the $10M Trade exception?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from kdp59. Show kdp59's posts

    the $10M Trade exception?

    supposedly because the trade was scructured like this:

    the Celtics traded
    Garnett- $12.4M
    Terry- $5.2M

    for

    Humphries- $12M
    Wallace- $10.1M
    Brooks- $1.2M
    Joseph- $.78M

     

     

    Pierce- $15.3M

    for

    Bogans- $5M


    The Celtics supposedly got a $10M TE for the Pierce deal.

    but HOW could we take back $24M in salary's for only $17.6M in the KG deal?


    or did the Nets get a $7M TE also?

    if so, why does the NBA even HAVE a salary "cap"

    can anyone explain this to me, because it makes NO SENSE.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from kdp59. Show kdp59's posts

    Re: the $10M Trade exception?

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    *Terry has a 7.5% trade kicker.

    That means his 5.2m becomes 5.6m.

     

    The Celtics will be sending a total of 33.39m.

    KG(12.433m) + Pierce(15.333m) + Terry(5.625m) = 33.39m

    The Nets will total 24.1m.

    Humpy(12m) + GW(10.105m) + Brooks(1.210m) + Joseph(.788k) = 24.103m

    24.103m x 125% + 100k is not enough to make match Boston's 33.39m.

    The Nets are short by 2.529m.

    24.103m + 2.529m = 26.632m

    So 26.632m x 125% + 100k = 33.39m

    SALARIES MATCH!

     

    To get the 2.529m, Bogans must be paid 5.058m. Only 50% of the 5.058m will count as outgoing salary because of the base year compensation rule. That's the 2.529m the Nets needed to make salaries match.

     

    Here's how the trade was broken down:

    Trade #1

    KG, Terry, and White = 19.085m

    for

    Humpy, GW, and Brooks = 23.315m

     

    Trade #2

    Joseph to Boston - minimum salary player

     

    Trade #3


    Pierce for Bogans

    15.333m - 5.058m = 10.275m TPE

     

     

     

     

     




    first time I've seen White was a part of the deal.

     

    so the Nets got a trade exeption also then?

     

    looks like they are due a $4M one by your calculations, right?

     

    what a  bunch of bull$2t...why even HAVE a cap if you have these kinds of exceptions to it?

     

    don't get me wrong, I am happy the Celtics get an advantage, but the whole salary cap is really nothing but a Fraud in the NBA it seems.

     

    where did you get this info from on the trade breakdown?

     

     

     

     

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from chris33. Show chris33's posts

    Re: the $10M Trade exception?

     

    Some teams allow trade exceptions to expire without using them, and that's possible here if Ainge doesn't find the right deal. But the Celtics now have another asset that could help them acquire talent. Ainge could be in good shape going into next summer, when his list of assets will look like this:

    1. Talented young (or young-ish, in some cases) players: Rajon Rondo, Kelly Olynyk, Jared Sullinger, Avery Bradley and Jeff Green should all have varying amounts of trade value. (Note: Bradley will be a restricted free agent.)

    2. Plenty of draft picks: The Celtics will have two picks in the 2014 draft (their own and Brooklyn's), plus seven picks over the four following drafts. Niccceeeeeee.

    3. Bogans and Bass' contract situations: Because the Celtics (reportedly, at least) included two non-guaranteed years on Bogans' new $5 million per season deal, he could be particularly helpful in facilitating a trade. Teams could acquire Bogans as part of a deal and then waive him immediately, saving $5 million in cap space in the process.

    Also a potential chip: Brandon Bass. The power forward's current deal extends through 2014-15, so you'll probably starting hearing him referred to as "Brandon Bass' expiring contract" at this time next year – a name change that should be good for his trade value.

    4. The trade exception: Since I went over it above, I won't do it again.

    I'm not saying the Celtics will become championship contenders by the end of next summer, but Ainge has plenty of flexibility as he moves forward in this rebuilding process. He could potentially target a veteran star if one becomes available, look to acquire a top 5 draft pick or try his best to do both. The Celtics roster doesn't currently make a lot of sense, but the team isn't set up poorly for a rebuild. Not at all, but of course what matters most is what Ainge does from here.

    http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2013/07/boston_celtics_rumors_2013_cel_1.html

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: the $10M Trade exception?


    The cap in the NBA is frustrating.

    Is it mismanagement when your team has 1 star player (Rondo) and you are over the cap?  I'd have to say yes - it is gross mismanagement.

     

    Defense.  It is still important.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from chris33. Show chris33's posts

    Re: the $10M Trade exception?

    In response to Schumpeters-Ghost's comment:


    The cap in the NBA is frustrating.

    Is it mismanagement when your team has 1 star player (Rondo) and you are over the cap?  I'd have to say yes - it is gross mismanagement.

     

    Defense.  It is still important.




    Not at all.

    We are perfectly situated for rebuilding. See above.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from scubber. Show scubber's posts

    Re: the $10M Trade exception?

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

    In response to kdp59's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     


    first time I've seen White was a part of the deal.

     

     

    so the Nets got a trade exeption also then?

     

    looks like they are due a $4M one by your calculations, right?

     

    what a  bunch of bull$2t...why even HAVE a cap if you have these kinds of exceptions to it?

     

    don't get me wrong, I am happy the Celtics get an advantage, but the whole salary cap is really nothing but a Fraud in the NBA it seems.

     

    where did you get this info from on the trade breakdown?

     

     

     

     

     

     



    The Nets don't get a trade exception.

     

     

    Trade #1 has the Celts sending out 19m and getting back 23.3m.

    The Celts can take in 19m x 125% + 100k in a trade.

    So the Celts can take back 23.3m because 19m x 125% = 23.75m.

     

    The reason why the NBA salary cap is like this is because the players union refused a hard cap. Right now the NBA is using a semi-hard cap. That's why it's complicated.

     

    And I won't reveal my source yet.

    I'll make those CRAPOLOGISTS work for it.

    HAHAHA

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    What exactly is the rule here?  The overall deal has to satisfy the salary matching rule, I presume.  Then any sub-deal can have mismatch and generate TPE?  Or is it all sub-deals have to satisfy the salary matching rule except for the last one that can be delayed and generate TPE?  I don't quite get the mechanics of this rule.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from scubber. Show scubber's posts

    Re: the $10M Trade exception?

    In response to Mployee8's comment:

    In response to scubber's comment:

     

    In response to Fierce34's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to kdp59's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     


    first time I've seen White was a part of the deal.

     

     

    so the Nets got a trade exeption also then?

     

    looks like they are due a $4M one by your calculations, right?

     

    what a  bunch of bull$2t...why even HAVE a cap if you have these kinds of exceptions to it?

     

    don't get me wrong, I am happy the Celtics get an advantage, but the whole salary cap is really nothing but a Fraud in the NBA it seems.

     

    where did you get this info from on the trade breakdown?

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    The Nets don't get a trade exception.

     

     

     

     

    Trade #1 has the Celts sending out 19m and getting back 23.3m.

    The Celts can take in 19m x 125% + 100k in a trade.

    So the Celts can take back 23.3m because 19m x 125% = 23.75m.

     

    The reason why the NBA salary cap is like this is because the players union refused a hard cap. Right now the NBA is using a semi-hard cap. That's why it's complicated.

     

    And I won't reveal my source yet.

    I'll make those CRAPOLOGISTS work for it.

    HAHAHA

     

     

     

     



     

     

    What exactly is the rule here?  The overall deal has to satisfy the salary matching rule, I presume.  Then any sub-deal can have mismatch and generate TPE?  Or is it all sub-deals have to satisfy the salary matching rule except for the last one that can be delayed and generate TPE?  I don't quite get the mechanics of this rule.

     




    The aggregate deal passes the 125% trade rule for teams over the cap. But within the aggregate, there were three deals ... White-Joseph (minimum salary has no affect - like a freebie), KG for nearly matching salaries and the Pierce trade for the S&T of Bogans. Even though there is a huge discrepency between Pierce & Bogans wages (which developed the TPE) the entire deal when aggregated does fall within the 125% trade rules.

     

    And to be clear ... Brooklyn didn't have a TPE that was traded to us. TPE's can't be traded amongst teams. They are generated when one team doesn't get back a similar amount that it gave up as in  an $8MM player for a draft pick having no value per the CBA. Under the right circumstance (such as this) the TPE is generated as a result of the trade being broken down into three deals within the overall deal. The C's can use it to aquire one player or more than one but it can't be bundled and it does not pass to another team. Once used it is expended and a new one generated in the name of the receiving team as a new TPE with a full year for them to use it in turn. If $8MM of a $10MM TPE is expended on a player then the receiving team gets their own TPE for $8MM and the C's now have a TPE worth $2MM for use on another player. The TPE cannot be bundled with other exceptions or players.




    I understand the total aggregate has to be within 125% of exchange salary part.  But what I don't understand is whether the KG deal (trade #1) has to satisfy the 125% rule within itself or not?  Does each of the smaller deals has to satisfy 125% matching requirement except for the last one, or is none of them has to satisfy as long as the larger aggregate deal satisfies?

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from scubber. Show scubber's posts

    Re: the $10M Trade exception?

    That makes sense, thanks.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share