Simmons: The Worst Contracts in the NBA(Or why DF is the man)

[DatWerkk]

LOL . . . if fans in Atlanta come out for Hawks playoff games, I'm pretty sure that the Barclays Center will be rocking when the Nets get into the playoffs. It's definitely a Knicks town . . for now.

LOL at you comparing jaded fans in a notoriously bad sports town not supporting a perennially bad-to-mediocre re-tread Hawks team to just recently hyped up, basketball-starved, notoriously rabid fans giving up on a BRAND NEW Nets team. Oh yeah, TOTALLY the same thing...

[TheNorthCydeRises]

LOL at you comparing jaded fans in a notoriously bad sports town not supporting a perennially bad-to-mediocre re-tread Hawks team to just recently hyped up, basketball-starved, notoriously rabid fans giving up on a BRAND NEW Nets team. Oh yeah, TOTALLY the same thing...

Nets are averaging over 17,000 a game, at a 95% capacity.

But don't believe me. Believe your own newspaper.

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/09/nets-make-full-effort-to-fit-into-brooklyn/

[DatWerkk]

Nets are averaging over 17,000 a game, at a 95% capacity. But don't believe me. Believe your own newspaper. http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/09/nets-make-full-effort-to-fit-into-brooklyn/

I can tell you're not dumb, so I have to assume that you're just fixated on being right, even in the face of evidence that you're wrong. Ninety-five percent capacity is not selling out, but keep pointing to slanted numbers if it makes you feel better about yourself. Let me break this down into some simple facts for you: 1) This is the inaugural season of existence of the Brooklyn Nets. 2) This is the inaugural year of existence of the one-billion-dollar-plus Barclays Center. 3) The first year for a new sports building (basketball arena, baseball ballpark, football stadium) is typically the best year attendance-wise as fans will come to games even if only to see what the new building is like. 4) The arrival of the Barclays Center was hyped, ballyhooed, and sensationalized here in Brooklyn for YEARS. The marketing effort could not have been any more extensive, any more fierce. 5) The Nets sell out the Barclays Center only about 50% of the time (18 out of 34, or 52.9%). Meanwhile, the Knicks have sold out 100% (32 out of 32) of their home games this season. That's 100% capacity, of a much bigger building, with much more expensive tickets, 100% of the time. And since I apparently have to spell it out for you, here you go: selling out 100% of your games means there is more than enough demand in your market for what you're selling. When another team IN THE SAME MARKET is selling out only 52.9% of its games that means something is wrong with what THEY'RE selling. There's a demonstrated unfulfilled demand for professional basketball here. People are falling all over themselves to get into Knicks games. They could probably sell out MSG twice over on some nights. But have the Nets capitalized on this demand? They're lucky if the building is even full. Worst contract in the NBA + future luxury tax bill reaching nine figures = 52.9% /thread

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I can tell you're not dumb, so I have to assume that you're just fixated on being right, even in the face of evidence that you're wrong. Ninety-five percent capacity is not selling out, but keep pointing to slanted numbers if it makes you feel better about yourself.Let me break this down into some simple facts for you:1) This is the inaugural season of existence of the Brooklyn Nets.2) This is the inaugural year of existence of the one-billion-dollar-plus Barclays Center.3) The first year for a new sports building (basketball arena, baseball ballpark, football stadium) is typically the best year attendance-wise as fans will come to games even if only to see what the new building is like.4) The arrival of the Barclays Center was hyped, ballyhooed, and sensationalized here in Brooklyn for YEARS. The marketing effort could not have been any more extensive, any more fierce.5) The Nets sell out the Barclays Center only about 50% of the time (18 out of 34, or 52.9%).Meanwhile, the Knicks have sold out 100% (32 out of 32) of their home games this season. That's 100% capacity, of a much bigger building, with much more expensive tickets, 100% of the time.And since I apparently have to spell it out for you, here you go: selling out 100% of your games means there is more than enough demand in your market for what you're selling. When another team IN THE SAME MARKET is selling out only 52.9% of its games that means something is wrong with what THEY'RE selling. There's a demonstrated unfulfilled demand for professional basketball here. People are falling all over themselves to get into Knicks games. They could probably sell out MSG twice over on some nights. But have the Nets capitalized on this demand? They're lucky if the building is even full.Worst contract in the NBA + future luxury tax bill reaching nine figures = 52.9%/thread

But 95% capacity, for a team that has been sorry as hell the past 5 years ( and for the history of the franchise in general ), and coming into an area DOMINATED by the Knicks and its fans, is pretty dang good in my book.

It would be like the Cleveland Browns moving to Ft Worth, TX, and expecting the Browns to all of a sudden sell out a 70,000 seat stadium . . . when you know that metro area ( and state, for that matter ) is dominated by the Cowboys and its fans.

So if the Browns could move to Ft Worth and draw 65,000 a game in the Dallas-Ft Worth metro market, and produce a good team in the process, that would be a major accomplishment. The same goes for the Brooklyn Nets, who have made themselves back into a relevant franchise in just one year.

I'm sure that most ( not all, but most ) NY sports fans aren't the bandwagon type. So it's not like the Nets were going to convert all of the Knicks fans who live or were born in Brooklyn, over to Nets fans overnight. It's still a Knicks town, and will probably always be a Knicks town.

But you make it sound like the Nets have been a failure, because they're not selling out 100% of the time. Only about 7 or 8 teams in this league do that on a nightly basis.

All I'm saying that when the playoffs come, the Barclays Center will be sold out for every home game. And if that team does win their home playoff games, and get to the 2nd round, their growing fan base will become even more rabid and support the team. And if that team makes noise in the playoffs this year, I'll GUARANTEE YOU that their attendance will increase next year.

It's just amazing that Hawk fans, of all people, can sit back an criticize a franchise like the Nets, when in just one year they've jumped from the bottom of the barrel, to at least 60% up the barrel and are right at our level ( or a little above ).

It's highly unlikely that anybody is beating the Heat and getting to the NBA Finals. But any team in the East that can avoid playing the Heat in the 2nd round, has as good of a shot as any to make it to the EC Finals. The 2nd place Knicks in the East would be the 6th seed out West. So there are no great teams in the East outside of the Heat. Just good ones.

Even if we got to the 2nd round as a 7th seed, I'm not discounting our chances if we have to play the Knicks, Pacers, Bulls or Nets. We can beat any of those teams in a 7 game series . . if we play to our strengths. And you can say the exact same thing about the Nets if they got to Round 2, and played any East team other than the Heat.

So the "good" team that can get to the EC Finals and play the Heat, can be the team that says that they had a successful season. And if they happen to push the Heat in the EC Finals ( ala what Boston did last year ), their fan base will be happy.

Like I told Eddie earlier in the thread, I understand why Hawks fans specifically do not want the Nets to succeed. It flies in the face of everything we've did, and what we will do in the future, when trying to build a contender.

[Eddielives]

But 95% capacity, for a team that has been sorry as hell the past 5 years ( and for the history of the franchise in general ), and coming into an area DOMINATED by the Knicks and its fans, is pretty dang good in my book.

It would be like the Cleveland Browns moving to Ft Worth, TX, and expecting the Browns to all of a sudden sell out a 70,000 seat stadium . . . when you know that metro area ( and state, for that matter ) is dominated by the Cowboys and its fans.

So if the Browns could move to Ft Worth and draw 65,000 a game in the Dallas-Ft Worth metro market, and produce a good team in the process, that would be a major accomplishment. The same goes for the Brooklyn Nets, who have made themselves back into a relevant franchise in just one year.

I'm sure that most ( not all, but most ) NY sports fans aren't the bandwagon type. So it's not like the Nets were going to convert all of the Knicks fans who live or were born in Brooklyn, over to Nets fans overnight. It's still a Knicks town, and will probably always be a Knicks town.

But you make it sound like the Nets have been a failure, because they're not selling out 100% of the time. Only about 7 or 8 teams in this league do that on a nightly basis.

All I'm saying that when the playoffs come, the Barclays Center will be sold out for every home game. And if that team does win their home playoff games, and get to the 2nd round, their growing fan base will become even more rabid and support the team. And if that team makes noise in the playoffs this year, I'll GUARANTEE YOU that their attendance will increase next year.

It's just amazing that Hawk fans, of all people, can sit back an criticize a franchise like the Nets, when in just one year they've jumped from the bottom of the barrel, to at least 60% up the barrel and are right at our level ( or a little above ).

It's highly unlikely that anybody is beating the Heat and getting to the NBA Finals. But any team in the East that can avoid playing the Heat in the 2nd round, has as good of a shot as any to make it to the EC Finals. The 2nd place Knicks in the East would be the 6th seed out West. So there are no great teams in the East outside of the Heat. Just good ones.

Even if we got to the 2nd round as a 7th seed, I'm not discounting our chances if we have to play the Knicks, Pacers, Bulls or Nets. We can beat any of those teams in a 7 game series . . if we play to our strengths. And you can say the exact same thing about the Nets if they got to Round 2, and played any East team other than the Heat.

So the "good" team that can get to the EC Finals and play the Heat, can be the team that says that they had a successful season. And if they happen to push the Heat in the EC Finals ( ala what Boston did last year ), their fan base will be happy.

Like I told Eddie earlier in the thread, I understand why Hawks fans specifically do not want the Nets to succeed. It flies in the face of everything we've did, and what we will do in the future, when trying to build a contender.

And I think that's where you lose your credibility on this topic. You've generalized all Hawks fans who disagree with you as basically just sourpusses who are afraid of seeing Brooklyn succeed. As if we're just simpletons who act on emotion and want Joe and New Jersey to fail so we can say see, told ya so!! That's borderline insulting dude.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

And I think that's where you lose your credibility on this topic. You've generalized all Hawks fans who disagree with you as basically just sourpusses who are afraid of seeing Brooklyn succeed. As if we're just simpletons who act on emotion and want Joe and New Jersey to fail so we can say see, told ya so!! That's borderline insulting dude.

I never said "all". But some in this thread definitely fit that train of thought. And if you know my history on this forum over the past 7 years, you should know that I could care less about my perceived "credibility" here. I simply do what others do, and express my opinion on things.

But check this out.

Despite Joe Johnson not leaving the Hawks on his own, a vocal minority of Hawks fans have taken it upon themselves in 2 games now that he's come back to Atlanta, to boo him.

I've never seen a guy who didn't want to be traded from a team, turn around and be booed by that same team's fans every time he touches the ball. I've seen it when a guy chooses to leave on his own, or when that guy forced the team to trade him. But never when the team traded him just to be getting rid of him.

It's strange that no other player in the league gets booed at Philips every time he touches the ball, not even the hated Paul Pierce or Kevin Garnett. But they boo Joe Johnson?

Why?

Because they never liked him . . they blamed him for whatever financial situation the franchise was in . . and because they don't want him to succeed in Brooklyn as a secondary/main guy, when he couldn't get it done as the main guy in ATL.

If you don't think that some of these things aren't factors in this thread, then I don't know what to say.

[Diesel]

I don't follow this. I first disagree that they had no hope for the future. Then they didn't land Dwight so now under your own criteria they still have "virtually no hope for the future" but they also have no ability to build OKC style. I don't think some short-term just better than mediocre play warrants destroying the possibility of a true team build for the next five years.

It's very simple. Deron is a very special player. Top tier PG in the game. IF trading a bunch of nothing to get Joe got Deron to stay, that trade was a win for Brooklyn.

Say what you will about contracts and declines. UNLIKE us, moving into a new arena in Brooklyn... they couldn't have done that and put a lottery team on the floor. I'm sure if you ask them, they would tell you that they would do the Johnson trade again. Maybe not the Wallace trade, but definitely the Johnson trade.

[Diesel]

The OKC model is about as much of a pipe dream as the Detroit model of no superstars on the team ( although that was a defensive star laden team ).

The OKC model means the Nets ( or any other team ) would have to:

- draft a Hall of famer . . . . Durant

- draft an All-Star ( 2nd or 3rd team All-NBA caliber player ) . . . . Westbrook

- draft another All-Star ( 2nd or 3rd team All-NBA caliber player ) . . . . Harden

- draft one of the best shot blockers in the game . . . . Ibaka

All within a 3 year period.

They literally didn't miss on a single high level draft pick.

If it were that easy to do, the Charlotte Bobcats, Sacramento Kings, and Washington Wizards would all have high caliber playoff level teams right now.

No . . . what Brooklyn decided to do, is follow the blueprint that Miami, New York, and Boston have done in the East. Go out and bring in a bunch of veteran star level players who couldn't get it done as "the man" on their former team, and team them together to see if they can get it done on the same team.

So if you want to fault a real bad team for paying a boatload of money to beccome a mid level playoff team, it is what it is I guess.

All I know is that I wouldn't want to trade places with Charlotte, or Sacramento, or Washington for the world.

Too many people have short memories. They don't remember when we sucked. They don't remember when we couldn't win 20 games. We're mediocre but we don't suck. They also don't remember the uncertainty of the draft.

While OKC was drafting a Westbrook and Durant (thanks Boston, thanks Orl).

We were drafting Marvin and Shelden.

That's all that needs to be said.

[Diesel]

The fact that Danny dumped both Joe and Marvin for expiring contracts is one of the greatest moves I've ever seen a front office do in sports history and I've been watching sports since the 1970's.

It's not great until he does something productive with the capspace.

We can just as easily turn over that same capspace to Smoove and Teague and Korver and be worst than before.

[Diesel]

But the moves aside from predicting the future Diesel. Can you say anything positive about what he was able to do to get rid of two undeniably horrible contracts?

It was good to get out of the contracts if we use the capspace right. If we don't then it was bad.

We could have just as easily kept JJ and traded Josh/Marvin/1st for Pau Gasol.

Teague, JJ, Pau and Horf would have been a good core for us also. Right now, we are where we have always been. Middle of the pack with nothing. We've shown that we can't beat any of the top 5 teams. We are a first round knockout and we either lose Smoove for nothing or overpay Smoove to stay and hike up threes..

[Eddielives]

It's not great until he does something productive with the capspace.

We can just as easily turn over that same capspace to Smoove and Teague and Korver and be worst than before.

We definitely disagree on this. The way I see it is very simple. We had arguably the worst contract in the NBA in Joe's. Nobody really disagrees with this. And it's not like it was going away any time soon. To find a team willing to take the risk of said contract is remarkable in and of itself. There's no reason to attach future moves to be able to rate that move. Now if you want to string together a succession of events that have yet to take place and might be related to the end game overall, then I see your point. But the fact is DF did what most people would have believed to be very unlikely in finding a suitor for Joe's albatross of a contract. Even if we strikeout on free agency this coming summer, I will still say at least we are trying and not floundering in mediocrity. I know it can get worse by becoming another lottery team. But I still reject the notion that because we've had bad drafting in the past or bad luck signing free agents in the past that it means it will never happen. Having a hopeless attitude towards this franchise being able to lure that big name or strike gold in the lottery is still a day I hope to see happen as a Hawks fan. And DF has put us in the position to at least try once again. If at first you don't succeed, you keep trying.

[Diesel]

We definitely disagree on this. The way I see it is very simple. We had arguably the worst contract in the NBA in Joe's. Nobody really disagrees with this. And it's not like it was going away any time soon. To find a team willing to take the risk of said contract is remarkable in and of itself. There's no reason to attach future moves to be able to rate that move. Now if you want to string together a succession of events that have yet to take place and might be related to the end game overall, then I see your point. But the fact is DF did what most people would have believed to be very unlikely in finding a suitor for Joe's albatross of a contract. Even if we strikeout on free agency this coming summer, I will still say at least we are trying and not floundering in mediocrity. I know it can get worse by becoming another lottery team. But I still reject the notion that because we've had bad drafting in the past or bad luck signing free agents in the past that it means it will never happen. Having a hopeless attitude towards this franchise being able to lure that big name or strike gold in the lottery is still a day I hope to see happen as a Hawks fan. And DF has put us in the position to at least try once again. If at first you don't succeed, you keep trying.

So let's get this clear.

You're saying that us getting rid of Joe's contract is a good thing EVEN IF the only thing we do with the capspace is resign Josh to a max deal and resign Teague, Zaza, and Korver. You must be a teapartyer?

Capspace is Meaningless unless you do something good with it.

[Eddielives]

So let's get this clear.

You're saying that us getting rid of Joe's contract is a good thing EVEN IF the only thing we do with the capspace is resign Josh to a max deal and resign Teague, Zaza, and Korver. You must be a teapartyer?

Capspace is Meaningless unless you do something good with it.

I don't know how on earth you injected politics into what I was saying. How did we go from talking about the Hawks to me being a teapartyer? All I'm saying is that if you are never in a position to try and make your team a championship contender and are far more satisfied with overpaid players that aren't leading you any further than maybe the second round, then I can understand how you feel. Yes, if we fail to sign a free agent that most would agree is worth the max then I will be disappointed but not is disagreement with the fact that DF put us into position to at least try. I don't know how to make it more clear but I believe you don't let past disappointments deter you from still pursuing a strategy that if you succeed, will make you more than just a good or above average team. I am willing to see the Hawks as a lottery team again if it means being in position to get that Durant type player in the draft. I'm willing to trade a terrible contract and take the chance on striking out in free agency even for the chance to get that big name to come here. And no I don't want to overpay for JOsh and I don't think DF will. I will say this though about Josh if he does get paid more than what he might deserve. His numbers won't decline and his passion will be more visible than Joe's apathetic and declining play was after he signed his contract. Look at Joe's numbers over the years. Notice the down arrow. Josh will more than likely, for whomever he signs, be at or above his career stats for the duration of the deal.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I don't know how on earth you injected politics into what I was saying. How did we go from talking about the Hawks to me being a teapartyer? All I'm saying is that if you are never in a position to try and make your team a championship contender and are far more satisfied with overpaid players that aren't leading you any further than maybe the second round, then I can understand how you feel. Yes, if we fail to sign a free agent that most would agree is worth the max then I will be disappointed but not is disagreement with the fact that DF put us into position to at least try. I don't know how to make it more clear but I believe you don't let past disappointments deter you from still pursuing a strategy that if you succeed, will make you more than just a good or above average team. I am willing to see the Hawks as a lottery team again if it means being in position to get that Durant type player in the draft. I'm willing to trade a terrible contract and take the chance on striking out in free agency even for the chance to get that big name to come here. And no I don't want to overpay for JOsh and I don't think DF will. I will say this though about Josh if he does get paid more than what he might deserve. His numbers won't decline and his passion will be more visible than Joe's apathetic and declining play was after he signed his contract. Look at Joe's numbers over the years. Notice the down arrow. Josh will more than likely, for whomever he signs, be at or above his career stats for the duration of the deal.

Josh is putting up increased numbers because his usage is that of a superstar. That increased usage isn't putting up superstar or even all-star numbers, because he's so inefficient as an offensive player.

His current Usage % is 26.7%. Al Horford's is currently at 21.6% ( a career high as of this moment ). If the Hawks want to improve in the coming years, those numbers BETTER be flipped, with Horford getting the star-like usage, and the chance to put up much better numbers.

As for JJ's so-called apathetic and declining play, he had one of his most efficient seasons just last season, with JJ also bailing us out of games with "hero ball" after the All-Star break. But his raw numbers were down because . . . . his Usage was down.

This season, his usage is down even more because he's arguably playing with 2 better offensive players. He's been playing bad since the All-Star break, so that definitely has contributed to his numbers being down.

As for his escalating contract, I'll say what I said when he signed it. If a team wants to get out of that contract in Year 5 and especially in Year 6, they'll be able to do it quite easily. The contract will represent too much money about to expire, for it to not be a highly attractive deal for a team that wants to get significantly under the cap. The Nets won't nearly be as hamstrung as people think they may be in a few years.

[Diesel]

I don't know how on earth you injected politics into what I was saying. How did we go from talking about the Hawks to me being a teapartyer? All I'm saying is that if you are never in a position to try and make your team a championship contender and are far more satisfied with overpaid players that aren't leading you any further than maybe the second round, then I can understand how you feel. Yes, if we fail to sign a free agent that most would agree is worth the max then I will be disappointed but not is disagreement with the fact that DF put us into position to at least try. I don't know how to make it more clear but I believe you don't let past disappointments deter you from still pursuing a strategy that if you succeed, will make you more than just a good or above average team. I am willing to see the Hawks as a lottery team again if it means being in position to get that Durant type player in the draft. I'm willing to trade a terrible contract and take the chance on striking out in free agency even for the chance to get that big name to come here. And no I don't want to overpay for JOsh and I don't think DF will. I will say this though about Josh if he does get paid more than what he might deserve. His numbers won't decline and his passion will be more visible than Joe's apathetic and declining play was after he signed his contract. Look at Joe's numbers over the years. Notice the down arrow. Josh will more than likely, for whomever he signs, be at or above his career stats for the duration of the deal.

being in a position to do something big and actually doing something big are two different things.

Everybody is labeling what DF did as great without seeing what will become of this capspace. Charlotte and Sacramento have both been low on the capspace totem pole several times. What has it yielded? Everybody believes in this capspace idea but the truth is that good players are not going to leave their bird rights to take money unless they are being overpaid. So we can talk about D-12, we can talk about CP3 but those are just pipedreams. IN fAct, we have every reason in the world that D-12 should want to be here...but LAL has one better reason.

So with our capspace, we have to hope that there is some player that is really upset with his place on his team and willing to come here for the money and opportunity. Or maybe we hope that the NBA will find a way to tax teams more so that our capspace can be more attractive.

[MaceCase]

As for his escalating contract, I'll say what I said when he signed it. If a team wants to get out of that contract in Year 5 and especially in Year 6, they'll be able to do it quite easily. The contract will represent too much money about to expire, for it to not be a highly attractive deal for a team that wants to get significantly under the cap. The Nets won't nearly be as hamstrung as people think they may be in a few years.

Sooooooooooo, the way that non-desirable expiring contracts work now is that teams will just help you out of them rather than dump their own non-desirable longer-term deals on you? This is a quite a take, I always do enjoy your insights into the business aspect of basketball.

[Guest]

Ferry cannot be judged by what he hasn't done, we can only judge him by what he has been able to do thus far. There was no hope with Joe, none, nada....2nd round at best. Everybody and their momma, cousin and crazy uncle knew that.

We now have chance to build something the right way - will it be succesful? I don't know, I hope that it is - only time will tell and that is better than just accepting our 2nd round at best status.

[Ruckus]

So Diesel... You wanted us to keep Joe?I have to agree with the mindset of it's better to try and fail than never to try at all. If Dwight and CP3 don't come to Atlanta I am not blaming Ferry. That was a long shot to begin with.Sure, I don't think he deserves the royal treatment for offloading Joe's contract exclusively. But, at least he had the balls to make a move he saw as beneficial to the organization's future. And many people just so happen to agree with his thought process. We were 4th seed last season, correct? Well we were 4th seed a couple of days ago, also. Even with our crazy bad play recently. Do I think we are better this season? No. But we aren't that far off either.

[Bahamut]

My impression of Ferry will come down to this off-season. That will tell the whole story, and I'm not just basing it on getting D12 or CP3. Just build a winner.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Sooooooooooo, the way that non-desirable expiring contracts work now is that teams will just help you out of them rather than dump their own non-desirable longer-term deals on you? This is a quite a take, I always do enjoy your insights into the business aspect of basketball.

You have it exactly right. You just can't see far enough to see how it will ( and has worked in the past ).

Of course the team will dump a longer contract on you. But it will be for less money, and may be easier to trade in the new future for an even lesser contract.

Scenario:

- It's January 2015, and the Nets are looking at paying a ridiculous tax bill at the end of the 2016 season. Their total salary will be 79 - 80 million going into the 2015 - 16 season ( after they sign a slew of vet minimum guys to fill out the roster ).

With the Nets failing to get to the NBA Finals, and the team in decline, they decide to deconstruct the team. And the target of that deconstruction are their 2 expiring contacts in 2016:

- Gerald Wallace: 10.1 mill

- Joe Johnson: 24.9 mill

- Total: 35 million

The goal: Flip those 2 contracts and turn them into 25 million worth of contracts going into the 2015 - 16 season. For the Nets, hopefully the Luxury Tax will be slightly higher in 3 years, at around 72 - 73 million.

- July 2015 . . . the Nets trade Wallace ( and his 10 mill salary ) to a team that has given up on a player with 2 years and 15 million ( 7.5 mill a year ) left on his contract. The team sees a way acquire Wallace, and shed that 10 million at the end of 2016, so they make the deal. This scenario could also involve 2 players making 4 mill apiece. They both may have contracts extending 2 or 3 years.

Nets savings on trade: 2 - 2.5 million

- August 2015 . . . the Nets strike a deal with a team to trade Joe Johnson in a 3 player trade. One player makes 11 million and has 3 yrs left on his deal. Another player makes 4 million and has 2 years left on his deal. The third player makes 5 million, and expires at the end of 2016. The team trading the 3 players sees the opportunity to shed 16 million in payroll by making this move at the end of 2016.

Nets savings on this trade: 5 million

- February 2016: The Nets make even more moves to shed payroll before the trade deadline. They trade a 4 million dollar player acquired in the Wallace deal for a guy making 2.5 mill for the next 3 years.

Nets savings on this trade: 1.5 million

Total trade savings: 8 million

Nets accomplish their goal, and get under the Tax.

Easy to do my friend. And it's done all the time in this league.