Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I didn't see them posted. Sorry if they already were.

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/main_story.asp?intid=3746923

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dssports/pro/015sd3.htm

---------

I was interested to read about Corie defending the 3/4/5 spots. So maybe he will be our version of a Derrick McKey type SF sometimes? If so then Maybe JK really is done? I still hope we use the money though. Maybe on someone for 1 yr.

Also I read at Hoopsworld. They think the Bulls might have an interest in Rodney Rogers since we are one of the few teams left with full cap money willing to spend it. Philly only has about $2.2 mill left or so. etc. Just a mention. No qoutes or major reasons. I though I'd mention it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Oh yeah I forgot Hoopsworld.com also had a trade idea (they created) that said maybe Indiana should try and trade for JC using JB or AH as bait. I know Harrington makes like $5 mill now and isn't he a BYC guy? JB probably makes the right amount if we threw in Hoiberg too, but Bender IMO is a step down in talent. He would be one tall skinny 3pt shooting SF though. Ironically the only player we could trade JC for w/o having to add players is Artest(wasn't mentioned in blurb) who makes $1.9 to JC's $2.0mill
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
Has there been any talk amy where elese about this Bender for Crawford trade. I would like to rid ourselves of JC and get a good SF/SG like Bender
any day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Originally posted by TJ
Has there been any talk amy where elese about this Bender for Crawford trade. I would like to rid ourselves of JC and get a good SF/SG like Bender
any day.
Nope. It's only something that has been discussed on the boards. I've never seen it anywhere else before now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Would someone please explain to me why the following statement is true, if in fact it is?

From the article ...

"Barring some unlikely trades, the Bulls will not have much cap room next year and most likely will only have the mid-level exception to offer free agents."

How can we be so close to the cap?

For 2002-2003 ...

Rose will make $12.1M
ERob will make $5.7M
Fizer will make $2.9M (per rookie scale)
JC will make $2.0M (per rookie scale)
TC will make $3M (per rookie scale)
EC will make $2.4M (per rookie scale)
JWill will make $2.7M (per rookie scale)
Hassell has to a little over a million (Let's assume $2M to be safe)
Hoiberg: $2.5M*
Dalibor probably makes a $1M too much (or $1M total)

Guyton, Baxtor, and Mason Jr all make the league minimum or thereabouts, which is conseratively estimated at $500K. So add another $1.5M.

* According to RealGM, Hoiberg is an unrestricted free agent after this season.

By my calculations, the Bulls will be approx $5.7M under the salary cap assuming that it doesn't go up at all.

For the upcoming 2003-2004 season, JC and Fizer will be in their 4th year which is a team option. So by rights, you don't even have to include either of them in the cap calculation which would push the available cap space up to $10.6M. The Bulls will still have a mid-level exception of $4.5M+ and a $1.5M exception to play with.

Is the article right? Or am I closer to the truth? If my calculations are close, would we have a legitimate shot at signing a guy like Tim Duncan?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
The Daily Herald artivale also state that
we could not do the Lewis deal ( Fizer/Crawford
for Lewis ) because they do not make what Lewis wants. Obviously it would be because we have clear more cap space because the Sonics coudl only take half of what Lewis is to get, because he is a BYC.

Apperently they are not sure what they are talking about in some respects.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Originally posted by TJ
The Daily Herald artivale also state that
we could not do the Lewis deal ( Fizer/Crawford
for Lewis ) because they do not make what Lewis wants. Obviously it would be because we have clear more cap space because the Sonics coudl only take half of what Lewis is to get, because he is a BYC.

Apperently they are not sure what they are talking about in some respects.
The one thing that signing Corie Blount did do that I was surprised wasn't mentioned was that it basically ended our pursuit of Lewis. We would have needed to renounce guyton,oak,best,richardson and used the cap space to trade for him. I never really thought it was a big possibility so I was too lazy to bother, but I always wonder how writers cannot take the 5 minutes to look up these players salaries to at least see if it was possible before they print it. We ripped that trade apart weeks ago for the same reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Originally posted by ABull


The one thing that signing Corie Blount did do that I was surprised wasn't mentioned was that it basically ended our pursuit of Lewis. We would have needed to renounce guyton,oak,best,richardson and used the cap space to trade for him. I never really thought it was a big possibility so I was too lazy to bother, but I always wonder how writers cannot take the 5 minutes to look up these players salaries to at least see if it was possible before they print it. We ripped that trade apart weeks ago for the same reason.
Fizer/Crawford for Lewis does work if Lewis signs for a starting salary of $5.8M. (Lewis counts for $4.4M - salary last year. See the Rashard Lewis thread.) If we got a trade exception by trading Best to Miami or Milwaukee, we could offer Lewis up to $8M as a starting salary - not that we necessarily would want to. I have several other trade scenarios on the Rashard Lewis thread.

Getting under the salary cap was by far the worst way to get Lewis in a sign-and-trade.

Krause for some reason has never seemed interested in Lewis. Perhaps he is gun-shy after his many previous rejections by high profile free agents, but he has never seemed very interested in him this year or a couple of years ago.

Frank Hughes pointed out today that re-signing Lewis for more than about $5M is likely to push them over the luxury cap threshhold. He argues that that will cost them an extra $7M for being over the cap and the $2M dollar-for-dollar penalty.

I think the being over the cap will cost about $18M, but even using the lower estimates, signing Lewis to a $7M starting salary is likely to cost the Sonics $16M this year. Lewis is a nice player, but so are Crawford & Fizer. And it wouldn't cost the Soncis' owners $16M (or $27M according to my estimates).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Yeah I had previously tried that but was told by BigDon or someone like that on the other board trades exceptions cannot be combined with other players to take back more salary.

On the wiz board over there I said I thought they could use the trade exception they got from the Alexander trade to combine with one of their players and take on a larger salary (to trade some youth for a vet with an ending contract etc), but was told it wasn't allowed. He seeemed pretty adamant about it, and he is one of the more respected cap guys.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
And the last I heard Miami and Milw are only offering 1yr deals unless they get best in a trade.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Yes, next summer is going to be real interesting with respect to free agency.

Teams like the Clippers, Nets, and Utah with boatloads of cap space will be scrambling to re-sign players.

The Clippers for instance will have Kandi, Odom, Maggette, Dre Miller, and Brand to re-sign. Otherwise, they'll need to go after another marque player. Miller, Dre, and Brand all want the max and Odom and Maggette will want a lot as well. So to be realistic, the Clippers will have a tough time just keep their nucleus in tact, much less competing for another big name FA.

The Nets will need to re-sign a lot their players as well. Jason Kidd has made an excellent case for being a max player and Kenyon Martin will want a considerable salary as well. The upside to the Nets is that they'll still have team options on Van Horn (which they'll forfiet) and Jefferson (which they'll retain) , as well as MacCullogh (keep) and Collins (undecided). If the Nets sign Kidd, they'll have a legitimate chance to go after another marque player, perhaps a Tim Duncan or Elton Brand. The way I see it, it all centers around then signing Kidd to an extension.

Utah will lose Malone and Stockton to retirement. Kirlelenko will be the only player under contract in 03/04 (other than this year's draft picks). Utah will be in a predicament. I expect Sloan to retire along with the Mailman and Stockton. That'll leave them in the same boat that Chicago was in 3 years ago. A boatload of money and no takers. Let's face it, who wants to play in Utah for God's sake?

Although these three teams will have a lot of cap space. I'm only threatened by Rod Thorn and the Nets.

Of the teams hovering between $20M and $30M of committed cap dollars, I am most concerned about Denver, Orlando, and possibly Miami.

In 03/04, Denver will have only $22M committed and they'll still have Sitka, Nene, and next years draft class which is likely to include LeBron James (if Cleveland doesn't get lucky). If Denver was able to sign a guy like Duncan or even Jermaine O'Neal, they could be trouble.

Cleveland is in the worst shape. Coupled with a rich history of being losers and making dumb trades, it's not likely that an impact player will sign to play in that armpit of a city. Cleveland's strategy should be to build around Miles and Wagner through the draft. Diop will be the X-factor. If he blossoms, they may have an outside chance to attract a reputable free agent.

Detroit will be in a predictament as well. They'll need to sign or fill positions for every player except Wallace (including Stackhouse and CRob.). With a weak draft this year and little chance of them slipping into the lottery next summer, they're destined for mediocrity for a long time.

Indy will have to build around Croshere, Harrington, and Tinsley. They'll need to fill the void left by both Millers (Reggie when he retires) and Brad when he tests the free agent market again). Again since Indy hasn't made a significant impact through the draft over past two years, they're going to be begging for someone to take their money. At best case scenario, they're no better than they are today. Barely making or missing the playoffs.

Seattle is in trouble too. They'll be forced to build around Calvin Booth and Radmanovic. Unless they're able to re-sign Lewis and Payton (or trade Payton for a promising young star-on-the-rise), they're going to be hurting. Playing in the West isn't going to help their chances of signing a big name FA either.

Orlando should be in pretty good shape. If Grant Hill can finally recover from his 2-year injury, they'll have a pretty good team in place (TMac, Hill, Hunter, Garrity, Griffith, and Humprey). Add to that Tim Duncan (whos already expressed an intest in playing near Mickey), they could contend for the title.

Miami will have Jones, Grant, and Butler, which will he a pretty solid 2-3-4 line up. The problem is that they'll need to sign a PG and C. While servicable PGs come a dime a dozen, quality C's don't. I wouldn't be surprised to see ol' Riles make a run for the Kandi man next summer. It won't be enough to win a title, but it may give them a legit chance to make the Eastern Conference Finals.

San Antonio will only have Rose and Parker under contract. They'll need to find a replacement for the Admirable as well as a capable SG. To make matters worse, they'll need to find a way to keep Tim Duncan. Unless they change the name from the Alamo Dome to DuncanDome, I don't see Timmy re-signing with the Spurs. Duncan waivered on re-signing with the Spurs the last time around when he had a decent supporting cast, I'm not seeing the incentive for him to do it again.

Lastly, the lowly Wizards. This team is destined for the cellar. Michael is the only thing from keeping them from having the worst record in basketball. They'll have Haywood, Kwame, Jefferies, and Dixon under contract with a roster with more holes than a Dunkin Donut Shop (not to be confused with a Duncan Do-not Shop). The Wizards will have no big name players to build around either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Originally posted by ABull
Yeah I had previously tried that but was told by BigDon or someone like that on the other board trades exceptions cannot be combined with other players to take back more salary.

On the wiz board over there I said I thought they could use the trade exception they got from the Alexander trade to combine with one of their players and take on a larger salary (to trade some youth for a vet with an ending contract etc), but was told it wasn't allowed. He seeemed pretty adamant about it, and he is one of the more respected cap guys.
You can't combine the traded player exception with other exceptions (the assigned player exception) that teams usually use when making trades. (The assigned player exception is the 115% + $100K rule.) See http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm , in particluar question #63 & #65. This might have been what they were talking about on the Wizard's board, but since I don't know the specifics of the trade you were talking about, I can't be sure.

This is getting really technical, so there is a possibility that I am wrong, but from my reading, the trade I proposed would only involve the traded player exception and thus would be legal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,052 Posts
MichaelOFAZ: I suspect the article is closer to the truth but I can't prove it.
I don't think a superstar player like Duncan will be signing with the Bull next summer.

Bull salaries
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
For the upcoming 2003-2004 season, JC and Fizer will be in their 4th year which is a team option. So by rights, you don't even have to include either of them in the cap calculation which would push the available cap space up to $10.6M. The Bulls will still have a mid-level exception of $4.5M+ and a $1.5M exception to play with.
I've been wondering when JC and Fizer's contract would be up. I think Krause will keep them on the team until there value goes up and a decent trade is offered. So if Fizer does well this year, maybe a trade will happen or I believe when their contract is up Krause will sign them and then take whatever he can get. Basically I can't imagine Krause ever letting them go for nothing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
NC ( Professor )

I am not sure whether you can include the trade exception you speak of with Fizer and Crawford to get Rashard more money

I am of the belief that a a trade exception can be used in a sign and trade only - not used independently after a sign and trade has been worked to boost someone's salary

For example , if we offered Jamal and Marcus at say $5M in salary , my understandng of the BYC rules would mean we would be limited to signing Rashard via a sign and trade for around $6M if we did not want to transgress CBA rules pertaining to BYC players, or , the next option would be to sign Rashard starting from $10M

I say this based on the rules that provide for a BYC player salary for trading purposes to be his last year's salary , or , half the value of his new contract whichever is the greater. As the greater amount here is worked in the inverse, that is , working on the combined value of Jamal and Marcus's salary of $5M which is greater than the $4.4M Rashard earned last year, then we would be compelled to pay him $10M if we traded these 2 players to Seattle on the basis that we intended to pay Rashard greater than $6M starting and send him into BYC territory

If we added a possible trade exception to this of $3.3M ( the Miami exception in a sign and trade with Best as we have talked about previously ) then that would be $8.3M that we would be giving up to Seattle which would mean Rashard would need to be signed at $16.6M by us

The only way realistically we can get Rashard with Jamal and Marcus is if Rashard wants to come to Chi for $6M

If we try and entice him with more money say starting at around $7M ( which I feel is his market worth ) we would need to get salaries down to no more than $4.4M that Seattle take back

That is why in a thread I posted a couple of weeks ago before the Dre Miller /Darius Miles trade went down and the Andersen/Baker trade went down , I suggested our best chance at Rashard was gettiing in on the Clips / Cavs action such that :

Cleveland got :

Miles
Fizer

Seattle got

Wilcox
Crawford

Clips got

Dre
Lamond Murray

Chi got

Rashard starting at $7M

We gave up $5M , but Seattle only take back just under $4M - complying ( i'm pretty sure with the BYC provisions of the CBA )

Now that the Andersen and Miller trades have occurred , Seattle has less use for Jamal but still have a banger type at PF to fill

So here is a possibility to get Rashard at $7M per starting

  • Send Travis Best to Miami for their $3.3M exception
  • Send Jamal Crawford to New Orleans
  • Send Jamal Magliore to Seattle with our $3.3M trade exception which would equal $4.4M
  • Send Rashard Lewis to Chi


There are a lot of variables in play for any sign and trade with Rashard which make any such trade unlikely IMO because Rashard has to get his money , Chi has to be comfy paying him a commercially reasonable amount of money , Seattle has to get a player back - a specific banging F/C ( like Magliore ) Hornets have to see value in Craw for Magliore -AND it all has to fit BYC /CBA stipulations .

Hmmmmm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Lewis S&T with trade exception

(I am going to put a copy of in the Rashard Lewis thread as well.)

Even I think we are starting to talk Rashard Lewis to death, but his case provides a nice launching point for talking about CBA matters. So here goes.

Suppose we have a $3.46M trade exception from a S&T with Miami (a big suppose).

Then we could trade Crawford ($2.03M) and Fizer ($2.95M) for Lewis signed anywhere from a starting salary of $4.24M to $8.44M. We would need to use the traded player exception for anything above $5.83M.

As an example, let's assume Lewis starting at $7.5M.

Here is how it works from Seattle's end.

If Lewis signs with Seattle for more than 20% of his previous year's salary, he becomes a BYC player. Then Lewis counts for the maximum of (a) his salary in the previous year, or (b) 1/2 his new salary. In this case, the maximum is his salary in the previous year, $4.4M.

Using the assigned player exception, Seattle can accept back 115% of $4.4M plus $100K, which is $5.16M. They are only getting $4.98M in salaries, so the trade works for them.

Here is how it works from the Bulls' end

Under the assigned player exception, we could accept back 115% of $4.98M plus $100K, which is $5.83M. But Lewis costs $7.5M for us, so this won't work.

So instead of using the assigned player exception, we use our traded player exception. Since we aren't combining it with any other exceptions on any of OUR players, then we can use it.

Using the traded player exception, we have $4.98M + $3.46M = $8.44M that we can spend on incoming salaries. We are only spending $7.5M, so the trade works for us, as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
Well that is interesting if that is possible

But I am not sure ( can't find anything in ****'s CBA FAQ ) as to whether the acquired exception can be used as a "tack on" without counting as salary value taken back - which would crash it from Seattle's end ... unless we wanted to sign Rashard to $16.6M as I foreshadowed earlier to meet the 50% BYC requirements ( reversing it back the other way in the salary value Seattle receives back - $8.3M - x 2 = $16.6M )

I would be inclined to think that it does count as salary value for trading purposes.

Afterall if we are relying upon it as equal trading value to sign and trade Travis Best for it , why would it not have a similar value proposition for salary trading purposes in any trade for Rashard?

Which means ( to my mind ) Crawford, Fizer and the exception do not get it done - or in any partial combination ( if you are assuming full value of the acquired exception - eg Craw at $2M + exception at $3.3M = $5.3M which means we are over into BYC territory which means we would have to pay Rashard in this latter example , $10.6M )

To keep costs for Rashard down to $7M - $8M making him a BYC trading proposition we have to find value to $4.4M - and preferably give them a young up and coming muscle bound intimidator at PF/C.

That's my reality in the understanding of the criteria

As we have two prospects that would be of interest to Seattle in Tyson and Eddy , they are obviously not for trade - and I can't see Seattle being interested in Fizer.

So who else is there around the league that we could involve in a 3rd party trade that may be interested in Fizer and Crawford?

The criteria narrows .

First of all who may Seattle be interested in ?
  • Jamal Magliore
  • Chris Wilcox
  • Nene Hilario
  • Amare Stoudemire
  • Zach Randolph

Question is , do we have anyone that could be traded to the Hornets for Magliore , the Clippers for Wilcox, the Nugz for Nene, Suns for Amare and Blazers for Zach ?

Maybe Crawford for Zach or Magliore works with either or's salary of $1M being parcelled with the $3.3M exception ( if we could procure it in a Best to Miami sign and trade ) to on send one ofthese young big bangers to Seattle with the Miami trade exception and the Bulls get Rashard at around $7M starting

Craw to Hornets or Blazers
Best to Miami ( exception to Seattle via Chi )
Magliore or Randolph to Seattle
Lewis to Chi

Liklihood of anything happening ?

None

Krause reportedly does not want to sign Harpring unless he can shift ERob, which , probably explains his detachment from the Rashard Lewis situation
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top