Cap experts help - Horford Bird Rights

[droopdog7]

I have a slightly unrelated question but I figured I would post in here instead of creating a new thread.  Let's say that the Bucks and Raptors somehow ends in 5 games and the Warriors win the Finals in less than 6.  Wouldn't this throw off revenue projections, leading to the salary cap falling below projections for next year?

I don't expect the season to end like this but it's certainly not impossible.

The short answer is yes, playoffs contribute to revenue and thus do have a direct link the cap.  That said, I wouldn't think that projections assume all series will be seven games and; any affect they have would not likely be huge.

[droopdog7]

Here is my general response to people trying to circumvent the salary cap.  Don't even try it.  Million dollars and smart people have spent a lot of time finding ways to close all the loopholes. 

As for your example, that one was probably the very first one they closed with the use of cap holds.

Eh, as long as there's new/evolving rules, there will be loopholes to exploit.

Just 2 years ago there was that loop hole that let Chris Paul be traded from LAC to Houston that has since been closed.  (For those that don't remember, Houston went out and acquired several small non-guaranteed contracts and used those to get to the salary requirements to trade for Paul, and because of that non-guaranteed salary can no longer be include for salary matching purposes).

And just this year, the Cavs helped Patrick McCaw get out of restricted free agency by signing him away from GS with a non-guaranteed contract and then waiving him 3 games later.  I'd bet that loop hole will be closed in the next CBA.  It seems like every CBA old loop holes are closed and new ones are found.


Also, might as well throw out a little history lesson as it applies to this whole convo.  So a lot of these rules came about because of what happened in the 1993 off season.  Chris Dudley (NJ to POR), Craig Ehlo (CLE to ATL), AC Green (LAL to PHX) all signed free agent contracts with new teams.  The new teams couldn't offer the same contracts that the old teams could though (since the old teams had Bird rights and could exceed the cap), so the new contracts were set up with an opt out after 1 year, after which they'd be signed to new, more lucrative contract.  If you're confused, here's how it worked:

New Jersey wanted to keep Dudley and offered him $20.7m/7yrs, with $1.56m in the first year.

Portland, could only afford to offer $11m/7yrs, with $790k in the first year.  Dudley took the Portland deal, then opted out after 1 year and re-signed for $24m/6yrs.

Then the next season, ORL tried to use this same tactic (one year opt out, then re-sign) to get Horace Grant from Chicago, offering Grant $22.3m/6yrs which was less per year than Chicago was offering. After this deal was signed, a judge ruled against it, and Grant had to take a 2 year opt out instead.  Then 2 years later when he opted out,  Grant was re-signed to a front loaded $50m/5yr which paid him $14.9m and $14.3m in the first 2 years.  And that's the story about how role player Horace Grant became the 2nd highest paid player in the league in '96 and the 3rd highest paid in '97, and why you now need 3 years with a team (or be traded) to have Bird rights.

Good points.  But, my second point stands.  The loophole that began this thread was probably closed on page 1, paragraph 1.