Gooden to Dallas?

[jthig32]

Originally posted by: DubOverdose

Actually, I believe Cuban might be targeting to be under the cap, so that we can go out and sign FAs whenever there's one we think would be a valuable addition. Yes, waiving Finley gives luxury tax relief, but also gets us closer to being under the cap. If we are under the cap, we will be able to take on whatever contracts we want and have significantly more flexibility. I really don't know where you are getting your argument. We only have less flexibility if we are over the cap, thus there's an incentive to be under the cap. If we are under the cap, we can trade a pick away for a player, and give the team immediate cap relief.

Your argument makes perfect sense if you can explain to me how waiving Fin gets us closer to being under the cap.....Oh wait, it doesn't! Waiving Fin has exactley zero effect on our cap. So why would we then let our most valued trade chip, a big expiring contract, just expire. We would not be under the cap, and we would lose that giant salary slot. You would essentially lose a potential 17 mil worth of players for nothing except bringing someone in on the veteran minimum. I repeat, waiving Fin does nothing for our cap. With that knowledge, how soon do you think we can be under the cap? The answer is not very soon.

[dalmations202]

Your argument makes perfect sense if you can explain to me how waiving Fin gets us closer to being under the cap.....Oh wait, it doesn't! Waiving Fin has exactley zero effect on our cap. So why would we then let our most valued trade chip, a big expiring contract, just expire. We would not be under the cap, and we would lose that giant salary slot. You would essentially lose a potential 17 mil worth of players for nothing except bringing someone in on the veteran minimum. I repeat, waiving Fin does nothing for our cap. With that knowledge, how soon do you think we can be under the cap? The answer is not very soon.

Let's see. ~ 91M in contracts..... 57M to Tax line. Need to drop ~ 34M

Waive Fin -- save 15M
Expiring Contracts of KVH and Terry - 23M
TAW - off now due to injury - 6 M
Bradley - will be off due to injury -- 5 M
EEshmeyer - was still counting off now due to injury -- 3.4M
Avery -- still on the books although retire -- 768 thousand
15+23+6+5+4 = 53
So they have dropped ~ 53M by the end of the year if they just keep the same team and waive fin. 91 - 53 = 38 M but they will need to resign Terry and KVH.

I was using last years #'s from Patricia's site, so I am sure I am a little off here and there, but you get the crux of the argument. They can basically get under the salary cap in one year if they make the cut to Finley.

[Lebanese_Fan]

How man times will we say it?!?! Luxury tax does not count on the salary cap and waiving fin WILL keep 15 mil on the salary cap!!

[jthig32]

Seriously Lebanese, I dunno.

Guys, I don't know how else to say it. Waiving..Fin..does..not..take..him..off..our...boo ks..in..regards..to..the..cap.

Even if we waive him, for the duration of his contract, if you look on the Mavs books, you will see Fin's contract right there, being paid, and counting against the cap.

The only relief we get from waiving him, is Luxury Tax relief.

I don't know how else to say it.


BTW, I believe your math also has other flaws. If Bradley's retirement is deemed to be due to injury, he will still against our cap for one year, then be taken off.

TAW will still count against our cap, even if the insurance company pays his salary due to injury.

Is Terry's contract over this year? I thought he had two more years.

So, change your calculations to:
Fin - Saving nothing
TAW - Saving nothing
Bradley - Saving nothing.

Now where are we in regards to the cap?

[alby]

we are not tryin to get under the cap by waiving fin, for the love of god.

[dalmations202]

BTW, I believe your math also has other flaws. If Bradley's retirement is deemed to be due to injury, he will still against our cap for one year, then be taken off.

TAW will still count against our cap, even if the insurance company pays his salary due to injury.

First -- I said "They can basically get under the salary cap in one year........"
Second - according to ESPN on the collective bargaining agreement that has not been ratified, and no one has the exact specifics on -- yet -- "the amount of time players with career-ending injuries will continue to count against a team's <u>salary cap</u>" -- one year instead of two. So at least Bradley and Esch can come off within a year. Avery is already coming off. TAW is questionable -- depending on if they can get it classified as career ending injury but it can be retroactive -- even if Mark or insurance pays the buyout.
Third -- yes, I read about the Luxury Tax relief, and that the player would still have to be paid......I think I read that the player no longer counts towards the salary cap as well, but I can't find that so you quite possibly could be correct that Fin would still count towards the cap. To me, that seems to defeat the purpose from both sides of the bargaining table -- so I am doubting that the player would still stay on the salary cap, but since I can't find a copy of the CBA since it isn't signed and out for the public....I'll conceed this one till I see the specs.

Seems to me that players would want that player off the salary cap, and being paid... that way their is more space available for them to be signed. Seems to me that owners would want the player off the salary cap since they would have to replace the player -- making the next player cost double automatically.

Where did you find the statement that waived players wouldn't be removed from the salary cap? I have read that owners would still have to pay them ... just like the injury settlement players, but I thought (and who knows, maybe I just assumed this) they came off the salary cap as well.

After a search, I did find this from the Denver Post --- The catch: The team is still on the hook for the player's salary, which also <u>would count</u> against the team's cap space until the contract expires. I found this nowhere on NBA.com, ESPN, or other places I read about the CBA though.

It also stated on NBA.com
When it comes to the new Collective Bargaining Agreement, you've likely heard many terms tossed around: "Moratorium" and "amnesty" are two such keywords that may cause some confusion for basketball fans.
<u>Only the parties involved in drawing up the new agreement really know what's going into the deal</u>, however, there have been a number of reports making the rounds to suggest guys like Michael Finley will be shown the exit through the new "amnesty" rule.


Oh well, if I am wrong, I apologize. If not, then that is how they would get under the cap in a year.

[chumdawg]

Keep in mind that we don't know for sure what will happen to Finley's option year if he is waived. At the very least, it can be bought out for half its value ($9MM). Under the old CBA, that is. It is possible that it might be erased altogether, which would of course save the Mavs even more money and take Fin off the cap one year earlier.

[jthig32]

Every account I have read, and every interview I have heard with NBA people, says that this would in no way affect the cap one way or the other. If it did, there wouldn't be a single person on this board saying not to drop Fin. At least I don't think so.

That is what I am basing my knowledge on.

My bad on the Bradley thing, I forgot the new CBA shortened it down to one year.

[foglemann]

jthg, you are right about the cap. Finley will be on there for the length of the contract. So he's owed 51mil. Chum, I didn't realize the last year was an option, that could come in handly for sure. BUT the key here is that whatever team signs Finley will be paying a part of that 51 mill. So if he signs the MLE for a four year deal, that's like 20 with 10% bonus. Making it about 28 mill for the life. So cut Fin, let him sign that contract and subtract that amont off of our salary cap. Leaving us only 22 mill of cap. instead of the whole 51 mill. Its not a bad deal to get better than 50% off sale.

At least that's how I took it, where's Dub when you need him.

[MavsFanFinley]

I might be confused with a buyout situation but wouldn't Finley have to agree? His player option is for the 06-07 year so what happens to the last year?

[chumdawg]

Maybe his last two years both are player options, but I thought it was the last one only.

According to Larry Coon's FAQ, there are some older contracts that don't have clear language about what happens to player options when a player is waived. At some point they realized the problem and started writing clear language into the contracts, so that the teams wouldn't be able to waive a player before his option came up, and then not be liable for the option years. I do not know whether Finley's contract is old enough to have the vague language or the clear language.

According to Coon, this was never really tested. Probably the players' union would have filed a grievance if it came up. But hey, this is a pretty unique situation here, this amnesty thing. Who knows what kind of legal issues are going on behind the scenes.

But if it came to just buying Fin out of the option year(s) at a reduced price, I would think that the Mavs could find a way to make this in his best interest. Especially if waiving him allows Fin to earn additional salary playing elsewhere.

[dalmations202]

Every account I have read, and every interview I have heard with NBA people, says that this would in no way affect the cap one way or the other. If it did, there wouldn't be a single person on this board saying not to drop Fin. At least I don't think so.

That is what I am basing my knowledge on.

I have kept reading up on this one......and from what I have been reading....you are correct. I'll still wait to see the final though, because it doens't make sense to me why either side would want it this way.

My apologies, I thought that with this rule when you used it, you waived the player, and they came off the salary cap and the luxury tax, but the owners still had to pay the player his contract - player becomes UFA (% payout off based on new contract). BUT, If you waive them, and they are still on the books, then there is less money for the players; and more money for the owners to have to spend to replace a player, as the salary on the books will assuredly keep them above the line. Looks to me like a lose-lose situation.

[MavsFanFinley]

Chum, hoopshype has his player option for the 06-07 year but I just checked Patricia's site and she has his last 2 years as player options. I think I'll trust Patricia on this one.