I'm still waiting for the day a crap player with "bird" rights gets a one year, max deal to be used as an asset come the trade deadline... 
"Base Year Compensation" makes it hard to do that, if it's a scrub you're giving a big raise.
If it's a scrub who is already coming off of a huge salary, then it's not as much of a problem. You already saw deals like this happening with last year's Jason Kidd deal, when I think Keith Van Horn was given a nice chunk of change for nothing.
Roy, let's say the C's wanted to do this with Scal after his contract expires in 2010... How much could they give him for a single year?
We can give Scal any raise we want, but to stay within BYC restrictions in the first year, we could only sign him to a 20% raise (i.e., a salary of $4,096,552). Any larger raise, and it makes him difficult to trade.
Rookies are subject to the same rules, essentially. If they get more than a 20% bump, they're very difficult to trade in their first year, when they are subject to the BYC rules.
You can find more info here:
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q73 The gist of it is that it's very difficult to make salaries work when dealing with BYC, especially in terms of players with large salaries (whereas a guy with a smaller BYC contract, like Tony Allen, could be traded more easily).
Topic: Raef more valuable than Amare? (Read 5914 times)