All the new NBA salaries article - Where the Hawks rate.

[thecampster]

Article ignores extensions reached last year that kick in this year but here is a summary of new contracts so far this year.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nba-salaries-contract-numbers-trickle-131052414.html

[JayBirdHawk]

Money just flowing:

There is a good reason why owners are agreeing to these mammoth contracts. The NBA earned $10 billion in 2021-22, so there is little cause for the owners or players to derail such momentum with prolonged labor issues. “The numbers did surprise me to a certain degree because they exceeded our projections,” commissioner Adam Silver said. “So to the extent our projections represent where we think our business was going, surpassing $10 billion in revenue clearly is a record for this league.”

 

[hazer]

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

Quote

• NBA players got a welcome surprise recently when the NBA decreased the amount of money they took out of their paychecks in the 2021-22 season. The league regularly takes out 10 percent of each player’s salary and puts it into escrow, and could later redistribute it in case of any shortfalls in revenue appropriated to players through the CBA. That number has increased during the COVID seasons and was set at 15 percent last season, with the league expecting a continued basketball revenue hit because of the pandemic. But with a revenue windfall exceeding expectations, players ended up with just 7.5 percent taken out of their checks last season, according to league sources.

 

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[Spud2nique]

1 minute ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

 

As far as the pay roll goes as it translates to winning, we should be the 11th best team in the league?

It’s weird but that sounds about right.

Crazy.

[macdaddy]

Capologists can (and probably will) correct me.  But being barely over seems to be where you don't want to be.  If we didn't intend to actually get under by the time it matters then i don't see any reason we'd trade Huerter.  

[JayBirdHawk]

14 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

Capologists can (and probably will) correct me.  But being barely over seems to be where you don't want to be.  If we didn't intend to actually get under by the time it matters then i don't see any reason we'd trade Huerter.  

Correct.  It's the repeater tax for next season that would be the issue if we are barely over this year.

[NBASupes]

1 hour ago, macdaddy said:

Capologists can (and probably will) correct me.  But being barely over seems to be where you don't want to be.  If we didn't intend to actually get under by the time it matters then i don't see any reason we'd trade Huerter.  

100% that repeater which Atlanta will have next year is real. That said, what else can you do right now

 

JC and Bogi value is slower than they would like

[JayBirdHawk]

mmmmmmmmmmmmm..................can't say I disagree in principle regarding retaining YOUR OWN players, since the idea behind RFA and the extra years is for teams to keep their own drafted guys.

 

Quote

Joe Lacob: “The truth is, we’re only $40 million more than the luxury tax. Now, that’s not small but it’s not a massive number. We’re $200 million over in total because most of that is this incredible penal luxury tax. And what I consider to be unfair and I’m going to say it on this podcast and I hope it gets back to whoever is listening … and obviously it’s self-serving for me to say this, but I think it’s a very unfair system because our team is built by — all top eight players are all drafted by this team.”

 

“I understand why they got mad at us for the Durant thing but anyone else would have done it too, if you want to go there,” Lacob said. “That’s the truth. And this one, I don’t know how they could be mad because we’re homegrown. And I think the luxury tax, you should be paying a high luxury tax if you’re using it to go get free agents and outspend your competition. But if you’re developing your own guys and paying Steph Curry what he deserves and Klay Thompson what he’s earned, why am I paying $200 million in luxury tax? I don’t think that’s fair.”

 

– via Ali Thanawalla @ Yahoo! Sports

 

[AHF]

2 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

mmmmmmmmmmmmm..................can't say I disagree in principle regarding retaining YOUR OWN players, since the idea behind RFA and the extra years is for teams to keep their own drafted guys.

 

 

Am I delusional or did GS go after FA DeAngelo Russell and sign him to a 117M deal and then flip him for Andrew Wiggins?

if GS is 40 million over, isn’t 31.6M of that Wiggins who was clearly not drafted by GS and was acquired by leveraging a FA you acquired in a SnT?

So if 79% of the salary over the cap is basically the result of you signing a high dollar free agent then why are you claiming all your team is home grown?  Is the guy who led your team in minutes played last season not a significant part of your roster?!?

[AHF]

4 hours ago, macdaddy said:

Capologists can (and probably will) correct me.  But being barely over seems to be where you don't want to be.  If we didn't intend to actually get under by the time it matters then i don't see any reason we'd trade Huerter.  

The key is that you only have to be under by the end of the year next season so you only have to free up 1.2M if you want to avoid the tax entirely and avoid being a repeater.  I think that is very achievable and assume the Hawks will do that unless they find some deal and are enjoying such success that Ressler agrees to increase the payroll in a trade next year.  Otherwise, the smart money is on betting that the Hawks do something like trading Harkless for a 3M player and ending up 300k under the tax line.

[Final_quest]

12 hours ago, AHF said:

The key is that you only have to be under by the end of the year next season so you only have to free up 1.2M if you want to avoid the tax entirely and avoid being a repeater.  I think that is very achievable and assume the Hawks will do that unless they find some deal and are enjoying such success that Ressler agrees to increase the payroll in a trade next year.  Otherwise, the smart money is on betting that the Hawks do something like trading Harkless for a 3M player and ending up 300k under the tax line.

Thanks.  That is what I was thinking and still watching for the Harkless move that will determine if we find a worthwhile player to trade him for or if we will look to unload the Harkless salary for crumbs. 

One of my bold predictions is that the Huerter move will show that we made the smart decision and got a 1st round pick for him that has more value than Huerter himself.  That move allowed us to be in position to get under the LT and add a decent rotation player in JH.  

[macdaddy]

14 hours ago, AHF said:

The key is that you only have to be under by the end of the year next season so you only have to free up 1.2M if you want to avoid the tax entirely and avoid being a repeater.  I think that is very achievable and assume the Hawks will do that unless they find some deal and are enjoying such success that Ressler agrees to increase the payroll in a trade next year.  Otherwise, the smart money is on betting that the Hawks do something like trading Harkless for a 3M player and ending up 300k under the tax line.

This is why I don't understand why folks are saying we're not avoiding the tax.   We obviously are or Huerter would still be here.  

[BangHolman]

3 hours ago, Final_quest said:

One of my bold predictions is that the Huerter move will show that we made the smart decision and got a 1st round pick for him that has more value than Huerter himself.  That move allowed us to be in position to get under the LT and add a decent rotation player in JH.  

Agreed. This trade can't be judged yet. Many pitched a fit when Cam was traded for the Charlotte pick that was utilized in the Dejounte deal, and the same type of thing could happen with the Sacramento pick. 

I also don't think keeping Kevin and staying that far over the LT makes us a contender anyways. It should be easier to move smaller contracts, like Harkless, as has been mentioned to get under the LT this season. If you're over the LT, you should be a contender.