Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Raptors Salary Cap Situation (and planning for the future)

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    e_wheazhy_ wrote: View Post
    Will we not have bird rights on DD, JV, Ross and the like? Meaning we could go over the cap to resign them.

    Could we not swing a deal where we sign durant first and then sign all those guys?

    Or do their cap holds impede that? (And as I'm typing this I'm thinking they most likely do).
    Its the situation right now with Parsons, Bosh and Houston.

    Comment


    • #17
      Raptors Salary Cap Situation (and planning for the future)

      raptors999 wrote: View Post
      Its the situation right now with Parsons, Bosh and Houston.
      That sign and trade is looking like a lot of asses were giving up. And even though I don't know them, I don't wanna give up our 3 future first rounders! They could be all stars! (/sarcasm)
      A key that opens many locks is a master key, but a lock that gets open by many keys is just a shitty lock

      Comment


      • #18
        DanH wrote: View Post
        With Lowry signed, and DD opting out and getting a big deal, and JV and Ross due for raises, no, not really. Let's see, quick look and the absolute best we can do for cap room with our current deals in 2016 is about 7M, assuming 14M to re-sign DD. So if we let DD and GV and JJ and Amir walk and sign nothing longer than a 1 year deal next summer, we could have the 21M. But not much in way of a team to attract him here.
        Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only guaranteed money we've got committed for 2016-17 is:
        Kyle Lowry $12mm
        Patrick Patterson $6mm
        Bebe Nogueira $1.9mm
        Bruno Caboclo $1.6mm

        If we were to re-sign Demar at $14mm
        renounce all cap holds except for
        Jonas Valanciunas $11.7mm

        We'd have over $20mm to offer Durant, assuming we trade away our picks and small pieces away into space. I'm not saying it's a great or even good option, just wondering if it's possible. Like if Lowry/Demar/Val were all playing at an all-star level, with strong support from the Brazilians, could we add KD and then fill out the roster with minor pieces?

        I'm just wondering what the risk level is of not having cap space and missing out on Durant versus losing the supporting players like Ross and Vasquez and being more certain of getting Durant.

        Comment


        • #19
          Scraptor wrote: View Post
          Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only guaranteed money we've got committed for 2016-17 is:
          Kyle Lowry $12mm
          Patrick Patterson $6mm
          Bebe Nogueira $1.9mm
          Bruno Caboclo $1.6mm

          If we were to re-sign Demar at $14mm
          renounce all cap holds except for
          Jonas Valanciunas $11.7mm

          We'd have over $20mm to offer Durant, assuming we trade away our picks and small pieces away into space. I'm not saying it's a great or even good option, just wondering if it's possible. Like if Lowry/Demar/Val were all playing at an all-star level, with strong support from the Brazilians, could we add KD and then fill out the roster with minor pieces?

          I'm just wondering what the risk level is of not having cap space and missing out on Durant versus losing the supporting players like Ross and Vasquez and being more certain of getting Durant.
          If it comes down to it, ideally you want to keep the supporting cast AND get Durant.

          But also, if we convinced Durant to sign here and OKC wasn't playing ball, we could always play the game HOU is and dump our salaries to a tanking team. Would probably end up the same 2015 and 2016 draft assets we send out to make it happen. Then we sign him outright. But I doubt it comes to that - if Durant is leaving, I'm certain Presti would play ball to get assets back.
          twitter.com/dhackett1565

          Comment


          • #20
            Thanks for the info, I posted a thread earlier asking about our current payroll situation. So I'm still a little confused, how much payroll exactly (including the exceptions) do we have left to use this year before hitting the luxury tax?

            Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

            Comment


            • #21
              raptors999 wrote:
              2.04m
              Yeah, if everyone is a flat contract. In the best case scenario, where they backload JJ, GV and PP, we have 2.7M.
              twitter.com/dhackett1565

              Comment


              • #22
                DanH wrote: View Post
                Yeah, if everyone is a flat contract. In the best case scenario, where they backload JJ, GV and PP, we have 2.7M.
                I have a question. I was looking at the Shamsports site and saw raptors still have cap holds for Pietrus and Telfair. Why not renounce those wouldn't it give us more room under the tax?

                Comment


                • #23
                  tucas wrote: View Post
                  I have a question. I was looking at the Shamsports site and saw raptors still have cap holds for Pietrus and Telfair. Why not renounce those wouldn't it give us more room under the tax?
                  Cap holds only count against the cap, not the tax.
                  twitter.com/dhackett1565

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Keep in mind too, tax isn't calculated until end of season (last regular season game, I believe). If we end up slightly over during the offseason, all it would take is sending out one contract for a slightly lower return to get back under. Given that any mid-season trades will change our cap hit, it's not like the goal is to get as high without going over right now. There isn't a big difference in being slightly over or slightly under until we start to get close to the trade deadline.
                    Last edited by octothorp; Thu Jul 10th, 2014, 03:48 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      At the end of the July Moratorium each year, the league sends out a memo containing all of the findings from the audit it conducted during it. That audit is what the moratorium period is for - the moratorium is one long end-of-season book-keep in which it crunches all the numbers related to revenue, BRI, escrow, tax and the like, and makes determinations on both the past and the future. That memo generally filters through to the mainstream media - it has to, because it contains all the things that will make the league work next year, such as the salary cap numbers and exact size of the luxury tax threshold. It also contains things such as the latest projection of the season after next ($66.3 million salary cap, $80.7 million luxury tax threshold) and the sizes of next year's exceptions.

                      This year, however, the league sent out a second memo. Entitled "Consideration in Trades and Trade Structure", it is a reminder and/or clarifier to teams about some of the specifics of what they can and cannot do in trades. Seemingly, they felt this was necessary

                      Considering the presence of this memo suggests that some teams do not entirely understand the rules (or, perhaps, have been intent on pushing them back a bit), it is self-evidently the case that those of us outside of the league will not fully know them either. So, here goes.

                      http://www.shamsports.com/2014/07/co...and-trade.html
                      The NBA is not happy with some of the transactions taking place it appears.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        mcHAPPY wrote: View Post
                        The NBA is not happy with some of the transactions taking place it appears.
                        Looks like the common practice of structuring deals differently from different teams' point of view might be getting put out to pasture. Look for a significant decrease in TPE's if that's the case. Tough to say though - they don't specify any particular rule change - just a "cut it out, guys" and mention of a case by case process.
                        twitter.com/dhackett1565

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          DanH wrote: View Post
                          Looks like the common practice of structuring deals differently from different teams' point of view might be getting put out to pasture. Look for a significant decrease in TPE's if that's the case. Tough to say though - they don't specify any particular rule change - just a "cut it out, guys" and mention of a case by case process.
                          I don't see the purpose here.

                          Different teams have different needs and are at different stages of development on different paths to get to where they want to be.

                          In other words, what is good for the goose might not be good for the gander.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            mcHAPPY wrote: View Post
                            I don't see the purpose here.

                            Different teams have different needs and are at different stages of development on different paths to get to where they want to be.

                            In other words, what is good for the goose might not be good for the gander.
                            I'm not sure. It could be as simple as pride - they designed the CBA to work a certain way, and don't like it when teams find loopholes. Even when there really is no harm done.
                            twitter.com/dhackett1565

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              imanshumpert wrote: View Post
                              Great analysis Dan. I will not be able to have children if our team looks like that in 2016/17
                              Great post. Could you explain the cap hold concept please?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                psrs1 wrote: View Post
                                Great post. Could you explain the cap hold concept please?
                                Bird Rights allow a team to go over the cap to keep their own free agents. But a trick a team could pull is to use all their cap space to sign other free agents, then re-sign their own free agents to go way over the cap. That's not the intent of the Bird Rights rule. So to stop teams from doing that, when they have the rights for a free agent, a cap hold for that free agent sits on the cap. It us essentially cap room set aside for your own free agents that can't be used for other teams' free agents.

                                So, for example, this year when Lowry, Vasquez and Patterson were free agents, the Raptors could have had over 10M in cap room. But they could not use that cap room, since the three free agents had cap holds of 10M, 7M and 5M, putting the team way over the cap. Note that you can actually sign your free agents for more than their cap hold. The cap hold is just an estimate of what a player might sign for based on their previous year's salary. Teams can find loopholes because of that. HOU's plan this summer was to use their cap room to sign a max free agent, then re-sign Parsons. This would only work because Parsons' cap hold was only 3M. For most free agents, their cap hold is fairly close to what they will sign for.
                                twitter.com/dhackett1565

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X