ESPN and Coon's CBA breakdown state that a player can not be traded in a deal that aggregates his salary with another player IF he had been previously traded in the past 60 days. If that's the case, how were we able to include Wayne Ellington's salary with Jeremy Tyler's to acquire Acy? Ellington has clearly been with us for less than 60 days and his salary was aggregated with Jeremy Tyler's contract for the numbers to work. What's the deal?
ESPN tells me it's not possible but is there someway we could field Larkin, Shumpert and Early in trade talks with the Pacers in hopes of pursuing a few of their veteran big men and George Hill?
2 separate deals. Acy/Tyler and Outlaw/Ellington
I don't think the deal is official until August 25.
Rookie wrote:2 separate deals. Acy/Tyler and Outlaw/Ellington
I thought it wasn't possible for that to occur. Isn't that the reason why the Clippers were forbidden from trading with the Celtics last year (because they gave up a 1st rounder for Doc Rivers' release)?
CrushAlot wrote:I don't think the deal is official until August 25.
Acy looks like he's an official member of the Knicks. His name is listed on our official roster on the team website as well as ESPN. I'm not sure what gives here. By that same token, Andrew Wiggins is still listed on the Cavs roster AND Kevin Love on the Wolves roster.
NardDogNation wrote:CrushAlot wrote:I don't think the deal is official until August 25.
Acy looks like he's an official member of the Knicks. His name is listed on our official roster on the team website as well as ESPN. I'm not sure what gives here. By that same token, Andrew Wiggins is still listed on the Cavs roster AND Kevin Love on the Wolves roster.
Maybe they are two separate moves. Acy for Tyler and Ellington for Outlaw later in August. I know that the Kings extended the date on when they would guarantee Acy's deal. Also, on trade checker it says Ellington can only be traded for 1 player currently.
NardDogNation wrote:Rookie wrote:2 separate deals. Acy/Tyler and Outlaw/Ellington
I thought it wasn't possible for that to occur. Isn't that the reason why the Clippers were forbidden from trading with the Celtics last year (because they gave up a 1st rounder for Doc Rivers' release)?
I believe that's a different case. AFAIK, that couldn't go through because you technically can't trade players for a coach. However, compensation (e.g.: picks and $$) is allowed. They wouldn't allow them to be done separately because it was obvious it was an attempt to subvert the system as the trade on its own made no logical sense.
NardDogNation wrote:Rookie wrote:2 separate deals. Acy/Tyler and Outlaw/Ellington
I thought it wasn't possible for that to occur. Isn't that the reason why the Clippers were forbidden from trading with the Celtics last year (because they gave up a 1st rounder for Doc Rivers' release)?
I think the spirit of what you are saying is correct. Obviously, it is one deal. Technically, if they submit it as two separate deals it works under the letter of the rule. It is in the grey area where lawyers find ways to bend these rules. If this were a major deal it would likely get more scrutiny, but it's pretty much a fart in the wind.
Read a bit more on a Kings blog about the trade. Apparently one of the reasons Ellington was desirable to them was that his deal is eligible for them to use the stretch provision. Apparently Outlaw's deal wasn't eligible.
Solace wrote:NardDogNation wrote:Rookie wrote:2 separate deals. Acy/Tyler and Outlaw/Ellington
I thought it wasn't possible for that to occur. Isn't that the reason why the Clippers were forbidden from trading with the Celtics last year (because they gave up a 1st rounder for Doc Rivers' release)?
I believe that's a different case. AFAIK, that couldn't go through because you technically can't trade players for a coach. However, compensation (e.g.: picks and $$) is allowed. They wouldn't allow them to be done separately because it was obvious it was an attempt to subvert the system as the trade on its own made no logical sense.
That's a good point. There's so many technicalities involved in the latest CBA that I thought there would've been something to prevent this from happening. It's good to know that the rules can be bent or circumvented because these rules adversely affects us.
Rookie wrote:NardDogNation wrote:Rookie wrote:2 separate deals. Acy/Tyler and Outlaw/Ellington
I thought it wasn't possible for that to occur. Isn't that the reason why the Clippers were forbidden from trading with the Celtics last year (because they gave up a 1st rounder for Doc Rivers' release)?
I think the spirit of what you are saying is correct. Obviously, it is one deal. Technically, if they submit it as two separate deals it works under the letter of the rule. It is in the grey area where lawyers find ways to bend these rules. If this were a major deal it would likely get more scrutiny, but it's pretty much a fart in the wind.
It's good to see that our legal team is on their game and has found a way to circumvent the CBA. I understand the need for parity but I think it fails to accomplish that and is more a pain in the ass than anything else. Even if we don't sign anyone in 2015, at least we'll have that much less to worry about, as far as red tape goes.
