Sicky Dimpkins

KG's salary in 00/01 was $19,610,000.

"Also, if the same contract covers the 2000-2001 season and any later season, then the salary in any season after 2000-01 can't be less than the 2000-01 salary."

An extension is by definition not a new contract. Since the current contract covered the 00/01 season and a later season, doesn't that mean that if Minn. offers KG an extension, it will have to start at a min. of $19,610,000?

I'm assuming that the 12.5% limit on salary decreases mentioned is limited to the year to year change of the extension and not the starting point of it relative to the ending point of the "old" part of the same contract. Definitions are important here.

Corrections or confirmations requested.

__________________
English not drafted, hopes for tryout.

Dan Rosenbaum

You might want to run this question by Larry Coon, but I suspect that for the application of this 2000-01 rule, extensions count as a new contract. I think that Cliff Robinson's extension with Detroit resulted in him being paid less in 2003-04 than he was in 2000-01.

Sicky Dimpkins

Looks like I had it 100% wrong(as usual). Uncle Cliffy made 6.89 mil in 00/01 and his new deal is $10 mil/2 years. Apparently the provision is for the year to year changes and the starting point can vary greater.

I can't post on RealGM(I was a bad boy. ) but it doesn't matter since NCBullsFan is the Larry Coon of this board!

Anyway here's what
Larry Coon says.

I still don't know how one can extend that which doesn't exist.

Thanks. End of thread.

__________________
English not drafted, hopes for tryout.