Who can we waive to save cap space?

[disoblige]

Any ideas?

[richardhutnik]

Any ideas?

You can't waive anyone to save cap space. They stay on the cap until the contract runs out. The "Allan Houston rule" allowed teams to waive ONE player (surprisingly, it wasn't used on Allan Houston), after the CBA was signed.

There is no easy way for the Knicks to get out of the mess they are in cap-wise, and explains why their salary is so large. This situation is why expiring contracts are HUGE for teams.

- Rich

[disoblige]

-= original quote snipped =-



You can't waive anyone to save cap space. They stay on the cap until the contract runs out. The "Allan Houston rule" allowed teams to waive ONE player (surprisingly, it wasn't used on Allan Houston), after the CBA was signed.

There is no easy way for the Knicks to get out of the mess they are in cap-wise, and explains why their salary is so large. This situation is why expiring contracts are HUGE for teams.

- Rich

But you only pay 50% of their contract if waived I believe.

[knicks742]

-= original quote snipped =-



But you only pay 50% of their contract if waived I believe.

Nope. You can negotiate a buyout and, in that case, only the buyout number counts on your cap.

[Tommy Udo 6]

Adonal Foyle gave the Warriors a huge break by taking only 65% of his guaranteed contract as a buy-out. That seldom happens. Usually players demand it all.

When the Magic came to Oakland recently, Warrior fans gave Adonal a Standing Ovation when he entered the game.

[Eli1005]

stephon and Malik should be bought out before next season. They will be expiring contracts next year, and to trade would be a big mistake because they will certainly bring in another huge contract that pushes back our progress even more

[NoLayupRule]

misconceptions;

the buyout saves the team money because they only pay the amount that the parties agree to - ie, 65% of a 10 mil salary saves them 3.5 mil.

however the cap still reflects the full contract amount. thats to protect teams from negotiating a buyout and subverting the salary cap/cba.

imagine a team slightly over the cap, paying lux tax, who convinces a player to take 10% of their salary in a buyout and thereby avoids the lux tax and then signs this same player as a 'consultant' or 'PR Rep' so they can pay him back the diference off the cap/books. that'd be unfair to the league.

So waiving a player doesnt affect the cap. Retirement due to injury saves a team in other ways and thats probably what you were thinking of with regards to the 50% though thats not exactly right either

[nynixlive]

stephon and Malik should be bought out before next season. They will be expiring contracts next year, and to trade would be a big mistake because they will certainly bring in another huge contract that pushes back our progress even more

That is how waiving a player helps the cap. If Isiah hadnt waived Mo Taylor and Jalen Rose, we'd probably have a max contract fringe impact player on our hands...oh wait we do....hi zbo.

[Eli1005]

exactly. and that's exactly why when everyone was saying over the summer how great a trade it was because we got rid of Francis' salary, I was saying Isiah's an idiot. We didn't clear any salary with that trade, we only took on three more years of a max player in Z-bo. What we should have done was package Frye with a long-term contract like Q or Jeff (especially since Isiah knew he was picking another SF in Chandler), and sent them off for an expiring contract. Instead, we got another long term max player who only adds to the problems here and doesn't play any defense.

That's why I am saying we should buy out Marbury and Malik over the summer - because it prevents Isiah from being persuaded to trade them as the trade deadline approaches next year.

[moocow007]

misconceptions;

the buyout saves the team money because they only pay the amount that the parties agree to - ie, 65% of a 10 mil salary saves them 3.5 mil.

however the cap still reflects the full contract amount. thats to protect teams from negotiating a buyout and subverting the salary cap/cba.

imagine a team slightly over the cap, paying lux tax, who convinces a player to take 10% of their salary in a buyout and thereby avoids the lux tax and then signs this same player as a 'consultant' or 'PR Rep' so they can pay him back the diference off the cap/books. that'd be unfair to the league.

So waiving a player doesnt affect the cap. Retirement due to injury saves a team in other ways and thats probably what you were thinking of with regards to the 50% though thats not exactly right either

^^

Correct. That's why he's a mod because he knows what he's talking about. Well that and he also has a cute butt.

[fimslim3]

-= original quote snipped =-



^^

Correct. That's why he's a mod because he knows what he's talking about. Well that and he also has a cute butt.

A lot of people know that information, he's a mod because he put up a pornographic avatar.

In fact he's more often wrong then right or is that only white suburban entitlement?

[moocow007]

-= original quote snipped =-



A lot of people know that information, he's a mod because he put up a pornographic avatar.

In fact he's more often wrong then right or is that only white suburban entitlement?

I say a little bit of both, but you still have to admit he has a toight set of buttocks.

[kosmovitelli]

-= original quote snipped =-
Correct. That's why he's a mod because he knows what he's talking about. Well that and he also has a cute butt.

Well I guess NLR is a mod only because he has a cute butt then ! LOL


It's incorrect. When a player and a team agree on a buyout, the amount replaces the total of salaries remaining on the original contract and it is distributed among the number of seasons in proportion to the original salary.

For example, Zach Randolph, after this season, has 3 years and $48M remaining on his contract.

2008-2009 : $14,666,667 (30.56%)
2009-2010 : $16,000,000 (33.33%)
2010-2011 : $17,333,333 (36.11%)
------------------------------------------
TOTAL : $48,000,000 (100%)

If in the off-season, for example in july, Zach agrees to a buyout worth $30M (instead of $48M) then here's how the Knicks salary cap situation will change :

2008-2009 : $9,166,666.88 (30.56%)
2009-2010 : $10,000 000.00 (33.33%)
2010-2011 : $10,833,333.13 (36.11%)
------------------------------------------
TOTAL : $30,000,000 (100%)


The Knicks save $18M in salaries and they will also likely save an additional $18M in luxury tax payments they won't have to pay. The Knicks would save $36M with this buyout operation.
The key here is, as Zach's salary becomes more and more a burden each year, the buyout would do a lot for the Knicks in the final season. We only save $5M the first season (it doesn't matter since we're way over the cap) but who know what the situation will be in 2010-2011. Saving $7M that season may mean a shot at some free agents. It could payoff in the end.


Obviously the Knicks won't buy out Zach Randolph, it's not a realistic scenario for the Knicks brass, it was just an exemple to show the dynamics of a buyout and how it can help a team. That example also reflects how stupid is was to add Zach to this team last june. Sadly, as always the front office and the majority of the fans only acknowledge that kind of stuff when it's too late and we cannot move the player to any other team without taking more garbage back...

[fimslim3]

-= original quote snipped =-
Correct. That's why he's a mod because he knows what he's talking about. Well that and he also has a cute butt.

Well I guess NLR is a mod only because he has a cute butt then ! LOL


It's incorrect. When a player and a team agree on a buyout, the amount replaces the total of salaries remaining on the original contract and it is distributed among the number of seasons in proportion to the original salary.

For example, Zach Randolph, after this season, has 3 years and $48M remaining on his contract.

2008-2009 : $14,666,667 (30.56%)
2009-2010 : $16,000,000 (33.33%)
2010-2011 : $17,333,333 (36.11%)
------------------------------------------
TOTAL : $48,000,000 (100%)

If in the off-season, for example in july, Zach agrees to a buyout worth $30M (instead of $48M) then here's how the Knicks salary cap situation will change :

2008-2009 : $9,166,666.88 (30.56%)
2009-2010 : $10,000 000.00 (33.33%)
2010-2011 : $10,833,333.13 (36.11%)
------------------------------------------
TOTAL : $30,000,000 (100%)


The Knicks save $18M in salaries and they will also likely save an additional $18M in luxury tax payments they won't have to pay. The Knicks would save $36M with this buyout operation.
The key here is, as Zach's salary becomes more and more a burden each year, the buyout would do a lot for the Knicks in the final season. We only save $5M the first season (it doesn't matter since we're way over the cap) but who know what the situation will be in 2010-2011. Saving $7M that season may mean a shot at some free agents. It could payoff in the end.


Obviously the Knicks won't buy out Zach Randolph, it's not a realistic scenario for the Knicks brass, it was just an exemple to show the dynamics of a buyout and how it can help a team. That example also reflects how stupid is was to add Zach to this team last june. Sadly, as always the front office and the majority of the fans only acknowledge that kind of stuff when it's too late and we cannot move the player to any other team without taking more garbage back...

Why aren't you a mod? You have a cute butt.

[nynixlive]

^^^^

Excellent, for that and more goto:

best cap guide ever


EDIT: LOOK AT #60

[moocow007]

-= original quote snipped =-



Why aren't you a mod? You have a cute butt.

He doesn't put out.

[StutterStep]

exactly. and that's exactly why when everyone was saying over the summer how great a trade it was because we got rid of Francis' salary, I was saying Isiah's an idiot. We didn't clear any salary with that trade, we only took on three more years of a max player in Z-bo. What we should have done was package Frye with a long-term contract like Q or Jeff (especially since Isiah knew he was picking another SF in Chandler), and sent them off for an expiring contract. Instead, we got another long term max player who only adds to the problems here and doesn't play any defense.

That's why I am saying we should buy out Marbury and Malik over the summer - because it prevents Isiah from being persuaded to trade them as the trade deadline approaches next year.

No, you misunderstand the value of that trade for us. Steve Francis was an immovable object that had to be moved. He is now injured and underachieving, while pissing on the Blazer's cap until next season.

Zach, though not our ideal player, is functional and his salary can be used for up 2 players with shorter deals. It is our choice what to do with him. With Stevie we would have had no choice, except to send him home like we did last year.