Talk About Salary Cap Hell. Or... It's Always Darkest Before the Dawn

[GSH]

First, a real-life situation from this season:
The Celtics signed Jeff Green to a 1-year $9M contract, and then lost him for the season when he failed his physical due to a heart problem. That gives them the right to void his contract. Unfortunately for them, they are still over the lux tax line, even after shedding that $9M. You would think that they would at least get a disabled player exception - so they could sign a player for up to $4.5M, right?

Technically they could. But to get the exception, Boston would have to pay Green's $9M contract, rather than void it. Then pay the $4.5M for the replacement player. Then double all that due to the lux tax. That's right - signing a $4.5M player under a disabled player exception would cost the Celtics 27 Million Dollars this year. And think about this: in two years, when the full provisions of the CBA kick in (higher lux tax, and repeat offender tax), signing the same $4.5M player in a similar situation could cost a team a whopping $70M in cash. No more upgrading the roster at any cost - even for the big market teams.

I mention it here just to start pointing out some of the new realities in the league. I know that no one is happy with the way this offseason has shaped up. But being solidly under the cap next year may be the single best thing that could happen to the Spurs' future. And signing some 1-year deals to be under the cap for the 13-14 season might be even better. If you haven't thought about it in these terms, here's something that might brighten your day - at least a little bit:

The Lakers' committed salaries for 2013-2014 are already enough to put them over the likely cap. If they extend Andrew Bynum, they are certain to be lux tax repeat offenders. So if they use their crappy $3M MLE to try and upgrade their roster, it will likely cost them at least $11.25M, and possibly as much as $15.75M in cash. The Heat look as bad or worse - plus, all of their big contracts have player options for the 14-15 season. :greedy Those guys are going to be rounding out rosters with minimum-salary players, and every dollar they spend will be costing them an additional 3-4 bucks in tax. I don't know about you, but I have to smile a little at the thought of the Lakers signing a $1M player - and then writing a check to the league for an additional $4.25M. (Expect to see a lot more talk about committed salaries, as teams are forced to plan ahead more, to avoid being lux tax repeat offenders.)

If there's a message here for Spurs fans, it's that the rebuilding effort could easily take care of itself. There are going to be a lot of teams looking to dump salary, and some quality players are going to become available as a result. I know that GM's around the league are aware of it, but I still think there is going to be some panic selling when reality fully sets in. I'd love to see the Spurs get one of the early picks in this next draft, and that could still happen. But even without that, if the Spurs FO plays their cards right we could be looking back at this offseason as the one that set up the next title run. :toast


.

[eric365]

Too bad we don't have the Dice contract anymore.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

I agree, I think the reason why they haven't signed anyone of note is because they've only been prepared to give 1-year contracts and obviously most notable FAs wouldn't be happy with that, however, I'd rather the Spurs not sign anyone than signing Butler on a 3yr/24 mil contract ( even if they could afford to ).

Still, I don't think there's a chance that the Spurs get a high pick in this draft, no way they tank it while the big three are still under contract unless NO somehow accept a Tony Parker/ Manu Ginobili for Minny's 1st rounder + Okafor, which I doubt is an option.

[The_Worlds_finest]

ITony Parker/ Manu Ginobili for Minny's 1st rounder + Okafor, which I doubt is an option.

Hornets would accept that trade in a heart beat you nob. Why the fuck would the spurs trade two future HOF for a never has and never will be okafor and a mid range lottery pick?
please stop posting

[ChuckD]

Spurs will not be under the cap next year.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Hornets would accept that trade in a heart beat you nob. Why the fuck would the spurs trade two future HOF for a never has and never will be okafor and a mid range lottery pick?
please stop posting

As it obviously is either/or ( that is either either or or for you ) let's say it's on your reading comprehension this time. Won't answer the personal attack to let you continue deluding yourself that you're somewhat smart. Cheers.

[Interrohater]

Hornets would accept that trade in a heart beat you nob. Why the fuck would the spurs trade two future HOF for a never has and never will be okafor and a mid range lottery pick?
please stop posting

I literally lol'd when i read 'you nob'.

[The_Worlds_finest]

As it obviously is either/or ( that is either either or or for you ) let's say it's on your reading comprehension this time. Won't answer the personal attack to let you continue deluding yourself that you're somewhat smart. Cheers.

Well when you leave nothing to assumption you gain some cred. However like you said, NO wouldn't do it for the player and pick and a straight player trade only would be stupid for the spurs.

So with all that said, you should have gone way over board and suggest if somehow magic would accept duncan for howard.

[Interrohater]

So gsh, what you're saying is the fo has a plan for the future? I wonder when that panicked sell-off will begin. The players are going to be so pissed, lol

[TimmehC]

Eh, a true rebuild is going to take at least 3 consecutive offseasons to pull off. But you're right, one of the only ways this uneventful offseason makes sense is if they're trying to set up the rebuild over the next few years.

[GSH]

So gsh, what you're saying is the fo has a plan for the future? I wonder when that panicked sell-off will begin. The players are going to be so pissed, lol


If the new lux tax rates were in effect, the Lakers current team salary could cost their owners about $160M. You can lol all you want to. But nobody is going to be laughing about that kind of salary expense.

A contract is a contract, shortbus. The players that already have fat contracts will get paid. But teams are going to be forced to let go of players that they would normally keep, just to get out from under the salary. Teams that find themselves over the tax line next season are going to shed players to avoid being repeat offenders, and paying 2.5X the current tax rate.

I never said anything about players under contract not getting paid. It's about player availability, especially in those first couple of years. Teams that are under the cap can take back 150% of the salary they send now, and lux tax teams are going to be looking to take advantage of that to shed high-priced players.

And yes, some of the players are going to be pissed when the new contracts aren't as fat as they are accustomed to.

Great post, though. Thanks for playing.

[cd98]

If the new lux tax rates were in effect, the Lakers current team salary could cost their owners about $160M. You can lol all you want to. But nobody is going to be laughing about that kind of salary expense.

A contract is a contract, shortbus. The players that already have fat contracts will get paid. But teams are going to be forced to let go of players that they would normally keep, just to get out from under the salary. Teams that find themselves over the tax line next season are going to shed players to avoid being repeat offenders, and paying 2.5X the current tax rate.

I never said anything about players under contract not getting paid. It's about player availability, especially in those first couple of years. Teams that are under the cap can take back 150% of the salary they send now, and lux tax teams are going to be looking to take advantage of that to shed high-priced players.

And yes, some of the players are going to be pissed when the new contracts aren't as fat as they are accustomed to.

Great post, though. Thanks for playing.

Problem is the only players that get cut loose are ones that are not superstars. Getting average players at expensive prices isn't hard if you have cap room. But that only ensures that you will have an average or below average team. To be a contender, you must have superstars and the only way we get that is through the draft because most, if not all, superstars are not going to want to come to San Antonio.

[thOOdee]

i definitely see the logic....and its kinda proven when u have a team like the mavs, who just won it all and do nothing but throw money at players mind you, actually downgrade. its probably better and wait and get that next piece that fits rather than having to settle for scraps.

[mailboogie52]

Spurs will not be under the cap next year.


Better check again dude. With Duncan 21mil and Jefferson 11 mi plus a D Butler 1 mi coming off we will have about 33 mil gone. 9 players and only about 40 mil on the books with a "ALL" contracts settled for the year. If the cap at about 60 mil we should be in line for a couple of solid young free agents. If Duncan returns it will be at a much lower contract. I have looked ahead on several other teams, and do not see the funds available for this kind of free agents season. My idea of how to go from here would be to target a team with an top 3 lottery pick. Offer them money and our 1st round and second round picks for that top 3 pick.

IMHO I think Peter Holt and the Spurs are in position to insure this city has a strong championship team for years to come.

[ginobilized]

This sounds totally positive and reasonable.
highly unusual this offseason and pre-season
I like it....it's crazy enough it just might work

[spurs1990]

Excellent post GSH.

[TDMVPDPOY]

if they were going to rebuild, shouldve done it now for the deep class of 2012

[spurs1990]

if they were going to rebuild, shouldve done it now for the deep class of 2012

Not too late to do so. Plenty of time to 'liquidate'.

[underdawg]

If the new lux tax rates were in effect, the Lakers current team salary could cost their owners about $160M. You can lol all you want to. But nobody is going to be laughing about that kind of salary expense.

A contract is a contract, shortbus. The players that already have fat contracts will get paid. But teams are going to be forced to let go of players that they would normally keep, just to get out from under the salary. Teams that find themselves over the tax line next season are going to shed players to avoid being repeat offenders, and paying 2.5X the current tax rate.

I never said anything about players under contract not getting paid. It's about player availability, especially in those first couple of years. Teams that are under the cap can take back 150% of the salary they send now, and lux tax teams are going to be looking to take advantage of that to shed high-priced players.

And yes, some of the players are going to be pissed when the new contracts aren't as fat as they are accustomed to.

Great post, though. Thanks for playing.

If what you're saying is true (not that I don't believe you - just don't want to go look it up), the Spurs really should consider trying to move TP this year while he still has value and throw in Bonner while you're at it. The rumors were that the Spurs were unable to move TP because they were asking for teams to take RJ's contract. The amnesty option should make that a moot point.

I understand it's too early to assume that the Spurs will have to overpay for quality FA's going forward, but the futility of the FO over the past few years does lend some credence to that possibility.

The Spurs still have a shot at being relevant, but it's hard to believe that it can be done without going back to being a strong defensive team. Spurs need defensive players and utility players to round out the roster going forward - good news is that those types of players are typically affordable. Neal should be able to fit that role as far as a utility player, but I'm of the strong belief that Bonner and Blair will not.