I think you are missing my point. You are right that they wouldn't be able to save money based on what their salary was before the trade. However, what I was saying was that if a team wanted Davis, and they had a player that they didn't want, because they didn't fit into the direction they were going, by doing a sign and trade for Davis, they would be saving money over paying Davis AND the other guy.
The Sacto example was if they sign and traded Davis and say, Tony and/or Scal for Nocioni, it would save them money over just signing Davis, because they would be essentially replacing Nocioni's salary slot with Davis and the filler, rather than putting Davis' salary on top of Nocioni's.
You're right, I did miss your point. I see what you're saying. For Sacto, they're freeing up the difference between Nocioni's salary and the extra salary we have to kick in, since the presumption is they want Davis anyway. I get you.
Exactly, and given the current economy of the NBA, some of the teams that would be interested in Davis could be very interested in using it as an opportunity to also clear some salary off the cap in to pay Davis with, rather than adding to their cap number. This would especially be the case if a rebuilding team is interested in Davis.
