An Oft-Ignored Reality of Cap-Space

[NUMBERICA]

Teams must pay 90% of the salary cap in payments to players for a given season starting in 2013. Meaning, the Jazz will have to pay out at least $50 million next year, one way or another (the penalty for teams that don't meet the minimum payroll threshold is making up the difference, so teams WILL pay that every year).
https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q15

Assuming Marvin Williams opts in, that means the Jazz have to find roughly $23 million of salary that they MUST add (and if he opts out, $30 million). James Harden is off the market, Dwight Howard and CP3 aren't happening, so what are the Jazz going to spend this money on?

That is not a rhetorical question, because I don't know and am curious. This is something I find a little alarming as that may mean the Jazz blow a bunch of dough on more dead-end players (or worse, keeping Al [AND Millsap, even]).

There is another option: trading some of our cap flexibility to a team to get an overpaid veteran that has years that their current team don't want and maybe getting other things in the process. I haven't spent a ton of time devising what scenarios, but Gasol certainly comes to mind even thought I've never had wood for him.

Anyway, keep this in mind. What do you think should be done to address this, and what do you think is likely to be done?

 

[NUMBERICA]

Between 2013 and 2015, the Jazz have to find places to spend money. I wonder if the Jazz could pull something similar to the Thunder and Collison where they throw a bunch of money at Millsap for those years, then shortly after that, sign him to a cheap two-year extension (effectively working around limits on how much you can front-load a deal by breaking it into two deals).

This could conceivably done with anyone. I think.

 

[franklin]

That's a lot of the reason behind this proposal: https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?13865-Crazy-trade-idea

There's going to be a lot more Kardashian Humphries type short-but-overpaying deals. I.E. paying Foye $6mm/1yr just to meet the minimum.

 

[GVC]

This has been covered before. Teams do not have to spend up to the minimum on player contracts. If they are below the minimum, the difference between their payroll and the minimum is distributed among the players on the roster. No need for concern.

 

[NUMBERICA]

This has been covered before. Teams do not have to spend up to the minimum on player contracts. If they are below the minimum, the difference between their payroll and the minimum is distributed among the players on the roster. No need for concern.

No need for concern? Teams are just going to shrug off tens of millions of dollars in effective penalty? Or maybe I'm naive to something?

 

[GVC]

No need for concern? Teams are just going to shrug off tens of millions of dollars in effective penalty?

Before they take on unnecessary cap-crippling long-term contracts? Probably. Like Frank said, there will probably be a team or two every year handing out bloated one year deals. No biggie.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Before they take on unnecessary cap-crippling long-term contracts? Probably. Like Frank said, there will probably be a team or two every year handing out bloated one year deals. No biggie.

Well that's just the thing, the Jazz have 2.5 seasons before "cap-crippling" could even begin to remotely become a question.

There's a dearth of money to spend and the Jazz have to figure out the best way to spend it. Paying Evans and some other scrubs a $2 million bonus a piece doesn't seem the best way the money could be spent.

 

[Hotdog]

That's a lot of the reason behind this proposal: https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?13865-Crazy-trade-idea

There's going to be a lot more Kardashian Humphries type short-but-overpaying deals. I.E. paying Foye $6mm/1yr just to meet the minimum.

Ding ding

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

I'm guessing the Jazz would be willing to take on a wayward or oft-injured vet contract if another team would sweeten the deal with picks or another player we like. Isn't this what the Jazz did when they picked up Tom Gugliotta from Phoenix ?

If the Jazz do this, that player they pick up had better be clear why he's getting picked up and not start whining for more playing time like Raja Bell did.

 

[candrew]

Jazz had the same problem in 2003 - they had to do a couple of creative things to get up to the minimum including signing but never playing Glen Rice.

There is another option: trading some of our cap flexibility to a team to get an overpaid veteran that has years that their current team don't want and maybe getting other things in the process. I haven't spent a ton of time devising what scenarios, but Gasol certainly comes to mind even thought I've never had wood for him.

And they picked up Tom Gugliotta, who at the time made about a billion dollars a month and could barely lift his arms above his head anymore. Which of course came with the infamous "Knick Pick" which gave us 5+ glorious years of stimulating converstion on this board

 

[theNBAnerd]

No need for concern? Teams are just going to shrug off tens of millions of dollars in effective penalty? Or maybe I'm naive to something?

how is it an effective penalty? the point is, the jazz will play the 90% minimum one way or another -- either by taking on bad salary they have no use for, or by assembling the team they actually want and then if they fall just short of 90%, salaries get adjusted upward by whatever percent is missing. how is that a penalty?

but either way, it's nothing to worry about. $23M to spend is really nothing. jazz will have two draft picks, both in the late lotto or mid first round, so you're adding 3M there. at least one of al/paul/mo will be back at a figure that will come close to eight digits. let's say mo and paul both return, then there, they've spent their money. if only one guy does, then the jazz have 10M left to spend to hit minimum salary and 10 guys on the roster (mo/paul, marvin, the core or 4, evans, murph and two rookies). it's not hard to spend 10M to add 3-5 guys.

and, if they don't spend it all by day 1, then they have until the trade deadline to put that flexibility to work in trades for future assets. a lot of our current team was acquired at least in part because of trades where we commodotized our cap space for other teams.

 

[theNBAnerd]

Jazz had the same problem in 2003 - they had to do a couple of creative things to get up to the minimum including signing but never playing Glen Rice.



And they picked up Tom Gugliotta, who at the time made about a billion dollars a month and could barely lift his arms above his head anymore. Which of course came with the infamous "Knick Pick" which gave us 5+ glorious years of stimulating converstion on this board

the reward for taking rice off of houston's hands wasn't googs... it was god.

 

[cctrackstar]

Trade a tuna sandwich to a team for one overpaid vet who can't play along with a talented young player who is redundant on their team. Preferably a point guard.

 

[candrew]

the reward for taking rice off of houston's hands wasn't googs... it was god.

John Amaechi?

 

[Brown Notes]

If one of the starting bigs is re-signed just frontload the **** out of their contract. After next year the Jazz will need a lot of free money to match offers on the young guys.

 

[NAOS]

I don't recall the details, but I think there are new rules regarding front loading contracts. For example, I don't think a contract like Collison's is possible anymore.

 

[cctrackstar]

I'd be interested in hearing the rules, because that is a good idea: frontload Al's or Millsap's contract and that opens up cap to re-sign Favors and Hayward and Alec and Kanter. Just restating and agreeing, in fact this is the only way I can forsee keeping either of those two without hampering the future. If the rules allow.

 

[Hotdog]

Sign Millsap to this contract next year.

4 yeard deal

Year 1 - 23 million dollars
Year 2 - 11 million dollars
Year 3 - 3 million dollars
Year 4 - 3 million dollars.


Ok. Jk. Probably not realistic. I wish though.

 

[NAOS]

Franklin, I seem to remember you having some real details on this issue.

Doesn't the new CBA mandate that annual decreases can't exceed a certain percentage of the previous year?

Yeah, I'm lazy when it comes to legal jargon... I don't want to surf through that.

 

[Hotdog]

Franklin, I seem to remember you having some real details on this issue.

Doesn't the new CBA mandate that annual decreases can't exceed a certain percentage of the previous year?

Yeah, I'm lazy when it comes to legal jargon... I don't want to surf through that.

Ive heard that too. I dont like it. I think its just puts more of a hamper on team's abilities to make trades. What wrong with a team front loading a contract a lot if they have the cap space? It would make players a lot easier to trade if the majority of their contract has been paid already.

Just imagine how easy Millsap would be to trade after year 2 if he was on that contract I just made up.