Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

    This thread is to provide CBA/Cap info related specifically this upcoming summer. It’s meant as a resource, and not necessarily as a place to talk about potential FA/trade/moves, etc. It might be useful if stickied, or it just might be useful for people to read/refer to when they are considering potential signings, acquisitions, etc.

    Exhibit A: The Pacers' Payroll



    FAQ's

    What is the Pacers cap situation? - The Pacers have $57.8mm in guaranteed contracts, which is slightly below the projected $58.7mm salary cap. The luxury tax threshold is projected at $69.4mm. The $57.8mm is for 9 players (including Tinsley), leaving the Pacers needing to fill 6 roster spots.

    Can the Pacers go over the cap to sign players? Yes. There are a number of "exceptions" to the cap that will allow the Pacers to exceed it.

    What exceptions are available to the Pacers? For most of their own Free Agents, the Pacers hold the "Bird Rights." This means they can pretty much pay them anything up to the max. For other teams' free agents, or for their own where they do not own the "Bird Rights", they can use one of three exceptions: Mid-Level (MLE), Bi-Annual, and Minimum Level.

    Exhibit B-1: Exception Amounts

    Code:
    Name	Amt
Mid-Level	 $6,000,000 
Bi-Annual	 $1,999,000 
Minimum	See Chart
    Exhibit B-2: Minimum Salaries by Years of Experience

    Code:
    Service	2009-10
0	457,588
1	736,420
2	825,497
3	855,189
4	884,881
5	959,111
6	1,033,342
7	1,107,572
8	1,181,803
9	1,187,686
10+	1,306,455
    The MLE and the Bi-Annual exceptions may be split and given to more than one player. The Minimum is for one player only.

    Special note on the Min: If we were to sign a 10-yr vet at $1.3mm, only the amount equal to a 3-yr vet's min would count against our salary/luxury cap figure. This is to prevent older veterans from being forced out of the league by the escalating salary.

    So, how much money do we have to spend on Free Agents? This depends on what we do with our own FA's. It is almost certain that the Pacers will treat the luxury tax threshold as a "hard" cap. If this is the case, then we have about $11.6mm to fill out the final 6 roster spots.

    Hey, what happened to the $22.4mm in "expiring contracts?" Why can't we spend all of that money? Expiring contracts are useful as trade filler, but they are misleading when it comes to free agency. Essentially, it is your total payroll that matters, not how much is coming off of your books. The Knicks, for example, have over $30mm coming off their books, but will still be over the luxury tax threshold.

    What's the difference between the salary cap and the luxury tax threshold? The salary cap is the limit that teams can spend on players' contracts. There are hard caps and soft caps. Hard caps, like the NFL has, cannot be exceeded. The NBA has a soft cap, which allows for exceptions for teams to use to exceed the salary cap. The reason for the soft cap is to make it easier for teams to keep their own players. It is probably impractical to have a hard cap when you have the guaranteed salary structure the NBA has.

    The luxury tax threshold is a number above the salary cap meant to help control teams' spending. If a team exceeds this amount, they have to pay $1 for every $1 over the threshold they are. For example, if the Pacers were to sign a player that puts them $2mm over the threshold, they would have to pay $2mm in taxes. Additionally, teams below the threshold get a 1/30th share of the total tax collected. In 2008, this number was about $3mm, so in the example above, it would have actually cost the Pacers $5mm ($2mm in tax, and $3mm in lost escrow).

    Most teams, including the Pacers, will treat the tax threshold as a quasi-hard cap...going to extremes to avoid or minimize payment of the tax. Examples of this behavior would have been Denver's trade of Camby to the Clippers for a 2nd round pick and the Chandler debacle with New Orleans this year.

    What about options on our own players? Marquis Daniels has a team option for about $7.5mm. There is virtually no chance that the Pacers pick that option up, making Daniels an expiring contract. Travis Diener has a player option for about $1.7mm, and I am assuming that he will exercise that option and stay with the team. The deadline for exercising the option is June 30.

    Can these players with options be traded? They can only be traded if the option is picked up before the trade. As noted above, there is almost no chance at all of Daniels option being picked, even for trade, as it would almost certainly put us over the tax. Diener is of negligible trade value.

    So, can we spend the $11.6mm on one player? Technically, yes, but it would have to be one of our own, like Jack. This will not happen. For outside FA's, we are limited to the exceptions above, with the MLE being the biggest.

    What about our draft picks? The Pacers have one 1st round next (likely #13) and one second round pick (from Dallas). The #13 pick will command about $1.8mm, while the 2nd rounder, if signed, will get about $0.5mm.

    What happens if we win the lottery? I'll drop dead from shock. However, a top three pick will command somewhere between $3.5mm and $5.0mm for the first year. This will reduce the amount of money we have to re-sign our own players or pick up FA's. It seems a small price to pay.

    What will we do with our Free Agents? Well, the debate of what should happen is for another thread, but I would expect us to let Daniels, Rasho, and Baston walk. We'll tender a qualifying offer to Jack, and plan on matching it (up to a point), and we'll probably try to re-sign McBob for the minimum or slightly above. Graham is up in the air. For the purposes of Exhibit A, I assumed that we would re-sign Jack to a 4/$16 contract, and that McBob and Graham would likely be among the 3 "Players needed" signing on the cheap.

    So, what kind of money do we realistically have to sign a FA? The most we could sign a FA for is about $6mm (or a little less) to start, or the MLE. However, using both the full MLE and re-signing Jack would almost certainly put us over the luxury tax.

    Exhibit A above assumes that if we sign our picks, re-sign Jack to a contract starting at $3.5mm (4/$16mm), and sign two players at the min (3 yr vet level), that would leave us just over $4.1mm to sign someone.

    This figure may be optimistic. It is possible that Jack could command more money, but my assumption is that the Pacers won't match anything over $5mm to start, maybe as little as $4.5. Therefore, an aggressive suitor for Jack could knock our available money down to as little as $2.6mm.

    Is there anything we should worry about longer term? Yes. As we all know, we're in cap hell. Bird did a lot with last summer's moves to alleviate that, but there's still a long way to go. It is not helped by the declining NBA revenues and cap structure...this probably cost the Pacers $5-6mm in space this summer, and another $6mm next.

    It is important to realize one thing. If we re-sign Jack, or pick up a similarly-price (MLE) FA this summer, we will go over the tax threshold, not for this coming year, but the year following. The good news is that our payroll situation clears up considerably in 2011, but if the Simons decided they did not want to pay the tax at any point, then we could be looking at a summer of losing Jack and only signing Min-type players.

    What about Tinsley? Well, what about him? He's owed $7.2mm next year and $7.6mm the year after. We should assume that all of that will remain on our books. His arbitration hearing will come this summer, and that could shed some light. However, it's unlikely to bring significant relief.

    The only way to get all of Jamaal's salary off the books is to find a team far enough under the cap to take on his salary and only send back a draft pick. This is exceedingly unlikely.

    What about a buyout? As discussed ad nauseum, the buyout could save some money if it is for less than the remaining amount. However, it's very unlikely that he'd take much less than $14.0mm on the $14.8 owed. A few hundred k or a mil could give a little breathing room, but only very little.

    What teams are under the cap? There are several teams like the Pacers, sitting a few hundred thousand or a couple million below the cap, but they are effectively over the cap, once you factor cap holds, draft picks, and re-signings.

    There are only seven (7) teams significantly under the cap: Atlanta, Detroit, Memphis, Minnesota, Oklahoma City, Sacramento, and Toronto. Of those teams, strong rumors indicate that only Detroit and Oklahoma City will be willing to take on significant salaries. Everybody else will be re-signing their own players, saving for 2010, or simply cutting costs.

    I'm sure there are more things, and I'll add as it makes sense.

    As I said, this is not a place for discussing what to do (what players to get) with the Pacers' available space/exceptions. However, if you have other questions, you can post them here, and someone will respond.

    or...you can follow the link below


    As always, Larry Coon's FAQ is the best source for detailed CBA questions, and I relied on it heavily for the information included.
    Last edited by count55; 05-16-2009, 02:57 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

    Nice info.

    Danny was paid around 3 million this season right?

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

      Originally posted by TroyMurphy3 View Post
      Nice info.

      Danny was paid around 3 million this season right?
      $2,329

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

        Count,

        Where'd you get the salary info for Danny? I've never seen it posted anywhere else.

        I hope you're demonstrating some prescience in your estimation of Jack's contract. $3.5 million for Jack would be a great deal.

        Of the under the cap teams, Atlanta, Minnesota, and Sacramento all need PG's pretty badly. I could see Atlanta making a run at Jack, but he doesn't make a ton of sense for Minnesota or Sacramento. I like him, but it's not like either one of those teams becomes even remotely competitive by adding Jack. The thing that worries me the most is somebody getting crazy and offering the full MLE.
        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

        - Salman Rushdie

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

          Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
          Count,

          Where'd you get the salary info for Danny? I've never seen it posted anywhere else.
          I hate to admit it, but I used Hoopshype. No one else has it posted, but the numbers they have fit with the reported 5/$60-$64mm. The big question is how the money is spread. This presentation is the most favorable for this summer, since it's the typical back-ended, max annual raise contract.

          If the contract's flat, we'll have less money. I'm hopeful Shamsports gets numbers up soon.

          Originally posted by mel
          I hope you're demonstrating some prescience in your estimation of Jack's contract. $3.5 million for Jack would be a great deal.

          Of the under the cap teams, Atlanta, Minnesota, and Sacramento all need PG's pretty badly. I could see Atlanta making a run at Jack, but he doesn't make a ton of sense for Minnesota or Sacramento. I like him, but it's not like either one of those teams becomes even remotely competitive by adding Jack. The thing that worries me the most is somebody getting crazy and offering the full MLE.
          I'm sure I'm being optimistic. Honestly, I think 4/$16 may be right, but it will be flat ($4mm per year). I think I mentioned it in my post, but I believe the Pacers will match anything up to $5mm before it gets dicey.

          If Atlanta has a brain in their heads, they'll try to re-sign Bibby for a reasonable amount. If they lose Bibby, I think they'll drop back into the 30's for wins.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

            Oh, and thanks for the sticky to whoever did it. I felt a little awkward asking, but this subject comes up a lot, and this might help for a little while.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

              Thanks to Count for putting all of this information into one thread. It will be a very handy reference tool.

              Count and I have debated the amount we each think Jack will get in the open market. He is pretty convinced 4 yrs 16 million is correct, while I am of the opinion Jack will get more than that, perhaps nearing 6 million per year. Time will tell on who ends up being right.

              A few things to remember that weren't specifically mentioned in the original post: First, remember that the possibilities for SIGN AND TRADE deals exist with free agents of our own and with other teams. There will be ways to be creative in how we utilize our money this season using this technique, and there are many variables to factor in. This may enable us to sign something other than a bargain basement free agent, if we can work out comepensation with the other team to take salary back from us.

              Secondly, keep in mind the rules of trading salaries to fit them under the CBA: salaries must match within 25% in either direction, plus $100,000. (If I am wrong about that Count can correct me).

              So for example, we in theory could sign free agent X for 8 million per year, if we did it in a sign and trade with his former club, where the other team took back within 25% either way of 8,000,000, plus $100,000.

              Just to clarify using real people, we in theory could sign Trevor Ariza (who I like to mention in every thread possible lol) in a sign and trade deal with the Lakers, in a structure like this:

              A. Lakers sign Trevor Ariza to a 4 year, 24 million dollar contract and trade him to Indiana. Indiana in exchange trades PF Jeff Foster to the Lakers (Foster makes around 6.5 million in 2009/10 I think, so this in theory would work)

              I am not saying this deal is realistic or even wise, it is just an example.


              And also remember that the players FIRST year salary in a multi year deal is very important to us. If a team really wanted to sign Jarrett Jack to a contract they don't want us to be able to match, they can structure the payout in such a way to make that hard on us the first year. For instance, using Count's theoretical 4 year 16 million dollar offer, it could be put together like this:

              Year 1: 5.5 million
              Year 2: 4.5 million
              Year 3: 3.5 million
              Year 4: 2.5 million.

              Again, I'm using soft numbers without doing the math, but I think that does come close to explaining what I mean at least. A salary can only increase or decrease a certain percentage each year, but there is no reason why a team couldn't front load the deal to make it harder on us. In fact, that is exactly what I believe some team will do.

              Lastly, I believe a team can structure a contract with a different PAYOUT structure. In other words, maybe a team could write it into the contract that Jack will recieve his entire lump sum salary for the year by a date certain, for example let's use August 1, 2009. If a team did something quirky like that, it would not only be the totality of the contract we would have to match, but also the payment schedule. That fact alone may influence a team like us with owners in a cash crunch to make a different financial decision than they ordinarily would.

              If any of what I just said is wrong, hopefully Count will read this and correct or clarify.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

                Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                Secondly, keep in mind the rules of trading salaries to fit them under the CBA: salaries must match within 25% in either direction, plus $100,000. (If I am wrong about that Count can correct me).

                So for example, we in theory could sign free agent X for 8 million per year, if we did it in a sign and trade with his former club, where the other team took back within 25% either way of 8,000,000, plus $100,000.
                You're in the ball park, but not exactly right. The rule is that you can take back up to 125% + $100,000 of the salary you're sending out. In the example you gave, the other team could take back as much as $10,100,000. However, we would have to send them a minimum of $6,320,000. So the formula's for the range would be:

                Max = (Salary * 125%) + $100k
                Min = (Salary - $100k) / 125%


                Originally posted by tbird
                And also remember that the players FIRST year salary in a multi year deal is very important to us. If a team really wanted to sign Jarrett Jack to a contract they don't want us to be able to match, they can structure the payout in such a way to make that hard on us the first year. For instance, using Count's theoretical 4 year 16 million dollar offer, it could be put together like this:

                Year 1: 5.5 million
                Year 2: 4.5 million
                Year 3: 3.5 million
                Year 4: 2.5 million.

                Again, I'm using soft numbers without doing the math, but I think that does come close to explaining what I mean at least. A salary can only increase or decrease a certain percentage each year, but there is no reason why a team couldn't front load the deal to make it harder on us. In fact, that is exactly what I believe some team will do.
                The decrease limits are the same as the raises...10.5% for your own players, 8% for other free agents. It's pretty much impossible to front load the contracts as severely as you describe. Because of this, there is no front loaded 4/$16 contract that we would not match, IMO.

                Lastly, I believe a team can structure a contract with a different PAYOUT structure. In other words, maybe a team could write it into the contract that Jack will recieve his entire lump sum salary for the year by a date certain, for example let's use August 1, 2009. If a team did something quirky like that, it would not only be the totality of the contract we would have to match, but also the payment schedule. That fact alone may influence a team like us with owners in a cash crunch to make a different financial decision than they ordinarily would.
                I can't find the link , but I am almost 100% positive that players get paid by the game, games 1 through 82. I believe this is the case because the player must pay taxes to the state/province where the game was played. So, when the Lakers play here, Kobe has to pay Indiana taxes.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

                  Originally posted by count55 View Post
                  I can't find the link , but I am almost 100% positive that players get paid by the game, games 1 through 82. I believe this is the case because the player must pay taxes to the state/province where the game was played. So, when the Lakers play here, Kobe has to pay Indiana taxes.
                  To the best of my knowledge (again, no link) players have the option to take one-sum annual paychecks or have the paychecks distributed on a weekly basis. I've never heard of a player getting paid on a per-game basis, but then again, I've never heard of The Hills before this week, so I'm a little out of touch.

                  BIG EDIT: Here's Paul Stanley discussing this three years ago:

                  http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...=1006040100861
                  Last edited by Los Angeles; 05-09-2009, 02:39 PM.
                  “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                  “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

                    Originally posted by count55 View Post
                    I can't find the link , but I am almost 100% positive that players get paid by the game, games 1 through 82. I believe this is the case because the player must pay taxes to the state/province where the game was played. So, when the Lakers play here, Kobe has to pay Indiana taxes.
                    Bi-weekly?
                    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...6175958AAJme4X
                    Resolved Question


                    When do NBA players get paid?

                    Do they get a check at the end of every game, week, month, or season?
                    • 3 days ago


                    by Nickster


                    Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

                    What up Myth Buster,

                    As far as i know NBA players get paid bi-weekly like the rest of us. There was an article in ESPN several years back and it was about why the Clippers were a poorly ran organization.

                    Ken Norman (Former Clipper) in this article said that there were several times when he came by the office to pick up his paycheck and the check was not ready-- his point being that this is supposed to be a professionally ran organization. Based on that article i'm gathering that NBA players are paid bi-weekly it's just that their paycheck has a lot more zeroes behind it.

                    Nickster
                    • 3 days ago

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

                      Anybody think that Morway backloaded Danny's contract to free up money for this and next off-season for FA signings?

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

                        Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                        Anybody think that Morway backloaded Danny's contract to free up money for this and next off-season for FA signings?
                        No

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

                          Originally posted by count55 View Post
                          No
                          Why not?

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

                            Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                            Why not?
                            Because, it appears that Danny got the standard max raise contract. It makes the most sense from a cash perspective for the Pacers, and it's the type of contract that the vast majority of players in Danny's position sign.

                            If there was any consideration, it was probably centered around avoiding the luxury tax and having Danny get more expensive as the bad contracts of Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley, and Ford slide off the books.

                            It may have worked out that it created more room for Free Agents, but it's not like this is some creatively crafted contract that magically allows us to do special things this year. It is what it is.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: The (Un)Official Summer 2009 Cap Resource and FAQ Thread

                              Great stuff. This makes it very easy to read and understand.

                              What are you basing the '10 draft pick salaries on?

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X