CBA and Salary Cap related items...New 6 year deal reached 2023!

[AHF]

Didn’t realize the Knicks were that close.

[thecampster]

6 hours ago, AHF said:

Didn’t realize the Knicks were that close.

They aren't.

To get to his numbers you have to decline the option on Portis, waive every non-guaranteed contract including Wayne Ellington, Elfrid Payton, Mitchell Robinson and Reggie Bullock, It means not signing Harkless.

 

Using his same method of calculation the Hawks are a smidge over 50 million, not at 47.

[AHF]

2 hours ago, thecampster said:

They aren't.

To get to his numbers you have to decline the option on Portis, waive every non-guaranteed contract including Wayne Ellington, Elfrid Payton, Mitchell Robinson and Reggie Bullock, It means not signing Harkless.

 

Using his same method of calculation the Hawks are a smidge over 50 million, not at 47.

Thought there may have been some shenanigans with that.  Thanks!

[Gray Mule]

3 hours ago, AHF said:

Thought there may have been some shenanigans with that.  Thanks!

My old pappy used to say:  "All who figure ain't liars, but remember, all liars can figure!"

[thecampster]

10 minutes ago, Gray Mule said:

My old pappy used to say:  "All who figure ain't liars, but remember, all liars can figure!"

Not sure liar, just lazy. He used a tool (like I typically do) and just waived everyone not in green (guaranteed). But any media worth their salt would realize at least 3 of those players are going to be back. Knicks will have about $20-$30 mil to spend at $117 million depending on which road they take.

 

On the Hawks and holding them to a similar standard Teague will probably get $6-8 million to come back/go elsewhere. Assuming he takes $7 mil to come back. Bembry and Skal resign for $2.5 million each (I have no idea what either's value is, we'd have 13 players (1 second round pick and 1 first round pick slotted 4th overall) and would still have about $40 million to spend on 2 players.

 

IMHO this is the most realistic scenario for us if we can keep all 3 players on reasonable contracts.

 

One more thought here, those contracts need to be reasonable because Collins comes up for a contract next year and Trae the year after. You are going to have pony up for them.

 

Now thought 2. There is talk that the league cap may drop as much as $30 million due to Covid. In that Scenario, everyone but the Hawks go over the cap but remember the rookie salary scale would also drop by 30% which may change some players' minds about returning to school. Just a thought.

[Buzzard]

3 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Not sure liar, just lazy. He used a tool (like I typically do) and just waived everyone not in green (guaranteed). But any media worth their salt would realize at least 3 of those players are going to be back. Knicks will have about $20-$30 mil to spend at $117 million depending on which road they take.

 

On the Hawks and holding them to a similar standard Teague will probably get $6-8 million to come back/go elsewhere. Assuming he takes $7 mil to come back. Bembry and Skal resign for $2.5 million each (I have no idea what either's value is, we'd have 13 players (1 second round pick and 1 first round pick slotted 4th overall) and would still have about $40 million to spend on 2 players.

 

IMHO this is the most realistic scenario for us if we can keep all 3 players on reasonable contracts.

 

One more thought here, those contracts need to be reasonable because Collins comes up for a contract next year and Trae the year after. You are going to have pony up for them.

 

Now thought 2. There is talk that the league cap may drop as much as $30 million due to Covid. In that Scenario, everyone but the Hawks go over the cap but remember the rookie salary scale would also drop by 30% which may change some players' minds about returning to school. Just a thought.

This is why I think the Knicks and Charlotte can only chase one good player. 15 - 25 million to spend and they are done. If they get into a bidding war with the Clippers and/or Detroit trying to keep Harrell and Wood its over for them.

I really hope the cap does not drop 30M, that throws a huge wrench in our ability to sign decent players.

[thecampster]

This is a composite of the Hawks cap situation described above. Hard to sign a second round pick so I just filled in the cap number for the 30th pick overall. It's a second rounder for about 1.2 million is the only difference.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2g197g3x3pg5onl/Hawks Cap.png?dl=0

[thecampster]

Here is the nonsense the Knicks have to do to get to $46 mil at a $117 million cap number.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/iat2fldal5yx2ne/KnicksCap.png?dl=0

[thecampster]

I just went through and looked at his spreadsheet. There are some inconsistencies in his calculations. His Detroit calculation if using his Knicks methodology is closer to $39 million. I guess its a guide but not really sure his methodology when dealing with draft picks slotting, roster slot charges, etc. I think he charged a for a few teams but didn't for others. Consider them guesstimates.

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

 

Quote

Group 1: Little or no impact

Atlanta Hawks, Cleveland Cavaliers, New York Knicks, Chicago Bulls, Minnesota Timberwolves, New Orleans Pelicans, Orlando Magic

 

Quote

Group 2: Minor impact

Dallas Mavericks, Memphis Grizzlies, Milwaukee Bucks, Oklahoma City Thunder, Portland Trail Blazers, Sacramento Kings, Utah Jazz, Washington Wizards.

 

Quote

Group 3: It’s complicated

Denver Nuggets, Indiana Pacers, Los Angeles Lakers, San Antonio Spurs, Toronto Raptors

 

Quote

Group 4: Bye-bye cap room

Charlotte Hornets, Detroit Pistons, Miami Heat, Phoenix Suns

 

Quote

Group 5: Luxury tax woes

Boston Celtics, Brooklyn Nets, Golden State Warriors, Houston Rockets, Los Angeles Clippers, Philadelphia 76ers

Hawks are in a good position to hopefully steal some unexpected talent with their capspace.

[thecampster]

On 5/20/2020 at 9:46 AM, AHF said:

Thought there may have been some shenanigans with that.  Thanks!

A few years ago, you and I had "a spirited and contentious" debate about the cost of draft slots and teams trading out of slots to gain salary cap room, etc or to avoid the LT.  This year is a very good example of how that could work and the Knicks info is a great place to start with that.

 

The Knicks are slotted right now at pick 3 which is a starting salary of 8.4 million. Should the Knicks win the lottery that amount goes up 2 million. If they lose and slide to 7, the amount goes down 2.7 million. So consider the Knicks choices come draft night. They think they can get the player they want at 6 but they have the 3rd overall pick. Also, they aren't sure the 20th pick could play right away. The Knicks need to show improvement right now or their fan base will be in full revolt. The value of trading down to 6 from 3 and trading out of the 1st round could produce 5.4 million in cap room for the Knicks to operate at the front of free agency as well as future considerations. In the Knicks case, winning the lottery could actually limit their trade partners as opposed to the 3rd or even 4th pick because of the salary (and hold) that comes with it as well as what would be required to gain that pick. Take a team with 4 million in cap room. Trading with the Knicks at 3 means having to have a pick worth 4 million which is 12 or higher. But trading with them at 1 would mean having a pick worth 6 million or more which would be 6th or higher. Without acquiring salary to move the pick, the Knicks gain 6 trade potential partners by getting 3 vs 1 in that scenario. It's convoluted, but there are some teams in tricky cap land that are in the lottery this year. 

The difference could mean the difference between them offering a max contract or not.

Edited May 25, 2020 by thecampster

[AHF]

22 hours ago, thecampster said:

In the Knicks case, winning the lottery could actually limit their trade partners as opposed to the 3rd or even 4th pick because of the salary (and hold) that comes with it as well as what would be required to gain that pick. Take a team with 4 million in cap room. Trading with the Knicks at 3 means having to have a pick worth 4 million which is 12 or higher. But trading with them at 1 would mean having a pick worth 6 million or more which would be 6th or higher. Without acquiring salary to move the pick, the Knicks gain 6 trade potential partners by getting 3 vs 1 in that scenario. It's convoluted, but there are some teams in tricky cap land that are in the lottery this year. 

The difference could mean the difference between them offering a max contract or not.

I'm not seeing this as an issue for any pre-draft or trades made prior to the pick being used.

Quote

Draft picks have multiple purposes for the NBA's 30 clubs, as they've become a measure of currency within the league given that they hold no cap hold, and don't count on the salary cap until they've been used. That means movement of draft picks is free. Teams won't have to open a roster spot, or make follow-up decisions, to accommodate the arrival of a draft pick.

 

[thecampster]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

I'm not seeing this as an issue for any pre-draft or trades made prior to the pick being used.

 

Once used, the pick has a hold which adjusts the team's cap going into F/A. It isn't about the pick, its about the salary ramifications post draft, pre-free agency.

 

Edited May 26, 2020 by thecampster

[AHF]

2 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Once used, the pick has a hold which adjusts the team's cap going into F/A. It isn't about the pick, its about the salary ramifications post draft, pre-free agency.

 

I don't follow that with your example.  A team with 4M in cap space does not require a pick with 4M to do a trade.  You can trade for picks 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 with $1 of cap space.  The fact that you will then go over the cap after the draft is a different issue to deal with and going over the cap to get the #1 overall pick is not something many teams fear.

The Knicks could trade their #1 pick to any team in the league.  No limitation on partners and the value of $4M in cap space is not going to be prioritized relative to the value of the #1 overall pick.  

[thecampster]

13 hours ago, AHF said:

I don't follow that with your example.  A team with 4M in cap space does not require a pick with 4M to do a trade.  You can trade for picks 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 with $1 of cap space.  The fact that you will then go over the cap after the draft is a different issue to deal with and going over the cap to get the #1 overall pick is not something many teams fear.

The Knicks could trade their #1 pick to any team in the league.  No limitation on partners and the value of $4M in cap space is not going to be prioritized relative to the value of the #1 overall pick.  

But that trade is with the cap in mind a month later. Don't make it about the trade, make it about the result.  Post pick, can they sign the player they want. A higher pick limits the amount they have to spend later. For teams in a win now mode, the pick is counterproductive to free agency a month later.

 

Edited May 27, 2020 by thecampster

[AHF]

4 hours ago, thecampster said:

But that trade is with the cap in mind a month later. Don't make it about the trade, make it about the result.  Post pick, can they sign the player they want. A higher pick limits the amount they have to spend later. For teams in a win now mode, the pick is counterproductive to free agency a month later.

 

I don't consider the free agent options for a team $4M under the cap to be materially different from a team over the cap.  Again, this example does nothing for me.

[JayBirdHawk]

How contract Bonuses may be handled.

Quote

When the season was suspended in March due to the coronavirus pandemic, multiple players were approaching eligibility for contract bonuses. With basketball likely to return this summer, the league and the NBPA have to negotiate what will happen to that money. Sources told ESPN that the most likely outcome will be similar to how the league handled bonuses during the lockout-shortened season in 2011-12. Contract incentives initially intended for 82 games were prorated to account for the 66-game season. For example, a player with a $500,000 bonus in his contract for playing in 70 games qualified for the bonus if he played in 56 games. However, performance bonuses based on averages — such as shooting percentages — were not adjusted.

 

– via Bobby Marks @ ESPN

 

[JayBirdHawk]

Some agents expect the NBA to opt out of the current collective bargaining agreement by using the force majeure provision due to the economic impact of the pandemic.

“I’m telling all my clients to opt in,” another agent said. “Although they won’t tear up the CBA if we actually have basketball this summer, they will want to make changes to BRI based on the overall losses.”

The NBA owners went from receiving 43 percent of revenues to anywhere between 49 and 51 percent of revenues with the 2011 lockout.

The NBA extended its current CBA with minimal changes in 2016 and runs through 23-24 with a mutual opt-out after 22-23.

DAVID ALDRIDGE, JOHN HOLLINGER/THE ATHLETIC

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

Adam Silver hopeful of NBA CBA deal by end of week

 

NEW YORK -- NBA commissioner Adam Silver said Wednesday afternoon that there has been progress made toward striking a new collective bargaining agreement with the National Basketball Players Association, and that he can "foresee" a potential new deal being agreed upon between now and Friday night's deadline to opt out of the current agreement.

"I think both sides understand that this is a window of opportunity that we should try not to miss," Silver said during his news conference at the conclusion of this week's meeting of the league's board of governors in midtown Manhattan. "Because, if we don't have the deal done this Friday, the next real deadline is June 30, but that's the very end of the season.

"The whole idea behind these early deadlines [is] to try to avoid going right up to the line."

Silver said the league and the NBPA have separated the various issues on the table into different groups, from player health to systemic issues with the league to various economic discussions, and said both sides can "acknowledge we've come closer together."

Still, he said, there is a "gap" between where things currently stand and where he believes they will need to go in order to get a new deal done ahead of Friday night's deadline for discussions.

One thing that seems unlikely to happen, however, is that the two sides will go into next season operating under the current agreement. While there have been discussions for the better part of a year over getting a new deal done, the current one allows both sides the opportunity to opt out of the final year of the deal, or to let it run through the 2023-24 season.

Asked whether he would be all right with it running through next season and then expiring, Silver said he would not be, saying several things have changed since the deal began in the 2017-18 season.

"It's part of this collective bargaining agreement that this opt-out existed, so we wouldn't be acting outside of the collective bargaining agreement by exercising it," Silver said.

"[But] certain dynamics have changed since we negotiated this collective bargaining agreement. I won't go through the list, but media is one of them. We think there are necessary changes that we would like to make in the current collectively bargained relationship that take into account the realities of what media, the media world looks like now as opposed to what it did in 2017."

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/35995090/adam-silver-hopeful-nba-cba-deal-end-week