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

4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

    thanx again to travmil for doing the copy/paste on larry coons nba cba faq. if you want to discuss salary cap, it is a must read. otherwise you end up looking like a dope. been there, done that, have the t-shirt.

    couple of half-thought out points. sorry this is a little unorganized.

    the 25% max salary is really 22% of the 100% cap and the 100% salary cap number is not really 100%. most teams use the luxury tax level number as their 'true' cap number. right now, the salary cap number is about $58M and the luxury tax number is ~$70M. that means the 'true' cap is about 120% of the actual cap. plus with the cliff provisions, teams can exceed the luxury tax number by $4M or so with out too much pain. which makes the practical cap about 125% of the cap.

    all of the above means a team can have up to 4 25%-max contracts and still have plenty of money left over to pay the rest of the roster. funny thing about playoff teams, most of them spend all their $58M-cap money on their top 5 players. or will if those players are still on their rookie contracts.

    Lets take a look at the pacers for example. Danny will make $13M and $14M next couple of years. Extend that for two years and you get $15M and $16M. David makes $10M next year. IF he continues to play well, he will make about $12M, $13M and $14M when the pacers resign him. Roy should make $12, $13M, $14M and $15M when he resigns. Paul is still on his rookie contract. Next year $2.5M, then $3.3M. But when he resigns, he will make say $13M and $14M. That means the pacers have extra money to spend for the first couple of years, but are still going to need cap space in two years.

    Once roy, danny, david and paul's contracts mature, the pacers will be spending almost all of their cap space on the 4 top guys. Without signing george hill at all. I'm guessing George Hill will be resigned for $6M or $7M. Say $7M, $7.5M, $8M and $8.5M. In a couple of years, the pacers will be bumping up against the luxury tax level without paying for the rest of the team. Unless DC, Tyler, Lance et al are replaced with guys making a minimum salary, the Pacers will be over the luxury tax level. Let me be clear. the team will be roy, danny, david, paul, hill and 8 D-leaguers.

    The good news in all this is every team will be having the same kind of problems. And it could be worse. Teams like the Lakers and Heat will be losing guys and not replacing them. Odds are the lakers will be losing a guy every year. The Heat have lots of good role players that will have to take minimum salarys to stay.

    Bottom line: a 25%-max contract is not really 25%. It is really 20% [about] of the luxury tax level. A team can carry 4 max salary guys. But not more than that. If the Pacers think the Roy, David, Danny and Paul team, then they can keep them without any real problems. If they want to add a guy, DWill for example, they have to trade/cut one of the other guys to pay for him. And the Pacers need to be real sure George Hill is the 5th guy they want. Because in signing him, they will not be able to affort mid-level, BiAnnual or any other non-minimum salary guys.

    Originally posted by dgranger17 View Post
    The issue then becomes, do you really want almost half of your cap tied up in Granger and Hibbert?
    Originally posted by cgg View Post
    Cap is 58M, 25% is 14.5M.
    Max should be 5yr/83.4M or 4yr/64.5M with 7.5% raises for resigning own FA, or 79M/61.9M with 4.5% raises from a competing offer.
    YR1 14.5
    YR2 15.6
    YR3 16.7
    YR4 17.8
    YR5 18.9
    Originally posted by 1984 View Post
    I will be interested to see what Roy commands. Contact negotiations say whether a player is about the name on the front of the jersey or on the back of the jersey.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by travmil View Post
      Someone has already pointed it out, but I'm going to repeat it. As a 0-6 year veteran, the absolute MAX that Roy's salary can start at, offered by ANY team is about 12.9 million per season. That number is 25% of the current cap, which by rule is the most any one player can take up. If the cap goes up, that number will also go up, but it WON'T go up to 15 million. There are exceptions to that rule, but Roy does not qualify for them.

      So to be clear, NO TEAM CAN OFFER ROY $15 MILLION PER SEASON...

      The following is lifted directly from Larry Coon's NBA Salary Cap FAQ at www.cbafaq.com

      __________________________________________________ _____________________________________________

      Here are the league-wide maximum salaries. Note that there are exceptions to the maximum salary (see question number 17).

      Years in NBA1 Defined maximum salary 2011-12
      0 - 6 25% of cap2 $12,922,194
      7 - 9 30% of cap2 $15,506,632
      10+ 35% of cap2 $18,091,071

      A free agent's maximum salary in the first year of a new contract is never less than 105% of his salary in the last year of his previous contract. For example, a ten-year veteran free agent who most recently earned $20 million has a maximum salary of at least $21 million, even if that is above the league-wide maximum. A free agent does not need to remain with the same team in order to receive 105% of his previous salary, although the team that signs him is subject to the same salary cap restrictions as with any other free agent.

      A first round draft pick who completed all four years of his rookie scale contract, or a second round draft pick or an undrafted player who has four years of service, is eligible to receive a higher maximum salary if he meets certain criteria (see question number 17).

      Named to the All-NBA First, Second or Third team at least twice
      Voted as a starter in the All-Star game at least twice
      Named the NBA Most Valuable Player at least once
      Olblu read this...

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

        Originally posted by dgranger17 View Post
        The issue then becomes, do you really want almost half of your cap tied up in Granger and Hibbert?
        While I'd like to keep them both, if I had to choose I'd choose Roy. Skilled wings aren't as rare as big centers who can stay on their feet and avoid fouls.

        Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
        all of the above means a team can have up to 4 25%-max contracts and still have plenty of money left over to pay the rest of the roster. funny thing about playoff teams, most of them spend all their $58M-cap money on their top 5 players. or will if those players are still on their rookie contracts.
        This assumes you don't want to be able to add pieces except via trades. Once you are over the cap you can't get a Free Agent of any kind (and I think you need to have cap space to sign your draft pick, I could be wrong on that).

        We have a window where the cap holds for our players is below what their actual signed cap impact will be. I think we need to be sure we do any FA work before we actually ink contracts with our own guys. Hopefully we are allowed to communicate something to them (I know it is problematic to make any kind of verbal agreement involving numbers, I just hope we can say that we aren't dissing them we just want to do things in the right order to help the team).
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

          Okay...so whatever the MAX that Hibbert can get....I am going to assume that he will command something close to that #.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Okay...so whatever the MAX that Hibbert can get....I am going to assume that he will command something close to that #.
            Yes I agree. The point is that no team is going to be able to swoop in and make an offer the Pacers wouldn't immediately match.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

              Hibbert, Kaman, West rotation at the 4-5 with supplemental from Hansbrough and Amundson.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                McGee is the most talented? I know he might of been overrated mainly due to his injury problems but I don't think there'd be a single GM in the NBA that would take McGee over Lopez. Now that McGee actually has a good coach though, I could see him develop his game more so I see what you're saying in a sense.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  . . . This assumes you don't want to be able to add pieces except via trades. Once you are over the cap you can't get a Free Agent of any kind (and I think you need to have cap space to sign your draft pick, I could be wrong on that).

                  We have a window where the cap holds for our players is below what their actual signed cap impact will be. I think we need to be sure we do any FA work before we actually ink contracts with our own guys. Hopefully we are allowed to communicate something to them (I know it is problematic to make any kind of verbal agreement involving numbers, I just hope we can say that we aren't dissing them we just want to do things in the right order to help the team).
                  short term yes, long term no. the next couple of years, because paul is still on his rookie contract, the pacers can add a piece without subracting a piece. that is true. but when paul is off his rookie contract, the pacers will be at the luxury tax level. so then they will either go over the luxury tax level, something they don't do, or not resign paul george.

                  the math is pretty clear. you can keep 4 1/2 25%max contracts. if you want to keep 5 guys, then you can only use min-vets contracts for the rest. that makes adding a player, DWill for example, effectively a trade. to add someone, you have to get rid of someone. add someone expensive, get rid of someone expensive. it is pretty cut and dried.

                  edit: the pacers can add a short term vet, andre miller, steve nash for example, with no problems. since paul is on a rookie contract, they can use his money to pay for the new guy. but past 2 years, the big contracts will overlap and either the pacers go over the luxury tax level or not resign one of their big contracts.
                  Last edited by xIndyFan; 05-10-2012, 01:04 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                    Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                    Hibbert, Kaman, West rotation at the 4-5 with supplemental from Hansbrough and Amundson.
                    if kaman can play the 4 effectively, lou and tyler don't matter. 'cause they ain't gonna play.

                    if he cannot, they the pacers have no reason to sign him.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                      He wants to be here and we want him here. Like Danny he seems to understand what his contract could do to hinder this team. He wants to be here and win. I am betting it comes out about 5 years at 50 million.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                        Kaman is not coming to the Pacers. Maybe if they could have gotten him at the trade deadline, but now it makes no sense. I doubt he would want to sign with the Pacers to be a backup to Hibbert. He is not quick enough to play the 4. Personally, based on the salary cap info above, I'd be ok with resigning Roy. I do not think he will get a max offer, if we can get him to a contract around 9-12 million I would be satisfied with that.

                        This is the one flaw to Bird's way of building the team. Only so much money to go around yet we have so many valuable pieces. Subtract one piece and things start to crumble. Remember how the bench was playing pre-Barbosa. The chances of him coming back if we resign Hill and Hibbert are slim. I don't know if we can resign Hill and have DC be happy at the same time. Both are going to want to be starters next year.


                        @Pacers24Colts12

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                          I'm hoping for more of 10 million per year type of contract over 5 years but expecting more like 12 - 13 million per year over 4 or 5. What really worries me is we become like the Hawks and are just stuck in the 3 - 6 range over the next couple of years and no way to make an improvement because of cap situations. With the people who are reported to be on the outs in our front office I really don't expect any sort of crafty trades to be made to get us to where we want to be. I think we're one piece away from getting over the proverbial hump, if that article about Deron Williams wanting to win has any substance/merit to it we're definitely in the better position considering our cap situation now and the fact that we got further than the mavs in the playoffs but, I still think it's going to take a solid showing against the heat for anyone to really tip our hats to us and give us any sort of credit. It'd be a really nice bargaining chip on our end if we could stretch the Heat out to 6 or 7 games and go and tell Deron we were THIS close to taking it to the heat all we need is one more guy and we think you could be that guy.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                            Originally posted by PacersCenter View Post
                            Kaman is not coming to the Pacers. Maybe if they could have gotten him at the trade deadline, but now it makes no sense. I doubt he would want to sign with the Pacers to be a backup to Hibbert. He is not quick enough to play the 4. Personally, based on the salary cap info above, I'd be ok with resigning Roy. I do not think he will get a max offer, if we can get him to a contract around 9-12 million I would be satisfied with that.

                            This is the one flaw to Bird's way of building the team. Only so much money to go around yet we have so many valuable pieces. Subtract one piece and things start to crumble. Remember how the bench was playing pre-Barbosa. The chances of him coming back if we resign Hill and Hibbert are slim. I don't know if we can resign Hill and have DC be happy at the same time. Both are going to want to be starters next year.
                            The discusion about Kaman has been beat to death. Yes, Kaman can and has played the 4 effectively and did so for a lot of last season. If we could bring him in as the combo 4/5 we should do it and give him around 30 min. per game. We don't have any player in the logjam that can't be moved for another asset and Kaman would be a huge upgrade. I doubt if this happens though since I think he's really going to be paid, but he if he could be had for 10 mil then we should be all over it. We could add Kaman and Nash then sign Roy and still be under the LT.
                            As far as Barbosa, I like having him but we could do better with our cap space. He was brought in as a rental and keeping him should not be a first priority.
                            I'm not the least bit worried about losing Hibbert, he's not going to get a max offer elsewhere and even if he does we'll match.
                            I'm fine with losing just about anyone else on this team other then Granger and George if it mean a major upgrade at the pg.
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                              If the cap is 58M, and his max salary is 25% of that, then explain how his max salary is 12.9M?
                              "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: 4 free agent centers, who gets paid?

                                Originally posted by cgg View Post
                                If the cap is 58M, and his max salary is 25% of that, then explain how his max salary is 12.9M?
                                the best way to explain it is give you this link. it is larry coon's NBA CBA FAQ. it does a great job of explaining the in's and out's of the NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement.

                                the short answer is they take out some/all benefits before calculating the 100% of cap to base the max salaries on.

                                here is the larry coon faq explaination

                                They use a different cap calculation to determine the maximum salaries, which is based on 42.14% of projected BRI rather than 44.74%. For this reason, the maximum salaries are not actually 25%, 30% or 35% of the cap, and instead are a slightly lower amount. For example, even though the salary cap for 2011-12 is $58.044 million and 25% of this amount is $14.511 million, the 0-6 year maximum salary is actually $12,922,194.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X