But could we potentially bring back Bullock and Rose and front load their contracts. For example instead of signing Rose for like 12M for 2 years could you pay him 18m in the first year and 6M in the second year. Bullock would probably need a 3 year deal. It would be great to bring them back and then you still keep extra cap space for the next year too

KnicksFever wrote:I’m not we’ll versed in nba contract rules. Seems pretty confusing sometimes.

But could we potentially bring back Bullock and Rose and front load their contracts. For example instead of signing Rose for like 12M for 2 years could you pay him 18m in the first year and 6M in the second year. Bullock would probably need a 3 year deal. It would be great to bring them back and then you still keep extra cap space for the next year too

Five percent for Rose and Bullock. That's how far you can drop the contract in successive years, depending on where the contract starts salary wise.

The salary system has mechanisms to avoid the luxury tax, however they've done everything possible to stop teams from avoiding the repeater tax. That's how heavy frontloading would be used, to allow teams to avoid the repeater tax. They want an escape hatch for cash poor teams but not provide a parachute for cash rich teams.

Nalod wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

KnicksFever wrote:I’m not we’ll versed in nba contract rules. Seems pretty confusing sometimes.

But could we potentially bring back Bullock and Rose and front load their contracts. For example instead of signing Rose for like 12M for 2 years could you pay him 18m in the first year and 6M in the second year. Bullock would probably need a 3 year deal. It would be great to bring them back and then you still keep extra cap space for the next year too

Five percent for Rose and Bullock. That's how far you can drop the contract in successive years, depending on where the contract starts salary wise.

The salary system has mechanisms to avoid the luxury tax, however they've done everything possible to stop teams from avoiding the repeater tax. That's how heavy frontloading would be used, to allow teams to avoid the repeater tax. They want an escape hatch for cash poor teams but not provide a parachute for cash rich teams.

I seem to recall this is how we lost Lin and Fields. They got from loaded. Not to say it was avoidable but Lin got a heavy front end deal. Perhaps in hindsight it was for for the best for all involved.

Lin and Asik were backloaded in their third year from their Rocket's contracts.

Morey took advantage in a wrinkle in the Gilbert Arenas provision. Asik was a 2nd rounder and Lin was an UDFA. Houston was limited in what they could offer the first two years but had NO CAP on what they could offer in Year 3. So, in effect, the NBPA wanted a mechanism to offer some type of market correction for breakout UDFA/2nd rounders, in part because they are technically not given any guaranteed money at all except for their team's discretion. The goal of a market correction was to bring the salary scale in line with what a mid first round pick would make. Almost all of the provisions protecting draftees and young players were aimed at first round picks at the time.

The Arenas provision is one of the reasons why I wanted the Knicks to sign De'Anthony Melton to an offer sheet last deep preseason. He was a 2nd rounder who was vastly outperforming his contract at the time.

In the current structure, non Bird and Early Birds are considered the same category. Five percent scale down in successive years. Full Birds can get up to 8 percent.

The issue for Lin and the Knicks was his contract would cause an acceleration on the luxury tax. Which was pretty stupid considering Lin's marketing potential would have covered that shortfall close to 10 fold. Esp in New York. Jeremy Lin, even as a replacement level player, was easily worth half a billion in marketing value to the Knicks in New York.

If teams were allowed to front load deals unchecked, players would collude even more to form super teams. Would you really like to see a total ****bag like Kyrie Irving pretend like he's Prop Joe from The Wire?

KnicksFever wrote:I’m not we’ll versed in nba contract rules. Seems pretty confusing sometimes.

But could we potentially bring back Bullock and Rose and front load their contracts. For example instead of signing Rose for like 12M for 2 years could you pay him 18m in the first year and 6M in the second year. Bullock would probably need a 3 year deal. It would be great to bring them back and then you still keep extra cap space for the next year too

You don’t even need to do that. I doubt either one of them gets more than a one year deal on the open market. Just overpay them on a one year deal

NardDogNation wrote:Would the Pelicans be willing to give us the 10th pick if we took back Eric Bledsoe AND Steven Adams? They've already got a bevy of youth and don't necessarily need more. What they are beginning to lack is cap space/flexibility, which we can provide by taking back those bad contracts. They should allow them to be able to keep both Lonzk Ball and Josh Hart, without worrying about luxury tax implications down the road.

I like Steven Adams- seems like a good ****- and would excel under Thibs. I don't like Eric Bledsoe but he'd still be an upgrade on Elfrid Payton and be useful during the regular season. Thibs has had a track record of turning around the careers of (attack-heavy) PGs (Nate Robinson, Jannero Pargo, DJ Augustin, etc); maybe he can do the same for Bledsoe. If not, we already have Immanuel Quickley and Luca Valdoza in the fold and will likely be bringing back Derrick Rose. That's plenty of PG depth to cycle off of Bledsoe if he flames out come playoff time.

Could be something there. Adams/Ball as a trade package alone is intriguing.

NardDogNation wrote:Would the Pelicans be willing to give us the 10th pick if we took back Eric Bledsoe AND Steven Adams? They've already got a bevy of youth and don't necessarily need more. What they are beginning to lack is cap space/flexibility, which we can provide by taking back those bad contracts. They should allow them to be able to keep both Lonzk Ball and Josh Hart, without worrying about luxury tax implications down the road.

I like Steven Adams- seems like a good ****- and would excel under Thibs. I don't like Eric Bledsoe but he'd still be an upgrade on Elfrid Payton and be useful during the regular season. Thibs has had a track record of turning around the careers of (attack-heavy) PGs (Nate Robinson, Jannero Pargo, DJ Augustin, etc); maybe he can do the same for Bledsoe. If not, we already have Immanuel Quickley and Luca Valdoza in the fold and will likely be bringing back Derrick Rose. That's plenty of PG depth to cycle off of Bledsoe if he flames out come playoff time.

NO will give a kings ransom for RJ Barrett because it would keep Zion Williamson there and stop the chirping he's doing about demanding out. If the Pelicans deal with the Knicks and RJB doesn't come back in some return, Zion would likely get triggered. He's a diva.

On the flip side, there is a legitimate pathway where Zion Williamson will eventually want to come to the Knicks to join RJB down the road.

TripleThreat wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:Would the Pelicans be willing to give us the 10th pick if we took back Eric Bledsoe AND Steven Adams? They've already got a bevy of youth and don't necessarily need more. What they are beginning to lack is cap space/flexibility, which we can provide by taking back those bad contracts. They should allow them to be able to keep both Lonzk Ball and Josh Hart, without worrying about luxury tax implications down the road.

I like Steven Adams- seems like a good ****- and would excel under Thibs. I don't like Eric Bledsoe but he'd still be an upgrade on Elfrid Payton and be useful during the regular season. Thibs has had a track record of turning around the careers of (attack-heavy) PGs (Nate Robinson, Jannero Pargo, DJ Augustin, etc); maybe he can do the same for Bledsoe. If not, we already have Immanuel Quickley and Luca Valdoza in the fold and will likely be bringing back Derrick Rose. That's plenty of PG depth to cycle off of Bledsoe if he flames out come playoff time.

NO will give a kings ransom for RJ Barrett because it would keep Zion Williamson there and stop the chirping he's doing about demanding out. If the Pelicans deal with the Knicks and RJB doesn't come back in some return, Zion would likely get triggered. He's a diva.

On the flip side, there is a legitimate pathway where Zion Williamson will eventually want to come to the Knicks to join RJB down the road.

Was hoping for this. Any chance of it happening before Zion's rookie contract expires? What would we need to attach to Randle to facilitate it, if possible?

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:Would the Pelicans be willing to give us the 10th pick if we took back Eric Bledsoe AND Steven Adams? They've already got a bevy of youth and don't necessarily need more. What they are beginning to lack is cap space/flexibility, which we can provide by taking back those bad contracts. They should allow them to be able to keep both Lonzk Ball and Josh Hart, without worrying about luxury tax implications down the road.

I like Steven Adams- seems like a good ****- and would excel under Thibs. I don't like Eric Bledsoe but he'd still be an upgrade on Elfrid Payton and be useful during the regular season. Thibs has had a track record of turning around the careers of (attack-heavy) PGs (Nate Robinson, Jannero Pargo, DJ Augustin, etc); maybe he can do the same for Bledsoe. If not, we already have Immanuel Quickley and Luca Valdoza in the fold and will likely be bringing back Derrick Rose. That's plenty of PG depth to cycle off of Bledsoe if he flames out come playoff time.

Could be something there. Adams/Ball as a trade package alone is intriguing.

If rumors are true, NO is willing to let Lonzo go. No need to take on Adams and his salary. Even if the Knicks tried to go that route, Chicago is waiting their to give Lonzo a big offer. Also, pick 10 isn't enough for me to take on Bledsoe and Adams. The talent drop after 10 just isn't big enough for me to gunk up the salary cap. I'll also add that I'm not really big on giving Lonzo a big deal.

I've heard those rumors. If they are true, are they letting Lonzo go for talent reaaons or financial? While his shortcomings are obvious, he is still a good ball player, entering his prime. In that situation, you should always try to protect the asset for a later play at the least (like what the Kings should've done with Bogdanovic). He also seems tight with the Pelicans' youth, especially Josh Hart and Zion. I don't think you risk rocking the boat with the players you still have on roster, if you have the ability to keep Lonzo and everyone else happy.

As for us, Bledsoe and Adams are only under contract for 2 more seasons at $35-$36M per. They are overpaid but useful, especially with the way Thibs coaches. Why not take the gamble when there aren't very many gamechangers projected to be available these two upcoming offseasons? And even if they were, we'd have a bunch of cap space to work with only Julius Randle being costly. James Boughknight and Jalen Johnson don't excite you at 10?

NardDogNation wrote:Was hoping for this. Any chance of it happening before Zion's rookie contract expires? What would we need to attach to Randle to facilitate it, if possible?

Gayle Benson will drive tampering charges against any team that Zion says he wants to be traded to during his rookie contract. And she would be right. Everyone tampers but the NBA in general has simply pretended not to look when it's star players/impact players and that talk generates a lot of buzz in the national press.

NO has been dicked around a lot by the league. Chris Paul forced his way out, but the league interfered over and over again. With new ownership, they were gifted AD, who forced his way out and LBJ openly tampered in an ugly way. They were gifted Zion to make up for AD and now he wants out before his rookie deal is over.

As a woman, she'll just say that a boys club of billionaire bigots are ****ing over a woman. She'll say the league ****ed over Gail Miller and forced her out too. Good luck surviving that.

It could be fairly argued that the rest of the owners are intentionally driving the Pelicans against a wall trying to get Benson to sell while relocating the team to a more profitable zone. The odds of her moving the team are not very good. If the Pelicans go for a sizeable price, of course they will be gifted another superstar in the draft and they'll be moved and the new owner will take the PR hit for moving the team. Every time an NBA franchise sells for a record price, the valuation of ALL NBA franchises upticks.

And if NBA owners love anything, it's more money.

It could happen but the Knicks don't have the assets for it. Maybe if they hit bonkers in this draft like the Pistons did last year that narrative will change.

I don't think a package around Randle will get it done.

It could happen but it's very likely to be a very ugly saga and the Knicks simply need to draft out of this world in this draft to have a chance.

NardDogNation wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:Would the Pelicans be willing to give us the 10th pick if we took back Eric Bledsoe AND Steven Adams? They've already got a bevy of youth and don't necessarily need more. What they are beginning to lack is cap space/flexibility, which we can provide by taking back those bad contracts. They should allow them to be able to keep both Lonzk Ball and Josh Hart, without worrying about luxury tax implications down the road.

I like Steven Adams- seems like a good ****- and would excel under Thibs. I don't like Eric Bledsoe but he'd still be an upgrade on Elfrid Payton and be useful during the regular season. Thibs has had a track record of turning around the careers of (attack-heavy) PGs (Nate Robinson, Jannero Pargo, DJ Augustin, etc); maybe he can do the same for Bledsoe. If not, we already have Immanuel Quickley and Luca Valdoza in the fold and will likely be bringing back Derrick Rose. That's plenty of PG depth to cycle off of Bledsoe if he flames out come playoff time.

Could be something there. Adams/Ball as a trade package alone is intriguing.

If rumors are true, NO is willing to let Lonzo go. No need to take on Adams and his salary. Even if the Knicks tried to go that route, Chicago is waiting their to give Lonzo a big offer. Also, pick 10 isn't enough for me to take on Bledsoe and Adams. The talent drop after 10 just isn't big enough for me to gunk up the salary cap. I'll also add that I'm not really big on giving Lonzo a big deal.

I've heard those rumors. If they are true, are they letting Lonzo go for talent reaaons or financial? While his shortcomings are obvious, he is still a good ball player, entering his prime. In that situation, you should always try to protect the asset for a later play at the least (like what the Kings should've done with Bogdanovic). He also seems tight with the Pelicans' youth, especially Josh Hart and Zion. I don't think you risk rocking the boat with the players you still have on roster, if you have the ability to keep Lonzo and everyone else happy.

As for us, Bledsoe and Adams are only under contract for 2 more seasons at $35-$36M per. They are overpaid but useful, especially with the way Thibs coaches. Why not take the gamble when there aren't very many gamechangers projected to be available these two upcoming offseasons? And even if they were, we'd have a bunch of cap space to work with only Julius Randle being costly. James Boughknight and Jalen Johnson don't excite you at 10?

BigDaddyG wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:Would the Pelicans be willing to give us the 10th pick if we took back Eric Bledsoe AND Steven Adams? They've already got a bevy of youth and don't necessarily need more. What they are beginning to lack is cap space/flexibility, which we can provide by taking back those bad contracts. They should allow them to be able to keep both Lonzk Ball and Josh Hart, without worrying about luxury tax implications down the road.

I like Steven Adams- seems like a good ****- and would excel under Thibs. I don't like Eric Bledsoe but he'd still be an upgrade on Elfrid Payton and be useful during the regular season. Thibs has had a track record of turning around the careers of (attack-heavy) PGs (Nate Robinson, Jannero Pargo, DJ Augustin, etc); maybe he can do the same for Bledsoe. If not, we already have Immanuel Quickley and Luca Valdoza in the fold and will likely be bringing back Derrick Rose. That's plenty of PG depth to cycle off of Bledsoe if he flames out come playoff time.

Could be something there. Adams/Ball as a trade package alone is intriguing.

If rumors are true, NO is willing to let Lonzo go. No need to take on Adams and his salary. Even if the Knicks tried to go that route, Chicago is waiting their to give Lonzo a big offer. Also, pick 10 isn't enough for me to take on Bledsoe and Adams. The talent drop after 10 just isn't big enough for me to gunk up the salary cap. I'll also add that I'm not really big on giving Lonzo a big deal.

I've heard those rumors. If they are true, are they letting Lonzo go for talent reaaons or financial? While his shortcomings are obvious, he is still a good ball player, entering his prime. In that situation, you should always try to protect the asset for a later play at the least (like what the Kings should've done with Bogdanovic). He also seems tight with the Pelicans' youth, especially Josh Hart and Zion. I don't think you risk rocking the boat with the players you still have on roster, if you have the ability to keep Lonzo and everyone else happy.

As for us, Bledsoe and Adams are only under contract for 2 more seasons at $35-$36M per. They are overpaid but useful, especially with the way Thibs coaches. Why not take the gamble when there aren't very many gamechangers projected to be available these two upcoming offseasons? And even if they were, we'd have a bunch of cap space to work with only Julius Randle being costly. James Boughknight and Jalen Johnson don't excite you at 10?

Jalen Johnson? Not really. His floor is scary low. Nobody talks about his on ball defense and his post defense. His recognition and defensive discipline also looked spotty. He's raw and I don't think anyone can give a definitive answer on his jumpshot based on the limited attempts he took ar Duke. I like Bouknight, but I think he goes before pick 10.

I hear you about Jalen Johnson. I have a bias for Duke players, so some of that might be at play in my evaluatio of him. Having guys like Johnny O'Bryant on staff makes me feel like those flaws can be corrected over time. Swingmen are at such a premium in the league that players with his skillset and physical profile feel like necessary gambles.

I agree about Boughknight but we'd be in striking distance to move up if he goes aheads of us. Some combination of 19, 21 and 32 could be used to sweeten the pot in that scenario.