2022-23 Team Developments: News / Trades / Free Agents / Rumors

negative cap space if russ isn't either renounced or re-signed at a lower rate prior to FA. you can't use the space AND exercise bird rights. the space is obtained via renouncing the rights.

 

This article specifically says that renouncing a cap hold has no effect on available cap space. I'm confused as to how renouncing Bird rights is giving you more cap space.

 

Ok..I get this one, but I'm still confused about what you were saying, about not being able to use cap space and Bird rights.

 

the cap hold is what allows the use of the exceptions. if you renounce the hold, there is no exception.

interestingly, even under-the-cap teams technically have an MLE--they just renounce it to use all the space.

there's all sorts of weird cap minutiae, the depths i've which i can never fully plumb. but i've got a hold of this stuff, and what you're saying can't happen in this case.

our options with russ are either to extend him prior to FA (best option, imo) or renounce him and either sign him into space or use the room exception to sign him after using the space.

i think he'd be (perhaps rightfully) offended by the latter proposition, so if he's here post-deadline, we need to be laying the groundwork for a 3/50 extension with that third year guaranteed for only 5 million. this a) puts him out of reach for most teams, particularly in his ideal role as a bench captain, and b) lets him save some face and likely retire in his hometown playing on national tv a lot.

if he just hates the FO and wants out, i *think* (this is deeper cba stuff) we should have extend-and-trade options right up to the draft, wherein we could negotiate using the rights to NO's pick should something interesting pop up. i think this scenario is pretty unlikely, though.

 

Perhaps I'm getting old and math is more fuzzy than it used to be or something. It's my understanding that we have 98 million in guaranteed contracts next season, and the projected cap is 134 million dollars. This is where the 34 million in available cap space is coming from, it has nothing to do with cap holds.

If you renounce a player, you cannot go over the cap to resign that player. You are losing me here, I thought that article pretty much laid everything out.


Therefore, Reaves and Westbrook, can be signed technically , to any contract we chose. The 34 million is what we have to add new players or give guys like Walker or Bryant a pay raise and still have a mini or a full MLE. I'm still not grasping this point about Westbrook specifically.

You can go over the cap to resign Bird Rights players and vet minimums even with a 20 % increase. So why do we need to renounce Westbrook? We have his full Bird rights, what is this part about exceptions regarding him? I haven't seen anything that says, that you have to resign a guy on an expiring contract to his cap hold figure.

 

Yeah, because BevMo is hot garbage.
I didn’t feel the need to actually type: “a trade that actually helps our team and not only benefits Ainge.”

 

Tucker is too. A fair exchange is not a swindle

 

I guess you didn’t realize that our last Chip team consisted of guys who were taller, bigger, and stronger at almost every position than their competition.

 

How can I not realize that, when I said that is why we won the chip? Lol..in this thread no less.

What does that have to do with Toronto still sucking?

 

cap holds are tied to current salaries (with some other arcane riders). reaves makes the vet min. his cap hold is a little higher, but not very much. troy brown's cap hold is like 1.5 million. lonnie's is like 8-ish, i think. russ's cap hold is 50 million. that sits on your cap until he's signed or renounced.

it's also more complicated in other ways. we can't sign reaves to any contract we choose. he has a weird provision (gilbert arenas) that allows us to match salaries up to a point AND limits what other teams can offer. so reaves can't sign a max deal with ANYONE next year. completely impossible unless we renounce his rights, which we have no incentive to do.

long story short: bird rights are to help you keep your guys, but cap holds are to prevent you from completely circumventing the cap to create insane payrolls--imagine we use the 34 million to sign kyrie, then 50 more to keep russ again--how's that fair in terms of talent distribution/competitive balance?

all that said, this is why i'd hoped lebron would do something wild like sign a deal for 4 million for one year, wherein we retain his bird rights but open up a ton of space (if he really wanted kyrie here, this is how it would happen). that way, his cap hold is like 6 million, but we can sign him to his max! this is what you're talking about doing with russ but can't happen because his current salary is too high.

 

Your back handed comment about everyone on the site “coveting size and length.” I’m not going round and round with you regarding this because you are a disingenuous debator who has no respect for nearly every one else here.

 

This is exactly how Golden State has an insane cap figure Abeer. You can sign your Bird's right guy to any figure you want. Now Reaves being a RFA may be more complicated, I'm not sure on that. However Westbrook can definitely be signed over the cap to 50, 30,20 or 10 million, it doesn't matter. The luxury tax is the deterrent. We could absolutely sign Kyrie to 30 and still go over the cap to resign Westbrook.

Again the article I posted specifically stated that cap holds have no effect on a team's available cap space. Renouncing Westbrook doesn't give us any more cap space. It's actually a false assumption, that a lot of NBA writers are putting out, about renouncing player's rights is creating more space. Just like a lot of them were touting these sign and trade deals, that we could make a couple of years ago, when we were already over the salary cap.

 

Yeah well that's probably because you jump to conclusions that aren't there. If you had simply read the above comments in this thread. I said that our size and length is what won us a chip. Lol..somehow you call yourself calling me out with the very same statement I posted. That's what is being disingenuous, sounds like you are more concerned with me being " wrong " about something, than actually following the conversation.

I noticed that you have nothing on the subject, of why does Toronto have the shooters,and the prototype size and length, but still stink.

 

This is exactly why you don't make a Russ for Rozier and Hayward trade. They will be owed 54 million in salary next season. That's already 20 million over the projected salary cap next season. The only thing we could do is sign vet mins and maybe a mini MLE. Bogdanovic for example, leaves you with 14 million.

 

It doesn’t work that way, we have 98m in guaranteed contracts. If we were to renounce everyone else, we would have 34m in cap space.

We can’t go out and use that cap space and then resign Russ with his bird rights, to get the cap space we have to renounce him and Walker, Bev, Nunn and all the vet minimums.

So probably what would happen is we would extend Russ first to a 3/50 or 4/60 (with only 2 years guaranteed) or something something like abeer said if we intend to keep him. That would then free up around 18-20m or so in cap space.

In an ideal world we would trade Bev and Nunn for a 20m piece now. We could then resign Russ and use our 11m MLE to retain Schroeder and/or Bryant with the promise of upping their wage like we did KCP. Then we could match any offer on Reaves with the Gilbert arenas provision and go over the cap.

I can post you my breakdown with numbers if you want it.

 

No. That is not how it works. Read this again

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/los-angeles-lakers/cap/2023/

Think about it...why would an expiring contract count against your cap space in the 1st place? It's an expiring contract. That doesn't make any sense. Your available cap space is strictly based off of your guaranteed contracts and the projected cap that season. This is why everyone says we have 30-34 million in space this summer. 134 million projected cap minus the 98 million in guaranteed salary. That is the way it works, the article even spells out that cap holds have no bearing on a team's available cap space. Renouncing a hold doesn't give you any cap space bro. So post what you have but this article is exactly how it actually works.

 

Per Article

Cap holds represent "placeholders" for pending free agents, unsigned draft picks, offer sheets, etc... Since the Lakers are currently over the league salary cap, these cap holds do not count against their Total Cap figure. Renouncing these cap holds will NOT afford the team any new cap space. These figures are not counted toward a team's Luxury Tax Allocation.

 

Go down another section to the “2023-2024 Los Angeles Lakers Salary Cap Totals” this is what you need to get your head around.

(Think of a cap hold as an option on resigning a player with “bird” rights. This provision was designed so when a team drafts a player, it isn’t forced to let go of them just because of cap space issues. The cost of keeping a players bird rights is the cap hold hit it carries.)

So this is the part you need to understand:

Cap Type
Active Roster Cap $91,806,609
Cap Holds $108,727,659
Total Cap Allocations $200,534,268

Salary Cap Maximum
2023 NBA Salary Cap Max $134,000,000
Current Cap Space $-66,534,268

When we retain the cap holds we have negative space for next season. You can see all our cap holds in the 2023-2024 Cap Holds section with Russell Westbrook at the top carrying a cap hold of $49.4m.

If we want to open up 34m in cap space we need to do the following (from the website):

Projected Practical Cap Space: $34,340,543
This is calculated by determining all guaranteed salaries + any dead cap from non-guaranteed salaries + estimated exercised and declined options + estimated retained cap holds and draft pool cap holds.

The part you’re missing is the “declined options”: this means declined cap holds of everyone not under contract.

 

Yes they will not afford any new cap space because they are an option on resigning. But the cap hold exists so you can’t game the system in the way you are talking about it.

I’m sorry but in this scenario, the way you are thinking about it is just not possible. The CBA is designed to block things like this.