Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: Should Knicks approach Atlanta about Johnson trade?

  1. #1
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default Should Knicks approach Atlanta about Johnson trade?

    An interesting article suggesting that Atlanta should consider trading Joe Johnson. I would love to see the Knicks put together a trade for Johnson!!
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

    If the Knicks could trade for him, I believe they could sin him after making 2 free agent signings. You could potentially have a starting lineup with Bosh, James, Johnson! NICE!!!

  2. #2
    Evacuee Crazy⑧s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    日本
    Posts
    6,487
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    How would that be possible?

    James will cost at least $23-25m per year.

    Add him to a roster of Lee, Robinson, Chandler, and Gallinari, and the Knicks probably have roughly $20 million left under the cap. Add him to a roster of Chandler and Gallinari alone, and the Knicks have roughly $35 million left under the cap.

    Bosh is currently earning $16m +

    With Johnson on board I can't see how we'd possibly even make roster requirements??

  3. #3
    Veteran LJ4ptplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ft. Collins, CO
    Posts
    2,950
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    If we traded for him we wouldn't be able to retain his Bird Rights so he would be an unrestricted free agent next year. Same goes for Lee, Nate, Harrington, Darko and practically the entire Knicks roster.

    This is the dilemma Donnie is going to have to deal with next year if he can't trade Curry and Jeffries by the deadline. 6 players on the roster and only enough money to sign 1 max and resign Lee. Essentially an 8 man roster when you need a minimum of 13.

    How is Donnie going to succesfully accomplish the 2010 plan if Jeffries and Curry are not traded? Somebody please let me know.

  4. #4
    Veteran nyk_nyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    3,529
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    I definitely think JJ can be traded but not for expiring contracts. Those contracts are way more valuable than his talent. Curry is ours until his contract expires. There is nothing we can do about that train wreck. Our best bet is to hope Curry somehow magically rejuvinates himself and becomes a dominant low post center.

    The only teams that might be willing to trade for JJ and send us expiring contracts in return are legitimate title contenders. Even in that scenerio those teams may feel like they can still get it done without JJ and shed some salary at the end of the season.

  5. #5
    Veteran GetRealistic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,370
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think Bird rights always come into play. We obvioulsy couldn't afford lebron bosh and johnson. But if we had Johnson this season we'd be able to have Lee, Johnson, and Lebron. The only real important facet would be signing Lebron first. Since we already have Johnson and Lee as players we can go over the cap to resign a player under our control... You can't go over the cap when bringing in an outside player but you can go over the cap when resigning your own free agent.

    You just have to sign Lebron first in order to have the money on the cap initially to sign him. It's like the Houston deal from years past. We already had an inflatted cap but we still gave Houston a massive extension because you can resign your own players over the cap.

  6. #6
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    683
    Rep Power
    10

    Default 2010

    We will not be able to pay LeBron James, or any other max free agent, more than 30% of the 2010 cap. If the 2010 cap is $53M, LeBron's 2010 Knick contract cannot be more than $15.9M, i.e, 30% of $53M.

    LJ4 is right. With Curry, we will have trouble putting together a 2010 team with only one max free agent. With a max free agent taking up $15.9M, Curry and Jefferies taking up $18M, and Gallo, Chandler, Hill and Douglas, another $9M or so, we will only have about $10M left to fill up a roster.

    I believe that Walsh, given the difficulties of trading Curry, is thinking of adding a second max free agent in 2011, not 2010. Besides, I do not think he is counting on LeBron. To be sure, however, he's hoping.

  7. #7
    Veteran LJ4ptplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ft. Collins, CO
    Posts
    2,950
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Originally Posted by GetRealistic
    Correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think Bird rights always come into play. We obvioulsy couldn't afford lebron bosh and johnson. But if we had Johnson this season we'd be able to have Lee, Johnson, and Lebron. The only real important facet would be signing Lebron first. Since we already have Johnson and Lee as players we can go over the cap to resign a player under our control... You can't go over the cap when bringing in an outside player but you can go over the cap when resigning your own free agent.

    You just have to sign Lebron first in order to have the money on the cap initially to sign him. It's like the Houston deal from years past. We already had an inflatted cap but we still gave Houston a massive extension because you can resign your own players over the cap.
    Just retaining Lee's Bird Rights will not allow us to sign a max-free agent next year. Best case cap projections have the Knicks with $28 mil in cap space.

    Retaining Bird Rights for a player is 1.5 times the player's final year salary. This amount eats into the cap space.

    Lee is getting $7-8 mil this year so therefore it will cost us $10.5-12 mil against our cap space to retain Lee's Bird Rights. That would only leave us potentially $16-17.5 in cap space after retaining Lee's Bird Rights. The low end is definitely not enough to sign a max, the high end may be just enough.

    Throw in Johnson's Bird Rights and there is no way to sign Lebron, Lee and Johnson.

    Bird Rights were essentially established for teams over the cap so they could keep their stars. It doesn't work too well for a team under the cap and the majority of it's roster as free agents.


    There, I hope that explains the dilemma I've been ranting about for the past few weeks. I really don't see how Donnie can bring in max free agents if Curry and Jeffries are not traded.

    Possibly the best option, as OldTimer suggested, is to retain the players that play well for us this year (e.g. Lee, Nate, Harrington...maybe Duhon and Darko) and then go after 1 max free agent in 2011 when Jeffries and Curry are off the books.

  8. #8
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    683
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Bird Rights and the Salary Cap

    It is my understanding that when determining whether a team (the "acquiring team") is under the cap and able to sign another team's free agent, all the acquiring team's free agents' contract amounts are counted even though they are not signed. In fact, I believe that the cap number for a free agent is something more than the prior year contract amount. Thus, in order to get under the cap to sign a max free agent, the Knicks will be required to renounce their Bird rights to Harrington, Lee, Nate etc.

  9. #9
    Superstar richtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Dirty Jersey
    Posts
    513
    Rep Power
    6

    Default

    lets keep this short and sweet..

    NO.

  10. #10
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    If the Knicks buy out Curry and Jarred's contracts this season, it will count this year only against the cap. This would allow the Knicks to make a few signings. I don't care if the Knicks resign Al Harrington or Nate or Hughes if they can get resign Lee and sign key free agents. So the Knicks, under this scenario, could trade for Joe Johnson and then resign Him, Lee and 1 max contract along with 1 large contract. They could resign Harrington with the full mid-level that doesn't count against the cap.
    Also, just because they give up the Bird rights to Lee doesn't mean they can't resign him. I still think the market will dictate Lee's worth and unless he set's records, I doubt Lee will get a max contract offer from another team!

  11. #11
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    I forgot to put in that I've heard that the buying out their contracts is a plan that Walsh will consider if they can't trade both these players by the trading deadline.

  12. #12
    Veteran LJ4ptplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ft. Collins, CO
    Posts
    2,950
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Originally Posted by hometheaterguy
    If the Knicks buy out Curry and Jarred's contracts this season, it will count this year only against the cap. This would allow the Knicks to make a few signings. I don't care if the Knicks resign Al Harrington or Nate or Hughes if they can get resign Lee and sign key free agents. So the Knicks, under this scenario, could trade for Joe Johnson and then resign Him, Lee and 1 max contract along with 1 large contract. They could resign Harrington with the full mid-level that doesn't count against the cap.
    Also, just because they give up the Bird rights to Lee doesn't mean they can't resign him. I still think the market will dictate Lee's worth and unless he set's records, I doubt Lee will get a max contract offer from another team!
    With all due respect, you don't have a clue. Buying out Curry's and Jeffries' contracts count against the cap for the entire span of their contracts.

    The full mid-level exception does add to the cap.

    Best case projections have us at around $28 mil in cap space next year if Jeffries and Curry are not traded (highly likely).

    $17 mil for max free agent
    $9 mil for Lee
    = $26 mil

    Add the full mid-level exception around $7 mil and we're $5 mil over the cap (- $2 mil cap space).

    So, now we have an 8 man roster for next year: Jeffries, Curry, Gallo, Chandler, Hill, Douglas, max free agent and Lee. No starting PG and not enough players to fill the 13 roster minimum.

    Someone please let me know how we're going to get a max-star and still have a team next year. I would like to know.

  13. #13
    Member DANUTZ39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    451
    Rep Power
    6

    Default

    Originally Posted by LJ4ptplay
    With all due respect, you don't have a clue. Buying out Curry's and Jeffries' contracts count against the cap for the entire span of their contracts.

    The full mid-level exception does add to the cap.

    Best case projections have us at around $28 mil in cap space next year if Jeffries and Curry are not traded (highly likely).

    $17 mil for max free agent
    $9 mil for Lee
    = $26 mil

    Add the full mid-level exception around $7 mil and we're $5 mil over the cap (- $2 mil cap space).

    So, now we have an 8 man roster for next year: Jeffries, Curry, Gallo, Chandler, Hill, Douglas, max free agent and Lee. No starting PG and not enough players to fill the 13 roster minimum.

    Someone please let me know how we're going to get a max-star and still have a team next year. I would like to know.

    With all the respect that's not true. Can you back up your claim?



    ''Exceptions
    Because the NBA's salary cap is a soft one, the CBA allows for several important scenarios in which a team can sign players even if their payroll exceeds the cap.

    The exceptions are as follows:

    Mid-Level Exception

    A team is allowed to sign one player to a contract equal to the average NBA salary, even if the team is over the salary cap already, or if the signing would put them over the cap. This is known as the Mid-level exception (MLE). The MLE may be used on an individual free agent or split among multiple free agents, and is available to any team that exceeds the salary cap at the beginning of the offseason. The Mid-Level Exception for the 2008-09 NBA season was $5.585 million. The MLE is $5.854 million for the 2009-10 NBA regular season.
    An example would be the [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]' acquisition of [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] during the 2007 off-season.''

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

  14. #14
    Veteran LJ4ptplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ft. Collins, CO
    Posts
    2,950
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Originally Posted by DANUTZ39
    With all the respect that's not true. Can you back up your claim?



    ''Exceptions
    Because the NBA's salary cap is a soft one, the CBA allows for several important scenarios in which a team can sign players even if their payroll exceeds the cap.

    The exceptions are as follows:

    Mid-Level Exception

    A team is allowed to sign one player to a contract equal to the average NBA salary, even if the team is over the salary cap already, or if the signing would put them over the cap. This is known as the Mid-level exception (MLE). The MLE may be used on an individual free agent or split among multiple free agents, and is available to any team that exceeds the salary cap at the beginning of the offseason. The Mid-Level Exception for the 2008-09 NBA season was $5.585 million. The MLE is $5.854 million for the 2009-10 NBA regular season.
    An example would be the [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]' acquisition of [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] during the 2007 off-season.''

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    The mid-level exception was set up so teams over the cap can sign free agents. The salary is still part of the team's total team salary which is against the cap.

    Jeffries was signed for the mid-level and his salary counts against our cap space. If not, then why wouldn't teams always just use the mid-level every year and never be over the cap?

    Why wouldn't the Bucks have given Sessions the mid-level?

    Because it subtracts from the available cap-space. Hence why the T-Wolves only have $14 mil in cap space after they signed Sessions.

  15. #15
    Member DANUTZ39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    451
    Rep Power
    6

    Default

    Originally Posted by LJ4ptplay
    Buying out Curry's and Jeffries' contracts count against the cap for the entire span of their contracts.
    As for buying out Curry and/or Jefferies, we will save some money depending on what the buyout sum they agree upon. The biggest problem is that I just dont see Curry and Jeffries leaving guranteed money on the table(not much anyway) based on their performance and phisical condition(curry).

    This how the buyout works and how it affects the salary cap:

    ''How do buy-outs affect a team's salary cap?

    The agreed-upon buy-out amount is included in the team salary instead of the salary called for in the contract. If the player had more than one season left on his contract, then the buy-out money is distributed among those seasons in proportion to the original salary. For example, say a player had three seasons remaining on his contract, with salaries of $10 million, $11 million and $12 million. The player and team agree to a buyout of $15 million. The $15 million is therefore charged to the team salary over the three seasons. Since the original contract had $33 million left to be paid, and $10 million is 30.3% of $33 million, 30.3% of the $15 million buyout, or $4.545 million, is included in the team salary in the first season following the buyout. Likewise, 33.33% of $15 million, or $5 million, is included in the team salary in the second season, and 36.36% of $15 million, or $5.455 million, is included in the team salary in the third season.
    The distribution of the buy-out money is a matter of individual negotiation. Changing the number of years in which the money is paid does not change the number of years in which the team's team salary is charged. In the above example in which the player's contract is bought out with three seasons remaining, the buyout amount is always charged to the team salary over three seasons. It does not matter if the player is actually paid in a lump sum or over 20 years (a spread provision).''

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Similar Threads

  1. Knicks to sign and trade Williams?
    By StEpHoN_mArBuRy in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Aug 10, 2009, 10:38
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: Jun 23, 2009, 17:07
  3. Replies: 29
    Last Post: Dec 31, 2008, 14:34
  4. Replies: 25
    Last Post: Sep 22, 2008, 16:40
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Feb 10, 2008, 11:12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •