Nate to Celtics Official / Danny's take (merged Nate threads)

[BudweiserCeltic]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

Yes.

That's incorrect.  Nate Robinson is on a one year deal, so if he gets traded his bird rights will be lost.

That's true, regardless I don't think anyone will be offering him more than $4 million + 120%.

[Cman]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

Yes.

That's incorrect.  Nate Robinson is on a one year deal, so if he gets traded his bird rights will be lost.

I don't know if that is right.  Here is Larry Coon (http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q25):

The basic idea is that a player must play for the same team for three seasons for his team to gain Bird rights (two seasons for Early Bird rights). It can be a single three-year contract, a series of three one-year contracts, or any combination that adds up to three seasons (two for Early Bird). However there are a number of complications:

•When a player is traded, his new team inherits his Bird rights. For example, if a player signs a three-year contract, plays two and a half seasons with that team, and is traded at the trade deadline in the third season, then his new team owns full Bird rights following the third season.
•The player must complete his contract immediately prior to becoming a free agent, which essentially means he can't have been waived. If he signs a series of contracts, then this only applies to the last contract. If a team signs a player and waives him after one game, signs and waives him after one game again the next year, and in the third year signs him and keeps him the entire season, then they will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•The clock resets when the player changes teams by signing as a free agent. An interesting case occurred in the 2008-09 season with Antonio McDyess, who had played exclusively for the Pistons since the 2004-05 season. In 2008-09 the Pistons traded him to the Nuggets, the Nuggets waived him, and he re-signed with the Pistons. Even though he only signed contracts with the Pistons and he completed his last contract without being waived, his Bird clock reset when he re-signed with the Pistons because he changed teams as a free agent.
•The first season of the three-year tenure doesn't have to be a full season. If a player is waived and signs with another team in year one, then plays with his new team for two additional seasons, his new team will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•If a player is waived and is claimed by another team before he clears waivers, then it is treated as a trade and does not affect his Bird clock.
•10-Day contracts (see question number 67) don't count toward Bird rights.
•If a team renounces a player (see question number 33), they can't use the Bird exception to re-sign him for one year.

So the Knicks definitely had Bird rights to Nate when they resigned him to the one year deal.

[Tai]

Looks like we are competing against the hated rivals for Nate's services....
 via Twitter:

WojYahooNBA  
Celtics and Lakers are discussing deals for Nate Robinson with the Knicks, sources tell @SpearsNBAYahoo.

That's just the Knicks putting stuff out there to try to force the C's into giving them a first round pick

Do not believe it

I do believe people were talking about the Lakers' woes. I don't know who the Lakers can provide, but you're crazy if you don't think the Lakers want Nate.

[Gainesville Celtic]

I am hard pressed to find any combination of House, Allen, Scalabrine and Giddens that works on the trade checker. Any idea what we might be giving up for Nate?

Trade checker is kinda crappy when BYC are involved, but here's one that seems to work:
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yk94fum

Yeah, the ESPN Trade Checker seems to perform differently from the RealGM Trade Machine.

I found another option as well, if the Knicks don't want to trade Landry: http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yjp7asb.

Either way, both trade has the amazing trait of making both teams worse off based on projected record. Fun

I'm sure they can figure it out but there's no way the deal could be Eddie for Nate straght up.

From the NYT article linked on the front page of CB:

Robinson made $2,020,179 last season, and re-signed for $4 million, triggering BYC. This means his outgoing salary for trade purposes is $2,020,179. Since teams can only acquire as much as 125 percent (plus $100,000) of their outgoing salary, the Knicks can accept no more than $2,625,223 in exchange for Robinson.

Eddie makes $2,900,000 and we would have to send out at least $3.120 M to take back Robinson's $4M contract...

Unless we can dump JR Giddens on a team like Memphis or create a 3-way I will be surprised if we make a move).

And i"m not crazy about giving up Shelden Williams -- who played well early in the season and who could be useful in a playoff series. And I certainly wouldn't give up a #1 pick in a House-Robinson deal unless we were getting something better back.

All that said I thought Robinson sounded like an engaging guy on the Rookie Game broadcast... he might be a positive shot in the arm despite his rep as a pain.

[Roy Hobbs]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

Yes.

That's incorrect.  Nate Robinson is on a one year deal, so if he gets traded his bird rights will be lost.

I don't know if that is right.  Here is Larry Coon (http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q25):

The basic idea is that a player must play for the same team for three seasons for his team to gain Bird rights (two seasons for Early Bird rights). It can be a single three-year contract, a series of three one-year contracts, or any combination that adds up to three seasons (two for Early Bird). However there are a number of complications:

•When a player is traded, his new team inherits his Bird rights. For example, if a player signs a three-year contract, plays two and a half seasons with that team, and is traded at the trade deadline in the third season, then his new team owns full Bird rights following the third season.
•The player must complete his contract immediately prior to becoming a free agent, which essentially means he can't have been waived. If he signs a series of contracts, then this only applies to the last contract. If a team signs a player and waives him after one game, signs and waives him after one game again the next year, and in the third year signs him and keeps him the entire season, then they will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•The clock resets when the player changes teams by signing as a free agent. An interesting case occurred in the 2008-09 season with Antonio McDyess, who had played exclusively for the Pistons since the 2004-05 season. In 2008-09 the Pistons traded him to the Nuggets, the Nuggets waived him, and he re-signed with the Pistons. Even though he only signed contracts with the Pistons and he completed his last contract without being waived, his Bird clock reset when he re-signed with the Pistons because he changed teams as a free agent.
•The first season of the three-year tenure doesn't have to be a full season. If a player is waived and signs with another team in year one, then plays with his new team for two additional seasons, his new team will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•If a player is waived and is claimed by another team before he clears waivers, then it is treated as a trade and does not affect his Bird clock.
•10-Day contracts (see question number 67) don't count toward Bird rights.
•If a team renounces a player (see question number 33), they can't use the Bird exception to re-sign him for one year.

Later, Coon clarifies:

In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances:

. . . Without the player's consent when the player is playing under a one-year contract (excluding any option year) and will have Larry Bird or Early Bird rights at the end of the season. This includes first round draft picks following their fourth (option) season, who accept their team's qualifying offer for their fifth season. When the player consents to such a trade, the team loses its Larry Bird/Early Bird rights, and the player is considered a Non-Bird free agent. Note: when there is an option year involved, they can get around this regulation by invoking the option prior to the trade.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q87

[rondohondo]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

Yes.

That's incorrect.  Nate Robinson is on a one year deal, so if he gets traded his bird rights will be lost.

I don't know if that is right.  Here is Larry Coon (http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q25):

The basic idea is that a player must play for the same team for three seasons for his team to gain Bird rights (two seasons for Early Bird rights). It can be a single three-year contract, a series of three one-year contracts, or any combination that adds up to three seasons (two for Early Bird). However there are a number of complications:

•When a player is traded, his new team inherits his Bird rights. For example, if a player signs a three-year contract, plays two and a half seasons with that team, and is traded at the trade deadline in the third season, then his new team owns full Bird rights following the third season.
•The player must complete his contract immediately prior to becoming a free agent, which essentially means he can't have been waived. If he signs a series of contracts, then this only applies to the last contract. If a team signs a player and waives him after one game, signs and waives him after one game again the next year, and in the third year signs him and keeps him the entire season, then they will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•The clock resets when the player changes teams by signing as a free agent. An interesting case occurred in the 2008-09 season with Antonio McDyess, who had played exclusively for the Pistons since the 2004-05 season. In 2008-09 the Pistons traded him to the Nuggets, the Nuggets waived him, and he re-signed with the Pistons. Even though he only signed contracts with the Pistons and he completed his last contract without being waived, his Bird clock reset when he re-signed with the Pistons because he changed teams as a free agent.
•The first season of the three-year tenure doesn't have to be a full season. If a player is waived and signs with another team in year one, then plays with his new team for two additional seasons, his new team will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•If a player is waived and is claimed by another team before he clears waivers, then it is treated as a trade and does not affect his Bird clock.
•10-Day contracts (see question number 67) don't count toward Bird rights.
•If a team renounces a player (see question number 33), they can't use the Bird exception to re-sign him for one year.

So the Knicks definitely had Bird rights to Nate when they resigned him to the one year deal.

I am pretty sure he loses his rights,

[lon3lytoaster]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

I am pretty sure he loses his bird right in any trade because he was only on a 1 year deal ,  but he would likely only command an MLE type deal next summer, I don't see any team giving him more than the MLE.

You don't lose bird rights in a trade, but the player has to be signed to a three year deal to be eligible for bird rights. Nate was obviously only signed to one.

[rondohondo]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

I am pretty sure he loses his bird right in any trade because he was only on a 1 year deal ,  but he would likely only command an MLE type deal next summer, I don't see any team giving him more than the MLE.

You don't lose bird rights in a trade, but the player has to be signed to a three year deal to be eligible for bird rights. Nate was obviously only signed to one.

That's exactly what I said.....

[Gainesville Celtic]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

Yes.

That's incorrect.  Nate Robinson is on a one year deal, so if he gets traded his bird rights will be lost.

I don't know if that is right.  Here is Larry Coon (http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q25):

The basic idea is that a player must play for the same team for three seasons for his team to gain Bird rights (two seasons for Early Bird rights). It can be a single three-year contract, a series of three one-year contracts, or any combination that adds up to three seasons (two for Early Bird). However there are a number of complications:

•When a player is traded, his new team inherits his Bird rights. For example, if a player signs a three-year contract, plays two and a half seasons with that team, and is traded at the trade deadline in the third season, then his new team owns full Bird rights following the third season.
•The player must complete his contract immediately prior to becoming a free agent, which essentially means he can't have been waived. If he signs a series of contracts, then this only applies to the last contract. If a team signs a player and waives him after one game, signs and waives him after one game again the next year, and in the third year signs him and keeps him the entire season, then they will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•The clock resets when the player changes teams by signing as a free agent. An interesting case occurred in the 2008-09 season with Antonio McDyess, who had played exclusively for the Pistons since the 2004-05 season. In 2008-09 the Pistons traded him to the Nuggets, the Nuggets waived him, and he re-signed with the Pistons. Even though he only signed contracts with the Pistons and he completed his last contract without being waived, his Bird clock reset when he re-signed with the Pistons because he changed teams as a free agent.
•The first season of the three-year tenure doesn't have to be a full season. If a player is waived and signs with another team in year one, then plays with his new team for two additional seasons, his new team will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•If a player is waived and is claimed by another team before he clears waivers, then it is treated as a trade and does not affect his Bird clock.
•10-Day contracts (see question number 67) don't count toward Bird rights.
•If a team renounces a player (see question number 33), they can't use the Bird exception to re-sign him for one year.

So the Knicks definitely had Bird rights to Nate when they resigned him to the one year deal.

While NY had his Bird Rights when they resigned him because it's a 1-year deal, if they trade him (as opposed to keeping him then using his Bird Rights to resign him) the team receiving him loses his Bird Rights. This is an incentive, i suppose, for teams to sign players to 2-year deals with the 2nd year a team option...

This is why a player in this situation ---  1 year deal with Bird Rights that would be lost in the process of being traded --- has the right to veto a trade.

It's a quirk in the CBA, was my understanding, but i'm 98% sure BOS woudln't have Robinson's Bird Rights if we traded for him.

[lon3lytoaster]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

I am pretty sure he loses his bird right in any trade because he was only on a 1 year deal ,  but he would likely only command an MLE type deal next summer, I don't see any team giving him more than the MLE.

You don't lose bird rights in a trade, but the player has to be signed to a three year deal to be eligible for bird rights. Nate was obviously only signed to one.

That's exactly what I said.....

Quoted the wrong post, my bad.

[Gainesville Celtic]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

I am pretty sure he loses his bird right in any trade because he was only on a 1 year deal ,  but he would likely only command an MLE type deal next summer, I don't see any team giving him more than the MLE.

You don't lose bird rights in a trade, but the player has to be signed to a three year deal to be eligible for bird rights. Nate was obviously only signed to one.

That's exactly what I said.....

NY had his bird rights because he finished his rookie contract w/o leaving the team as a FA.

Too lazy to go look it up, but IIRC Robinson played the first 4 years of a possible 5 on his rookie scale contract (2 quaranteed, next 2 at the team's option), then since NRob and NY couldn't agree on a long term deal (since NY wanted to not commit long term salaries), rather than play his 5th under the qualifying offer, he signed a 1-year $4M contract.

That deal was more than a 20% raise over his previous season, which NY could only pay b/c they had his Bird Rights ---- making more than 20% more than the previous season also makes him a BYC guy....

whew.

[Roy Hobbs]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

I am pretty sure he loses his bird right in any trade because he was only on a 1 year deal ,  but he would likely only command an MLE type deal next summer, I don't see any team giving him more than the MLE.

You don't lose bird rights in a trade, but the player has to be signed to a three year deal to be eligible for bird rights. Nate was obviously only signed to one.

Bird rights don't require a three year deal.  If a team signs a player to a 3 year contract, they'll have Bird rights at the end of the deal.  However, they'd also have Bird rights after signing a player to three separate one year deals, so long as the player didn't depart for another team via free agency or waiver.

However, in the case of a player playing on a one-year deal, where the player's team would have Bird rights at the end of that deal (either for the first time, or not), those Bird rights are extinguished upon a trade.

Long story short:  we wouldn't have Nate's Bird rights, but could give him a 20% raise over his current salary.

[lon3lytoaster]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

I am pretty sure he loses his bird right in any trade because he was only on a 1 year deal ,  but he would likely only command an MLE type deal next summer, I don't see any team giving him more than the MLE.

You don't lose bird rights in a trade, but the player has to be signed to a three year deal to be eligible for bird rights. Nate was obviously only signed to one.

Bird rights don't require a three year deal.  If a team signs a player to a 3 year contract, they'll have Bird rights at the end of the deal.  However, they'd also have Bird rights after signing a player to three separate one year deals, so long as the player didn't depart for another team via free agency or waiver.

However, in the case of a player playing on a one-year deal, where the player's team would have Bird rights at the end of that deal (either for the first time, or not), those Bird rights are extinguished upon a trade.

Long story short:  we wouldn't have Nate's Bird rights, but could give him a 20% raise over his current salary.

I see, I see. It's nice to have a walking NBA encyclopedia around here, Roy.

[Cman]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

Yes.

That's incorrect.  Nate Robinson is on a one year deal, so if he gets traded his bird rights will be lost.

I don't know if that is right.  Here is Larry Coon (http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q25):

The basic idea is that a player must play for the same team for three seasons for his team to gain Bird rights (two seasons for Early Bird rights). It can be a single three-year contract, a series of three one-year contracts, or any combination that adds up to three seasons (two for Early Bird). However there are a number of complications:

•When a player is traded, his new team inherits his Bird rights. For example, if a player signs a three-year contract, plays two and a half seasons with that team, and is traded at the trade deadline in the third season, then his new team owns full Bird rights following the third season.
•The player must complete his contract immediately prior to becoming a free agent, which essentially means he can't have been waived. If he signs a series of contracts, then this only applies to the last contract. If a team signs a player and waives him after one game, signs and waives him after one game again the next year, and in the third year signs him and keeps him the entire season, then they will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•The clock resets when the player changes teams by signing as a free agent. An interesting case occurred in the 2008-09 season with Antonio McDyess, who had played exclusively for the Pistons since the 2004-05 season. In 2008-09 the Pistons traded him to the Nuggets, the Nuggets waived him, and he re-signed with the Pistons. Even though he only signed contracts with the Pistons and he completed his last contract without being waived, his Bird clock reset when he re-signed with the Pistons because he changed teams as a free agent.
•The first season of the three-year tenure doesn't have to be a full season. If a player is waived and signs with another team in year one, then plays with his new team for two additional seasons, his new team will have full Bird rights following the third season.
•If a player is waived and is claimed by another team before he clears waivers, then it is treated as a trade and does not affect his Bird clock.
•10-Day contracts (see question number 67) don't count toward Bird rights.
•If a team renounces a player (see question number 33), they can't use the Bird exception to re-sign him for one year.

Later, Coon clarifies:

In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances:

. . . Without the player's consent when the player is playing under a one-year contract (excluding any option year) and will have Larry Bird or Early Bird rights at the end of the season. This includes first round draft picks following their fourth (option) season, who accept their team's qualifying offer for their fifth season. When the player consents to such a trade, the team loses its Larry Bird/Early Bird rights, and the player is considered a Non-Bird free agent. Note: when there is an option year involved, they can get around this regulation by invoking the option prior to the trade.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q87

TP, thanks for the clarification Roy.

[Cman]

Does any of the CBA buffs out there know whether we will have Bird rights on Nate, if he gets traded to the Cs?

I am pretty sure he loses his bird right in any trade because he was only on a 1 year deal ,  but he would likely only command an MLE type deal next summer, I don't see any team giving him more than the MLE.

You don't lose bird rights in a trade, but the player has to be signed to a three year deal to be eligible for bird rights. Nate was obviously only signed to one.

Bird rights don't require a three year deal.  If a team signs a player to a 3 year contract, they'll have Bird rights at the end of the deal.  However, they'd also have Bird rights after signing a player to three separate one year deals, so long as the player didn't depart for another team via free agency or waiver.

However, in the case of a player playing on a one-year deal, where the player's team would have Bird rights at the end of that deal (either for the first time, or not), those Bird rights are extinguished upon a trade.

Long story short:  we wouldn't have Nate's Bird rights, but could give him a 20% raise over his current salary.

Which any other team with the MLE could also give him...
Given this, I believe it is too risky to use a 1st round pick, unless it is heavily, heavily protected.