snickles
07-02-2015, 10:52 AM
I've seen a ton of people working under the assumption that S&Ts still get players the extra year and the 7.5% raises. This rule was changed in the last CBA.
A player in a sign and trade can not get a contract any higher than what they would get from signing with a new team
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q93
93. Why would teams or players want to do a sign-and-trade? Teams benefit because they can get something in return for players they would otherwise lose to free agency. For players the benefits are limited. Under previous CBAs a player who qualified could receive a full Bird contract and go to the team of his choice, which encouraged the player to seek a sign-and-trade once he decided to play elsewhere. Under the current CBA a player receives the same contract via sign-and-trade (four years, 4.5% raises) that he could get by signing with his new team directly, and can receive a larger Bird contract only if he stays with his previous team. In addition, it is much simpler for the player to sign directly with his new team, as a sign-and-trade has to be agreed to by three parties rather than two. A player is really only forced to seek a sign-and-trade if he wants to go to a team that is capped-out (or doesn't have enough cap room to give the player his full starting salary) and can't sign him directly.
Another factor encouraging a player not to seek a sign-and-trade is that his new team might be weakened by losing players or draft picks in the trade. So while a sign-and-trade is a useful tool when the team does not have the cap room to sign the player directly, the player and his new team have little reason to seek a sign-and-trade when the player can be signed without involving his previous team.
A player in a sign and trade can not get a contract any higher than what they would get from signing with a new team
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q93
93. Why would teams or players want to do a sign-and-trade? Teams benefit because they can get something in return for players they would otherwise lose to free agency. For players the benefits are limited. Under previous CBAs a player who qualified could receive a full Bird contract and go to the team of his choice, which encouraged the player to seek a sign-and-trade once he decided to play elsewhere. Under the current CBA a player receives the same contract via sign-and-trade (four years, 4.5% raises) that he could get by signing with his new team directly, and can receive a larger Bird contract only if he stays with his previous team. In addition, it is much simpler for the player to sign directly with his new team, as a sign-and-trade has to be agreed to by three parties rather than two. A player is really only forced to seek a sign-and-trade if he wants to go to a team that is capped-out (or doesn't have enough cap room to give the player his full starting salary) and can't sign him directly.
Another factor encouraging a player not to seek a sign-and-trade is that his new team might be weakened by losing players or draft picks in the trade. So while a sign-and-trade is a useful tool when the team does not have the cap room to sign the player directly, the player and his new team have little reason to seek a sign-and-trade when the player can be signed without involving his previous team.