Just As I Figured! Looks Like No Luxury Tax in 05

[Traceman]

With all these teams fighting so hard to reduce salary costs, it looks like teams won't have to pay the luxury tax in 05 or 06. If that is truly the case, since luxury tax payments are not calculated until AFTER the season, we won't be getting back a share of money from the league for staying under the luxury tax threshold after this season. If that is the case, trading Dog for Brandon's contract looks even worse than it already did. I would have rather had Sprewell or Van Horn for Dog than that expiring contract. Both of those guys would be a [censored] of a lot better than what we are looking at now and their deals are still up by 05/06.

Man, Cuban must be laughing his ass off somewhere. He might have the 3rd highest payroll in the league but if he doesn't have to pay luxury tax after the season, he will still make a nice profit this year. And he'll do it while doing everything in his power to put a winning team on the

floor.

See the attached link:

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/sports/6605114.htm

[cyman3]

in that case, it doesnt hurt too much to go over the cap...

DANGGIT!

[KB21]

If that happens to take effect, it won't be till the summer of 2005. That's 2 summers away. The luxury tax will still be asessed after the 2003-2004 season, and the Hawks would have had to pay it had they kept Robinson.

[Diesel]

You Are the main proponent of addition by subtract. However, on every front, you see that it doesn't work.

Where are the FAs we're supposed to sign?

Where is the contract we're supposed to give to JT?

Where is the freedom (financially) that we are supposed to recieve from this move?

What is really going to come down to is when we are a gutter team and Philly is near the top of the food chain. What will you say then??

In this game, name a time when it was good to trade a player for NOTHING????

[cyman3]

i believe it was KNIGHT who said that this move was in the best interest of the PRESENT and the FUTURE.

we cant evaluate the trade after a month diesel, esp when its a financial trade. suppose we somehow got Kobe Bryant next year b/c of this trade, in that case- it did work out! i know thats kinda far fetched...

but til then, we cant evaluate the trade....

[Diesel]

Was the Dominique trade a success?

Essentially, it was the same thing. We traded a player for NOTHING...

Was it successful?

[Gray Mule]

Hawks traded Big Dog for "nothing."

"Nothing" is now a Hawk. We own his contract instead

of the contract of Big Dog, therefore he is our property.

My question. Do we have the right to trade "Nothing"

to another N.B.A. team now or in the immediate future?

How long must an N.B.A. team keep a player, once they

trade for him, or is there any set time? Can they trade

for a player today and then trade him to someone else

tomorrow?

Are we forced, by the agreement of the union contract,

to keep a player, once traded for, a certain amount of

time?

"Nothing" is now a Hawk. There were several N.B.A.

teams that were trying to get in on the trade for

"Nothing" when the 4 way was made. Are the Hawks

now stuck with "Nothing" for ever and ever? Because

of the speculation now about the luxury tax, does that

mean that the contract of our player "Nothing" now

has no value on the market, should we be able and

willing to trade "Nothing" for something??

If we do keep "Nothing" until he retires and the money

for his contract no longer counts for anything, will we

be able to find someone, any one, who has any talent

whatsoever, who we can force to take this money and

play for the Hawks? Is our money saved from the

retirement of "Nothing" tainted so that it we can't

use it?

Or, will the players already signed plus the addition of

the {Hopefully } contract for Jason Terry soak up all

the money the Hawks saved with the retirement of

our player "Nothing" which would still leave our money

pot empty??

Surely, out of "Nothing" we gain something. If not, why

were the other N.B.A. teams interested in the contract

when the trade was made? Is this destined to be, like

so many things that seem to happen to the Hawks, a

complete and total disaster for the franchise as some

seem to think now?

[Diesel]

What did we gain...

As a team, we gained NOTHING. In fact, we loss quite a bit.

As a franchise we gained $$$. The team did not and will not prosper because of the owner's cheapness.

As far as Cyman's comments about getting Kobe, that's a whole lot of Knight spin on that statement. However, supposed we did have Kobe. And a large Contract. $$$ dictates, that we would have to trade somebody else for NOTHING.

I like your humor gray... However, realistically, what have we gained from that trade? What concrete thing can any of us point to and say... "that's what we got". Idealist say... "well now we can pay JT." I say... Can we? Why haven't we? Idealist say " Now we can go after FAs" I say... Can we? Why Haven't we? Idealist say "It's only a matter of time before the deal is complete and we can make moves again". I say "really? What's the hold up?"

It's time that we be realist.... The moves we have made thus far are the moves of a team that is not trying to go anywhere soon.

[Traceman]

that would have been extremely large. We could have kept Dog, resigned JT (starting at around $5.5 million), signed Diaw, signed Hansen and signed Glover and DJ (or other players) to minimum contracts and paid only about $5 million in luxury for the 03/04 season. NEXT season though, without making a move, we would have been looking at about $13 million in luxury tax and I think THAT is the payment management absolutely was NOT going to pay.

[KB21]

They didn't intend to pay it this year either, especially on a team that everyone knows was not going to win with Robinson in the line up. It was a bad mix.

And at this point, it is pure speculation that there won't be a luxury tax at the end of the 2004-2005 season.

It was simply not going to work with Glenn in the line up, and for the Hawks to improve upon what they have for the present and the future, Glenn had to go.

It won't work in Philly either. Glenn and Iverson are two players who demand the ball, and it simply will not work out between the two. Especially with a very weak head coach in Randy Ayers.