76ers Big man log jam

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

The floor doesn't matter. Worst case, if the team doesn't meet the floor then they just distribute the gap to the other players on the roster.

And on top of this enraging other owners, GMs, agents and the players union to the point the league might decide to force them to ditch their GM.

[DPG21920]

I wish I had a gif of Dennis Hopper... yer freakin' me out man. I thought the purpose in the floor was to keep teams from doing exactly this? It's not much of a floor, if you don't have to meet it. And you're saying they can just distribute more money to the players who are already under contract for a lesser amount? I've already written too much for one day, but you see all the games that could allow them to play? And I thought the Players' Union wanted a floor to try and get more money out to more players? That all just seems totally contrary to what I thought they wanted to accomplish.

I understand wanting to leave room to absorb contracts. , they Sixers have been doing that for years and stockpiling picks. I believe you - I just don't see the point in having a floor if they can work this way.

The floor does get more money to the players though. In the PHI example, if they don't sign someone(s) with salaries above the floor, then that number they are below the floor gets divided out evenly and paid to the players. The team is paying money no matter what (the same amount) whether it's to current roster or another player they bring in.

[GSH]

The floor does get more money to the players though. In the PHI example, if they don't sign someone(s) with salaries above the floor, then that number they are below the floor gets divided out evenly and paid to the players. The team is paying money no matter what (the same amount) whether it's to current roster or another player they bring in.

Okay then. Seems to me the league would treat that floor just like a cap hold, and not let them absorb more than the gap between the cap and the floor. But that's what I get for assuming.

So if a min-contract player has an extra half-million doled out, when the team has to meet the floor... they basically double their salary? And do they have a $500K cap hold for the next season, or $1M? And if they get an extra $500K this season, but next season the team has a bigger payroll?

They could send out a player who would get paid $500K by his new team. But if he stayed in Philly, he would make $1M because of the distribution? What a mess. I think I'm just going to pretend like I didn't read any of this.

[Chinook]

Nobody? Chinook, you know tons about the cap. Aren't the Sixers like way below the announced salary floor? What am I missing?

Trades depend on the cap ceiling, not the floor. Teams are only punished for being below the floor by increasing the salaries of the players on the team to compensate. It's not really a big deal.

That does mean that Palangi's proposed trade is possible.

[Chinook]

Okay then. Seems to me the league would treat that floor just like a cap hold, and not let them absorb more than the gap between the cap and the floor. But that's what I get for assuming.

So if a min-contract player has an extra half-million doled out, when the team has to meet the floor... they basically double their salary? And do they have a $500K cap hold for the next season, or $1M? And if they get an extra $500K this season, but next season the team has a bigger payroll?

They could send out a player who would get paid $500K by his new team. But if he stayed in Philly, he would make $1M because of the distribution? What a mess. I think I'm just going to pretend like I didn't read any of this.

DPG is a little off in the sense that the money doesn't HAVE to be split evenly, but I don't see why it wouldn't be. However, that salary isn't carried over to the next year by any means, neither as a benefit nor a punishment. In the scenario you suggested, the player would just double his salary that year and be eligible for the two-year min the next season.

It's actually kind of cool. In theory, the team can distribute the money based on relative salary, though that's up to the NBPA. But imagine being a guy who signs right before the end of the season and cashes in on like a million bucks for the trouble. That's life-changing money for a guy who probably wasn't making enough to live on just a few weeks before.

[DPG21920]

Okay then. Seems to me the league would treat that floor just like a cap hold, and not let them absorb more than the gap between the cap and the floor. But that's what I get for assuming.

It's really one in the same. Whether you sign a free agent for x amount or trade/absorb a player for x amount, it ends up being the same thing overall. This floor was set to ensure a minimum amount of money was spent/invested period. Now cheap teams will either have to pay more than normal or be actively engaged in trade talks - both good things for players/nba.

So if a min-contract player has an extra half-million doled out, when the team has to meet the floor... they basically double their salary? And do they have a $500K cap hold for the next season, or $1M? And if they get an extra $500K this season, but next season the team has a bigger payroll?

Correct. I believe its just evenly distributed and not pro-rated based on contract size for purposes of the extra distribution (but I'm not 100% sure). Either way it would not impact the cap holds from my understanding (because in your situation, they would have a roster spot open that would have the charge anyways for cap purposes vs doubling the cap hold for a min player).

The floor is an annual qualifier that only has to met by a certain deadline. So what happens this year is only this year. Next year, that players contract goes back to what it normally is and the team may sign other players that push them above the floor and no extra payout for that year.

They could send out a player who would get paid $500K by his new team. But if he stayed in Philly, he would make $1M because of the distribution? What a mess. I think I'm just going to pretend like I didn't read any of this.

That is correct. However, they really don't do that because they are paying the same amount regardless so it does them no good when they are below a floor to send a player out.

[TheDoctor]

"Big Man Log Jam" sounds like one of those water rides at an amusement park....Or the party theme for a gay cruise.

[SpursforSix]

Bend over, I'll ing show you a Big Man Log Jam.

[DPG21920]

Also, GSH, when you call out to Chinook are you implying I don't know about the cap??? WTF

[BillMc]

[GSH]

Also, GSH, when you call out to Chinook are you implying I don't know about the cap??? WTF

You ignored me. In my hour of confusion, I turned to the ever-constant Chinook. No, I had a little seam in my schedule, and thought you had gone off for a while. You guys are both pretty damn good sources. It's almost like having personal access to Larry Coon x2.

I really do get the concept about a non-hard floor. I'd have to give it some thought, but I have a feeling it gives them some extra angles in managing roster/salary/trades. Usually the league has tried to close loopholes. If nothing else, the Sixers could absorb $17M worth of salary right now. If the floor was mandatory, the most any team could absorb is about $10M. (The gap between floor and cap.) That's not insignificant. It gives the Sixers the ability to swing a blockbuster, and potentially rewards them for staying below the floor. I know they have to come up to the floor eventually, but it gives them one of a lot of extra flexibility in the interim. That is just inconsistent with everything else I'm used to.

Look at it this way: if you KNOW that they are going to have to s out $84M and change, then they should be treated like that much is committed. Then they would only have the ability to absorb $10M or so, just like a team that was truly at the floor. I'm not going to beat it to death (more than I already have), but I think it gives them too much advantage over other teams.

[tonight...you]

You ignored me. In my hour of confusion, I turned to the ever-constant Chinook. No, I had a little seam in my schedule, and thought you had gone off for a while. You guys are both pretty damn good sources. It's almost like having personal access to Larry Coon x2.

I really do get the concept about a non-hard floor. I'd have to give it some thought, but I have a feeling it gives them some extra angles in managing roster/salary/trades. Usually the league has tried to close loopholes. If nothing else, the Sixers could absorb $17M worth of salary right now. If the floor was mandatory, the most any team could absorb is about $10M. (The gap between floor and cap.) That's not insignificant. It gives the Sixers the ability to swing a blockbuster, and potentially rewards them for staying below the floor. I know they have to come up to the floor eventually, but it gives them one of a lot of extra flexibility in the interim. That is just inconsistent with everything else I'm used to.

Look at it this way: if you KNOW that they are going to have to s out $84M and change, then they should be treated like that much is committed. Then they would only have the ability to absorb $10M or so, just like a team that was truly at the floor. I'm not going to beat it to death (more than I already have), but I think it gives them too much advantage over other teams.

I'm going to be honest:
I'b be willing to take that man on a fishing trip. The convo's would probably be so much fun... it would be worth it.

[DPG21920]

You ignored me. In my hour of confusion, I turned to the ever-constant Chinook. No, I had a little seam in my schedule, and thought you had gone off for a while. You guys are both pretty damn good sources. It's almost like having personal access to Larry Coon x2.

I really do get the concept about a non-hard floor. I'd have to give it some thought, but I have a feeling it gives them some extra angles in managing roster/salary/trades. Usually the league has tried to close loopholes. If nothing else, the Sixers could absorb $17M worth of salary right now. If the floor was mandatory, the most any team could absorb is about $10M. (The gap between floor and cap.) That's not insignificant. It gives the Sixers the ability to swing a blockbuster, and potentially rewards them for staying below the floor. I know they have to come up to the floor eventually, but it gives them one of a lot of extra flexibility in the interim. That is just inconsistent with everything else I'm used to.

Look at it this way: if you KNOW that they are going to have to s out $84M and change, then they should be treated like that much is committed. Then they would only have the ability to absorb $10M or so, just like a team that was truly at the floor. I'm not going to beat it to death (more than I already have), but I think it gives them too much advantage over other teams.

I was just kidding. Chinook knows more about the minutiae of the CBA than I do - especially after the changes. I know most of the general stuff, but when it gets down to the nitty gritty I have to research and ask.

[tonight...you]

I was just kidding. Chinook knows more about the minutiae of the CBA than I do - especially after the changes. I know most of the general stuff, but when it gets down to the nitty gritty I have to research and ask.

I'm going to be in SA the beginning of March to see a few games, for my birthday. You would be one of the peeps I would love to meet in person.
Actually, I invite... most of you, should you want, to hook up with a fellow Spurs fan the weekend of March 4th. No... I'm not buying your drinks.

And no, I don't what place would be good to go to, for a hangout, but I know it's not going to be the Blue Pearl.
But we'll be staying at a hotel on the Riverwalk... if that helps.

Maybe I should make a thread...

[DPG21920]

Just make a thread about it as it gets closer - I'm not always in SA but if I am I'll meet up if the place is awesome

[tonight...you]

Just make a thread about it as it gets closer - I'm not always in SA but if I am I'll meet up if the place is awesome

Will do.

[GSH]

I'm going to be honest:
I'b be willing to take that man on a fishing trip. The convo's would probably be so much fun... it would be worth it.

Heh. I actually live on the water these days, and fish all the time. No talking, except about fishing.

[Seventyniner]

The salary floor doesn't really have any teeth. I wonder if a change is part of the new CBA being negotiated, but I doubt it; it doesn't seem like a high priority issue. Unless both the players and owners want to punish the Sixers for gaming the system.

[tonight...you]

Heh. I actually live on the water these days, and fish all the time. No talking, except about fishing.

Love it. My older brother lives on a house-boat in Florida. He swears by it.
I love fishing, having grown up in Corpus Christi, but now living in El Paso... well, let's just say I don't get the chance like I used to.

[palangi]

I like RoCo but he's not as good as Danny at shooting or defense. Adding RoCo to the existing squad would be great. Then Forbes for Mills is a massive downgrade at this point.

In a bubble Danny for Noel is fine value but it hurts the overall team now.

Why is mills a massive downgrade? After thinking about it I don't think it is. Mills shooting isn't much better. He isn't better defensively, they are equal here. Ball handling is about the same.

So what is the difference in the two? Forbes is taller and longer. And mills has more experience.

[r0drig0lac]

76ers would not trade Noel for Mills + Danny, they have enough players and assets to actually make a real upgrade in the backcourt

[spurraider21]

sixers aren't going to move noel.

and we arent goin to make a move for oak

/thread

[GSH]

Bigger concern to me is that I thought Dedmon was on his way up. He played really well for a few games, but hasn't looked nearly as good lately. Of all the trades that get talked about, very few ever come true. He's the guy we've got right now, and I was really hoping for more than we've seen recently.

Much as I hate to say it, I'd consider packaging him in a trade for one legit C. Pau plus one more solid big man would probably be enough to make the run into the postseason. Dedmon has moments, but I can't say that the word "solid" comes to mind when I'm watching him lately.

[cjw]

Bigger concern to me is that I thought Dedmon was on his way up. He played really well for a few games, but hasn't looked nearly as good lately. Of all the trades that get talked about, very few ever come true. He's the guy we've got right now, and I was really hoping for more than we've seen recently.

Much as I hate to say it, I'd consider packaging him in a trade for one legit C. Pau plus one more solid big man would probably be enough to make the run into the postseason. Dedmon has moments, but I can't say that the word "solid" comes to mind when I'm watching him lately.

He's a free agent after this season without bird rights, so going to be hard to get any value for him. I'd love to upgrade the spot, but think Spurs are stuck with it

[Raven]

76ers would not trade Noel for Mills + Danny, they have enough players and assets to actually make a real upgrade in the backcourt

lol, they would give noel AND okafor for that.