Using unlikely bonuses to get Hayward to the max

[saltlover]

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2016/11/players-with-incentive-bonuses-for-201617.html

Apparently Mirotic has a team wins bonus of 65 wins in his contract from Chicago according to this salty. Great idea. TP.

Thanks! TP back at you for the find!

Would the league consider just 55 wins unlikely though? May need to go higher.

I feel like the league would challenge 55 wins and they'd have a good case seeing as we won 53 w/out Hayward.

Do these bonuses count against the max? Hypothetically could you differ a guy a max contract + unlikely bonuses?

But their rules specifically say that the prior season defines what is unlikely or likely.  I admittedly picked 55 because it's a round(er) number than 54, but it should be unlikely.  It might be more likely than 60, but it's the NBA's rule.

Bonuses can never take a player beyond a maximum salary.  So you can't max and then give someone an unlikely bonus on top of it.

The CBA FAQ page lists ones of their examples as:

A team wins 25 games and adds the previous seasons MVP. If the MVP has a 30-win clause in his contract it will be classified as "unlikely". Once again you appear to be on the money.

Terrific find SL and a TP is headed your way.

I am a bit confused about the challenge process you mentioned.

Isn't this sort of max-manipulation exactly what the challenge process would be installed to avoid? Or am I missing something?

The challenge process exists to determine whether or not a bonus is likely.  Players want all bonuses to be unlikely, because that increases the cap pool.  The NBA wants them to be likely, for the opposite reason.  They have their specified rule of  "if it would have been met last year it's likely, otherwise no" for a reason -- to create certainty when negotiating contracts.  Challenges are mostly for a player who might have missed the previous season, for example.  If he has to average 10 points per game, and his last healthy season he averaged 20, there might be a challenge.  (There might not, also, depending on the nature of the injury).  It could be used for this, but I really think it would fall short.  There are just too many variables in projecting win totals.  IT might miss the beginning of the season -- does that get factored in, for example?

[JBcat]

Is there a limit to how much a bonus can be?  Just thinking of how much we can actually save off the cap to keep some players.  Enough for Kelly's cap hold for example?  Maybe 3 point percentage can be another category?  I'm sure he would get more open looks on this team.

Need idea.

Based on quick googling it seems like a max of 15% of the contract can be in bonuses..

Nice.  That's a good chunk of savings off the cap.

[saltlover]

Is there a limit to how much a bonus can be?  Just thinking of how much we can actually save off the cap to keep some players.  Enough for Kelly's cap hold for example?  Maybe 3 point percentage can be another category?  I'm sure he would get more open looks on this team.

Need idea.

Based on quick googling it seems like a max of 15% of the contract can be in bonuses..

Nice.  That's a good chunk of savings off the cap.

Yes, but there's a big difference in Hayward gambling that he'll reach that final 1% of his salary that I've proposed vs. 15%. In other words, I don't think it can realistically be used to do more than allow us to sign him after moving just Rozier and Smart.

[bdm860]

This is from the current CBA:

(2) No Player Contract may provide for any Unlikely Bonus for
the first Salary Cap Year covered by the Contract that, if included
in the player’s Salary for such Salary Cap Year, would result in the
Team’s Team Salary exceeding the Room under which it is signing
the Contract. For the sole purpose of determining whether a
Team has Room for a new Unlikely Bonus, the Team’s Room shall
be deemed reduced by all Unlikely Bonuses in Contracts approved
by the Commissioner that may be paid to all of the Team’s players
that entered into Player Contracts (including Renegotiations)
during that Salary Cap Year.

This sounds like your plan wouldn't work.

[saltlover]

This is from the current CBA:

(2) No Player Contract may provide for any Unlikely Bonus for
the first Salary Cap Year covered by the Contract that, if included
in the player’s Salary for such Salary Cap Year, would result in the
Team’s Team Salary exceeding the Room under which it is signing
the Contract. For the sole purpose of determining whether a
Team has Room for a new Unlikely Bonus, the Team’s Room shall
be deemed reduced by all Unlikely Bonuses in Contracts approved
by the Commissioner that may be paid to all of the Team’s players
that entered into Player Contracts (including Renegotiations)
during that Salary Cap Year.

This sounds like your plan wouldn't work.

Darn lawyers closing my loopholes.

[The Oracle]

The problem is that when you group those events together along with using Martingale system tactics, is it then unlikely that the bonus is achieved?  Each individual event may be unlikely but if he only has to hit 1 of them and the bonus is rolled forward it then becomes very likely he would get the bonus.  Pretty sure that as suggested that would not be allowed, really like the idea though of using an unlikely bonus.

It is debatable, and there is a reason I wanted to make it contingent upon one of multiple criteria, but as there are limited ways to properly calculate the total probability of any of these events occurring, I think it would pass muster.

If this sort of thing was allowable then teams would come up with 100 unlikely events to stick in every players contract, for the maximum allowable bonus, effectively increasing their cap space by as much as they possibly could.

[bellerephon]

I don't think the nature of the contract will influence Hayward's decision. The Celts will offer any contract he wants, it might be tricky, but DA can clear enough space for the max if he really wants to. I also seriously doubt that Hayward would choose his landing spot based on the amount of money we are talking about here. If money is the issue, then the Celts really don't have much chance, the Jazz can offer the biggest raises, even if he only wants a 3 plus 1 deal, and Miami has a more attractive tax environment. The only real issue is where Hayward wants to go, if he wants to come to Boston the two sides will get it done. I think the decision will be based on basketball issues not financial issues.