Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 45 of 45

Thread: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

  1. #26
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    As far as I know, it's exclusively used to allow you to absorb a player from another team's roster onto your payroll without giving up someone in return.

    I'm not sure if you have to include something (cash, a pick, a tiny salary) to make it legal or if you can just absorb a player another team doesn't want anymore.

    Otherwise, it's useless.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wage View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That is pretty much how I understand it. It allows you to trade nothing (consuming the TE) for a player that makes equal or less dollars than your TE is worth. I'm not sure if the 125% rule is also in effect with TEs, but I would doubt it. It's basically picking up another team's player as a restricted free agent(because they want to get rid of his salary), but your salary cap situation is not taken into account.

    So it is of no value when trading players for one another (well, if you are creative there are ways if it is multiple players I guess), but is only used when you want to trade nothing for something.
    The TE is essentially an instant expiring. It can be used to get a player from a team who is basically looking to cut payroll (a la Harrington), or it can be used to trade something that has no cap value (like a draft pick or the rights to a player) for something that has a cap value.

    The 125% rule does not apply because, basically, the TE is the "orphan child" of the 125% rule from another trade. If you use a TE, it is actually considered to be part of the first trade. In the Harrington deal, it was the completion of the Peja deal. We have two TE's that basically represent "trades pending" from the JO and Ike deals. This is why the expiration date on a TE is one year from the date of the trade.

    In the vast majority of cases, the TE is actually considered of value not for it's ability to allow a team to pick up another player, but for its ability to allow the team to shed salary. For example, the Pacers were able to reduce their payroll this year by $2.7mm in the JO trade, allowing them to stay under the luxury tax.

    This is why TE's expire the vast majority of the time, with the team holding them wishing to keep the salary relief for themselves (or the more mundane reason that they are simply too small to be useful, like the Ike exception). For example, Denver received (actually, created) a $10mm TE when they traded Marcus Camby to the Clippers, but their sole purpose for that trade was salary relief. They will almost certainly let that expire, in whole or in part, because the salary relief (and, in this case, tax relief as well) is likely of much more value to them than any player they could add.

    The Harrington deal was an exception. An odd confluence of events where the TE was "created" by Morway & the Simons as a way to keep from losing Peja for absolutely nothing. It is the only time that a TE was created with the express purpose of being used to get another player rather than salary relief.

    Generally, you should assume that teams will allow TE's to expire.

  2. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brown County, Indiana
    Posts
    3,800

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by QuickRelease View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I guess I'll never understand this TE thing.
    Think of it this way. Consider the TE as a player with no name. This no name player has a salary worth "x" amount, that is a one year salary. You can trade this no name player to another team, but only by himself.

    Now, Who's on first?

  3. #28
    Next stop June 2015
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,100

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom White View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Think of it this way. Consider the TE as a player with no name. This no name player has a salary worth "x" amount, that is a one year salary. You can trade this no name player to another team, but only by himself.

    Now, Who's on first?
    That's how I've viewed the TE. Pretty much as a ghost player....like a trading card with a value...

  4. #29
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    But not really because it's not like the other team receives the TE. It just vaporizes.

  5. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brown County, Indiana
    Posts
    3,800

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    But not really because it's not like the other team receives the TE. It just vaporizes.
    So do some players. Carlos Rogers, for example.

  6. #31
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,573

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    But not really because it's not like the other team receives the TE. It just vaporizes.
    it's true that the original trade exception vaporizes, but the team that "receives" the trade exception (i.e. sends away a player for nothing) will usually generate a new trade exception out of the transaction.

    so the vacant slot analogy is reasonably accurate.

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is why TE's expire the vast majority of the time, with the team holding them wishing to keep the salary relief for themselves (or the more mundane reason that they are simply too small to be useful, like the Ike exception). For example, Denver received (actually, created) a $10mm TE when they traded Marcus Camby to the Clippers, but their sole purpose for that trade was salary relief. They will almost certainly let that expire, in whole or in part, because the salary relief (and, in this case, tax relief as well) is likely of much more value to them than any player they could add.
    generally true, but the nuggets are a bad example. there's talk that they will use their $10m exception once iverson's $20m contract expires next year.

    which is not a bad plan. assuming that they're not interested in re-signing iverson, they will have some financial space to rebuild a younger roster - a $10m player from trade, and a mle player from free agency.

  7. #32
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by wintermute View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    it's true that the original trade exception vaporizes, but the team that "receives" the trade exception (i.e. sends away a player for nothing) will usually generate a new trade exception out of the transaction.

    so the vacant slot analogy is reasonably accurate.

    I've never heard that. As I understand it, you either have a big enough TE or you don't. If you do, that much is gone to acquire the player. The other team doesn't get a new TE.

  8. #33
    Next stop June 2015
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,100

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    A little help from wikipedia. Not sure if this is accurate of course:

    Traded Player Exception: If a team trades away a player with a higher salary than the player they acquire in return (we'll call this initial deal "Trade #1"), they receive what is called a Traded Player Exception, also known colloquially as a "Trade Exception". Teams with a trade exception have up to a year in which they can acquire more salary in other trades (Trade #2, #3, etc) than they send away, as long as the gulf in salaries for Trade #2, #3, etc are less than or equal to the difference in salary for Trade #1. This exception is particularly useful when teams trade draft picks straight-up for a player; since draft picks have no salary value, often the only way to get salaries to match is to use a trade exception, which allows trades to be made despite unbalanced salaries. It is also useful to compensate teams for losing free agents as they can do a sign and trade of that free agent to acquire a trade exception that can be used later. Note this exception is for single player trades only, though additional cash and draft picks can be part of the trade.

  9. #34
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,573

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I've never heard that. As I understand it, you either have a big enough TE or you don't. If you do, that much is gone to acquire the player. The other team doesn't get a new TE.
    Well, consider an example. Let's say team A has a TE, which is just enough to absorb player Z from team B. Both teams are over the cap so normal trade restrictions apply. Now, a trade involving player Z going to team A for zero salary (i.e. picks, cash, etc) is perfectly valid. Right? This part should be clear.

    But look at the trade from team B's perspective. They just sent out player Z for nothing (zero salary). In order to "balance" the trade (in terms of the CBA), a new trade exception equivalent to player Z's salary slot will be generated for team B.

    I can't think of any real life example right now. But I'm pretty sure that's how it works. Let's revisit the Denver Camby trade. In real life, the Clippers used cap space to absorb Camby's salary, thus generating a TE for Denver. However, hypothetically if the Clippers weren't under the cap but instead had a $10m TE, they could have done the same deal (Camby for nothing), with the same TE being generated for Denver. From Denver's perspective, it doesn't matter whether Clippers are using cap space or a TE - what matters is that they are sending away Camby's salary for nothing in exchange, which is what generates the TE for them.

  10. #35
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    I'll let count55 or somebody else confirm or deny but I'm pretty sure it does not work that way. For example, Atlanta did not get a TE after the 06 Al Harrington trade.

  11. #36

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Yeah, they didn't. We just had the ability to take on his new contract, while sending a 1st round pick the other way.

  12. #37
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueNGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    A little help from wikipedia. Not sure if this is accurate of course:

    Traded Player Exception: If a team trades away a player with a higher salary than the player they acquire in return (we'll call this initial deal "Trade #1"), they receive what is called a Traded Player Exception, also known colloquially as a "Trade Exception". Teams with a trade exception have up to a year in which they can acquire more salary in other trades (Trade #2, #3, etc) than they send away, as long as the gulf in salaries for Trade #2, #3, etc are less than or equal to the difference in salary for Trade #1. This exception is particularly useful when teams trade draft picks straight-up for a player; since draft picks have no salary value, often the only way to get salaries to match is to use a trade exception, which allows trades to be made despite unbalanced salaries. It is also useful to compensate teams for losing free agents as they can do a sign and trade of that free agent to acquire a trade exception that can be used later. Note this exception is for single player trades only, though additional cash and draft picks can be part of the trade.
    This is kinda, sorta right and kinda, sorta wrong. It gets the broad aspects correct, but the bolded, italicized segment implies that you could combine it to other salaries and take back more salaries (ie $6mm in salaries and a $3mm exception for $10mm in salaries), which is not correct, as discussed, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

    Quote Originally Posted by wintermute View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    it's true that the original trade exception vaporizes, but the team that "receives" the trade exception (i.e. sends away a player for nothing) will usually generate a new trade exception out of the transaction.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I've never heard that. As I understand it, you either have a big enough TE or you don't. If you do, that much is gone to acquire the player. The other team doesn't get a new TE.

    Quote Originally Posted by wintermute View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well, consider an example. Let's say team A has a TE, which is just enough to absorb player Z from team B. Both teams are over the cap so normal trade restrictions apply. Now, a trade involving player Z going to team A for zero salary (i.e. picks, cash, etc) is perfectly valid. Right? This part should be clear....
    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'll let count55 or somebody else confirm or deny but I'm pretty sure it does not work that way. For example, Atlanta did not get a TE after the 06 Al Harrington trade.
    I don't see, theoretically, why wintermute would be wrong. If Team A sends out $X in salaries (and is above the cap) while receiving $0 back, I would think that would generate an exception. Atlanta did not receive an exception because they were below the cap. Only teams above the cap can recieve a TE.

    The only reason that a TE might possibly not be created would be if there were some specific wording forbidding it. In other words, the fact that it was part of a non-simultaneous trade would negate the creation of the TE due to a "technicality" in the wording. However, I can find no such wording anywhere in Larry Coon's FAQ, and a cursory reading of the actual text of the CBA doesn't indication any such prohibition.

  13. #38
    Member Manguera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SoFla
    Posts
    104

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by pacergod2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    ...Wait until a starting PG goes down and they have no viable options. There will be a team whose PG goes down. Think Alston in Hou, Nash in Pho, Fisher in LA, Rondo in Bos, or Kidd in Dal.
    Or maybe Arenas in Washington? Antonio Daniels is their only PG until late Dec, early Jan. Not sure who we would get/want from them though... Etan Thomas?
    A healthy man takes a crap every day. A smart man does it on company time.

  14. #39
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,748

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Manguera View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Antonio Daniels is their only PG until late Dec, early Jan.
    At the earliest.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  15. #40
    Member Manguera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SoFla
    Posts
    104

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    I know Mike Wells' blog said the Wiz have no interest in Tins, but that was based on him missing 14 games. I'm reading that it may now be late Dec to early Jan before he comes back which would mean he'd miss 30-35 games. They're trying to get Juan Dixon but they're only able to offer a non-guaranteed deal for the minimum. If he turns that down they may start getting desperate... I hope.
    A healthy man takes a crap every day. A smart man does it on company time.

  16. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,443

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Manguera View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    They're trying to get Juan Dixon but they're only able to offer a non-guaranteed deal for the minimum. If he turns that down they may start getting desperate... I hope.
    The fact that they're only willing to offer Juan Dixon a non-guaranteed minimum deal says a lot about the chances that they're going to be willing to take on Tinsley's guaranteed $21M. It would take a huge leap of desperation.

    If they get desperate, they'll just cave in and offer Dixon a little bit more money under a guaranteed deal.

  17. #42
    Member denyfizle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Nap Town
    Posts
    1,409
    Mood

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yep that is stupid for him to say Marbury would start here.

    Otherwise, the Pacers would really have to think about a a Banks deal (I think he basically has 3 years 13.3 million left) and expiring contract(s).

    Then they'd have the option to waive Banks (maybe even wait until after this season) and then it's essentially like buying out Tinsley for

    -one year of Banks on the team
    -plus 9 million (what is left on the last two years of Banks contract.
    -plus the expiring one year deal of a expiring player for like 3 million (you could keep that player or not, really)

    So its like buying out Tinsley sort of, but you save some money and some future cap space and maybe Banks becomes a better asset than Tinsley after a year.

    Not the best thing in the world since Banks will still be on your books 3 years from now, but for only 4.7 million v. 7.5 for JT.

    Again, not the best thing in the world, but it gets Tinsley out of town and you save some money/capspace. Plus JT on Southbeach is worth it all by itself.

    edit, Smush Parker is a free agent now (not available to be expiring contract fodder), I guess, at least according to Wikipedia so it has to be true.

    Banks is not such a bad 3rd PG option either. The only way he can make this trade look bad is if he gets into stupid stuff like JT. I used to see him back in his college days at UNLV Thomas and Mack center, and he seemed like a cool dude. Not the type that would pull off a Jamaal Tinsley. Diener may head elsewhere after this season anyway so yea... I'd rather take Banks than buying JT out.

  18. #43
    Member Manguera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SoFla
    Posts
    104

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by d_c View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The fact that they're only willing to offer Juan Dixon a non-guaranteed minimum deal says a lot about the chances that they're going to be willing to take on Tinsley's guaranteed $21M. It would take a huge leap of desperation.

    If they get desperate, they'll just cave in and offer Dixon a little bit more money under a guaranteed deal.

    Dixon is a FA so they can't offer him anymore because they are already at the luxury tax threshold and don't want to go over. They can, however, trade for JT without going over.
    A healthy man takes a crap every day. A smart man does it on company time.

  19. #44
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    http://www.newsday.com/sports/basket...,3019397.story

    Marbury's release is getting closer.

    I also think this could be taken as a sign that an expiring could be "too big" to actually have any value, making me more comfortable that we didn't wait on JO under the illusion that he would gain value simply because his contract was one year shorter.

  20. #45
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    http://www.newsday.com/sports/basket...,3019397.story

    Marbury's release is getting closer.

    I also think this could be taken as a sign that an expiring could be "too big" to actually have any value, making me more comfortable that we didn't wait on JO under the illusion that he would gain value simply because his contract was one year shorter.
    Yep, that was becoming my fear over last season as well. I'm glad we got all that we did for JO.

Similar Threads

  1. RealGm.com Tinsley Trade Options
    By eldubious in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 121
    Last Post: 08-26-2008, 05:33 PM
  2. James Jones going home to the Heat
    By Unclebuck in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-10-2008, 03:19 AM
  3. How has Tinsley changed this year
    By Unclebuck in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12-22-2007, 02:02 AM
  4. Tinsley calls incident a "stupid mistake"-IndyStar
    By Trader Joe in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 12-11-2007, 09:44 AM
  5. Ummmmm...Marbury???????
    By NapTonius Monk in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 86
    Last Post: 11-20-2007, 12:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •