yellowboy90 wrote:On another board a poster linked an article about the Lakers are thinking about extending Deng contract then using the stretch provision. It would be a cool little loop hole to sneak through if a team can pull that off.
This is actually pretty interesting from a thought discussion/resource management standpoint.
Deng is 32. Since the "extension" would add to his previous contract, signed before the advent of the "Over 38" rule, he's grandfathered in to the standards of the "Over 36 Rule" Meaning his max extension could only be 3 years.
The issue then becomes creating a contract that has no functional guaranteed money in it. That's the only way this works for the Lakers. It's functionally reducing his 36 million total cap hit across the two years into ELEVEN years. Which is roughly between 3-4 million a season. The problem is there's no reason for Deng to sign it, except to double dip, sign with Timberwolves on a vet minimum deal, and to basically circumvent the CBA and salary cap. An extension signed without any good faith to actually play out the extension is an open circumvention of the salary cap. The league would have no choice but to void the extension unless there was some guaranteed money in the extension. Incentive based contracts can only carry about 15 percent annually of not likely to be earned provisions ( which don't count against the cap, every other type of performance incentive does count against the cap)
Every team either in the tax zone or the repeater tax zone will demand the Lakers be punished under provisions in the CBA regarding salary cap manipulation/circumvention, which would essentially destroy any hope of LeBron James being a Laker.