Ok, someone explain Bird rights

[Mediocre Man]

Not in the remedial form, but as it pertains to JJ Hickson and a player like Tyreke Evans.

I understand Sacramento does not own his rights because they didn't make him a QO, but if a team traded for him, would they have any sort of protection?

As for Hickson, we own his Bird rights, but if he is traded the team trading for him does not get them?


Do I have that right?

 

[HailBlazers]

Good question, want Tyreke. Paging Brain from Washington.

 

[magnifier661]

Not in the remedial form, but as it pertains to JJ Hickson and a player like Tyreke Evans.

I understand Sacramento does not own his rights because they didn't make him a QO, but if a team traded for him, would they have any sort of protection?

As for Hickson, we own his Bird rights, but if he is traded the team trading for him does not get them?


Do I have that right?

Yes you have that right about hickson. I think it has more to do with not having a multi year contract. If he was signed for more than two years, then his bird rights would transfer.

 

[Jayps15]

Um, your Evans questions don't make much sense because you're making false assumptions.

For Evans: The kings have Tyreke Evans Bird Rights this offseason, he's been there for 4 years and all they need is 3. As for the QO, of course they haven't made him a qualifying offer yet, they can't do that until this offseason. And whether or not they do it doesn't effect his Bird Rights, only whether or not he becomes a UFA or RFA this offseason.

Hickson: Bird Rights are tranfered in trades, so a team trading for Hickson would have the same rights we have. From Larry Coons CBA FAQ (1st bullet in the question) http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q32

 

[Mediocre Man]

Um, your Evans questions don't make much sense because you're making false assumptions.

For Evans: The kings have Tyreke Evans Bird Rights this offseason, he's been there for 4 years and all they need is 3. As for the QO, of course they haven't made him a qualifying offer yet, they can't do that until this offseason. And whether or not they do it doesn't effect his Bird Rights, only whether or not he becomes a UFA or RFA this offseason.

Hickson: Bird Rights are tranfered in trades, so a team trading for Hickson would have the same rights we have. From Larry Coons CBA FAQ (1st bullet in the question) http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q32

How do they? I thought they didn't offer him a QO?

Actually, I am wrong on this. He is a RFA

 

[Mediocre Man]

How do they? I thought they didn't offer him a QO?

I also think you are incorrect on Hickson, I am pretty sure

 

[Jayps15]

How do they? I thought they didn't offer him a QO?

Qualifying Offers have nothing to do with Bird Rights.

Kings offering the QO or not = whether or not Evans becomes a restricted free agent or a an unrestricted free agent

Bird Rights = being with a team for 3 or more years, either with one contract or a series of contracts. Gives that team a salary cap exception to go over the cap to resign that player.

 

[Jayps15]

I also think you are incorrect on Hickson, I am pretty sure

Look at the FAQ, if we have Hickson's Bird Rights and we trade Hickson, his new team gets the same rights.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

My knowledge of Bird Rights rivals Charlie Kelly's knowledge of Bird Law.

[video=youtube;YvSx7-CTTl4]

 

[BrianFromWA]

For Evans, they have his Bird rights. They picked up all of his rookie options, they just didn't extend him by Oct. 31. What you might be thinking of is the situation we have with Luke and Nolan, where we didn't pick up their 4th-year options:

If a player was a first round draft pick, just completed the third year of his rookie scale contract, and his team did not invoke its team option for the fourth season (see question number 48), then the team cannot use the Larry Bird exception to re-sign him to a salary greater than he would have received had the team exercised its option. In other words, teams can't decline an option year in order to get around the rookie salary scale and give the player more money.

Tyreke's situation is essentially the same thing we had for Nic last year, where they can offer a 6.9M Qualifying offer which makes him an RFA. If they don't extend the QO then he's an unrestricted free agent. If we traded for him before the deadline, we would get his Bird Rights in trade. However, his cap hold is $10,503,650. One of the bigger benefits of bird rights (for non-max players) is that usually someone's cap hold is lower than what you want to pay them (for instance, IF JJ was going to get a max contract this summer, we could stash his 7.6M cap hold until we'd signed all of our new FA's, then go over the cap to give him the max). But since there's little likelihood that we'd want to have a 10.5M hold on our books in free agency.

JJ is a different case.

(a player cannot be traded when...) the player is playing under a one-year contract (excluding any option year) and will have Larry Bird or Early Bird rights at the end of the season. This includes first round draft picks following their fourth (option) season, who accept their team's qualifying offer for their fifth season. When the player consents to such a trade, his Larry Bird/Early Bird rights are not traded with him. The player becomes a Non-Bird free agent instead

If, looking into the future, Tyreke accepts the QO b/c he just wants out of SAC after one year (see Ben Gordon), then he'd be in the same category next year as JJ is now.

 

[KeepOnRollin]

Look at the FAQ, if we have Hickson's Bird Rights and we trade Hickson, his new team gets the same rights.

That is only true when you your Bird Rights came from a 3 year or longer deal. Hickson is on a 1 year deal so if he is traded his new team doesn't get his Bird Rights.

 

[Jayps15]

For Evans, they have his Bird rights. They picked up all of his rookie options, they just didn't extend him by Oct. 31. What you might be thinking of is the situation we have with Luke and Nolan, where we didn't pick up their 4th-year options:


Tyreke's situation is essentially the same thing we had for Nic last year, where they can offer a 6.9M Qualifying offer which makes him an RFA. If they don't extend the QO then he's an unrestricted free agent. If we traded for him before the deadline, we would get his Bird Rights in trade. However, his cap hold is $10,503,650. One of the bigger benefits of bird rights (for non-max players) is that usually someone's cap hold is lower than what you want to pay them (for instance, IF JJ was going to get a max contract this summer, we could stash his 7.6M cap hold until we'd signed all of our new FA's, then go over the cap to give him the max). But since there's little likelihood that we'd want to have a 10.5M hold on our books in free agency.

JJ is a different case.

If, looking into the future, Tyreke accepts the QO b/c he just wants out of SAC after one year (see Ben Gordon), then he'd be in the same category next year as JJ is now.

Eh, I was wrong on JJ. Didn't know there was a special exception for one year contract players.

Now my question for you BWA is this, I keep hearing that we have Hickson's Bird Rights in every article and post but then in Coon's FAQ there's this under #32 http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q32

If a player is waived and is claimed by another team before he clears waivers, his Bird clock does not reset. This was settled in an arbitration decision in June, 2012. However, players who are waived and claimed by another team do not retain full Bird rights unless the player was waived through the Amnesty provision (see question number 67).

So Hickson wasn't amnestied, and we picked him up off the wire. So do we have full Bird Rights?

 

[Jayps15]

That is only true when you your Bird Rights came from a 3 year or longer deal. Hickson is on a 1 year deal so if he is traded his new team doesn't get his Bird Rights.

From reading the info in BWA's post I get that it's only not true when a player signed a 1yr deal and is trading during that season. If we have Bird Rights on a FA and sign them to a 2yr deal they could be traded and the new team would get the rights, so close but not quite true.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Eh, I was wrong on JJ. Didn't know there was a special exception for one year contract players.

Now my question for you BWA is this, I keep hearing that we have Hickson's Bird Rights in every article and post but then in Coon's FAQ there's this under #32 http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q32

So Hickson wasn't amnestied, and we picked him up off the wire. So do we have full Bird Rights?

The arbitrators ruled in June 2012 that it was in keeping w/ the spirit of the CBA and Bird Rights to keep them if you were *claimed* off of waivers. If you passed through, you lost them. We claimed JJ. Same went for Lin and Chauncey and Novak.
http://www.blazersedge.com/2012/6/2...r-gives-blazers-f-j-j-hickson-his-bird-rights

 

[Mediocre Man]

I think I know this, but can Hickson be signed and traded this off season?

 

[BrianFromWA]

yes. Whether or not we renounce him.

There is a rule that allows teams to re-sign their own free agents for trading purposes, called the sign-and-trade rule. Under this rule the player is re-signed and immediately traded to another team. This is done by adding a clause to the contract stipulating that the contract is null and void if the trade to the specific team is not completed within 48 hours. To qualify for a sign-and-trade, all of the following must be true:

The player must re-sign with his prior team -- a team cannot include another team's free agent in a sign-and-trade.
The player must finish the preceding season with that team (deals are no longer allowed that sign-and-trade players who are out of the league, such as the sign-and-trade that sent Keith Van Horn from Dallas to New Jersey as part of the Jason Kidd trade in 2008).
The player cannot be a restricted free agent who has signed an offer sheet with another team (see question number 43).
Starting in 2013-14, the team receiving the player cannot be above the "apron" ($4 million above the tax level) after the trade1.
Starting in 2013-14, the team cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade if they have used the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25) that season.
The trade must be completed prior to the first game of the regular season (sign-and-trades are not allowed once the season begins).
The player cannot be signed using the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception, the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception, or any exception that cannot be used to offer a three-year contract (see question number 25).
A sign-and-trade deal can be made with a free agent who has been renounced, as long as all the above criteria are met. Sign-and-trade contracts must be for at least three seasons (not including any option year) and no longer than four seasons. The first year of the contract must be fully guaranteed, but the remaining seasons can be non-guaranteed. The combination of a three-year minimum with a one-year guarantee ensures that the player's new team cannot acquire the player's Bird rights any sooner than if they had signed him directly (if they wanted to re-sign him in less than three years they would first have to waive him, and lose any Bird rights -- see question number 32).

 

[Jayps15]

The arbitrators ruled in June 2012 that it was in keeping w/ the spirit of the CBA and Bird Rights to keep them if you were *claimed* off of waivers. If you passed through, you lost them. We claimed JJ. Same went for Lin and Chauncey and Novak.
http://www.blazersedge.com/2012/6/2...r-gives-blazers-f-j-j-hickson-his-bird-rights

Ah nice, didn't see that article or read about the arbitration. I kept thinking I must be missing something, and that was it.

Thanks

 

[Mediocre Man]

yes. Whether or not we renounce him.

So for example, we can simply not renounce him, sign him to a contract of say 9 mm and then deal him for a player making up to 15 mm or whatever our cap room is plus whatever we signed Hickson for....right?

 

[magnifier661]

So for example, we can simply not renounce him, sign him to a contract of say 9 mm and then deal him for a player making up to 15 mm or whatever our cap room is plus whatever we signed Hickson for....right?

Now that would be very interesting if we could.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

So for example, we can simply not renounce him, sign him to a contract of say 9 mm and then deal him for a player making up to 15 mm or whatever our cap room is plus whatever we signed Hickson for....right?

Yes, we could S&T him for any players that wouldn't put us over the cap. Any trade that might potentially put us over the cap would be subject to base-year-compensation consideration.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I'm a bit confused by your scenario, but let me take a shot. If we don't renounce him, then we just maintain his cap hold until all of our other FA signings have been made. Otherwise, if we're just using it for an unbalanced trade, renouncing him or not doesn't make a difference---he's BYC (and practically untradeable in a S&T) unless we stay below the cap.

Let's say cap is at 60M, we have the #12 pick and we don't renounce JJ. We would only have about 5.4M in cap space to sign FA's or make unbalanced trades. Once that was done, then we could offer JJ any contract up to a max, but for the trade purposes he's still a BYC player

For example, Hickson made $4 million last season, is a Larry Bird free agent, and re-signs with his previous team for $10 million. The signing is part of a sign-and-trade with another team, for that team's $10 million player. Since the conditions were satisfied the player's outgoing salary for trade purposes is $4 million. This trade would not be allowed, even though the players' new salaries match, since a taxpaying team cannot trade a $4 million player for a $10 million player. The highest salary this team could acquire in a sign-and-trade arrangement is $5.1 million.

 

[magnifier661]

I'm a bit confused by your scenario, but let me take a shot. If we don't renounce him, then we just maintain his cap hold until all of our other FA signings have been made. Otherwise, if we're just using it for an unbalanced trade, renouncing him or not doesn't make a difference---he's BYC (and practically untradeable in a S&T) unless we stay below the cap.

Let's say cap is at 60M, we have the #12 pick and we don't renounce JJ. We would only have about 5.4M in cap space to sign FA's or make unbalanced trades. Once that was done, then we could offer JJ any contract up to a max, but for the trade purposes he's still a BYC player

But without hickson aren't we at 12 something millions? I think he's trying to say, you trade for a $12mil player, which we could use hickson and said other player. Maybe Babbitt with a sign and trade as well.

 

[RR7]

I'm a bit confused by your scenario, but let me take a shot. If we don't renounce him, then we just maintain his cap hold until all of our other FA signings have been made. Otherwise, if we're just using it for an unbalanced trade, renouncing him or not doesn't make a difference---he's BYC (and practically untradeable in a S&T) unless we stay below the cap.

Let's say cap is at 60M, we have the #12 pick and we don't renounce JJ. We would only have about 5.4M in cap space to sign FA's or make unbalanced trades. Once that was done, then we could offer JJ any contract up to a max, but for the trade purposes he's still a BYC player

Oddly, in your Coon quote, you edited out the part right after previous team that says

which is a taxpayer and therefore well over the cap

. That doesn't apply to us. We're fine to sign and trade him if we are under the cap.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Yeah, without Hickson in his scenario we're at around 12M. Whether JJ has the cap hold or we renounce him doesn't affect our ability to do a S&T. But in that scenario, since he's going to make more than 4.8M next year (a raise of >20%) we can't go over the cap--so it would have to be a 12M or less player, and to a team who meets all of the #88 requirements. For all intents and purposes, if we're planning on moving JJ, it might be more worth it to do it at the deadline--unless he (or the guy we're getting back) is the cog that helps us go far in the playoffs.

you can't package a S&T player with anyone else.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Oddly, in your Coon quote, you edited out the part right after previous team that says . That doesn't apply to us. We're fine to sign and trade him if we are under the cap.

I edited it because we aren't that team. We ARE fine to sign and trade him. What we can't do is sign and trade him and take back something that would make us go over the cap, which is kind of the point of bird rights.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Yeah, without Hickson in his scenario we're at around 12M. Whether JJ has the cap hold or we renounce him doesn't affect our ability to do a S&T. But in that scenario, since he's going to make more than 4.8M next year (a raise of >20%) we can't go over the cap--so it would have to be a 12M or less player, and to a team who meets all of the #88 requirements. For all intents and purposes, if we're planning on moving JJ, it might be more worth it to do it at the deadline--unless he (or the guy we're getting back) is the cog that helps us go far in the playoffs.

you can't package a S&T player with anyone else.

Trading JJ at the dealing makes the most sense, but his value would be so low, I can't imagine what we would get back

 

[magnifier661]

I edited it because we aren't that team. We ARE fine to sign and trade him. What we can't do is sign and trade him and take back something that would make us go over the cap, which is kind of the point of bird rights.

Personally the more I think about it, the more I think hickson may agree to be traded to a competent team. The only thing he benefits is being able to be over cap. If the said player is on a team that is under cap, the. There is no real issue for him to get a 3 year over a 4 year contract.

What is confusing me is can we sign and trade him before deadline? Doesn't seem like that is a possibility. I don't think a team would want to risk losing their player for hickson unless he is guaranteed somehow.

 

[magnifier661]

Trading JJ at the dealing makes the most sense, but his value would be so low, I can't imagine what we would get back

Unless you package him with leanord?

 

[BrianFromWA]

What is confusing me is can we sign and trade him before deadline? Doesn't seem like that is a possibility. I don't think a team would want to risk losing their player for hickson unless he is guaranteed somehow.

No, you can only extend a contract (say, like Melo) if it's a 4 year or greater contract to start. JJ's is a 1-year

 

[magnifier661]

No, you can only extend a contract (say, like Melo) if it's a 4 year or greater contract to start. JJ's is a 1-year

That's what I thought