Why Beasley was the #2 pick

[SunsTzu]

or teams that are doing sign and trade deals. Who gives up the worse deal is a matter of how the players perform.

Teams rarely stay under the cap for long periods of time so sign and trades become one of the few ways that those teams can improve.

The trade of KT was a mistake and a panic move.

S&Ts are going to be less common starting next year when the new rules take full effect.

Cap space trumps expiring contracts.

 

[Evil Ash]

Really? Show me where I made something up. And Kolb worked out greeeeat, didnt he?

That no other team was interested in him. Flat out false

He was a top 5 rated QB for the first 3 weeks of the season until getting beat up by the worst offensive line in the NFL. I'll give him more than one season that had a shortened offseason due to a lockout while learning a new offense to judge him appropriately

 

[elindholm]

Where guys like Childress, Frye and Warrick would require the Suns to give assets just to have another team take them.

I disagree on Frye. I think he brings enough to the table that there are other teams out there that would regard him as positive value on his current contract. But I agree that it's questionable. Childress and Warrick were mistakes, especially the Childress deal, which almost everyone agreed was horrific the instant it was signed. Warrick was a decent gamble, and the Suns wouldn't have to bribe another team much to take him off of their hands.

 

[Evil Ash]

S&Ts are going to be less common starting next year when the new rules take full effect.

Cap space trumps expiring contracts.

Doubtful. In fact they'd likely increase as the higher salary teams no longer have the MLE to fall back on.

You expect teams to keep under control and stay under the cap, I don't

 

[SweetD]

S&Ts are going to be less common starting next year when the new rules take full effect.

Cap space trumps expiring contracts.

New Rules are already in effect. Teams are going to resign all their players and trade them away. This will be the only way team over the cap will be able to aquire talent. You will see more players resign for more money with their current team, just to be traded. Bird rights will be more important than cap space soon. This will be the only way to get around the cap holds with the new CBA.

 

[Phrazbit]

That no other team was interested in him. Flat out false

He was a top 5 rated QB for the first 3 weeks of the season until getting beat up by the worst offensive line in the NFL. I'll give him more than one season that had a shortened offseason due to a lockout while learning a new offense to judge him appropriately

I know the exact debate you're talking about. Cbus kept linking rumors from March and April to show that Kolb had other teams pursuing him in late July. He was taking something out of context, the facts and common sense showed that the Cards were alone in the bidding as soon as Seattle signed Tavaris and I was not alone in that assertion. I wont go into it here because its totally OT. But go back and look at that thread on the Cardinal board if you dont believe me.

And you can hope for him to suddenly become immensely better, but the fact remains, his first season turned out how I expected it to.

 

[Phrazbit]

I disagree on Frye. I think he brings enough to the table that there are other teams out there that would regard him as positive value on his current contract. But I agree that it's questionable. Childress and Warrick were mistakes, especially the Childress deal, which almost everyone agreed was horrific the instant it was signed. Warrick was a decent gamble, and the Suns wouldn't have to bribe another team much to take him off of their hands.

I might be wrong, but isnt Warrick's final year a team option? If thats accurate then there isnt much point in bribing someone to take him off our hands with him essentially expiring next summer.

 

[SunsTzu]

Doubtful. In fact they'd likely increase as the higher salary teams no longer have the MLE to fall back on.

You expect teams to keep under control and stay under under the cap, I don't

The new S&T rules will prevent tax paying teams from being able to acquire players via S&T.

 

[SunsTzu]

New Rules are already in effect. Teams are going to resign all their players and trade them away. This will be the only way team over the cap will be able to aquire talent. You will see more players resign for more money with their current team, just to be traded. Bird rights will be more important than cap space soon. This will be the only way to get around the cap holds with the new CBA.

The new rules are not FULLY in effect yet. It would have been impossible for the Lakers to acquire Nash via S&T had they been in effect. Teams in tax range will not be able to acquire players via S&T at all starting next year.

 

[Evil Ash]

The new S&T rules will prevent tax paying teams from being able to acquire players via S&T.

I don't remember seeing or hearing anything about that. Are you sure about this?

 

[SweetD]

The new S&T rules will prevent tax paying teams from being able to acquire players via S&T.

Not really...
Taxpaying teams can take back up to 125% of their outgoing salaries, plus $100,000, no matter how much salary the team is sending away. For example, a taxpaying team trading away $10 million in salaries can acquire one or more replacement players making up to $12.6 million.

Only real diffeance is a team under the cap can take back 150%, unless it is over $19Million in salary.

 

[SunsTzu]

I don't remember seeing or hearing anything about that. Are you sure about this?

Starting in 2013-14, teams above the apron cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade transaction

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm

 

[SweetD]

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm

You can still trade your player for another even though your over the cap and recieve back 125%. Which is why you will see more teams signing their bird rights players to extend their "cap space" This why NY keeping Lin's Birds rights was just BS.

 

[Evil Ash]

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm

You kinda forgot a part

Starting in 2013-14, the team receiving the player cannot be above the "apron" ($4 million above the tax level) after the trade

Teams will likely stay under the luxury tax but teams rarely stay under the cap for very long. Two very different things

 

[SweetD]

I might be wrong, but isnt Warrick's final year a team option? If thats accurate then there isnt much point in bribing someone to take him off our hands with him essentially expiring next summer.

I think there might be a buy out clause, but if not it will be $4.25.

 

[SunsTzu]

You can still trade your player for another even though your over the cap and recieve back 125%.

I'm really not sure where the disconnect is but teams in tax range will be unable to acquire players via S&T at all. They can still do other types of trades no S&T.

 

[SunsTzu]

You kinda forgot a part



Teams will likely stay under the luxury tax but teams rarely stay under the cap for very long. Two very different things

No I didn't it's the point in which the tax penalties are assessed, this is just one of the penalties. If you think the new rules are going to encourage more S&Ts then it's safe to say we disagree.

 

[Evil Ash]

I'm really not sure where the disconnect is but teams in tax range will be unable to acquire players via S&T at all. They can still do other types of trades no S&T.

Teams can be $4 million over the tax threshold and still be able to get players via sign and trade

 

[Evil Ash]

No I didn't it's the point in which the tax penalties are assessed, this is just one of the penalties. If you think the new rules are going to encourage more S&Ts then it's safe to say we disagree.

I'm fairly certain that no teams were that far over the tax threshold so it affects very few (if any) teams. This really doesn't affect sign and trades one way or the other

 

[SunsTzu]

I'm fairly certain that no teams were that far over the tax threshold so it affects very few (if any) teams. This really doesn't affect sign and trades one way or the other

Well the Lakers are, so no Nash for them if this were in effect.

 

[Phrazbit]

I'm fairly certain that no teams were that far over the tax threshold so it affects very few (if any) teams. This really doesn't affect sign and trades one way or the other

Pretty sure the Lakers are well over the luxury tax. If that rule were being enforced it would have blocked Nash.

 

[SweetD]

No I didn't it's the point in which the tax penalties are assessed, this is just one of the penalties. If you think the new rules are going to encourage more S&Ts then it's safe to say we disagree.

In 2012-13 the tax level was determined by taking 53.51% of projected BRI (see question number 13), subtracting projected benefits, and dividing by the number of teams in the league1. For 2012-13 the tax level was guaranteed to be no less than $70.307 million. only
Lakers ($12.6), Celtics ($7.4), Heat ($6.1), Mavericks ($2.7), Spurs ($2.5), Hawks ($0.7)

 

[SweetD]

Pretty sure the Lakers are well over the luxury tax. If that rule were being enforced it would have blocked Nash.

They used the trade exception from Lamar Odem

 

[SunsTzu]

They used the trade exception from Lamar Odem

That wouldn't have made a difference.

 

[Phrazbit]

They used the trade exception from Lamar Odem

But being over the luxury tax would have prevented them doing a S&T regardless of what they used under the upcoming rule.