SupremeCommander wrote:

RonRon wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Can someone explain how this actually works, is it an extra 3.6 mill you have to spend on a FA. In other words, can you take the MLE and combine it with the trade exception which would totally about 7 mill, and use it on a FA?

I have always been a little confuse at how thos exceptions work

No, you get 1 year to use it from the date of the trade, it can never be combined with anything, use it or lose it
You can sign use it to sign a free agent or in trades (but can not be combined to take more salary, only one contract within the exemption obtained

well apparently I was confused too - I thought you could sign a guy outright

You could you just can't combine it

EnySpree wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

RonRon wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Can someone explain how this actually works, is it an extra 3.6 mill you have to spend on a FA. In other words, can you take the MLE and combine it with the trade exception which would totally about 7 mill, and use it on a FA?

I have always been a little confuse at how thos exceptions work

No, you get 1 year to use it from the date of the trade, it can never be combined with anything, use it or lose it
You can sign use it to sign a free agent or in trades (but can not be combined to take more salary, only one contract within the exemption obtained

well apparently I was confused too - I thought you could sign a guy outright

You could you just can't combine it

oh - thanks

BRIGGS wrote:Gives us more to spend than the MLE

It essentially like having two, but with one better than everyone else's

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Can someone explain how this actually works, is it an extra 3.6 mill you have to spend on a FA. In other words, can you take the MLE and combine it with the trade exception which would totally about 7 mill, and use it on a FA?

I have always been a little confuse at how thos exceptions work

I checked Coon's site and found it a bit confusing. This is from Wiki:

Traded Player Exception[edit]

If a team trades away a player with a higher salary than the player they acquire in return (the deal hereafter referred to as "Trade #1"), they receive a Traded Player Exception, also known as a "Trade Exception". Teams with a trade exception have up to a year in which they can acquire more salary in other trades (Trade #2, #3, etc.) than they send away, as long as the gulf in salaries for Trade #2, #3, etc. are less than or equal to the difference in salary for Trade #1. This exception is particularly useful when teams trade draft picks directly for a player; since draft picks have no salary value, often the only way to get salaries to match is to use a trade exception, which allows trades to be made despite unbalanced salaries. It is also useful to compensate teams for losing free agents, as they can do a sign and trade of that free agent to acquire a trade exception that can be used later. Note this exception is for single player trades only, though additional cash and draft picks can be part of the trade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Salary_Cap

Nalod wrote:We did rid ourselves of Felton too!!!!!

If Phil can get a number one pick for Eisley and Duhan it would be epic!!!

Phil is so good, he can trade retired players!

LOL
Good one

SupremeCommander wrote:

RonRon wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Can someone explain how this actually works, is it an extra 3.6 mill you have to spend on a FA. In other words, can you take the MLE and combine it with the trade exception which would totally about 7 mill, and use it on a FA?

I have always been a little confuse at how thos exceptions work

No, you get 1 year to use it from the date of the trade, it can never be combined with anything, use it or lose it
You can sign use it to sign a free agent or in trades (but can not be combined to take more salary, only one contract within the exemption obtained

well apparently I was confused too - I thought you could sign a guy outright

Ok, so it can be used for straight up FA signings, right? So now we're looking at the mini-MLE ($3.2mm?) AND this trade exception of $3.6mm to sign FAs? Is that the deal? If so, that's awesome. Much easier to bring in 2 impact players now -- re-sign Cole Aldrich and get another player as well, be it another PG, more of a name-brand PF, etc.. A couple of combinations immediately come to mind:

Cole Aldrich/Jerryd Bayless

Cole Aldrich/Jordan Hill (then cut Pablo and find a 3rd PG on the cheap somewhere -- Seth Curry, Kalin Lucas, etc.). Hill may command more than either amount we have available to spend though..

Jordan Hill/Jerryd Bayless

If we could get Aldrich to take his minimum for one more year and found a way to get Aldrich, Hill AND Bayless on board, I'd be ecstatic!

CrushAlot wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Can someone explain how this actually works, is it an extra 3.6 mill you have to spend on a FA. In other words, can you take the MLE and combine it with the trade exception which would totally about 7 mill, and use it on a FA?

I have always been a little confuse at how thos exceptions work

I checked Coon's site and found it a bit confusing. This is from Wiki:

Traded Player Exception[edit]

If a team trades away a player with a higher salary than the player they acquire in return (the deal hereafter referred to as "Trade #1"), they receive a Traded Player Exception, also known as a "Trade Exception". Teams with a trade exception have up to a year in which they can acquire more salary in other trades (Trade #2, #3, etc.) than they send away, as long as the gulf in salaries for Trade #2, #3, etc. are less than or equal to the difference in salary for Trade #1. This exception is particularly useful when teams trade draft picks directly for a player; since draft picks have no salary value, often the only way to get salaries to match is to use a trade exception, which allows trades to be made despite unbalanced salaries. It is also useful to compensate teams for losing free agents, as they can do a sign and trade of that free agent to acquire a trade exception that can be used later. Note this exception is for single player trades only, though additional cash and draft picks can be part of the trade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Salary_Cap

thanks guys

EnySpree wrote:It's the trade that keeps on giving

ha! Not a bad haul really- Calderon, Dalambert, Ellington, a first rounder from last year in Larkin, plus 2 2nd rounders (which we used to select two promising players), a trade exemption and we got rid of Felton and Tyson (both of who I grew to despise). Hated the trade at first, but we did get a a lot out of it!

Finestrg wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

RonRon wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Can someone explain how this actually works, is it an extra 3.6 mill you have to spend on a FA. In other words, can you take the MLE and combine it with the trade exception which would totally about 7 mill, and use it on a FA?

I have always been a little confuse at how thos exceptions work

No, you get 1 year to use it from the date of the trade, it can never be combined with anything, use it or lose it
You can sign use it to sign a free agent or in trades (but can not be combined to take more salary, only one contract within the exemption obtained

well apparently I was confused too - I thought you could sign a guy outright

Ok, so it can be used for straight up FA signings, right? So now we're looking at the mini-MLE ($3.2mm?) AND this trade exception of $3.6mm to sign FAs? Is that the deal? If so, that's awesome. Much easier to bring in 2 impact players now -- re-sign Cole Aldrich and get another player as well, be it another PG, more of a name-brand PF, etc.. A couple of combinations immediately come to mind:

Cole Aldrich/Jerryd Bayless

Cole Aldrich/Jordan Hill (then cut Pablo and find a 3rd PG on the cheap somewhere -- Seth Curry, Kalin Lucas, etc.). Hill may command more than either amount we have available to spend though..

Jordan Hill/Jerryd Bayless

If we could get Aldrich to take his minimum for one more year and found a way to get Aldrich, Hill AND Bayless on board, I'd be ecstatic!

that was my understanding from the start but now I'm uncertain if that's right.