crzymdups wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Apparently it is:

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=42508

If you read the article or any of the posts in that thread, you know the tax bill is for the whole roster, not just Lin.

Why not do the same math on Amar'e or Melo or Kidd or Camby or Felton or Novak?

Here's another way to look at it - the Knicks gave Novak $15M for one skill. Lin has at least four elite skills (driving to the rim, drawing fouls, pull up jumpers, passing) and people are balking at paying him $25M.

This is one of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard.

Not signing Lin does nothing to help the team's flexibility. If anything it hurts it - it gives away our most valuable trade chip, possibly next to Shump, for NOTHING.

There are reasons morey and Lin structured the contract the way they did. It was meant to be so prohibitive that the knicks wouldn't match it.

The Knicks can afford it. And they'll make far less advertising money without Lin.

They'll probably even lose money to the Nets.

Dolan is an idiot. There's a reason he's been a failure at every venture he's ever entered into.

Despite Dolan being an idiot and melo being a hard to like star this situation is not about them. This about morey and Lin presenting the k I is with an offer that almost
assures Lin is a rocket. I think the biggest thing we have in our favor is that Dolan is an idiot and might match. Also, I want Lin back.

FeltonandAmare wrote:The real question is are the Knicks fully committed to wining a championship. If they are then they
sign Lin. If they are not then all hell breaks loose. This franchise will become the full fledged
laughing stock that some people want it to be.

Why is Lin the Lebron Killer? If so, sign him up to $1billion. To me and alot of logical Knicks fans, he's good but unproven. But please don't mention championship and Jeremy Lin when the guy only started 25 games in February.

Also players that have played in the playoffs.

25 games..not sure it's worth it.

We've already used our amnesty.

And I like Melo, chandler and amare more.

Just my two cents. He's not worth $8 mill a year IMHO. See Jamal Crawford and isiah.

FeltonandAmare wrote:

Caseloads wrote:True Statement:

Knicks also can't do sign and trades and they would be paying a much higher amount than they ever have in the past.

Also True Statement (directed to feltonandAmare and crzymadups): the knicks would be paying around 43 million in luxury tax for lin ALONE in 2015.

You do not understand how the new luxury tax system works - it is NOT the simple dollar for dollar luxury tax system of the old CBA.

Lin isn't costing the Knicks $43 million in tax in 2015. Their total payroll is. These are the kind of math tricks politicians use and you should become a politician with your twisted logic.

Your causality issue has truth to it, but the issue currently is that they can avoid $43M of luxury tax implications by declining to match Lin's offer. All other courses of action are contractual obligations. They would be contractually obligated to pay approximately 74M for 4 players in 2014/15 by matching Lin's offer.

Without projecting the 'apron' of luxury tax implications, they are virtually hamstrung by these implications. Comparing to 06/07 where the penalties for luxury taxes were not 'multiples' isn't a fair comparison.

The only argument you can use to support this is that the Knicks may have the ability to move one of their other players without receiving back salary in order to clear cap space.

So, with that in mind, which of Melo, Stat and Chandler would you trade for nothing to avoid losing Lin for nothing?

I think the oturage for most people is their unhappiness at having to shelve their "Lin" jerseys. The contract is overly burdensome for what it is.

EwingsGlass wrote:

FeltonandAmare wrote:

Caseloads wrote:True Statement:

Knicks also can't do sign and trades and they would be paying a much higher amount than they ever have in the past.

Also True Statement (directed to feltonandAmare and crzymadups): the knicks would be paying around 43 million in luxury tax for lin ALONE in 2015.

You do not understand how the new luxury tax system works - it is NOT the simple dollar for dollar luxury tax system of the old CBA.

Lin isn't costing the Knicks $43 million in tax in 2015. Their total payroll is. These are the kind of math tricks politicians use and you should become a politician with your twisted logic.

Your causality issue has truth to it, but the issue currently is that they can avoid $43M of luxury tax implications by declining to match Lin's offer. All other courses of action are contractual obligations. They would be contractually obligated to pay approximately 74M for 4 players in 2014/15 by matching Lin's offer.

Without projecting the 'apron' of luxury tax implications, they are virtually hamstrung by these implications. Comparing to 06/07 where the penalties for luxury taxes were not 'multiples' isn't a fair comparison.

The only argument you can use to support this is that the Knicks may have the ability to move one of their other players without receiving back salary in order to clear cap space.

So, with that in mind, which of Melo, Stat and Chandler would you trade for nothing to avoid losing Lin for nothing?

I think the oturage for most people is their unhappiness at having to shelve their "Lin" jerseys. The contract is overly burdensome for what it is.

You trade Stat that last year and give with him whatever it takes for a team to take him on. A team under the cap will take him on. Worse case scenario, we trade Lin or Melo or Chandler in that 3rd year. But at least we have 2+ years to decide. Don'T decide on Tuesday!!!

oh, by the way, Linsanity led to a 13% stock price increase at MSG. If you don't think that's valuable to MSG, you don't know what MSG cares about. I have to think there are some voices in the organization telling Dolan he needs to match. I hope.

Again, there is no way the Knicks are trying to be thrifty by not re-signing Lin. Read below if you have doubt of this.

crzymdups wrote:

Rookie wrote:

alright, not being savvy in the ways of the market it would appear that MSG stock is already dropping...so, as of right now in the short term MSG has already lost 49M in market capitalization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Much has been made already about the New York Knicks decision — reportedly at this point — not to sign Jeremy Lin. But another way to look at the move is that the Knicks’ owner, Madison Square Garden Inc. MSG -1.83% , has already lost more money in market capitalization than the cost of Lin’s contract.

The 64-cent drop in MSG stock equates to a market capitalization loss of about $49 million.

Estimating the cost to MSG of matching the Jeremy Lin contract offer from the Houston Rockets is a bit trickier. The roughly $25 million over three years that the Knicks would owe the Harvard graduate is almost irrelevant, because the Knicks will be paying the NBA’s full salary cap, and then some, with or without Lin. The only real direct cost comes from the luxury-cap implications.

This piece by Business Insider does a pretty good job of laying out different scenarios for 2014, when the Lin contract could be considered, to use Carmelo Anthony’s terminology, “ridiculous.” The one this author feels would have been most likely is not actually presented — getting rid of Marcus Camby and Raymond Felton, and keeping Iman Shumpert — but the approximate difference in luxury tax between keeping Lin or not is somewhere in the order of $35 million to $40 million.

And that’s assuming no business impact at all from the revenue side. (Even if a Lin-inspired boycott by Knicks fans is short-lived, it does seem there will be at least some negative revenue element from not bringing back the popular player.) And when you factor in the time value of money — e.g., money now is worth more than money later — the Lin non-signing is even more a negative for MSG stockholders." http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2012/07/16/mondays-msg-market-cap-drop-would-have-paid-for-lin-contract/

This is huge. So, Dolan's TANTRUM about Jeremy Lin has ALREADY COST the organization TWICE what Lin's contract would have.

Not to mention that Linsanity led to a HUGE surge in MSG stock in February. Lin was responsible for a 13% rise in stock in February.

Since Lin debuted against the Nets on February 4, MSG’s stock has surged as much as 13% to an all-time high of $33.18 this week, compared with a rise of about 1% on the broad S&P 500.

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2012/02/17/linsanity-validates-msg-spinoff/#ixzz20oUXiywZ

Not let me ask you this - if a 2% drop in stock share is worth $50M in losses to MSG...

What does a 13% gain equal? $300M or so?

Of course that's not an exact number, but it gives you an idea of how valuable Lin was to this organization...

And that's before taking into account that Lin is just flat out better than any other option the Knicks have at PG for the next 3yrs.

This is flat out the stupidest, most childish move ever by Dolan.

He should be flayed in the media for this.