"Let's Trade Aldridge and Start JJ, a REAL PF, at PF!"-- um no

[Denny Crane]

Yes in your scenario, Matthews makes around 7.8 million. We have the cap space to absorb 12.2 million for the 20 mil contract for Howard. If that scenario takes place; then Lakers get Matthews and a 12.2 million TE.

Now Lakers could use that TE for 1 player. They can't combine that exemption with a player to get a 20 mil per player.

You said there was a TE involved.

 

[magnifier661]

No, there wouldn't be a TE. We would just absorb the extra money because we have the cap space.

Lakers get a 12.2 million TE through this trade.

 

[magnifier661]

You said there was a TE involved.

No I said Lakers get a TE in the deal. That is 100% accurate.

 

[magnifier661]

Yes you can. You cannot use a TE in combination of obtaining a player with that TE. Portland isn't using a TE. They are giving Lakers the TE because the deal is lopsided.

Read this and get back to me Denny.

 

[Denny Crane]

No I said Lakers get a TE in the deal. That is 100% accurate.

No, they just get a team salary that's $12.2M lower.

 

[Natebishop3]

Lakers get a 12.2 million TE through this trade.

I don't think they would. They would get whatever we sent them and we would absorb the excess funds. I think where this is getting confusing is that Denny is saying we can't trade a player AND a TE for another player. In my scenario, we're sending them Matthews, Batum, and either absorbing the excess 4 million or sending them filler. I don't think a TE is involved at all.

 

[Denny Crane]

Read this and get back to me Denny.

I quoted you the relevant part of the CBA faq. It's right, you're not

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't think they would. They would get whatever we sent them and we would absorb the excess funds. I think where this is getting confusing is that Denny is saying we can't trade a player AND a TE for another player. In my scenario, we're sending them Matthews, Batum, and either absorbing the excess 4 million or sending them filler. I don't think a TE is involved at all.

I'm saying you can't trade two players for a player and a TE. Or two players for a TE. (Two TE's perhaps)

 

[magnifier661]

I quoted you the relevant part of the CBA faq. It's right, you're not

Um, how is what I said different than the CBA faq? LMAO!

 

[Natebishop3]

I quoted you the relevant part of the CBA faq. It's right, you're not

I think the only exception is draft picks. For example, the Heat traded the Cavs 4 picks and a TE for LBJ.

 

[Denny Crane]

In fact, from what I see, a TE can only be given in a deal involving ONE player and only one player.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think the only exception is draft picks. For example, the Heat traded the Cavs 4 picks and a TE for LBJ.

Draft picks don't count as salary. So this is correct.

 

[magnifier661]

I'm saying you can't trade two players for a player and a TE. Or two players for a TE. (Two TE's perhaps)

If Portland trades Matthews (7.8 mil), Batum (12 mil) + Cap Space (10 mil) for Kobe (30 mil per); would the NBA accept the deal?

 

[Natebishop3]

I'm saying you can't trade two players for a player and a TE. Or two players for a TE. (Two TE's perhaps)

What? Who is trading two players for a player and a TE? I'm pretty sure every scenario mentioned here has the Blazers trading one or two players for Dwight Howard (one player).

 

[Denny Crane]

If Portland trades Matthews (7.8 mil), Batum (12 mil) + Cap Space (10 mil) for Kobe (30 mil per); would the NBA accept the deal?

Yep. 150% + $100K rule works for both teams. The Blazers might be over the cap, slightly, after the deal. If not, it still works for them. The Lakers can take back 150% of Kobe's $30M plus $100K.

 

[magnifier661]

Yep. 150% + $100K rule works for both teams. The Blazers might be over the cap, slightly, after the deal. If not, it still works for them. The Lakers can take back 150% of Kobe's $30M plus $100K.

Very good. So what would the Lakers receive other than just Matthews and Batum?

 

[Denny Crane]

Yes you can. You cannot use a TE in combination of obtaining a player with that TE. Portland isn't using a TE. They are giving Lakers the TE because the deal is lopsided.

There ya go, nate.

 

[Denny Crane]

Very good. So what would the Lakers receive other than just Matthews and Batum?

A $10M lower team salary.

If it used to be $80M in salary, it's now $70M.

 

[magnifier661]

A $10M lower team salary.

If it used to be $80M in salary, it's now $70M.

And?

 

[magnifier661]

Read this Denny and get back to me. And it was written by the man who made the salary cap faq, so you don't argue the content.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7360566/nba-trade-exceptions-expiring

When a team trades a player by himself, it has a choice. It can take back up to 125 percent of the salary it sent away (the limit is higher under the new CBA for teams under the luxury tax line) and complete the trade right away; or it can take back no more than 100 percent of the player's salary, but take up to a year to finish the job. (Both choices come with a $100,000 fudge factor.)

For instance, the Lakers recently sent Lamar Odom to Dallas, receiving only a future draft pick (which counts as zero dollars for trade purposes) in return. They now have a year to acquire up to $9 million to complete the Odom trade. The subsequent trade doesn't need to be with the Mavericks; as long as the Lakers can find a player or players making $9 million or less, they can do the acquiring without needing to send out matching salaries. Any incoming salary is charged to the Odom trade.

This one-year credit is commonly referred to as a trade exception.

So in the scenario that I just used for Kobe; the lakers could use the TE for cap relief, or sign 1 player that makes that amount or less.

So Lakers would get Matthews, Batum and a 10 million TE

 

[Denny Crane]

You're misreading it. They can't do both a simultaneous and non-simultaneous trade. They have the choice of taking players or a TE, but not both.

 

[Natebishop3]

You're misreading it. They can't do both a simultaneous and non-simultaneous trade. They have the choice of taking players or a TE, but not both.

That's how I always understood it, but my understanding of the CBA has always been cloudy.

Either way, my idea was Matthews, Batum, and either filler or we absorb the rest of the cap hit.

 

[magnifier661]

You're misreading it. They can't do both a simultaneous and non-simultaneous trade. They have the choice of taking players or a TE, but not both.

What are you arguing about man?!?!

Teams receive trade exceptions when they trade one player and take back less salary than they send away. Teams don't get a trade exception when they send players together, although it's often possible to reconfigure a multiplayer trade as separate, parallel single-player trades in order to gain trade exceptions. Trade exceptions can't be combined with anything -- even other trade exceptions.

I think you aren't understanding that the Lakers are only trading 1 player. They will receive less salary in return for that "one player"; so they have the option to use that space as a TE.

 

[Natebishop3]

What are you arguing about man?!?!



I think you aren't understanding that the Lakers are only trading 1 player. They will receive less salary in return for that "one player"; so they have the option to use that space as a TE.

So, if I'm reading that right, the Blazers aren't actually sending a trade exception. The Lakers just get a trade exception by default because they sent out more salary than they received?

 

[magnifier661]

So, if I'm reading that right, the Blazers aren't actually sending a trade exception. The Lakers just get a trade exception by default because they sent out more salary than they received?

Yes. And they have 1 year to finish the trade by either finding players that equal the exemption (with a $100,000 fudge factor).

 

[Denny Crane]

You're still misreading it. You even bolded the part that you're confused about.

The deal might be reconfigured to gain a trade exception. But in this case, it can't be done.

Here is a more complicated example of a legal non-simultaneous trade: Team A is a taxpaying team with a $4 million trade exception from a previous trade, and a $10 million player it currently wants to trade. Team B has three players making $4 million, $5 million and $7 million, and the two teams want to complete a three-for-one trade with these players. This trade is legal -- the $5 million and $7 million players together make less than the 125% plus $100,000 allowed for the $10 million player ($12.6 million), and the $4 million player fits within the $4 million trade exception. So the $4 million player actually completes the previous, non-simultaneous trade, so Team A is left trading its $10 million player for Team B's $5 million and $7 million players in a separate, simultaneous trade. From Team B's perspective there is also a simultaneous and a non-simultaneous trade -- it aggregates its $4 million and $5 million players to acquire Team A's $10 million player in a simultaneous trade, and it sends the $7 million player to Team A for "nothing" in a separate, non-simultaneous trade, thereby receiving a $7 million trade exception.

 

[magnifier661]

You're still misreading it. You even bolded the part that you're confused about.

The deal might be reconfigured to gain a trade exception. But in this case, it can't be done.

Here is a more complicated example of a legal non-simultaneous trade: Team A is a taxpaying team with a $4 million trade exception from a previous trade, and a $10 million player it currently wants to trade. Team B has three players making $4 million, $5 million and $7 million, and the two teams want to complete a three-for-one trade with these players. This trade is legal -- the $5 million and $7 million players together make less than the 125% plus $100,000 allowed for the $10 million player ($12.6 million), and the $4 million player fits within the $4 million trade exception. So the $4 million player actually completes the previous, non-simultaneous trade, so Team A is left trading its $10 million player for Team B's $5 million and $7 million players in a separate, simultaneous trade. From Team B's perspective there is also a simultaneous and a non-simultaneous trade -- it aggregates its $4 million and $5 million players to acquire Team A's $10 million player in a simultaneous trade, and it sends the $7 million player to Team A for "nothing" in a separate, non-simultaneous trade, thereby receiving a $7 million trade exception.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q81

81. What is the Traded Player exception?

As described in question number 80, exceptions are the mechanisms that allow teams to sign players or make trades that leave them above the salary cap. Any trade which leaves the team over the salary cap requires an exception -- even if the team is moving downward in salary. For example, if the salary cap is $60 million, a team has a team salary of $65 million, and they want to trade a $5 million player for a $4 million player, they still have to use an exception. Even though their team salary is decreasing by $1 million as a result of the trade, the fact that they would finish over the salary cap ($64 million) means that an exception is required.

The Traded Player exception is the primary means by which teams over the cap complete trades. It allows teams to make trades that leave them over the cap, but it places several restrictions on those trades. Trades using the Traded Player exception fall into two categories: simultaneous and non-simultaneous. As its name suggests, a simultaneous trade takes place all at once. Teams can trade players together and acquire considerably more salary than they trade away in a simultaneous trade. Simultaneous trades are described in question number 82. A non-simultaneous trade may take up to a year to complete, but the team can only trade away one player, and its team salary can increase by no more than $100,000 as a result of the trade. Non-simultaneous trades are described in question number 83.

In short:

A simultaneous trade gives the team more money but less time
A non-simultaneous trade gives the team more time but less money

82. How do simultaneous trades work? How much salary can a team take back in a simultaneous trade?

A simultaneous trade takes place all at once. The amount of salary a team can take back in a simultaneous trade depends on the outgoing salary and whether the team is a taxpayer. They always use the post-trade team salary when looking at whether a team is a taxpayer, so a team under the tax level would be considered a taxpayer if the trade takes them over the tax level.

 

[magnifier661]

So what this means is the Lakers are in tax threshold. They must get a trade exemption for the player they send out and take back less salary in return. Therefor, trading Matthews and Batum for Kobe would give the Lakers a 10 mil TE for whatever is left over for the player they send out. The Lakers can exercise using this trade exemption for another trade that involves a player(s) that is equal or less than the trade exemption they just received from the Portland deal, with a $100,000 buffer.

 

[RR7]

Any time there is a large difference in salary in a deal, a team acquires a TPE. The Lakers would receive a TPE in the amount of $$ different between Matthews and Howard. We are not giving them a TPE. You don't give TPEs, they are created in lopsided deals.

 

[magnifier661]

Any time there is a large difference in salary in a deal, a team acquires a TPE. The Lakers would receive a TPE in the amount of $$ different between Matthews and Howard. We are not giving them a TPE. You don't give TPEs, they are created in lopsided deals.

True, but then if you think about it; they didn't have a TPE until the team gives up their salary cap to create the TPE; therefor the TPE is given by the team absorbing the contract.