Article-Charlotte Could Play a Role in Landing Kobe

[schutd]

Originally posted by Joe Mama
I don't think any team would pay $10 million (Eisley's remaining salary - $3 million cash) for just a few draft picks.

Joe Mama

BUt thats my point. They dont havr to. They take him, get our picks, and he simply doesnt make the roster. He gets cut and becomes a UFA and the Bobcats arent responsible for the remianing years on the contract. Bobcats get two picks, we get out of the contract. Thats what the article is saying right?

 

[schutd]

Originally posted by hcsilla
What do you mean under "read THIS"?

IN the article. Specifically this line:

"Charlotte is only allowed two-thirds of what other teams get in salary-cap space next season, but the team is allowed to waive players taken in the expansion draft and erase them from their cap."

Isnt that why teams try and bribe the drafting team to take a bad contract? Becasue they get draft picks and arent even responsible for the bad contract if they cut the player anyway?

 

[jbeecham]

I thought when you waive a player, their salary still must be paid. If another team sign the player then the original team pays the difference between the original contract and the players new contract.

The NBA may be allowing them to waive players without the $ amount affecting their cap total, but I do not think they can just void contracts. At least that's how I read it.

 

[schutd]

And I thought that the loophole in the CBA was specifically for the expansion draft. I could certainly be incorrect, but I remember reading that expansion teams will often take a crappy contract in a "bribe" scenario because of that loophole. Only in the expansion draft. The players drafted in that draft are only guaranteed their contracts if they make the team.

Thats how I read it. But Im overwhelmingly in the minority here.

 

[elindholm]

The link hcsilla posted before seemed to indicate that there are additional restrictions. It's possible that beat writers don't understand all the rules and are speculating based on what they think people are telling them.

Maybe he'll post it again.

 

[Joe Mama]

Originally posted by schutd
BUt thats my point. They dont havr to. They take him, get our picks, and he simply doesnt make the roster. He gets cut and becomes a UFA and the Bobcats arent responsible for the remianing years on the contract. Bobcats get two picks, we get out of the contract. Thats what the article is saying right?

Their contract doesn't count against a salary cap, but they definitely still get paid. NBA players have guaranteed contracts. Some of those contracts have clauses that allow for their termination under certain situations (Vin Baker). However in this case the player would definitely still get paid for his contract. If another team picks him up after he's been cut I believe the team that cut him pays the difference between his new contract and old one. I could be mistaken there though.

Joe Mama

 

[JS22]

Ok, I think the darkhorse in all of this is Steve Nash. It almost pains me to say it, but I have a strange feeling that JC is positioning the team to get Nash back.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Originally posted by WastedFate
Ok, I think the darkhorse in all of this is Steve Nash. It almost pains me to say it, but I have a strange feeling that JC is positioning the team to get Nash back.

It is possible that they think Nash is exactly the type of player for this young team.

The added benefit is that it would make Dallas worse.

Who really knows at this point. We do know that JC and BC aren't saying a word.

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by Joe Mama
I don't think any team would pay $10 million (Eisley's remaining salary - $3 million cash) for just a few draft picks.

Joe Mama

Actually Eisley's contract may be even worse.
Although hoopshype.com shows Eisley's last year as a team option one of the realgm.com's CBA gurus stated before that Eisley's contract is quaranteed till 2007.

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by schutd
IN the article. Specifically this line:

"Charlotte is only allowed two-thirds of what other teams get in salary-cap space next season, but the team is allowed to waive players taken in the expansion draft and erase them from their cap."

I think that is simply wrong.
I quoted the CBA in another thread which proved that this rule does work only for players with ETO or team options which their team can excersize this season.
So Eisley does not qualify.

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by elindholm
The link hcsilla posted before seemed to indicate that there are additional restrictions. It's possible that beat writers don't understand all the rules and are speculating based on what they think people are telling them.

Maybe he'll post it again.

No, I won't because you are the only one who does remember that post so why should I bother other posters?
However if you wish I could PM it to you.....

 

[schutd]

Originally posted by hcsilla
No, I won't because you are the only one who does remember that post so why should I bother other posters?
However if you wish I could PM it to you.....

I remember the post. it was a section that made specific reference to RFA's and nothing more. It didnt say that this is ONLY available to RFA's nor did it state that any player in any other contract situation was exempt from this loophole. I dont even remember it being specific to rules in an expansion draft, though it certainly could have been.

I dont know why I continue to pursue this. I hope I'm not annoying people. I just have yet to see an answer that convinces me either way and we still seem to have some differing views about it.

If its not of interest to anyone, just ignore me, and Ill let it die....



for now. Heh.

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by schutd
I remember the post. it was a section that made specific reference to RFA's and nothing more. It didnt say that this is ONLY available to RFA's nor did it state that any player in any other contract situation was exempt from this loophole. I dont even remember it being specific to rules in an expansion draft, though it certainly could have been.

I dont know why I continue to pursue this. I hope I'm not annoying people. I just have yet to see an answer that convinces me either way and we still seem to have some differing views about it.

I made another research and.... well, you seem to be right.

"If an expansion team drafts a player in the expansion draft and waives him prior to the first day of the season, then that player's salary does not count against their salary cap (although they still have to pay him). This provides some protection against bad decisions made in the expansion draft -- Charlotte could select a player, later decide they don't really want him, and waive him without their cap being negatively affected."

Larry Coon's FAQ

So yes, Eisley to CHA without loading their cap is technically possible.

 

[schutd]

Thanks for finding that. So it shows that George is correct. Kind of. He speculated that the Suns would have to pay his salary, but it looks like the Bobcats would have to.

Either way, he gets paid. So then Joe makes a good point that the Bobcats would have to pay the salary, and a couple picks wouldnt convince them to do so. Even if it didnt negatively affect their cap.

I think I agree with Joe on that assessment.

Nice work, Hcsilla. thanks for doing the legwork. I'm really not very good at that kind of stuff.

 

[elindholm]

Now all we have to do is figure out whether the ORL pick that came in the Outlaw trade was really used for Stoudemire...

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Originally posted by elindholm
Now all we have to do is figure out whether the ORL pick that came in the Outlaw trade was really used for Stoudemire...

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by elindholm
Now all we have to do is figure out whether the ORL pick that came in the Outlaw trade was really used for Stoudemire...

BTW, it was not.
And I'm not joking.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Please BC. If you are going to try to sign Nash, you've got to stand firm. Don't give in no matter how much his agent pushes you.



NO HAIRCUT...NO DEAL! YOU HEAR THAT..NO HAIRCUT....NO DEAL!

Maybe you could throw in a membership to The Hair Club for Men, just to take away the sting a little.