Knicks · Obi to Indy for 2 2nd Rd Picks (page 9)

gradyandrew wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:From reading a lot of the posts the way I understand it is:

1) Obi was a terrible pick
2) Yet by getting only two seconds for him means we got fleeced
3) This creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning

Got it.

Please stop posting this. The Knicks did NOT need to trade Obi to offer DDV the full MLE, As soon as Hart opted in to his Player option the Knicks had the required space. Knicks we're under absolutely 0 pressure or need to trade Obi.

There were multiple reports saying it was necessary to avoid the luxury tax. Were they incorrect? Or are you saying the Knicks should have said screw it, and paid up?

ToddTT wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:From reading a lot of the posts the way I understand it is:

1) Obi was a terrible pick
2) Yet by getting only two seconds for him means we got fleeced
3) This creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning

Got it.

Please stop posting this. The Knicks did NOT need to trade Obi to offer DDV the full MLE, As soon as Hart opted in to his Player option the Knicks had the required space. Knicks we're under absolutely 0 pressure or need to trade Obi.

There were multiple reports saying it was necessary to avoid the luxury tax. Were they incorrect? Or are you saying the Knicks should have said screw it, and paid up?

If the Knicks weren’t extending Obi, best to trade him and evaluate other options.

gradyandrew wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:From reading a lot of the posts the way I understand it is:

1) Obi was a terrible pick
2) Yet by getting only two seconds for him means we got fleeced
3) This creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning

Got it.

Please stop posting this. The Knicks did NOT need to trade Obi to offer DDV the full MLE, As soon as Hart opted in to his Player option the Knicks had the required space. Knicks we're under absolutely 0 pressure or need to trade Obi.

I should have said:

“Creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning. Or just plain denied.

KnickDanger wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:From reading a lot of the posts the way I understand it is:

1) Obi was a terrible pick
2) Yet by getting only two seconds for him means we got fleeced
3) This creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning

Got it.

Please stop posting this. The Knicks did NOT need to trade Obi to offer DDV the full MLE, As soon as Hart opted in to his Player option the Knicks had the required space. Knicks we're under absolutely 0 pressure or need to trade Obi.

I should have said:

“Creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning. Or just plain denied.

Roby and Jeffries deals don't become guaranteed until Jan. 10. After Jan 10, Knicks would be over the luxury tax line by 2 million if they kept Obi, Jeffries, Roby, and Fournier. Knicks could get under the lux tax line by:
a. releasing Roby and Jeffries on Jan 9
b. trading some combination of Fournier, Roby, Obi, and Jeffries in a deal that takes back a lower cap amount. For example, Fournier Obi Roby and Jeffries for Jerami Grant.

My big disagreement with the canard about "they needed to do it to sign DDV" is that it ignores the possibility that Obi's salary could be aggregated with other contracts to trade for a much wider group of players.

Knicks still have the trade exception but that can't be combined in other trades.

Not blaming you because you just read it off of an article, but if you take a look at the Knicks salary cap on spotrac, you can see the Knicks had a lot of options going forward. It's tough to argue that two late, late future picks (worst of multiple swaps) was too good a deal to pass up.

The only accurate way to view the trade is "Knicks did Obi a solid."

gradyandrew wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:From reading a lot of the posts the way I understand it is:

1) Obi was a terrible pick
2) Yet by getting only two seconds for him means we got fleeced
3) This creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning

Got it.

Please stop posting this. The Knicks did NOT need to trade Obi to offer DDV the full MLE, As soon as Hart opted in to his Player option the Knicks had the required space. Knicks we're under absolutely 0 pressure or need to trade Obi.

I should have said:

“Creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning. Or just plain denied.

Roby and Jeffries deals don't become guaranteed until Jan. 10. After Jan 10, Knicks would be over the luxury tax line by 2 million if they kept Obi, Jeffries, Roby, and Fournier. Knicks could get under the lux tax line by:
a. releasing Roby and Jeffries on Jan 9
b. trading some combination of Fournier, Roby, Obi, and Jeffries in a deal that takes back a lower cap amount. For example, Fournier Obi Roby and Jeffries for Jerami Grant.

My big disagreement with the canard about "they needed to do it to sign DDV" is that it ignores the possibility that Obi's salary could be aggregated with other contracts to trade for a much wider group of players.

Knicks still have the trade exception but that can't be combined in other trades.

Not blaming you because you just read it off of an article, but if you take a look at the Knicks salary cap on spotrac, you can see the Knicks had a lot of options going forward. It's tough to argue that two late, late future picks (worst of multiple swaps) was too good a deal to pass up.

The only accurate way to view the trade is "Knicks did Obi a solid."

There is no doubt the Knicks did Obi a solid.

The Knicks currently sit right under the salary cap. What would their team salary position be if the kept Obi?

martin wrote:There is no doubt the Knicks did Obi a solid.

The Knicks currently sit right under the salary cap. What would their team salary position be if the kept Obi?

To add to the question: which moves have the Knicks freed themselves up to do now by having traded Obi? What was the urgency of trading him for nothing, instead of giving it a try for at least another couple of months, and trading him later in the season if this last try did not work out?

I mean, what was the urgency in getting rid of the only reliable finisher on the team?

ESOMKnicks wrote:

martin wrote:There is no doubt the Knicks did Obi a solid.

The Knicks currently sit right under the salary cap. What would their team salary position be if the kept Obi?

To add to the question: which moves have the Knicks freed themselves up to do now by having traded Obi? What was the urgency of trading him for nothing, instead of giving it a try for at least another couple of months, and trading him later in the season if this last try did not work out?

I mean, what was the urgency in getting rid of the only reliable finisher on the team?

Not being over the first tax apron?

Not having all of the available cap space disappear?

Knicks are currently 4 million under the tax line.

As long as the Knicks are under the line, they could use.the full MLE to go past the line.

Obi's deal is for ~ 7 million, so after signing DDV, they would have been 3 million over the tax line with 15 guys rostered.

Since teams are only required to roster 12 players, they could have released Roby and Jeffries (2 million each) to get under the line, or make a trade saving 4 million.

I'm estimating that Roby/ Jeffries contracts are prorated by games played so the Knicks would have 20 games to release them, or roughly right before their guaranteed date of Jan 10.

One could argue that the Knicks traded Obi to make sure they can keep Roby and Jeffries.

That's a hard sell for me,but I don't watch the practices.

gradyandrew wrote:Knicks are currently 4 million under the tax line.

As long as the Knicks are under the line, they could use.the full MLE to go past the line.

Obi's deal is for ~ 7 million, so after signing DDV, they would have been 3 million over the tax line with 15 guys rostered.

Since teams are only required to roster 12 players, they could have released Roby and Jeffries (2 million each) to get under the line, or make a trade saving 4 million.

I'm estimating that Roby/ Jeffries contracts are prorated by games played so the Knicks would have 20 games to release them, or roughly right before their guaranteed date of Jan 10.

One could argue that the Knicks traded Obi to make sure they can keep Roby and Jeffries.

That's a hard sell for me,but I don't watch the practices.

Hard capped. Unlikely bonues count towards hard cap.

Fred breaks it down:

https://theathletic.com/4678482/2023/07/...

Donte’s dazzling deal

We should have known DiVincenzo’s four-year deal with the Knicks would be offbeat. But this time, contract creativity could have negative repercussions for New York.

DiVincenzo’s agent, Jason Glushon, is known around the industry to add fun quirks to his contracts — purely because … why not? A few years back, he negotiated and wrote the cheapest bonus in league history into Spencer Dinwiddie’s contract: $1 if Dinwiddie’s team wins the title. He put together the Jericho Sims contract, too, which is loaded with far more dates that trigger guaranteed money throughout the year than your average deal has.

The DiVincenzo contract, meanwhile, is a doozy.

He is guaranteed $47 million over four years but also will receive $750,000 a season in unlikely bonuses (“unlikely” is a technical term, meaning he did not accomplish them in the previous season). It’s a fair contract for a player of DiVincenzo’s caliber. But it’s also a confusing one from the Knicks’ perspective.

First, let’s dive into the unlikely incentives, which are nothing short of glorious.

According to a league source who knows the contract details, the deal includes unlikelies for reaching the NBA Finals as well as ones for (take a deep breath if you are reading out loud and also grab some water in case you get lightheaded) winning MVP, defensive player of the year, sixth man of the year, most improved player, first team All-NBA, second team All-NBA, third team All-NBA, first team all-defense, second team all-defense and making the All-Star Game.

The technical term for these incentives may be “unlikely,” but the colloquial one is “not gonna happen.” The two sides should have placed an NBA Rookie of the Year bonus in there just for fun. But as spectacular and seemingly harmless as these bonuses are for DiVincenzo, considering he won’t garner an MVP any time soon, there should be questions about why the Knicks allowed these into the deal, especially with the way the new collective bargaining agreement works.

Unlikely incentives that teams throw into deals just for kicks, the ones that are Krispy Kreme for contract nerds such as anyone who is still somehow reading this, should become a thing of the past for teams in the Knicks’ financial position. Because New York gave DiVincenzo more than $5 million of the midlevel exception, it hard-capped itself at $172.3 million. In other words: the Knicks’ payroll, under no circumstances and at no time, can go over that number.

As The Athletic addressed last week, ever since Leon Rose took over as team president in 2020, this team has done whatever it could to establish flexibility not to sign a star but to trade for one. The Knicks have loaded up with first-round picks and tradeable, middle-class contracts. But now they are even closer to the hard cap than it appears at first glance.

They are pushing up against the luxury tax threshold, which is $165.3 million, $7 million short of the hard cap. And teams don’t get taxed on their unlikely incentives (unless a player earns them), but there is a twist: Whether DiVincenzo wins MVP or not, his $750,000 a year in unlikely bonuses still count against the hard cap. And that’s where we get into the Knicks eating into their flexibility.

Evan Fournier and Barrett already have $4.4 million combined in unlikely incentives in their deals. DiVincenzo’s now brings the team total to $5.2 million.

It means the Knicks could be pushing up against the luxury tax threshold (which, again, is $7 million short of the hard cap) but would be only $2 million short of the hard cap.

So, what happens if things go south in, say, Philadelphia midway through the season, and Joel Embiid says he wants out? The Knicks could have to include someone extra just to make the money work — and it could be because they agreed to include a series of delightful (but possibly hampering) bonuses for DiVincenzo.

gradyandrew wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:From reading a lot of the posts the way I understand it is:

1) Obi was a terrible pick
2) Yet by getting only two seconds for him means we got fleeced
3) This creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning

Got it.

Please stop posting this. The Knicks did NOT need to trade Obi to offer DDV the full MLE, As soon as Hart opted in to his Player option the Knicks had the required space. Knicks we're under absolutely 0 pressure or need to trade Obi.

I should have said:

“Creating cap space for the DiVincenzo signing isn’t worth acknowledging much less mentioning. Or just plain denied.

Roby and Jeffries deals don't become guaranteed until Jan. 10. After Jan 10, Knicks would be over the luxury tax line by 2 million if they kept Obi, Jeffries, Roby, and Fournier. Knicks could get under the lux tax line by:
a. releasing Roby and Jeffries on Jan 9
b. trading some combination of Fournier, Roby, Obi, and Jeffries in a deal that takes back a lower cap amount. For example, Fournier Obi Roby and Jeffries for Jerami Grant.

My big disagreement with the canard about "they needed to do it to sign DDV" is that it ignores the possibility that Obi's salary could be aggregated with other contracts to trade for a much wider group of players.

Knicks still have the trade exception but that can't be combined in other trades.

Not blaming you because you just read it off of an article, but if you take a look at the Knicks salary cap on spotrac, you can see the Knicks had a lot of options going forward. It's tough to argue that two late, late future picks (worst of multiple swaps) was too good a deal to pass up.

The only accurate way to view the trade is "Knicks did Obi a solid."

Well in the realm of agree to disagree, I can see your point ”technically.” But as others have pointed out the paths you mention don’t align with the best fiscal responsibility or cap flexibility going forward. Emphasis on the flexibility.

Then we are left with whether they could have gotten more than the two picks or they were more focused on the “solid.” I don’t know and I don’t think anyone here does though some like to act like they do. Personally I am good with these latest moves in the ongoing upwards trajectory the team has been on since Rose took over, fully acknowledging the missteps. Others can focus on the two seconds and their various Knicks beefs - it’s one’s prerogative.

Martin, it still seems like the Knicks would have been able to make it by releasing one of Roby or Jeffries. Jeffries didn't even get on the court and plays SG, a position where the Knicks are about 5 deep now. Spotrac currently has the Knicks at 161 in salaries. Maybe the unlikely bonuses throughout the roster add up to 14 million, meaning they would have had to trade Obi but could keep Jeffries and Roby.

KnickDanger, I have a lot of trust and respect for the front office so I'm not grabbing my Pitchfork and getting ready to storm MSG. I'm just disappointed in this deal for Obi who at least has shown that when Randle is injured is a capable injury replacement.

gradyandrew wrote:Martin, it still seems like the Knicks would have been able to make it by releasing one of Roby or Jeffries. Jeffries didn't even get on the court and plays SG, a position where the Knicks are about 5 deep now. Spotrac currently has the Knicks at 161 in salaries. Maybe the unlikely bonuses throughout the roster add up to 14 million, meaning they would have had to trade Obi but could keep Jeffries and Roby.

KnickDanger, I have a lot of trust and respect for the front office so I'm not grabbing my Pitchfork and getting ready to storm MSG. I'm just disappointed in this deal for Obi who at least has shown that when Randle is injured is a capable injury replacement.

Fred Katz lets us know that the Knicks currently sit $2m below the hard cap without Obi’s ~$7m contract.

The cap rules are very strange and have all sorts of oddities; the Knicks FO has navigated these types of things pretty well and also have insight to steps further down the line.

You’ve picked a strange windmill to battle. I really don’t care and don’t think anyone else who is responding to you does either. Obi has been traded and is in the rear view mirror

martin wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Martin, it still seems like the Knicks would have been able to make it by releasing one of Roby or Jeffries. Jeffries didn't even get on the court and plays SG, a position where the Knicks are about 5 deep now. Spotrac currently has the Knicks at 161 in salaries. Maybe the unlikely bonuses throughout the roster add up to 14 million, meaning they would have had to trade Obi but could keep Jeffries and Roby.

KnickDanger, I have a lot of trust and respect for the front office so I'm not grabbing my Pitchfork and getting ready to storm MSG. I'm just disappointed in this deal for Obi who at least has shown that when Randle is injured is a capable injury replacement.

Fred Katz lets us know that the Knicks currently sit $2m below the hard cap without Obi’s ~$7m contract.

The cap rules are very strange and have all sorts of oddities; the Knicks FO has navigated these types of things pretty well and also have insight to steps further down the line.

You’ve picked a strange windmill to battle. I really don’t care and don’t think anyone else who is responding to you does either. Obi has been traded and is in the rear view mirror

Good one, LOL.

It's a combination of factors but mostly the paltry return. There's a big difference between second round picks and worst of 3 swapped second round picks. Part of me was hoping Knicks could combine Obi and EF with some picks to bring in another game changer but so far it seems like DDV is one of the steals of free agency. Anyway, point taken.

gradyandrew wrote:

martin wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Martin, it still seems like the Knicks would have been able to make it by releasing one of Roby or Jeffries. Jeffries didn't even get on the court and plays SG, a position where the Knicks are about 5 deep now. Spotrac currently has the Knicks at 161 in salaries. Maybe the unlikely bonuses throughout the roster add up to 14 million, meaning they would have had to trade Obi but could keep Jeffries and Roby.

KnickDanger, I have a lot of trust and respect for the front office so I'm not grabbing my Pitchfork and getting ready to storm MSG. I'm just disappointed in this deal for Obi who at least has shown that when Randle is injured is a capable injury replacement.

Fred Katz lets us know that the Knicks currently sit $2m below the hard cap without Obi’s ~$7m contract.

The cap rules are very strange and have all sorts of oddities; the Knicks FO has navigated these types of things pretty well and also have insight to steps further down the line.

You’ve picked a strange windmill to battle. I really don’t care and don’t think anyone else who is responding to you does either. Obi has been traded and is in the rear view mirror

Good one, LOL.

It's a combination of factors but mostly the paltry return. There's a big difference between second round picks and worst of 3 swapped second round picks. Part of me was hoping Knicks could combine Obi and EF with some picks to bring in another game changer but so far it seems like DDV is one of the steals of free agency. Anyway, point taken.

Knicks were at the juncture of Opportunity Cost and Free Agency and jumped at the chance to add a legit, underpriced player who strangely also duplicates both the minutes and position of a few other player. IMO that speaks to other, yet to be made moves.

DDV does not have the upside as someone like IQ but also just signed a roughly $12m annual contract for 4 years which is bonkers in this market. It makes Brunson and Hart (who also did the Knicks a solid, without whom the Knicks wouldn’t have been able to do any of this) super juiced. That matters too.

In an ideal world, sure, everyone wants to trade EF Obi at the same time but that ain’t gonna come up for a while or may not come up at all, and other business gotta move forward.

The Knicks wanted DDV and got their guy. This time around, bird in hand and gut punch at same time. Them’s the breaks.

gradyandrew wrote:Martin, it still seems like the Knicks would have been able to make it by releasing one of Roby or Jeffries. Jeffries didn't even get on the court and plays SG, a position where the Knicks are about 5 deep now. Spotrac currently has the Knicks at 161 in salaries. Maybe the unlikely bonuses throughout the roster add up to 14 million, meaning they would have had to trade Obi but could keep Jeffries and Roby.

KnickDanger, I have a lot of trust and respect for the front office so I'm not grabbing my Pitchfork and getting ready to storm MSG. I'm just disappointed in this deal for Obi who at least has shown that when Randle is injured is a capable injury replacement.

Yep, I was disappointed in the return for Obi as well. Point I have been making is there is a bigger picture that involves more than just two seconds for Obi.

Anyway this has been a fun way to kill a few minutes in a long off-season. We shall now go tilt at some other windmill!

martin wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Knicks are currently 4 million under the tax line.

As long as the Knicks are under the line, they could use.the full MLE to go past the line.

Obi's deal is for ~ 7 million, so after signing DDV, they would have been 3 million over the tax line with 15 guys rostered.

Since teams are only required to roster 12 players, they could have released Roby and Jeffries (2 million each) to get under the line, or make a trade saving 4 million.

I'm estimating that Roby/ Jeffries contracts are prorated by games played so the Knicks would have 20 games to release them, or roughly right before their guaranteed date of Jan 10.

One could argue that the Knicks traded Obi to make sure they can keep Roby and Jeffries.

That's a hard sell for me,but I don't watch the practices.

Hard capped. Unlikely bonues count towards hard cap.

Fred breaks it down:

https://theathletic.com/4678482/2023/07/...

Donte’s dazzling deal

We should have known DiVincenzo’s four-year deal with the Knicks would be offbeat. But this time, contract creativity could have negative repercussions for New York.

DiVincenzo’s agent, Jason Glushon, is known around the industry to add fun quirks to his contracts — purely because … why not? A few years back, he negotiated and wrote the cheapest bonus in league history into Spencer Dinwiddie’s contract: $1 if Dinwiddie’s team wins the title. He put together the Jericho Sims contract, too, which is loaded with far more dates that trigger guaranteed money throughout the year than your average deal has.

The DiVincenzo contract, meanwhile, is a doozy.

He is guaranteed $47 million over four years but also will receive $750,000 a season in unlikely bonuses (“unlikely” is a technical term, meaning he did not accomplish them in the previous season). It’s a fair contract for a player of DiVincenzo’s caliber. But it’s also a confusing one from the Knicks’ perspective.

First, let’s dive into the unlikely incentives, which are nothing short of glorious.

According to a league source who knows the contract details, the deal includes unlikelies for reaching the NBA Finals as well as ones for (take a deep breath if you are reading out loud and also grab some water in case you get lightheaded) winning MVP, defensive player of the year, sixth man of the year, most improved player, first team All-NBA, second team All-NBA, third team All-NBA, first team all-defense, second team all-defense and making the All-Star Game.

The technical term for these incentives may be “unlikely,” but the colloquial one is “not gonna happen.” The two sides should have placed an NBA Rookie of the Year bonus in there just for fun. But as spectacular and seemingly harmless as these bonuses are for DiVincenzo, considering he won’t garner an MVP any time soon, there should be questions about why the Knicks allowed these into the deal, especially with the way the new collective bargaining agreement works.

Unlikely incentives that teams throw into deals just for kicks, the ones that are Krispy Kreme for contract nerds such as anyone who is still somehow reading this, should become a thing of the past for teams in the Knicks’ financial position. Because New York gave DiVincenzo more than $5 million of the midlevel exception, it hard-capped itself at $172.3 million. In other words: the Knicks’ payroll, under no circumstances and at no time, can go over that number.

As The Athletic addressed last week, ever since Leon Rose took over as team president in 2020, this team has done whatever it could to establish flexibility not to sign a star but to trade for one. The Knicks have loaded up with first-round picks and tradeable, middle-class contracts. But now they are even closer to the hard cap than it appears at first glance.

They are pushing up against the luxury tax threshold, which is $165.3 million, $7 million short of the hard cap. And teams don’t get taxed on their unlikely incentives (unless a player earns them), but there is a twist: Whether DiVincenzo wins MVP or not, his $750,000 a year in unlikely bonuses still count against the hard cap. And that’s where we get into the Knicks eating into their flexibility.

Evan Fournier and Barrett already have $4.4 million combined in unlikely incentives in their deals. DiVincenzo’s now brings the team total to $5.2 million.

It means the Knicks could be pushing up against the luxury tax threshold (which, again, is $7 million short of the hard cap) but would be only $2 million short of the hard cap.

So, what happens if things go south in, say, Philadelphia midway through the season, and Joel Embiid says he wants out? The Knicks could have to include someone extra just to make the money work — and it could be because they agreed to include a series of delightful (but possibly hampering) bonuses for DiVincenzo.

I appreciate Katz, but other than the fact that the articles confirms unlikley bonuses count towards the cap, I don't care about the other 99% of the article. I've seen enough to know Aller isn't going to put in something "cute into a contract just because" that will in anyway hamper the big picture down the road.

I bolded a couple items which make no sense to me because appreaing in the same article they contradict themselves (maybe a poor choice of words on my part, but what I mean is he acknowledges the current FO's track record for contracts yet still somehow believes these "unlikelies" where done "just for kicks".

I am going to stand by the belief that they are in there for a reason that I don't know yet.

joec32033 wrote:I appreciate Katz, but other than the fact that the articles confirms unlikley bonuses count towards the cap, I don't care about the other 99% of the article. I've seen enough to know Aller isn't going to put in something "cute into a contract just because" that will in anyway hamper the big picture down the road.

I bolded a couple items which make no sense to me because appreaing in the same article they contradict themselves (maybe a poor choice of words on my part, but what I mean is he acknowledges the current FO's track record for contracts yet still somehow believes these "unlikelies" where done "just for kicks".

I am going to stand by the belief that they are in there for a reason that I don't know yet.

My guess: FO asked DDV to come down by $1.5m off of the top line $12.4m MLE number. Agent counters. They split the difference with agent getting to save face by including the $750K bonus difference that will count towards the hard cap limit. No other real reason. Not a win-win really but almost. FO doesn’t include the bonus in contract, the agent does.

Some people are acting as if the Knicks chose the worst possible trade offer. Yes it sucks to get two seconds for a former lottery pick but the reality is that is what he was worth. Not enough toughness and impact for his position

We can wonder why didn’t the Knicks keep him and try to develop him further if he was worth so little. But it could be the case we only saw the tip of the iceberg of Obi’s discontent. He may not have been hungry enough to play tough and do the little things, or he may have simply been incapable. The reality is he had enough time to demonstrate that.

I wish him well but won’t be surprised if his career is short

martin wrote:

joec32033 wrote:I appreciate Katz, but other than the fact that the articles confirms unlikley bonuses count towards the cap, I don't care about the other 99% of the article. I've seen enough to know Aller isn't going to put in something "cute into a contract just because" that will in anyway hamper the big picture down the road.

I bolded a couple items which make no sense to me because appreaing in the same article they contradict themselves (maybe a poor choice of words on my part, but what I mean is he acknowledges the current FO's track record for contracts yet still somehow believes these "unlikelies" where done "just for kicks".

I am going to stand by the belief that they are in there for a reason that I don't know yet.

My guess: FO asked DDV to come down by $1.5m off of the top line $12.4m MLE number. Agent counters. They split the difference with agent getting to save face by including the $750K bonus difference that will count towards the hard cap limit. No other real reason. Not a win-win really but almost. FO doesn’t include the bonus in contract, the agent does.

Probably accurate. I just find it stupid of Katz to say people put clauses in multi million dollar contracts "just because".

joec32033 wrote:

martin wrote:

joec32033 wrote:I appreciate Katz, but other than the fact that the articles confirms unlikley bonuses count towards the cap, I don't care about the other 99% of the article. I've seen enough to know Aller isn't going to put in something "cute into a contract just because" that will in anyway hamper the big picture down the road.

I bolded a couple items which make no sense to me because appreaing in the same article they contradict themselves (maybe a poor choice of words on my part, but what I mean is he acknowledges the current FO's track record for contracts yet still somehow believes these "unlikelies" where done "just for kicks".

I am going to stand by the belief that they are in there for a reason that I don't know yet.

My guess: FO asked DDV to come down by $1.5m off of the top line $12.4m MLE number. Agent counters. They split the difference with agent getting to save face by including the $750K bonus difference that will count towards the hard cap limit. No other real reason. Not a win-win really but almost. FO doesn’t include the bonus in contract, the agent does.

Probably accurate. I just find it stupid of Katz to say people put clauses in multi million dollar contracts "just because".

Yeah, it's weird, and yet they do it all the time.