How the hell were the Nets able to sign and trade Keith Bogans as a part of the Boston deal when their payroll is above the apron and they'll be increasing their payroll?
You can sign and trade your own player if you have bird rights, just can't receive a player from another team in a sign and trade, AFAIK.
NardDogNation wrote:Solace wrote:You can sign and trade your own player if you have bird rights, just can't receive a player from another team in a sign and trade, AFAIK.
This CBA is stupid.
Understatement of the year.
I told you guys the Owners were full of crap and that they continually do new CBA's and each time they mess things up more and more. Literally each of the last 3 CBA's created more issues than they solved.
The cba made it difficult for over the threashold teams to aquire free agents...hence the restriction on receiving a sign and trade player. Don't know what the issue is here other then it works against the knicks at the current moment.
Andrew wrote:The cba made it difficult for over the threashold teams to aquire free agents...hence the restriction on receiving a sign and trade player. Don't know what the issue is here other then it works against the knicks at the current moment.
The Knicks made the choice to put the payroll like this. Maybe it was a gamble but even under Zeke we had cap problems. I don't remember what it was under Layden but I believe it was high then too. Maybe it's time for a different approach. But you gotta fill seats.
Andrew wrote:The cba made it difficult for over the threashold teams to aquire free agents...hence the restriction on receiving a sign and trade player. Don't know what the issue is here other then it works against the knicks at the current moment.
Because of the underlying fact that we'd be giving to then receive. It is very well possible to acquire a player via a sign and trade and not even increase the payroll in the process, so why should this be inhibited?
OasisBU wrote:Andrew wrote:The cba made it difficult for over the threashold teams to aquire free agents...hence the restriction on receiving a sign and trade player. Don't know what the issue is here other then it works against the knicks at the current moment.
The Knicks made the choice to put the payroll like this. Maybe it was a gamble but even under Zeke we had cap problems. I don't remember what it was under Layden but I believe it was high then too. Maybe it's time for a different approach. But you gotta fill seats.
Is it a choice? All real contenders are atop the league in spending and I don't think that is by coincidence.
Why are nets able to do all this? They "cheating"? They know the rules better? Trying to make the knicks look cheap and petty?
No!
They are willing and able to pay an 80 million dollar Tax!!!!!!!!
No loophole! They are going deep into where no other team was willing to go before!!!
Most teams have mandated to not pay the tax (including knicks) or at the very least stay as low on it as possible.
Is it stupid? Prok has at the very least tripled his investment and the teams valued has soared. If they can win a title they grab a market that has not one a championship in over 40 years. They grab a younger fan base that does not know of Ewing other than "Patrick Chewing retired player and coaching victim", the know Oak as "bad back Benson the car wash king" and John Starks as " Tulsa Crack Rock game 6 choke king"!
Lighting up the empire state building in the Nets "Black and white" might prove to be not so colorful!
