Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 133 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've heard rumors maybe on espn news I think, that Rashard Lewis is coming for a visit, I'm wondering if there's any truth to this rumor. :D
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
58,359 Posts
The insider briefly mentioned that Lewis has not ruled out the Bulls and Houston. Also said that the bulls seem to be the only team that can trade and offer him the money he wants. Also mentioned that they cant see Lewis going to Dallas and accepting ANOTHER low salary to play fifth wheel on a team. In three years, what if Dallas doesnt pay him? Unlikely, imo but you still have to ask that. Cuban does trade players.

On the Bulls he would be in the top three of options. We would have yet to see in what order he would be! And keep in mind Lewis on the Bulls would get us closer to the playoffs than we are now!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
The Bulls could easily sign Lewis for what he wants and still be under the Luxory tax level. I wonder if Krause does not really like Lewis or if he doing
a stealth attack here. He could easily work out a sign a trade or just sign him straight up
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
The Bulls are at 36M right( if the renounce Best and Oakley) so adding 10M would be at 46M which is under 50M. I beleive these nunbers are correct .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,052 Posts
The Bull were estimated to be 5.5 mil under the cap by Krause a month or so ago.
Now that the cap has come down I think most are estimating that the Bull(IF they changed strategy and renounced FA's) would be ~2 mil and change under the cap. As far as I know the most they can offer is the mid-level exception @ ~ 4.5 mil..

As for a S&T, it's possible but far from easy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Originally posted by TJ
The Bulls are at 36M right( if the renounce Best and Oakley) so adding 10M would be at 46M which is under 50M. I beleive these nunbers are correct .
TJ, like the rest of us at times in the past, you have a lot to learn about the salary cap and CBA.

Right now, we are over the salary cap, and even if we renounced Best, Oakley, and our exceptions, we would not be able to offer Lewis more than about $4M. So the best we can do without a sign-and-trade is offer Lewis our full mid-level exception of $4.5M.

If Lewis signs for more that 20% of his salary last year (about $5.3M), he becomes a BYC player, which makes it very difficult to trade for him, since Seattle can only take back the maximum of (a) half of his new salary or (b) his last year's salary in trades for him. In order to sign-and-trade him to anything more than about $6M, we would need trade away about our whole roster, in particular Jalen Rose or involve a third team under the cap (good luck getting the Clippers involved).

Larry ****'s site in invaluable in learning all of the details of the CBA.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
The CBA and the Salary Cap are way too complicated for me and I read Larry's page and still do not
understand a thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
apparently the Players Assoc. has the same problem.
 

·
BasketballBoards Fat Cat
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Originally posted by NCBullsFan
If Lewis signs for more that 20% of his salary last year (about $5.3M), he becomes a BYC player, which makes it very difficult to trade for him, since Seattle can only take back the maximum of (a) half of his new salary or (b) his last year's salary in trades for him. In order to sign-and-trade him to anything more than about $6M, we would need trade away about our whole roster, in particular Jalen Rose or involve a third team under the cap (good luck getting the Clippers involved).
You're not making sense. You say that Seattle can take back the max of last year's salary or 50% of new salary. It doesn't follow that the Bulls would have to trade away huge salary to meet this restriction. Perhaps you can re-state your thoughts.

Also, I'm pretty sure that renouncing Best and Oakley would put us under the cap. That's why Krause hasn't done it yet -- we wouldn't be allowed to use the exceptions if we were under the cap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
In looking at Larry's page, it looks like Oakley and best will account for 12M in cap space unless I am reading this wrong. If the Bull renounce them,
do they get the full use of this cap space? Apperantly not!

I do think a sign and trade is possible for the Bulls & Sonics on Lewis, and it would not involve a 3rd team.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,052 Posts
It makes sense to me.

I think it helps to look at it from Seattle's perspective. Let's say Lewis gets $8 mil. then the most salary the Sonic can accept back is $4 mil.. IF Seattle will accept this then it can happen but why would they? IF a 3rd team under the cap or with exceptions wants to help then better terms can be had for Seattle but very few teams are both in the position cap wise to do it and have a self interest in doing so.

If you re-read his post he clearly says that IF the Bull renounced FA's etc. that the Bull could offer ~ $4 mil.. This is probably a more accurate figure than the one I gave but still less than the mid-level exception.

BYC basics

Advantage of a 3rd team example

How a S&T becomes BYC(2nd to last paragaph)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,052 Posts
Originally posted by TJ
I do think a sign and trade is possible for the Bulls & Sonics on Lewis, and it would not involve a 3rd team.
How?

I know crazy things are happening due to the luxury tax and bad economy but I still don't think Seattle would do this.

I'm all eyes. What gives you optimism?
 

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

You're not making sense. You say that Seattle can take back the max of last year's salary or 50% of new salary. It doesn't follow that the Bulls would have to trade away huge salary to meet this restriction. Perhaps you can re-state your thoughts.
Thanks Sicky for all of the specific posts on this issue. You are absolutely great on doing that.

Nater, but remember since we are over the salary cap, the salaries we accept must be within about 15% of the salaries that we trade. So if we sign-and-trade Lewis for $8M, we need to trade at least $6.9M in salaries to make it work. But Seattle can only accept back $4.4M in salaries (plus about 15%) due to the BYC status of Lewis, so the trade is impossible.

The only way to get this to work is to involve a team with exceptions or cap-space or trade a whole bunch of salary so that the 15% leeway adds up to $3M-$5M difference in what Lewis costs for us and for Seattle due his BYC status. That means we need to be trading between $20M-$35M in salaries, i.e. practically our whole team.
 

·
BasketballBoards Fat Cat
Joined
·
1,320 Posts
Ok, gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.

What if we renounce Oakley and Best? Then we're under the cap... so BYC issues no longer apply. Is that correct?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Originally posted by Nater
Ok, gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.

What if we renounce Oakley and Best? Then we're under the cap... so BYC issues no longer apply. Is that correct?
If renounced Oakley, Best, AND ALL OF OUR EXCEPTIONS, then I think we would be only about $3M under the cap. Lewis would still be a BYC player, since Seattle is over the salary cap.

We could then trade something like Crawford and Fizer (approximately $5M) for Lewis signed at about $8M. It would be hard to work a deal with Robinson.

But we could offer Crawford and Fizer for Lewis signed at about $5.8M without renouncing Best, Oakley, or our exceptions.

Or a trade of Crawford, Fizer, and Robinson for Booth and Lewis at $7.4M would also work without renouncing our exceptions.

But this deal would put Seattle perilously close to luxury tax territory. The previous deals are a bit better for the Sonics, but still put them close to the luxury tax. Re-signing Lewis for more than $5M puts the Sonics is similarly-bad situation with regard to the luxury cap.

And remember just barely crossing the luxury tax line might cost teams $17M-$25M in lost escrow and luxury tax penalty paybacks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
No, the BYC applies because Seattle is over the cap.
The Bulls will have a tough time doing this trade, but it could be done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,052 Posts
NCBullsFan: Thanks for the :love: :laugh: . Right back at you for the more detailed example(the ~15% + $100,000). :love: .

I'm curious to get feedback on this idea to still get a BYC deal done without a 3rd team. I'm using Lewis as an example only and not because I'm in favor of dealing for him.

Let's say Seattle had "dead weight"(a player whose cost was clearly more than his worth and there was no real hope of that changing). What if this "dead weight" were traded with Lewis to "balance out" the "loss" in value the Sonic would recieve from Lewis? It's possible that Booth(your idea) or Potapenko are in this category.

Let's say Player "DW" is valued at $2 mil if he were to be up for a contract today but his contract pays him $6 mil.. Couldn't the Sonic use this $4 mil "extra" trade value to get the ~ $4 mil in value back that they'd lose from trading Lewis?

Another idea is to use rookie contracts. A good player is never cheaper than when he's under a rookie contract. Of course the Fizer/JC idea does just this.

It's my understanding that draft picks count as ZERO $ in trades. Wouldn't this be a way to "make up" value for the team with a BYC player?

To conclude: Either the team with the BYC player tacking on "over valued" players or the team interested in the BYC player offering "undervalued" assets"(rookie contracts/picks) in return seems like a way to "make whole"(reduce/eliminate the "value recieved" penalty the team with the BYC player incurs) the team trading a BYC player without the addition of a 3rd team.

Sonic Salaries

Bull Salaries

I still don't see it happening but am "open to persuasion". (apology to J. Armatrading)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Most of your post has to do with evening up the talent/value on both sides of a trade. Without a specific trade idea in mind, it is hard to talk about these kinds of things in the abstract.

Yes, unsigned draft picks count as zero dollars in trades (1st round pick do count against the cap though). But they count as zero dollars for both teams, so they don't help in making up salary differences in trades, such as in a BYC case.

Minimum-salary players also count as zero dollars for the team receiving the players, but not the team sending them, so if we had any minimum-salary players to give Seattle, that could help with this trade. But I don't think we have any.

I would consider Booth a DW player under your definition (salary higher than value), but we are trading another DW player, so I am not sure if adding Booth and Robinson to the mix makes it any more attractive for the Sonics.
 
1 - 20 of 133 Posts
Top