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 It says that the player CAN become, it doesnt say that they will. What does question 72 say about the BYC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB21 Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#72 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 31, 2003 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 I told you that Terry was not a Poison Pill Player... YOu refered to 75 but it refered you back to 72... In reply to:For extended rookie scale contracts, the player's BYC begins on the July 1 preceding the first season of the extension. For example, if an extension of a rookie scale contract is signed on 10/30/99, his BYC begins on 7/1/00, because the first season of the extension is 00-01. If a team tries to trade an extended rookie between the date his extension is signed and the date it takes effect, his "trade value" for the receiving team is the average of the salaries in the last year of the scale contract and each year of the extension. This is called the "poison pill provision." The example is that all of last year, Wally Z was a poison Pill player. He could not be traded because his base salary was about 3 million but he had already signed for a new contract that starts this year. JT hasn't signed anything more than the qualifying offer which is not put him in BYC... Therefore, he is not a poison Pill player. Also, you missed this too. In reply to:Teams benefit because it allows them to get something in return for players they would otherwise lose to free agency. Players benefit because they can earn more money and perhaps play for a team they wouldn't otherwise be able to play for. This is because teams can use the Larry Bird exception (as long as the player qualifies) when re-signing players for a sign-and-trade deal. So they can probably offer more money than other teams, which are constrained by the salary cap. And even if the other team can offer the maximum salary to the player, they can only offer 10% raises, while the original team, using the Bird exception, can offer 12.5% raises. So the player makes more money. Also, the sign-and-trade can be made with a team that's capped-out and wouldn't otherwise be able to sign the player. This last point is very important -- the sign-and-trade rule is a useful tool for teams that are capped-out and unable to offer players large contracts, but want to obtain specific high-priced free agents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 So then JT will become a BYC player due to him receiving a 20% or more increase in pay. So for the next year we can only take back 50% of his salary. So lets say that we do sign JT for 6 years/55million. Who would be a viable SnT option that would even come close to being as valuable as JT? That would have to be someone who makes on average 4.5 mil per year and I dont know of any player that makes that kinda money that is worthy of JT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDude Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 discuss trades that are actually decent.. I hate these dumb trades where we get nothing or they get nothing.. i mean for real.. harrington and tinsley?.. why risk it? why redo the roster for that? that's not even rebuidling, that's just giving up a good player just to do a trade... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB21 Posted July 31, 2003 Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 Because that's the only kind of trades Diesel can come up with. Trades for the sake of making trades. A realistic trade is not in his vocabulary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted July 31, 2003 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted July 31, 2003 Oh... sure, let's just keep this 27 win team together for the Next 2 years and then when Theo and SAR walk and we have money, let's watch every good free agent turn their nose up at Atlanta ala Chicago a few years back... Then let's decide to pick up some player who is really unworthy of a large contract and pay him just to come ala Eddie Robinson.... KB, your view is totally f'ed up. You can't see anything past today. You refuse to be honest about anything. You're like Knight's Lackie. Grow a sack man. Look at this team realistically. This team WON'T win NOTHING. Why keep it together. It's not trading for the sake of trading. It's trading because it's the better alternative. Aren't you still one of those who swore up and down that there were weapons of Mass Destruction? Aren't you one of those who swore up and down that Smitty for JJ/JR would be good. I know you're the one who said: 1. Swift will be an allstar. 2. Bright will be a good PG. 3. Dampiere would be a world class C. Dude... You have Mississippi vision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now