martin wrote:
This makes the most sense. Then the Knicks play a little more small ball this year with Randle and OG at the 4/5.
I don’t understand the first/ second apron.
Why do we have to trade away Precious salary to reach the highest apron ?
I understand the impact of being first or second apron, but not how you get there.
Clean wrote:People stop falling for the twitter hysteria. They don't know anything. Just relax. Remember people get paid for interactions now. The Knicks would not be doing all this if there was no chance.
These reporters are glorified speculating fans. Did any of them say we could trade for OG or Bridges, no, they didn't.
FrenchKnicks wrote:I don’t understand the first/ second apron.
Why do we have to trade away Precious salary to reach the highest apron ?
I understand the impact of being first or second apron, but not how you get there.
New rules. Because we took back more salary than we sent out, that triggers first apron hard cap. If we expand the trade to send out more from our perspective (ie send more salary to another team) then we are taking back “more salary” but we trigger a different rule, the aggregation rule which hard caps the second apron 189m)
So, let’s say we send iHart to Orlando in cap space 16mm and then send Randle to LAC and take back George at 40mm a year, that basically would balance all trades and hard cap us at 189m. That’s a weird example, but basically, because of the Bridges trade we have to do everything together and send out more than we take back.
Alpha1971 wrote:Clean wrote:People stop falling for the twitter hysteria. They don't know anything. Just relax. Remember people get paid for interactions now. The Knicks would not be doing all this if there was no chance.
These reporters are glorified speculating fans. Did any of them say we could trade for OG or Bridges, no, they didn't.
Knicks are very tight lipped and the front office doesn’t care about public perception. The beat writers don’t get a ton of info. Berman had the most of anyone and he’s gone. Interest in both OG and bridges were known but the actual moves came out of left field. I remember Ian begley did lead us to DiVincenzo very early though, so there are some examples out there.
I think IHart is staying. Knicks did not prioritize drafting a big man and also did not extend QO to Precious. They must have some confidence
TheMTL wrote:I think IHart is staying. Knicks did not prioritize drafting a big man and also did not extend QO to Precious. They must have some confidence
We literally have our starting C still on the roster. His name is Mitchel Robinson.
Well we gotta find a way to keep him now.
7:20 p.m. ET: The New York Knicks view the Oklahoma City Thunder as Isaiah Hartenstein's most likely destination in free agency if the center leaves New York, sources told ESPN's Tim Bontemps. The Thunder have significant cap space this summer and can outbid the Knicks on a Hartenstein deal.
EwingsGlass wrote:FrenchKnicks wrote:I don’t understand the first/ second apron.
Why do we have to trade away Precious salary to reach the highest apron ?
I understand the impact of being first or second apron, but not how you get there.
New rules. Because we took back more salary than we sent out, that triggers first apron hard cap. If we expand the trade to send out more from our perspective (ie send more salary to another team) then we are taking back “more salary” but we trigger a different rule, the aggregation rule which hard caps the second apron 189m)
So, let’s say we send iHart to Orlando in cap space 16mm and then send Randle to LAC and take back George at 40mm a year, that basically would balance all trades and hard cap us at 189m. That’s a weird example, but basically, because of the Bridges trade we have to do everything together and send out more than we take back.
Hello - I am new here and super excited about the Nova Knicks LOL.
Still trying to understand the above explanation. What is the benefit of hitting the second apron? Why would we want to? Will it increase how much we can spend? If we can't keep Hartenstein, do we care?
NovaKnick wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:FrenchKnicks wrote:I don’t understand the first/ second apron.
Why do we have to trade away Precious salary to reach the highest apron ?
I understand the impact of being first or second apron, but not how you get there.
New rules. Because we took back more salary than we sent out, that triggers first apron hard cap. If we expand the trade to send out more from our perspective (ie send more salary to another team) then we are taking back “more salary” but we trigger a different rule, the aggregation rule which hard caps the second apron 189m)
So, let’s say we send iHart to Orlando in cap space 16mm and then send Randle to LAC and take back George at 40mm a year, that basically would balance all trades and hard cap us at 189m. That’s a weird example, but basically, because of the Bridges trade we have to do everything together and send out more than we take back.
Hello - I am new here and super excited about the Nova Knicks LOL.
Still trying to understand the above explanation. What is the benefit of hitting the second apron? Why would we want to? Will it increase how much we can spend? If we can't keep Hartenstein, do we care?
In other words, why are the cap rules so bloody convoluted? What problem are they solving?
I want iHart to stay so OKC can have struck out on FA like we have so many times before.
Panos wrote:NovaKnick wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:FrenchKnicks wrote:I don’t understand the first/ second apron.
Why do we have to trade away Precious salary to reach the highest apron ?
I understand the impact of being first or second apron, but not how you get there.
New rules. Because we took back more salary than we sent out, that triggers first apron hard cap. If we expand the trade to send out more from our perspective (ie send more salary to another team) then we are taking back “more salary” but we trigger a different rule, the aggregation rule which hard caps the second apron 189m)
So, let’s say we send iHart to Orlando in cap space 16mm and then send Randle to LAC and take back George at 40mm a year, that basically would balance all trades and hard cap us at 189m. That’s a weird example, but basically, because of the Bridges trade we have to do everything together and send out more than we take back.
Hello - I am new here and super excited about the Nova Knicks LOL.
Still trying to understand the above explanation. What is the benefit of hitting the second apron? Why would we want to? Will it increase how much we can spend? If we can't keep Hartenstein, do we care?
In other words, why are the cap rules so bloody convoluted? What problem are they solving?
Hard cap at 1st apron 179m vs second apron 189m is directly tied to our ability to offer Hartenstein up to 16m and flexibility to finish our roster.
