Horry's Early Bird Rights

[whottt]

Are we certain that the Spurs have Horry's early bird rights? I have seen two articles(one national and one SA) that seem to think we are going to have to pay him out of the MLE...

Now we did renounce Horry's rights last summer...

But the CBA faq(which I read slightly during some stupid fucking arugment with Chump) says that you can renounce a players rights for 1 year and the reclaim them with the proper exception for # of years on the team...but why haven't I seen an article that realizes we have Horry's early bird rights? Every time I see him mentioned they talk about him getting part of the MLE...

I've seen the board capologists get owned by the Spurs and cap before...like no one realizing how that Team Option on Ferry's contract could be used as a trade perk to clear capspace to get Hedo.....That was probably due to a lack of information on Ferry's last year being a team option..but still...they got owned on that one.

So at this point I am questioning whether or not we do have his EB rights for certain...

[timvp]

That is an question for ChumpDumper. From everything I've read, the Spurs can use EB rights with Horry. I brought up the fact that the Spurs renounced him, but ChumpDumper came back with the quote from the CBA clarifying that he should still be an EB player. I double checked and it seems right to me, but I haven't read up on the CBA since last year so I'm a little rusty.

[Kori Ellis]

There's a lot of articles that say that the Spurs have to use the MLE to pay him (case in point the Marc Stein article just posted about Oberto). But I honestly don't know.

Whottt - by any chance did you post the free agent list (or read it) on prowrestling.com?

[whottt]

Yeah...that's the same place I got it from...and the faq does seem to say that when you renounce the rights you get them back exactly a year later...but no one else is saying that...I can see why Chump made that point...

But.............

Chump didn't catch the Ferry contract thing either....and don't forget that Chump liked Charlie Ward too...and let's not forget than Chump tends to get owned frequently when the subject isn't Pop related...I usually do trust Chump on cap related issues(as opposed to loving chokers)...but it's disconcerting that there isn't any confirmation in the media...if we don't have his EB rights this FA period becomes a whole lot more challenging...


Just sayin'...I haven't seen any media confirmation that we do have Horry's early bird rights...

[whottt]

Whottt - by any chance did you post the free agent list (or read it) on prowrestling.com?


No...I haven't watched wrestling in a long time because they bumped Chris Benoit to midcard and are jobbing him out...if he's not main eventing I pretty much lose interest due to all the crappy high profile matches with stiffs that can't move in the ring. Haven't followed it in a year or so, or been on any wrestling websites.

[timvp]

Luckily, the media is clueless this time of year. The amount of errors is amazing this time of year.

As far as trusting what you read, this forum > local or nation media. It still isn't 100% right all the time though. ChumpDumper usually has a good grip on the CBA so I'm guessing that the Spurs do have EB rights on Horry.

[Kori Ellis]

Whottt - let me go search for you and see what I can find. I'm curious too.

[whottt]

Luckily, the media is clueless this time of year. The amount of errors is amazing this time of year.

As far as trusting what you read, this forum > local or nation media. It still isn't 100% right all the time though. ChumpDumper usually has a good grip on the CBA so I'm guessing that the Spurs do have EB rights on Horry.


I agree...Chump is strong on the cap...but I am ready to pounce if my hopes have been falsely raised on this...

[whottt]

Ok, TY Kori.

[whottt]

The thing that bothers me...I think one of the articles that said we had to sign Horry out of the MLE was by Ludden...and Ludden usually does know what the Spurs $$ and FA situation is...

[Kori Ellis]

Bear with me as I just think and type regarding this renouncing/Early Bird Right of Horry.

If the Spurs renounced Horry last year, then according to Coon they would give up the use of his Bird/Early Bird/Non Bird exception until the following June 30 (now).

But why that doesn't make sense to me is because at the time when he was renounced, they didn't even have his Early Bird yet -- he had only been in San Antonio one season. So how could they give up something they didn't even have?

I'm guessing the Spurs didn't renounce him, and thus now have his Early Bird.

[Kori Ellis]

Alright, I'm going to sleep - Chump and AHF can figure it out.

Where's genghis?

[timvp]

EARLY BIRD EXCEPTION -- This is a weaker form of the Larry Bird exception. Players who qualify for this exception are called "Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agents" in the CBA. A player qualifies for this exception after just two seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. Using this exception, a team may re-sign its own free agent for 175% of his salary the previous season or the average player salary, whichever is greater.

Is not picking up a team option considered getting waived? I don't think so but if it is (or if Coon's CBA guide is slightly wrong), then the Spurs could be in trouble.

Signing Scola and Horry with the MLE is much more difficult than what we've been discussing for the last couple weeks.

[TheTruth]

Spurs Trying To Find Way To Land Scola
Wire Reports
Friday, July 01, 2005



Already the Spurs are finding challenges in dealing with free agency this summer.

According to ESPN's Marc Stein, the newly crowned World Champs are trying to determine whether their $4.9 million salary-cap exception is sufficient loot to re-sign shooting specialist, Robert Horry, and bring in one of their top foreign draft picks, Argentine power forward and Euroleague superstar Luis Scola.

Scola is under contract in the Spanish League and reportedly, if the cost to import Scola for next season is too high, the Spurs are looking into the possibility of signing Scola and Manu Ginobili's countryman Fabricio Oberto.
Another for Horry not having EB rights.

[ChumpDumper]

It certainly could be that way -- I wanted to read the actual CBA on this one, but the NBPA site took the old one down.

I'll be wrong if I'm wrong, and whottt can jock someone who can't even play in the league as his replacement.

[ChumpDumper]

BTW, I was under the impression that we renounced Ferry after his first season to maximize our cap space in the summer of DRob/DA/Webber -- and he was definitely signed to an EB deal after his second. So the "without waiving" clause might not have anything to do with renouncing.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I'm in Chump's corner on this, it sounds like we should have it.


I have seen two articles(one national and one SA) that seem to think we are going to have to pay him out of the MLE...

And we all know the press is right more than they're wrong on the CBA at this time of year :lol

[ChumpDumper]

If the EB rights aren't there, all that needs to be done is a wink-wink to use them the following year. Ask Bruce if the Spurs make good on those. Maybe Rob gets paid after he retires. Considering that and what teams like Miami have to offer, I'm not terribly worried.

[Marcus Bryant]

As long as the Spurs do not renounce Horry then they will have his Early Bird rights.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

You guys know that if I do become a sports journalist (as opposed to working news like I think I will), I'm coming here for information that I can then get confirmed or denied, right?

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

If the EB rights aren't there, all that needs to be done is a wink-wink to use them the following year. Ask Bruce if the Spurs make good on those. Maybe Rob gets paid after he retires. Considering that and what teams like Miami have to offer, I'm not terribly worried.

That's what I think (hope) too. RoHo is only going to want to go to a top contender so that limits the pool of teams the Spurs will be competing with. I'd hope the Spurs can get this deal done with or without EB rights this year.

[FromWayDowntown]

If the EB rights aren't there, all that needs to be done is a wink-wink to use them the following year. Ask Bruce if the Spurs make good on those. Maybe Rob gets paid after he retires. Considering that and what teams like Miami have to offer, I'm not terribly worried.

You get close to Joe Smith territory in that situation, though.

[Kori Ellis]

I'm still confused.

So Chump and AHF - you both think that we renounced Horry last year and should now be able to use Early Bird to sign him? And Marcus, you think we did not renounce him last year and as long as we don't renounce him this year, then we can use Early Bird to sign him?

[FromWayDowntown]

Two things we need to nail down:

1. What exactly did the Spurs do with Horry last summer? Did they merely refuse to exercise a team option or did they renounce him? (and does refusal to exercise a team option amount to renunciation?)

2. If Horry was renounced, what effect does renunciation have on Early Bird rights?

Looking at Coon's explanation (provided by timvp) and approaching it from a legalistic standpoint, I'd argue that there's a significant difference between waiving a player and renouncing a player. To my knowledge, a team cannot renounce a player who is under contract -- the team can renounce its rights to a player who was under contract, but that would only terminate an exclusive right to bargain with the player (i.e., the Spurs could renounce Big Dog or Mike Wilks, since neither of those guys is under contract for next season).

A team can only waive a player who is under contract (i.e., the Spurs could waive Tony Parker, Manu, Timmy, Rasho, Beno, etc. . . ). The two mechanisms have different effects, too. When a player is waived, his salary (which requires that there be an existing contract) still counts against the waiving team's cap. When a player is renounced, the renouncing team is relieved of a cap hold. In a general sense, I don't think a team could renounce a player in the middle of the season.

I seem to recall, however, reading somewhere that a team could not negotiate with a player it had renounced. I may be confusing doctrines there, but that would seem to be a fair penalty to pay for the renunciation -- otherwise, teams would renounce every free agent, usually with the understanding that a new deal would be worked out. That makes me wonder if the Spurs actually renounced Horry last summer.

[Kori Ellis]

I'm still not getting why there would be .. if he's renounced, then "until next June 30" they won't have his EB. They wouldn't have had his EB before that anyway - he hadn't been here two years.

Everything I can find last year says that the Spurs denied his team option. It doesn't say they renounced him (and, for example, it does say they renounced Hedo). But timvp says that they had to have renounced him, otherwise they couldn't have gotten under the cap to get everyone signed.

[ChumpDumper]

Horry would have to have been renounced to gain the cap room to sign Manu, so that isn't in question. The only question is whether renouncing Horry last summer precludes us from using EB rights on him this summer. The passage I read from the FAQ says it doesn't, but there are enough conflicting reports to cast doubt on it.
I'm still not getting why there would be .. if he's renounced, then "until next June 30" they won't have his EB. They wouldn't have had his EB before that anyway - he hadn't been here two years.Well it precludes the Spurs from using any special rights they may have qualified for. In Horry's case it was only the right to sign him at a contract with a starting salary as much as 120% of that of the previous year. To wit:
NON-BIRD EXCEPTION -- Players who qualify for this exception are called "Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agents" in the CBA. They are defined as veteran free agents who are neither Qualifying Veteran Free Agents nor Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agents. This exception allows a team to re-sign its own free agent to a salary starting at 120% of the player's salary in the previous season or 120% of the minimum salary, whichever is greater, even if they are over the cap. Raises are limited to 10% and contracts are limited to six years when this exception is used. http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#17

As I said, I would refer to the actual CBA to get to the bottom of this, but the site is down.

[FromWayDowntown]

I was more or less wrong about the no re-signing thing with renounced players. And this seems to make Marcus' point about the June 30 date being most important, whether the player was renounced or not:


By renouncing a player, a team gives up its right until the following June 30 to use the Larry Bird, Early Bird, or Non-Bird exceptions (see question number 17 ) to re-sign that player. A renounced player no longer counts toward team salary, so teams use renouncement to gain additional cap room. After renouncing a player, the team is still permitted to re-sign that player (the previous CBA prevented teams from re-signing a renounced player until 55 days into the regular season), but they must either have enough cap room to fit the salary, or sign the player without using one of the three "Bird" exceptions.

[whottt]

Here's the deal...these articles saying we have to sign Horry out of the MLE...they don't say the same thing about Devin...

Without doing any indepth research, and having a rudimentary knowledge of the cap, the assumption should be that we have Horry's early bird rights as well...because he's been here two seasons.

I personally don't know if they renounced Horry's rights last summer...all I know that they did for sure was decline an option on his contract...I don't know if that counsts as renunciation or if the Spurs formally renounced them to clear cap space...

To me, declining his option shouldn't count as a renouncement...I mean did Horry renounce his own rights this summer when he opted out of his deal? He can't do that.

And it probably is possible to renounced the first year of rights to a player even though there are no exceptions granted with those rights...that better be possible..or Chump got owned earlier this season.


Like I mentioned earlier...the one thing that does bother me about this whole situation, and the reason I am worried...

I think Ludden was one of the guys that said we had to sign Horry out of the MLE...I've never seen Ludden be wrong about the cap situation or the hows and whys of signing someone...my guess is because he usually gets his info straight from the horses' mouth.


Stein saying it, doesn' bother me...Ludden saying it, does.

[Kori Ellis]

Okay, so if everyone is saying he was renounced ...


I'm still not getting why there would be .. if he's renounced, then "until next June 30" they won't have his EB. They wouldn't have had his EB before that anyway - he hadn't been here two years.

[ChumpDumper]

And it probably is possible to renounced the first year of rights to a player even though there are no exceptions granted with those rights.It is, and you actually do get an exception for a 1 year player.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#17

[whottt]

Chump was the one who said the Spurs renounced Horry's rights...it was a typical hair split to get off the ropes in an argument he/she was losing to me...

But I think it might be possible to renounce the first years rights...because basically when you have the rights of a player they have a placeholder in your cap, even if they don't have Bird exceptions...the Spurs were trying to clear every last penny of space last summer...so they might have renounced Horry's placeholder in the cap...

I dunno..since they declined his option I don't know what his place holder figure would be...but that doesn't mean there wasn't one.....he might have still be holding a place equivalent % to the contract that was opted out of....and the Spurs had to renounce that slot as well...and in doing so gave up one year off their ability to claim his Bird exceptions...still, we should have those rights back now...

I dunno...I don't know crap about the cap and unlike some, never claimed to...


But basically it boils down to this, I hope Chump is right...if Horry has been with the team for two seasons? And we don't have his Bird Rights? Someone in the Spurs org screwed up somehow...that would be unusual, and costly.

[MannyIsGod]

Kori, I think those FAQ are just covering every situation. So they are assuming that at the time of renouncement they had the EB rights and therefore would get them back one year later.

Everything that I read seems to indicate that the Spurs have his EB rights. There should be no question about renouncing Horry last year because the only way to have cap room for the Manu contract to be possible was to renounce him. So that's a definete.

Horry has completed 2 seasons with the Spurs, and those CBA FAQs all point to Horry having the EB rights unless the Spurs renounce him this year which would be really fucking stupid. The only reason you renounce players is to remove them from the cap but it doesn't preclude you from signing them.

Anyhow, one thing to consider is what the NEW CBA says about those EB rights, because the old one is going to mean jack shit when we start signing players. I hope none of that has changed, and while there is no indication it has there have already been several little suprises with this CBA.

[Kori Ellis]

..since they declined his option I don't know what his place holder figure would be...but that doesn't mean there wasn't one.....he might have still be holding a place equivalent % to the contract that was opted out of.

From what I can see, his placeholder amount would have been 120% of his previous year's contract.

[Kori Ellis]

Kori, I think those FAQ are just covering every situation. So they are assuming that at the time of renouncement they had the EB rights and therefore would get them back one year later.

I get that. I'm asking because everyone here keeps bringing up that we have them because we "got them back" after June 30. To me, we would have never had them before June 30.


Everything that I read seems to indicate that the Spurs have his EB rights.

Except that every article in America that lists if teams have a certain player's EB rights, don't list Horry as one of those players.

But the media just may not know the situation.

[MannyIsGod]

My understanding from what I've read is that when you renounce a player you remove the placeholder on the cap. As a result you lose any exceptions for one year. That usually doesn't matter because players that are renounced are more than likely not going to be resigned, but when they are you gain the right to use those exceptions in one year.

From that line of reasoning, under the old CBA and the new one if it's the same the Spurs have his EB rights. I think we're just making this debate harder than it has to be.

[spurster]

The Spurs had an option. I don't think renouncing an option is equivalent to renouncing Bird rights.

[MannyIsGod]

I get that. I'm asking because everyone here keeps bringing up that we have them because we "got them back" after June 30. To me, we would have never had them before June 30.



Except that every article in America that lists if teams have a certain player's EB rights, don't list Horry as one of those players.

But the media just may not know the situation.
Well, for the record I would trust the scrutiny that is placed on the CBA by the posters of this board much farther than I would trust that of any sports writers. I've seen enough mistakes over my years here to recognize how all of them - including Ludden - don't bother to analyze the CBA in the way we do.

[MannyIsGod]

The Spurs had an option. I don't think renouncing an option is equivalent to renouncing Bird rights.
Declining an option is not the same as renouncing. When they declined his option Horry still had a 120% placeholder counting against the Spurs cap. So in order to sign Manu last year, they had to not only decline his option but renounce him in order to remove the placeholder and open up the cap space to fit Manu's contract.

[spurster]

If this is correct, the Spurs have Horry's EB rights. From http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

EARLY BIRD EXCEPTION -- This is a weaker form of the Larry Bird exception. Players who qualify for this exception are called "Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agents" in the CBA. A player qualifies for this exception after just two seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent. Using this exception, a team may re-sign its own free agent for 175% of his salary the previous season or the average player salary, whichever is greater (see question number 22 for the definition of "average salary"). Early Bird contracts must be for at least two seasons (which limits this exception's usefulness -- it's often better to take a lower salary for one more season and then have the full Bird exception available the next season) and no longer than six seasons. A player can receive 12.5% raises using this exception.

[whottt]

Ludden - don't bother to analyze the CBA in the way we do.

Ludeen usually gets his info straight from the Spurs...

[Kori Ellis]

A player qualifies for this exception after just two seasons without being waived or changing teams as a free agent

We've all read that. That's what we are debating if it applies to this situation because of the fact that Horry was renounced.

[ChumpDumper]

And hootie, don't be such a cunt about your ignorance of cap issues. I only know these things because of questions that were asked on this board and SR, and got a rep for knowing this stuff because I simply did the research. Feel free to find a post where I say I know everything about the CBA -- you won't find it. There are definitely three or four guys here who clearly know more than I, but they don't post as frequently. The information is there for anyone who wants to know about it, though the FAQ and CBA are almost as long as one of your Coyote posts.

So in conclusion, don't PM me asking about the Kincks cap situation anymore.

[whottt]

Get fucked Chump...you know you were being a dickhead about it when you said "learn what renounce means"...so fuck you. I am gonna be on your ass if you were wrong about this...you may as well prepare for it, it's gonna be on the list.


And I never said "you" claimed to be an expert...

[MannyIsGod]

:lol

[ChumpDumper]

you know you were being a dickhead about it when you said "learn what renounce means"Do you know yet? I gave you a link. I wasn't going to give you the fish for a day.
I am gonna be on your ass if you were wrong about this.I won't be bothered a bit. I've been wrong before. If you'd like, I'll make the "My understanding is" disclaimer more standard.
And I never said you claimed to be an expert...The implication is quite clear. Don't back down now.

[spurster]

Yes, the Spurs have Horry's EB rights.

http://nbpa.org/downloads/CBA.pdf

"Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent" means a Veteran Free Agent who, prior to becoming a Veteran Free Agent, played under one or more Player Contracts covering some or all of each of the two preceding Seasons, and who: (i) either exclusively played with his Prior Team during such two Seasons, or, if he played for more than one Team during such period, changed Teams only (x) by means of assignment, or (y) by signing with his Prior Team during the first of the two Seasons; or (ii) became a Veteran Free Agent on July 1, 1998 and played with his Prior Team for some or all of each of the preceding two Seasons, and who did not change Teams during such two Seasons by signing with his Prior Team as a Veteran Free Agent.

[Marcus Bryant]

The Spurs had an option. I don't think renouncing an option is equivalent to renouncing Bird rights.

Bingo. A team can decline to extend a contract using an option and yet retain that player's Early Bird or Bird Rights.

[ChumpDumper]

Thanks for the link!

[MannyIsGod]

So that seals it, they have his rights.

[timvp]

So is that the new CBA or the old CBA?

[ShoogarBear]

Trophy Honeymoon is over; whottt and Chump are back at each other's throats.

[ChumpDumper]

Old. I don't have my full version of Acrobat here at work so I can't cut and paste, but the section on renouncing is on page 68.

[whottt]

The funny thing is watching Chump get indignant over the fact that I actually seek his/her/it's opinion on cap issues...Chump should be honored....I considered it an act of magnanimity on my part after the Charlie Ward fiasco...My respect on such issues is more than he/she/it has earned...that's for damn sure.

[spur219]

Horry is interested with the Heat.

[MannyIsGod]

I have to type this because it's not letting me copy that shit

(1) To renounce a Veteran Free agent, a Team must provide the NBA with an express, written statement renouncing its right to re-sign the player, effective no earlier than the July 1 following the last Season covered by the player's Contract. (The NBA shall notify the Players Association of any such renunciation by fax within two (2) business days following receipt of notice of such renunciation) From the date of such renunciatoin until the following July 1, the player's Prior Team will only be permitted to re-sign such palyer with Room (i.e., the Team cannot sign such player pursuant to section 6(b) below) or pursuant to the Minimum Player Salary Exception. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event a Team renounces one or more players in order to create Room for an Offer Sheet, and the offeree-player's Prior Team subsequently matches the Offer Sheet and enters into a Contract with that player, the Team may rescind the renunciation(s) within two (2) business days of the date the Offer sheet is matched, whereupon any such "unrenounced" player may again sign a Player Contract with his Prior Team as a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, Early Qualify Veteran Free Agent, or Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, as the case may be, and will again be included in his Prior Team's Salary at his applicable Free Agent Amount. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Team may not rescind the renunciation of a player if (i) at the time the player was renounced the TEam's Team Salary was at or below the Salary Cap and "unrenouncing" the player would cause the Team's Salary to exceed the Salary Cap, or (ii) at the time the player was renounced the Team's Team Salary was above the Salary Cap and "unrenouncing" the player would cause the Team's Salary to exceed the Salary cap by more than the amount by which the Team Salary exceeded the Salary Cap prior to renunciatoin.

[MannyIsGod]

However, if that shit changed in the new CBA, we don't have it. Is there a copy of the new CBA anywhere on the net?

[Kori Ellis]

With this that Spurster posted, I am sold that they have his EB. I don't think it matters that he was renounced.


Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent" means a Veteran Free Agent who, prior to becoming a Veteran Free Agent, played under one or more Player Contracts covering some or all of each of the two preceding Seasons, and who: (i) either exclusively played with his Prior Team during such two Seasons

[ChumpDumper]

The funny thing is watching Chump get indignant over the fact that I actually seek his/her/it's opinion on cap issues.I'm not indignant about that -- I'm indignant about your talking shit about my opinion on cap issues after asking me about them, dumbass.

[Kori Ellis]

However, if that shit changed in the new CBA, we don't have it. Is there a copy of the new CBA anywhere on the net?

No, it hasn't even been all approved yet.

[timvp]

Good finds.

What I don't understand then is why no national media outlet brings this up. Basically, under any circumstances, if you are with a team for two years, that team has your EB rights. Shouldn't that be an easy thing to check? I can't think of a situation where a player plays for a team for two seasons and isn't an EB player (as long as the team doesn't renounce that player after the second season).

[ChumpDumper]

It's not up on the NBPA site yet. Fortunately the whole site isn't down and the pdf of the old CBA is still available.

[ShoogarBear]

If there's one thing I've learned about the national media since the advent of the Internet, it's that they're lazy as shit.

You can count on one hand the number of people who actually seem to put some effort into research and fact-checking. Everyone else is about making splashes.

[whottt]

I'm not indignant about that -- I'm indignant about your talking shit about my opinion on cap issues after asking me about them, dumbass.


I wasn't asking your opinion when I was rudely told, "learn what renounce means"...now was I?

[Marcus Bryant]

Using an option to terminate a contract or declining an option to extend does not constitute renouncing a player's rights. Even if it did, that's immaterial as of today with regards to Horry's Early Bird status.

So open up a cold one and relax.

[MannyIsGod]

Using an option to terminate a contract or declining an option to extend does not constitute renouncing a player's rights. Even if it did, that's immaterial as of today with regards to Horry's Early Bird status.

So open up a cold one and relax.
Thats true, they are different things. But in order to sign Manu last year, they had to do both. Renounce and decline the option.

[ChumpDumper]

I wasn't asking your opinion when I was rudely told, "learn what renounce means"...now was I?Look, I know you're used to being schooled by me, but that doesn't make me your teacher. Man up and do some reading.

[ChumpDumper]

But in order to sign Manu last year, they had to do both. Renounce and decline the option.not necessarily in that order.

[whottt]

After reading that excerpt by Manny...I don't think the Spurs renounced Horry's rights anyway...I don't remember there being much about it last season...just they declined to pick up his option...

I have never seen or heard of a team losing Bird exceptions...declining options or not...

Has anyone?

Is everyone absolutely certain that when a team declines to pick up an option on a player that his placeholder figure is automatically 120% of his last contract?

Does that apply with a declined option?


On top of that...there is a grey are here still...Say the Spurs had been over the cap last summer when they declined Horry's option...they would not have been able to resign him even at his placeholder figure...it would have been against the rules of the CBA for a player with a team for only one year.....but based on what is written in that excerpt posted by Manny...they would have still retained his rights.

[Kori Ellis]

After reading that excerpt by Manny...I don't think the Spurs renounced Horry's rights anyway

If they didn't renounce him, they wouldn't have been under the cap far enough to sign everyone that they did.

[Horry For 3!]

I don't see Horry going anywhere.

[whottt]

If they didn't renounce him, they wouldn't have been under the cap far enough to sign everyone that they did.


That's assuming his placeholder was 120% of his previous contract...

What if it wasn't? What if that 120% figure doesn't apply to a declined option...only to expiring contracts?

What if his placeholder was based on the vet min because it was a declined option?

[spur219]

The Spurs don't have EB rights to Horry. Because the Spurs declined the team option last season.

[whottt]

What I am saying is..it looks to me like there is more red tape involved in renouncing a players rights than there is in merely declining an option...

Like I said...say the Spurs had been over the cap and terminated Horry's contract after one season...but didn't send in written notification that they were renouncing his rights? What would have happened then?

I think there is something here that we are missing...

And like I said...I've never heard of a team losing Bird exceptions for a player that has been with them multiple seasons...never.

[whottt]

The Spurs don't have EB rights to Horry. Because the Spurs declined the team option last season.

In the CBA it appears that they are two entirely different things...

[ChumpDumper]

Is everyone absolutely certain that when a team declines to pick up an option on a player that his placeholder figure is automatically 120% of his last contract?It's 120% if the player has only been on a team for one season on a one year contract. Had he been there longer, the placeholder figure is higher.

To free up the cap space to sign Manu, the Spurs had to do two things with Horry.

1) Decline his option to get that amount off the cap.

2) Renounce his rights to get his 120% placeholder value off the cap.

After that, Horry's cap hit for the Spurs was zero until he re-signed after Manu and the others were signed.

[Marcus Bryant]

The Spurs don't have EB rights to Horry. Because the Spurs declined the team option last season.


Again, that doesn't mean jack. What matters is renouncing his rights and again, that doesn't matter because we have passed June 30th.

How many more times are we going to have to go through this?

[Kori Ellis]

That's assuming his placeholder was 120% of his previous contract...

What if it wasn't? What if that 120% figure doesn't apply to a declined option...only to expiring contracts?

What if his placeholder was based on the vet min because it was a declined option?


I think that Horry was a "Non-Bird" free agent after they declined his option. (They didn't have his Bird or Early Bird). The placeholder for Non-Bird free agents is 120%.

But I'm not sure if I understand it correctly.

[Kori Ellis]

To free up the cap space to sign Manu, the Spurs had to do two things with Horry.

1) Decline his option to get that amount off the cap.

2) Renounce his rights to get his 120% placeholder value off the cap.

That's exactly how I understand it.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm completely open to the possibility we don't have EB rights for some obscure reason. But, given the way Ferry came into his EB deal and what we've learned here -- it looks like the Spurs have them for Horry.

[Marcus Bryant]

Early Bird rights for Horry have been restored as of today, assuming he was renounced last summer. So open up a cold one, get filled with some patriotic fervor this weekend and go beat up some foreigners if you are still feeling on edge.

:)

[MannyIsGod]

Early Bird rights for Horry have been restored as of today, assuming he was renounced last summer. So open up a cold one, get filled with some patriotic fervor this weekend and go beat up some foreigners if you are still feeling on edge.

:)
:lol

[whottt]

Here is what I am getting out of reading the FAQ..

#1.What the Spurs did or did not do with Horry's rights last season is meaningless in defining him as an EB FA this season....it doesn't even matter if we regained his rights on June 30 or not. It's a moot point because what a team did or did not do in the first year has nothing to do with getting a players EB rights.


#2. To be an EB FA the only qualification is that you have played with a team for 2 seasons without changing teams. That's all it says...Own teams FA for 2 seasons without changing teams.


I am just trying to make sure there isn't some obscure reason we lost his rights...

There is a grey area there with regards to Team Options on players...I just want to be certain that within that grey area...there's no loophole that could have caused us to lose Horry's rights...

It bothers me that the journalists automatically get that we have Devin's EB rights...but not Horry's...they should be concluding we have Horry's for the same reasons they conclude we have Devin's...why aren't they drawing that obvious conclusion?

The SA journalists should be well aware that Horry has been with the team for 2 seasons.

[ChumpDumper]

The only possible rub has to do with how renouncing Horry last summer affects the rights the Spurs hold on him. Everything we've seen points to those rights being reinstated in full today.
The SA journalists should be well aware that Horry has been with the team for 2 seasons.They could be under the impression that renoucing Horry means the Spurs started back at zero last summer and are now only halfway to attaining EB rights.

[whottt]

Does anyone have a link to the article where the Spurs declined Horry's option last season? I want to see if they mentioned anything about renouncing rights...I read that FAQ and there is a signifigant grey area in the area of Team Options..


Let me ask this...what rights did they renounce last season? I haven't seen any exception rights tied into being with team for 1 season...how can you renounce rights that don't exist?

If the Spurs had been over the cap...they couldn't have signed him at that place holder %.

The Bird rights begin after being with a team for 2 seasons...not before.

[Kori Ellis]

Does anyone have a link to the article where the Spurs declined Horry's option last season? I want to see if they mentioned anything about renouncing rights...I read that FAQ and there is a signifigant grey area in the area of Team Options..


Let me ask this...what rights did they renounce last season? I haven't seen any exception rights tied into being with team for 1 season...how can you renounce rights that don't exist?

If the Spurs had been over the cap...they couldn't have signed him at that place holder %.

The Bird rights begin after being with a team for 2 seasons...not before.

As I explained above, I believe he was a Non-Bird free agent after they declined his option. So then he counted the 120% amount (all of your free agents count against your cap in one form or another until they are renounced, signed by you, or signed by someone else). Then he was renounced, so he no longer counted as 120%.

Do you understand now? (I'm not being condescending)

[Marcus Bryant]

The Road Goes on Forever and the Party Never Ends...

[ChumpDumper]

I'm posting this for the second time in this thread, feel free to actually read it this time
NON-BIRD EXCEPTION -- Players who qualify for this exception are called "Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agents" in the CBA. They are defined as veteran free agents who are neither Qualifying Veteran Free Agents nor Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agents. This exception allows a team to re-sign its own free agent to a salary starting at 120% of the player's salary in the previous season or 120% of the minimum salary, whichever is greater, even if they are over the cap. Raises are limited to 10% and contracts are limited to six years when this exception is used. http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#17

Since it is the second time, I am being condescending.

[MannyIsGod]

Whott, the only way for them to sign Manu was to both decline his option and renounce him. It happend dude, let it go!

[whottt]

So what would have happened if the Spurs had been over the cap last season when they declined his option?

Automatic cancellation of his Early, Early Bird right? No paper work necessary?


They could not have resigned him at that placeholder figuree...whether they formally renounced his rights or not...it would have been a violation of the CBA.

As far as I know there is no exception right for being with a team for one season...other than getting a raise his second season...

IOW...what ever right they renounced last season? It had nothing to do with Early Bird rights...zip, zero, zilch, nada.

[whottt]

Whott, the only way for them to sign Manu was to both decline his option and renounce him. It happend dude, let it go!


What right did they renounce?


The ability to go over the cap to resign him after 1 year, at more than the vet min? They never had that right to renounce....it doesn't exist

His pre early, early bird right? Never heard of it.

[Kori Ellis]

What right did they renounce?

His pre early, early bird right? Never heard of it.

Whottt, are you reading my posts?

They renounced him as a Non-Bird free agent.

[MannyIsGod]

You don't renounce rights, you renounce players. So whether or not a player has any exception coming up, you renounce them in order to remove their placeholder against their cap.

[Kori Ellis]

Whottt -- all of your free agents count against your cap in some way until one of the following happens:


The player signs a new contract with the same team. When this happens, the player's affect on his team's team salary is based on his new salary.

The player signs with a different team. As soon as this happens, the player becomes the new team's problem, and his salary no longer counts against his old team.

The team renounces the player.

How much they count against the cap depends on what kind of free agent they are.

Larry Bird, except when coming off rookie "scale" contract At least the average salary 150%*
Larry Bird, except when coming off rookie "scale" contract Below the average salary 200%*
Larry Bird, coming off rookie "scale" contract At least the average salary 200% in 98-99*
225% in 99-00*
250% in the remaining seasons*
Larry Bird, coming off rookie "scale" contract Below the average salary 300%*
Early Bird Any 130%*
Non-Bird Any 120%*

In Horry's case, it was Non-Bird (as explained above in Chump's definition of Non-Bird).

[timvp]

I don't know why they would have had to renounce him. Renouncing a player means you are giving up your rights to re-sign them based off their last contract. After the Spurs didn't pick up the option, they didn't have any rights to sign him using his previous season's salary.

To clarify, lets say he was making 4 million in 2004 with an option in 2005 for 5 million. When the Spurs didn't pick up that option, they no longer had the opportunity to re-sign him using the 2004 salary as a basis. When they didn't pick up his option, they had to sign him with either cap room or an exception. So to me, he didn't have to be renounced because the Spurs didn't have any rights to him. Not even the first year bird rights or whatever.

[Marcus Bryant]

:lol

Why the fuck is this thread continuing? The Spurs have Early Bird rights for Horry.

Fuck man, it's a 3 day weekend.

Laters.
-MB

[ChumpDumper]

After the Spurs didn't pick up the option, they didn't have any rights to sign him using his previous season's salary.Yes, they did, but if they were over the cap (they were before letting Hedo go and renouncing almost everyone else besides Manu), they were limited to giving him a new deal starting at 120% of the previous year's deal -- that ended up being only a little over the option year amount.

[MannyIsGod]

I don't know why they would have had to renounce him. Renouncing a player means you are giving up your rights to re-sign them based off their last contract. After the Spurs didn't pick up the option, they didn't have any rights to sign him using his previous season's salary.

To clarify, lets say he was making 4 million in 2004 with an option in 2005 for 5 million. When the Spurs didn't pick up that option, they no longer had the opportunity to re-sign him using the 2004 salary as a basis. When they didn't pick up his option, they had to sign him with either cap room or an exception. So to me, he didn't have to be renounced because the Spurs didn't have any rights to him. Not even the first year bird rights or whatever.
Regradless of Bird Rights, every free agent counts against the cap until signed by the team, signed by another team, or renounced. Even first year players with no bird rights.

So when the declined his option, he was still counting against the cap. In order to remove that placeholder and free up the nessecary cap room to fit in Manu's contract they had to renounce him.

[timvp]

I guess it comes down to if after the Spurs didn't pick up his option, were they still able to offer him a contract starting at 120% of his 2004 salary? If yes, then the Spurs would have had to renounce him. In no, then it wouldn't make sense to have to renounce a player you have no special rights to.

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao

You know whats fucked up? The people in here arguing aren't the new ones who havne't been through several offseasons where everything in the CBA is disected in here, it's the old vets who should know this stuff. It's like we get some sick fucking high off of arguing about the CBA.

[timvp]

Either way, everything that I've read says that if you have a player for two years, they are an EB candidate.

So yeah, MB is ahead of us. Pop open a cold one.

:smokin

[whottt]

TimVP gets it...he sees the grey area too.

I am reading you guys posts...ya'll just aren't reading mine...I know they gave up the place holder...I know he was entitled to a raise...What I see nothing to indicate...is that he was entitled to that raise after the team declined his option...and I fail to see what right they could have renounced that would have impacted is EB status...

There is no right associated with EB status, or Bird Status, to renounce after 1 season with the team...there is no Pre, Early, Early Bird right....

What I am waiting for someone to point out...is what it(alleged renouncement last season) has to do with Early Bird Rights...it doesn't...it has nothing to do with them...So there is no loophole there that could have cost us his EB status...and that's a good thing...it's just one I am trying to close off...and getting quite a bit of opposition from my boardmates in my attempt to do so.

[whottt]

:lmao

You know whats fucked up? The people in here arguing aren't the new ones who havne't been through several offseasons where everything in the CBA is disected in here, it's the old vets who should know this stuff. It's like we get some sick fucking high off of arguing about the CBA.


Yeah but this doesn't happen every season...not like this. We don't bust guys down to the min from 5 million every season...

[Marcus Bryant]

When you decline to use an option or use an option to cancel a contract you are only giving up the terms of that contract for the next season, not the player's rights. The option and the rights are separate.

So the Spurs are in good shape and I'm going to get toasted.

[Kori Ellis]

TimVP gets it...he sees the grey area too.

I am reading you guys posts...ya'll just aren't reading mine...I know they gave up the place holder...I know he was entitled to a raise...What I see nothing to indicate...is that he was entitled to that raise after the team declined his option...and I fail to see what right they could have renounced that would have impacted is EB status...

There is no right associated with EB status, or Bird Status, to renounce after 1 season with the team...there is no Pre, Early, Early Bird right....

What I am waiting for someone to point out...is what it(alleged renouncement last season) has to do with Early Bird Rights...it doesn't...it has nothing to do with them...So there is no loophole there that could have cost us his EB status...and that's a good thing...it's just one I am trying to close off...and getting quite a bit of opposition from my boardmates in my attempt to do so.

The renouncing has nothing to do with EB. They didn't have his EB last year because he hadn't been here two years so that whole crap about they lose it for one year, blah blah didn't really apply in this situation.

He was a Non-Bird free agent after the Spurs declined the team option last summer. The Spurs renounced him to get rid of his 120% placeholder and get under the cap. And then re-signed him to a two year contract with the second year as a player option. Now he declined the player option and he's become an Early Bird free agent because he's been here for 2 years.

That's it.

[whottt]

The renouncing has nothing to do with EB. They didn't have his EB last year because he hadn't been here two years so that whole crap about they lose it for one year, blah blah didn't really apply in this situation.

He was a Non-Bird free agent after the Spurs declined the team option last summer. The Spurs renounced him to get rid of his 120% placeholder and get under the cap. And then re-signed him to a two year contract with the second year as a player option. Now he declined the player option and he's become an Early Bird free agent because he's been here for 2 years.

That's it.


LMAO...that's the point I am trying to make...you can't renounce early bird rights after 1 season because you don't have them...the June 30th thing has nothing to do with it.

But that still leaves the question...why is Ludden(I think) saying he has to be signed out of the MLE...doesn't Ludden get his info straight from the Spurs?


Ludden was the guy that said we would have more leverage after 03 thanks to a little known loophole(which I now assume was the TO on Ferry's contract)...

[MannyIsGod]

Well, I'm assuming Ludden writes his own articles and may have just assumed that portion of things.

[whottt]

I hope you're right...but no one on the board caught that thing with Ferry...

[Kori Ellis]

LMAO...that's the point I am trying to make...you can't renounce early bird rights after 1 season because you don't have them...the June 30th thing has nothing to do with it.

Yeah, that's what I've been saying since last night.


But that still leaves the question...why is Ludden(I think) saying he has to be signed out of the MLE...doesn't Ludden get his info straight from the Spurs?

I haven't found a Ludden article that says that. Can you find it? I actually have emails into some people would really know if they have Horry's EB; so I'll let you know if/when I hear back. And yes, Ludden normally gets info from the Spurs but he's not infallible in this area.


Ludden was the guy that said we would have more leverage after 03 thanks to a little known loophole(which I now assume was the TO on Ferry's contract)...

It was never public knowledge that there was more to Ferry's contract (most places had it listed as over) so that's where all that mix up happened (which was a good thing). NBA teams never release the actual terms of contracts. So actually everything we are going on is strictly hearsay. It's just once it gets printed once, it's spreads like wildfire on the net, whether it's correct or not.

[spur219]

Hopefully you are right Kori but I am with the understanding that they don't have EB rights to Horry.

[Marcus Bryant]

LMAO...that's the point I am trying to make...you can't renounce early bird rights after 1 season because you don't have them...the June 30th thing has nothing to do with it.


That's not the point. The point is that his being renounced last summer does not have an impact on his Early Bird rights this summer. That's been the issue all along.

The "June 30 thing" was important because until June 30 had passed the Spurs could not sign Horry to a new contract as if they had his Early Bird rights this summer.

Fuck it, this is madness.

[Kori Ellis]

Hopefully you are right Kori but I am with the understanding that they don't have EB rights to Horry.

Well did you see the CBA passage that spurster quoted in this thread? It's pretty clear that since Horry has been here 2 seasons that the Spurs have EB.

[timvp]

I haven't found a Ludden article that says that. Can you find it?

Your wish is my command, my lady. :smokin


Unlike previous summers, the Spurs don't have salary-cap room. To re-sign Horry and add Scola or any free agents, they will be limited to using the $4.9 million mid-level exception and $1.6 million exception. The exact value of the two exceptions won't be determined until the league finalizes its new collective bargaining agreement on July 22.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/basketball/nba/spurs/stories/MYSA062605.1C.BKNspurs.main.aa8723f.html

[whottt]

Yeah, that's what I've been saying since last night.



I haven't found a Ludden article that says that. Can you find it? I actually have emails into some people would really know if they have Horry's EB; so I'll let you know if/when I hear back. And yes, Ludden normally gets info from the Spurs but he's not infallible in this area.

I am not 100% certain it was a Ludden article...but I am certain it was one written by an express news writer...I'll look for it.

[whottt]

There you go....I knew I read it at some point.

That looks like he's quoting the horse if you ask me...

[Marcus Bryant]

Renouncing a player would mean nothing if it didn't cost you the ability to sign a player as if they had prior tenure with your team for a certain period. In the NBA that time is until the June 30th after the season passes.

Effectively it meant very little for him since he'd been with the team only a season prior, but if he had been with the team 2 or more seasons it would've mattered, at least for the contract he signed last summer.

So the Spurs lost Horry's prior tenure for a season and now since it's July 1st, they have that back and he's an Early Bird free agent as of today.

[whottt]

That's not the point. The point is that his being renounced last summer does not have an impact on his Early Bird rights this summer. That's been the issue all along.

:rolleyes


The "June 30 thing" was important because until June 30 had passed the Spurs could not sign Horry to a new contract as if they had his Early Bird rights this summer.

Fuck it, this is madness.

Where I was coming from earlier...it was alluded by some that his raise rights(after 1 season or what ever) are somehow tied into his early bird rights, they aren't...and that we basically lost the first years claim to his early bird rights by renouncing him last summer...when in fact that was never the case.

[Kori Ellis]

Off topic (almost): I think they should get Scola to sign for the $1.6M.

[whottt]

Renouncing a player would mean nothing if it didn't cost you the ability to sign a player as if they had prior tenure with your team for a certain period. In the NBA that time is until the June 30th after the season passes.

Effectively it meant very little for him since he'd been with the team only a season prior, but if he had been with the team 2 or more seasons it would've mattered, at least for the contract he signed last summer.

So the Spurs lost Horry's prior tenure for a season and now since it's July 1st, they have that back and he's an Early Bird free agent as of today.


See that's where I don't agree with you....the only way they could ever lose bird rights or early bird rights, is by renouncing them the season in which they could go into effect...Show me how it could happen otherwise...Illustrate your point.

And there was a penalty at the time for renouncing his rights...they might have lost him that season because they couldn't give him a raise over his previous seasons contract...that was the penalty.

[Marcus Bryant]

It's not a permanent loss but it is a loss until July 1st after that season ends.

If you had a player who had been with you 3 years and you renounced them, then you wouldn't have their Bird Rights until July 1st after that following season ended. (assuming, of course, that they re-signed with you for a 4th year).

[MannyIsGod]

With a 2 million dollar buyout? Good fucking luck!

[Kori Ellis]

It's not a permanent loss but it is a loss until July 1st after that season ends.

If you had a player who had been with you 3 years and you renounced them, then you wouldn't have their Bird Rights until July 1st after that following season ended. (assuming, of course, that they re-signed with you for a 4th year).

True, but since Horry had only been here one year when they renounced him, the fact that they had to wait until the following July1 (now) didn't mean a thing.

[whottt]

Isn't the LLE going to go up? And can't the Spurs also contribute something like 350K(or more) to his buyout?

[Marcus Bryant]

See that's where I don't agree with you.....


Then you are wrong. The rule is rather clear. It is put in place to prevent teams from signing other teams' free agents first before they sign their own.

[Marcus Bryant]

True, but since Horry had only been here one year when they renounced him, the fact that they had to wait until the following July1 (now) didn't mean a thing.


It didn't mean a thing except that whottt didn't know what he was attempting to discuss.

[Kori Ellis]

With a 2 million dollar buyout? Good fucking luck!

Why? He doesn't pay it all up front. He can make payments like Manu did if Tau agrees to it.

[Kori Ellis]

Isn't the LLE going to go up? And can't the Spurs also contribute something like 350K(or more) to his buyout?

$1.6M is just an estimate and yes they can pay around $350K towards it.

[ChumpDumper]

you can't renounce early bird rights after 1 season because you don't have them.You renounce the rights to that player.

After one season, they are called Non-Bird because that is the rights exception you are limited to using on that player if you are over the cap.

After two seasons, they are called Early-Bird because the player can now be signed using that exception.

After three seasons, they are called Full Birdbecause that exception can be used.

They are the same rights -- they just qualify a player for different exceptions as time goes on -- and if they are renounced at any time, the team give up the right to use whatever exceptions those rights qualify the player for until the following July 1 - in Horry's case it was the Non-Bird exception.

[whottt]

It didn't mean a thing except that whottt didn't know what he was attempting to discuss.


Bullshit...I was under the impression we had his EB rights and what little I have read of the cap backed that impression up...

My question was...and still is...if there isn't some loophole that has caused us to lose them...

You guys are certain beyond the shadow of a doubt that we haven't...I however, realize, that the two people that are the most certain are a guy that wanted Jason Kidd(Chump probably wanted him to)...and a guy/it that loves chokers...neither of whom noticed the beneficial situation with Ferry...

The purpose of my question is to make sure nothing is being overlooked...because of Ludden's comments...I've never seen him wrong on the Spurs cap situation...I have seen ya'll get caught with your pants down.

[2centsworth]

Whott,

Why don't you just call Ludden and ask him? I would do it for you but don't know wth you guys are talking about.

[whottt]

They are the same rights -- just different

Chump and MB...

From Coon's cap faq(I might as well become the rightest person the board, even when it comes to the cap, because kryptonite is boring):

Terms for qualifying for EBR:Own free agent, 2 seasons without changing teams as a free agent

Terms for qualifying for BR:Own free agent, 3 seasons without changing teams as a free agent


That's all it says....it doesn't say you have to go unrenounced for 2 years or 3 years to qualify...just says you have to be with the team without changing teams(other than trade).

Owned..

[Marcus Bryant]

Again, and now that MB has a nice ale and stoogie to relax with out on the patio as well as MB's ladyfriend on the way, renouncing a player matters because if a team's own free agents did not factor into that team's total team salary figure then a team that had a bunch of free agents (and would be under the cap if the team was not hit with a cap charge for their rights) could sign other teams' free agents first before re-signing their own. Hence the reason that renouncing Horry mattered last summer. The Spurs had to renounce Horry's rights in order to clear cap room. In doing so, the Spurs lost his prior tenure with the team until July 1st of this year. Yes, it didn't really matter then since he only had been with the team for 1 season. But now, it does matter since the Spurs want to use Early Bird rights to retain him.

The point of this is that the "June 30 thing" does exist and is not a figment of my imagination.

[ChumpDumper]

That's all it says....it doesn't say you have to go unrenounced for 2 years or 3 years to qualify...just says you have to be with the team without changing teams(other than trade).No shit.

Glad you finally figured that out.

Had you actually read any of our posts you would have known that this morning.

[Marcus Bryant]

Where the renouncing/cap charge really screws up teams is when you have a player for whom you have Early Bird or full Bird rights as well as a player who you've had for only a season who is unwilling to re-sign for whatever you have left over after you renounce them. Since Horry was willing to go from a $5 million annual salary to a minimum one or whatever then it didn't hurt the Spurs. But if Horry had a significant offer last summer from another club it would've screwed up the Spurs' plans and they likely would have lost him, because they couldn't give him a new contract with a raise off of his old salary.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, we're almost lucky Horry tanked against the Lakers.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Bullshit...I was under the impression we had his EB rights and what little I have read of the cap backed that impression up...

Fuck whott.

I don't know everything that was discussed on pages 2-4, but...

We never had his Early Bird rights last summer to renounce. The Early Bird rights stipulates only that a player must be a member of the same team for two years prior to being EB eligible.

We've reached that point now with Horry, and hence have his rights.

As for Ludden... BFD. He said we weren't going to make any trades at the deadline in February, either. I'd reckon there's at least 3 and probably in reality 4 people on this site who could dance circles around Johnny Ludden when it comes to the CBA.