PDA

View Full Version : Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A - Jan 17, 2006



Kegboy
01-17-2006, 05:11 PM
So, we need a new starting 1, 3, and 5? If only he'd said 4, I'd swear he was Bball. :sarcasm:

indygeezer
01-17-2006, 08:59 PM
I was actually thinking more along the lines of Jay, but hey, Bball works as well


HEy (I don't get no respect)


Jay...BBall...and Geezer

We ride together!

Kegboy
01-17-2006, 10:36 PM
HEy (I don't get no respect)


Oh, that's nothing. Try to be me, not being listed as a Cabbage hater. Now that's disrespect. :(

Shade
01-17-2006, 10:39 PM
Since we need 15 new players, can we trade the Pacers for the Steelers?

Then we can trade the Colts for the Pistons.

SoupIsGood
01-17-2006, 10:53 PM
Oh, that's nothing. Try to be me, not being listed as a Cabbage hater. Now that's disrespect. :(

You loaded a pic of Cabbage into that one game that PN posted, didn't ya? :-p

Shade
01-17-2006, 11:01 PM
So, we CAN trade Bender and have his salary come off the other team's cap if he retires?

I R so confuzzled. :confused:

Kegboy
01-17-2006, 11:49 PM
You loaded a pic of Cabbage into that one game that PN posted, didn't ya? :-p

Yes, but the picture I used was him in Cavs jersey, so it ain't all bad.

able
01-18-2006, 06:06 AM
So, we CAN trade Bender and have his salary come off the other team's cap if he retires?

I R so confuzzled. :confused:

No, it is one of a series of answers that show that Wells is either a lazy sod who refuses to do some research and instead uses his Q&A to sink to the level of some people who email him, or is simply not skilled/informed enough to answer questions to which the answer is more or less readily available on the net.

A: with the Bender situation as is (Pacers will ask for a medical exemption for him, no matter what anybody speculates, it takes his salary of the LT and the cap, we get the right to take half that salary back in should we so desire) we are "on" the LT treshold, in other words 61.7 mio of our payroll is taxable (give or take a few 100 K )
Hence despite the Pacers being "willing" to pay approx 8 mio in LT IF we'd stay complete we are not using that willingness this season, though we still have a 84 mio payroll to cough up, unless insurance gives us something back for JB.
The 10 mio would only have been the case had we extended Fred.

IF we trade Bender then the receiving team has to accept some silly things; they will not be able to insure him anymore, they will have to pay his salary for this and the next year, be it that he might retire and they don't have to pay it all if such an agreement can be reached, but he will still count against the LT and the Cap. Unless you are really desperate to get rid of a player there's no way on earth you gonna do that.
The new team can NOT claim the med exemption on Bender, not for a year, which makes it useless as he comes of the books anyway (Mike are you reading this, next time you can just copy and paste it :D )

As I said in another thread, our current payroll / LT situations is as follows:

84.5 mio in salary to be paid (this is what goes to the bottomline of the company)
For LT purposes the following salaries are not counted:
Miller (6.1 mio) amnesty/ending contract
Pollard (6.3) ending contract
Jones (2.5) ending cotract
Gill (0.8) ending contract
Bender (7.1) med exemption

Total to be deducted for LT purposes 22.8 mio which leaves 61.7 counting, being the exact treshold.

indygeezer
01-18-2006, 06:40 AM
No, it is one of a series of answers that show that Wells is either a lazy sod who refuses to do some research and instead uses his Q&A to sink to the level of some people who email him, or is simply not skilled/informed enough to answer questions to which the answer is more or less readily available on the net.

A: with the Bender situation as is (Pacers will ask for a medical exemption for him, no matter what anybody speculates, it takes his salary of the LT and the cap, we get the right to take half that salary back in should we so desire) we are "on" the LT treshold, in other words 61.7 mio of our payroll is taxable (give or take a few 100 K )
Hence despite the Pacers being "willing" to pay approx 8 mio in LT IF we'd stay complete we are not using that willingness this season, though we still have a 84 mio payroll to cough up, unless insurance gives us something back for JB.
The 10 mio would only have been the case had we extended Fred.

IF we trade Bender then the receiving team has to accept some silly things; they will not be able to insure him anymore, they will have to pay his salary for this and the next year, be it that he might retire and they don't have to pay it all if such an agreement can be reached, but he will still count against the LT and the Cap. Unless you are really desperate to get rid of a player there's no way on earth you gonna do that.
The new team can NOT claim the med exemption on Bender, not for a year, which makes it useless as he comes of the books anyway (Mike are you reading this, next time you can just copy and paste it :D )

As I said in another thread, our current payroll / LT situations is as follows:

84.5 mio in salary to be paid (this is what goes to the bottomline of the company)
For LT purposes the following salaries are not counted:
Miller (6.1 mio) amnesty/ending contract
Pollard (6.3) ending contract
Jones (2.5) ending cotract
Gill (0.8) ending contract
Bender (7.1) med exemption

Total to be deducted for LT purposes 22.8 mio which leaves 61.7 counting, being the exact treshold.


Those come off the books for NEXT year correct? We would still pay a LT on Pollard, Jones, Gill, and Bender this coming summer, based upon them being in this season's payroll. So even if none of them come back we will have to fill their roster spot with SOME player/salary next season.

Gamble
01-18-2006, 07:01 AM
So when can you use the medical exemption and if its now why
not pull the trigger if its trully the best solution?

indygeezer
01-18-2006, 07:03 AM
So when can you use the medical exemption and if its now why
not pull the trigger if its trully the best solution?

Benie has to be the one to call the shots on that. It has to be his decision to retire.

able
01-18-2006, 07:08 AM
Those come off the books for NEXT year correct? We would still pay a LT on Pollard, Jones, Gill, and Bender this coming summer, based upon them being in this season's payroll. So even if none of them come back we will have to fill their roster spot with SOME player/salary next season.
To establish the LT the league uses its team salary on the date of their last regular season game .
This means that "ending contracts" are not counted, they are no longer on the payroll on that date. (contract ends)

So they come of the LT this season, what's not there at the start of the season is not important.

indygeezer
01-18-2006, 07:12 AM
To establish the LT the league uses its team salary on the date of their last regular season game .
This means that "ending contracts" are not counted, they are no longer on the payroll on that date. (contract ends)

So they come of the LT this season, what's not there at the start of the season is not important.

So how come so many reports put us as being over 10 mil over the LT level? Blatant ignorance?

able
01-18-2006, 07:12 AM
So when can you use the medical exemption and if its now why
not pull the trigger if its trully the best solution?
53. How do retired players count against the cap?

http://www.cbafaq.com

Any money paid to a player is included in team salary, even if the player has retired. For example, James Worthy retired in 1994, two years before his contract ended. He continued to receive his salary for the 1994-95 and 1995-96 seasons, so his salary was included in the Lakers' team salary in those seasons. It is at the team's discretion (or as the result of an agreement between the team and player) whether to continue to pay the player after he has retired.

There is one exception whereby a player can continue to receive his salary, but the salary is not included in the team's team salary. This is when a player is forced to retire for medical reasons and a league-appointed physician confirms that he is medically unfit to continue playing. There is a waiting period of one year following the injury or illness before a team can apply for this salary cap relief. If the waiting period expires mid-season (on any date prior to the last day of the regular season), then the player's entire salary for that season is removed from the team's team salary. For example, in March 2003 the Knicks were allowed to remove Luc Longley's entire 2002-03 salary from their books (and since the luxury tax is based on the team salary as of the last day of the regular season, the Knicks avoided paying any tax on Longley's salary). This provision can also be used when a player dies while under contract.

Teams are not allowed to trade for disabled players and then apply for this salary cap relief. Only the team for which the player was playing when he was disabled may request this relief.

If a player retires, even for medical reasons, his team does not receive a salary cap exception to acquire a replacement player.

note: apply for med exception first, get replacement, let JB retire. (IF we wanted a replacement)

able
01-18-2006, 07:20 AM
So how come so many reports put us as being over 10 mil over the LT level? Blatant ignorance?
Ignoring Gill, ignoring Fred and not counting on JB retiring.

and ignorance (i.e. it was on AP so it wlil be ok, why check facts)

:D

if they did not come of the LT (the expiring contracts) they would still be wrong, because in that case we would be more over the cap (approx 13 mio)

Jerry_McGuire
01-18-2006, 07:36 AM
Answer: I see several needs for the Pacers. I think they need an upgrade at point guard. Anthony Johnson and Sarunas Jasikevicius are both backups in the NBA.

If you put them in starting 5 - they wont be backups anymore... :rolleyes:
Stupid guy. Who is that Mike Wells by the way?

:fatbanana

Will Galen
01-18-2006, 08:16 AM
To establish the LT the league uses its team salary on the date of their last regular season game .
This means that "ending contracts" are not counted, they are no longer on the payroll on that date. (contract ends)

So they come of the LT this season, what's not there at the start of the season is not important.

I think you are wrong. Ending contracts would still be on the payroll for the last game. Contracts don't end until they are satisfied.

Anthem
01-18-2006, 08:29 AM
I think you are wrong. Ending contracts would still be on the payroll for the last game. Contracts don't end until they are satisfied.
That's correct.

indygeezer
01-18-2006, 09:08 AM
That's correct.


Yeah that's what I thought.

able
01-18-2006, 09:14 AM
I think you are wrong. Ending contracts would still be on the payroll for the last game. Contracts don't end until they are satisfied.

This was my first thought, however.......

Coons is not really clear about this, nor is any other info you can find atm.
So that leaves speculation, first of all the words are "the day" the last regular season game is played.
Now is that midnight or close of business, you can make a case for either.
Why this day, contracts run on into the playoffs, so where does that leave the teams that play in the playoffs, do they have a different LT then the ones that are dead in the water ?
Why would teams trade for ending contracts to get under the LT

The exact formulation if this clause is for the moment not to be found, but for speculations let's assume both, in the case of my example we are btw under the LT, as the numbers on the PD salary list don't add up, so I used another one :)
our payroll is (including reggie) 79.9 mio
Reggie comes off, no matter what, (6.1) so that leaves us with 73.8 which would be a 12.1 mio hit on the LT

Once I find out the exact data, OR the exact way of handling this I will come back to it.

For now we are either under or 12.1 over, there's no two ways about that

naptownmenace
01-18-2006, 09:40 AM
To establish the LT the league uses its team salary on the date of their last regular season game .
This means that "ending contracts" are not counted, they are no longer on the payroll on that date. (contract ends)

So they come of the LT this season, what's not there at the start of the season is not important.


I don't think this is correct. In years past the cut off date has been July 1st. Players' ending contract do not end until July 1st which is the date they become free agents.

So the Pacers will have to pay the luxury tax for Pollard, Jones, Bender, and Gill but not on Reggie because of the Amnesty. Really if this wasn't the case, why would the Pacers use the amnesty on Reggie if his contract wasn't going to be included in the Luxury tax to begin with?

Will Galen
01-18-2006, 10:03 AM
Look at it this way Able. Say we sign Big John to a 3 year contract. Say we will be over the luxury tax threshold for all 3 years. That means we would have to pay the tax for 3 years. You are saying we wouldn't have to pay the tax the 3rd year because it's an ending contract year.

That would obviously also mean we would only be paying the tax for 2 years on a 3 year contract.

Things don't work that way. This world always demands it's pound of flesh.

able
01-18-2006, 10:09 AM
I send an email to Coons, when he replies I will follow up