Reply With Quote
Lightweight
You guys can edit it if you figure it out. I'm going to sleep.
Lightweight
If Parker's deal is $66M over 7 years with a 12.5% increase, that works out to a starting salary at a little under $7M.
I'll just round it to $7 million.
Parker's contract isn't seven years; it's six.
The lady is right. Scratch that. $8M was more accurate.
.
I keep correcting people in the forum about that. I don't know why people think it was seven years. His contract starts at around $8.4M.
Assuming the Spurs have both SAR and GRob on the bench, that's some scoring punch to have available, something that as Spurs fans we've not seen before. Yes, over the years the Spurs have had benches that have been able to put up points, but not any great individual scorers. Being able to throw in a Rahim or a GRobinson is a nice dimension. Teams have to prep for the Spurs' big 3, but the Spurs would add more wrinkles to their offense if they had another bigman who can score inside and outside as well as a guy who is automatic with his jumper.
The thing is, the Spurs could get Rahim for Kers...er, Nesterovic, sign GRobinson for a relatively small deal, and bring in Scola and watch him tear up the league and yet Bryan Colangelo or whoever would get the Exec of the Year award for signing Raja Bell.
It's ok, as long as the Spurs keep adding the hardware.
Chump do you have any idea what the threshold will be?
Why does Tony's contract start out at so much more than Manu's?
It seems like they both average out to around 11 million per season...
Manu is 5 years 55 million and Tony is 6 years 66 million...right?
I know they don't make a straight 11 million per year but Tony is going to get a raise in that last season too...
That's where things get screwy. The cap is based on what the league thinks revenues will be before the season, while the tax threshold is based on actual revenues totaled up after the season.
If the projections turn out to be completely accurate with a $50 million cap, the tax threshold should be about $59.9 million.
No, Manu is 6 year $52M and Tony is 6 year $66M.
According to Larry Coon, for 03-04 the Luxury Tax threshold was $54.6M and the Cliff threshold was $58.3M.
That's pretty high...it's concievable the Spurs could pull off this roster and be under that threshold...
Thanks for figuring that.
I saw that...I don't think there is a cliff threshold anymore...
That's why Chump and Aggie are saying Holt might not be as tight...
I still think he's not going to like the idea of paying that tax though...
I think he's a republican...
Yeah I was just putting the numbers out there to guestimate what the Tax Threshold should be this year -- I see Chump already estimated it at $59.9M
All I know is that the league set an attendance record and had 3 or 4 7 games series in the playoffs and set an international record for ratings in game 2 of the finals(all of them did well interntaionally I believe, and even the national ratings were up in the later games)...all those things increase the BRI thingamajig...I don't think that happens very often.
If revenues are high enough, there won't be any luxury tax.
Even if there is -- the rebates are now distributed evenly between teams no matter what their tax situations. So if the total rebates equal $60 million, the Spurs can be $2 million over the tax threshold with no net penalty.
Will the waive loophole and higher cap decrease the chance of the lux tax kicking in as well?
Very likely. I forgot the exact total paid in taxes the previous seasons, but i'm pretty sure it was higher than $60 million.Will the waive loophole and higher cap decrease the chance of the lux tax kicking in as well?
ChumpDumper - you can go to sleep now. I'll get Whottt to stop dragging you back in this thread for tonight.
Actually, wouldn't the waive loophole increase the chance of the luxury tax kicking in? I haven't read up too much on the subject but if high dollar players get waived, their salary is still getting paid and included in the BRI (this is where I might start losing the concepts here). When they re-sign with other teams, their deals for the MLE or MLE+ would add to the amount being paid out in player salaries. While the extra amount might not be terribly significant, I just think that it would inch us closer to a tax as opposed to a move in the opposite direction.
And yes, I have considered the idea that money that goes to them either would have gone to other players anyway or as a result, other people might be forced to sign for less thus leveling the playing field since the teams tend to have a finite amount of money they can spend.
I saw Kukoc's stats last season and all he mostly did was shoot 3s.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
