It does, but slightly, except probably in year 2 of the contract. Trade bonuses are also pro-rated. Also, in an extreme case, since his 4th year is an option you can't use it for bonus-spreading cap purposes. So if he signed a 4/70M contract, then that's 16.4M first year with raises of the following: After Year 1: 16.4M, 53.6M left. 15% of that is 8.04M. Since he is already making the max, he (in effect) doesn't get a dime of cash. After Year 2: 17.1M, 36.5M left. 15% of that is 5.4M. Since ~25% of a 90M cap is 22.5M, he can get almost all of his trade kicker and still be below his "max" for a 0-6yr player. After Year 3: 17.9M, 18.6M left 15% of that is 2.7M. Still counts as a 0-6yr vet (as he's in his 7th year), so he's still a "25% max-er", but with the huge cap he'll be well under. Up to trade deadline, Year 4: 18.6M (but in a non-guaranteed year, b/c of his ETO), about 7M left if he opted to stay, so about 1M in kicker. Easy. Normally, the bonus is spread across the remaining years for cap calculation purposes, but it's only for 'guaranteed years". So since he has an ETO, if he was traded during Year 2, where he's right on the edge of being able to get the whole 5+ million he has in the kicker, his "salary" for trade purposes isn't 17.1M. It's not even the 18.9M it would be if spread evenly over the last 3 years of the contract. It's 19.8M, which is his salary plus the 5.4M divided by the 2 guaranteed years left. If he opts into his final year after the trade, no cap number for year 4 changes occur b/c they've already been allotted to year 2 and year 3. Long story short, in the grand scheme of things this probably isn't a huge deal. But it does affect OKC in trade scenarios, where we've seen very dollar have to count sometimes. Coon CBA FAQ #98 and #99 talk a ton about this stuff.
Yes, where every dollar counts, even $1 in kicker can be an issue. The 115% I talked about wasn't spreading his kicker across any years at all. Taken all at once. 115% is still less than 125% or 150%. The kicker amount doesn't affect OKC's side of the transaction at all. There have been untradable contracts before that have been moved. The size of the deals' contracts just needs to be high enough that the difference is small %.
Yes, but that wasn't your quote. You said that you couldn't understand why people wanted Davis/Aminu/Harkless for the same price as Kanter. I showed why. You then said that they couldn't be traded for starters on a contender, and that they wouldn't even be the 6th man on one. I think they would be 6th men (and could probably bring back a starter if needed, as our team has done more with less in the recent past). You then shift to "do I think they're starters on a contender". Short answer again, yes. I look at some of the players MIA trotted out over the last few years and shake my head. I look at some of SAS's starters and do the same. There's a reason that championship teams are generally said to have a "big 3" and not a "big 5". I don't see how these guys are supremely different than what carried DET to a championship. Someone brought up Iverson's 2001 team. If you don't think Aminu could've played the 3 for them I don't know what to say. Yes, I'm bringing up some extremes, but there's a reason that "role players" is a term used in the NBA. Personally, I like that Davis' game is much more efficient than LMA's. I don't think he'll get close to the usage rate needed to put up counting numbers like LMA, but who needs that? I like that Aminu can be a homeless man's Scottie-Pippen-esque defender on the 1 through 4. That's valuable. If you ask eventually "do you think Aminu and Ed are part of our Big Three on the championship contender?", I say "probably not". But I'd rather have Aminu than, say, Boris Diaw. I'd rather have Davis than, say, Tristan Thompson or Tiago Splitter or Taj Gibson...all of whom a) play PF for contenders and b) will make more than Ed Davis in the next 3 years.
Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics. Seems like both sides of this argument are cherry picking their stats to prove what they already believe. I think the crux of the disagreement is this: Aminu, Davis, and Harkless can't get their own shot or create offense for anyone else, making them ho hum. Kanter can, so he's awesome. I think there is a lot of validity to this line of thinking, and it can be proved with stats. However, there is more to the game of basketball than getting your own shot. Kanter's defense is much worse than any of the 3, and pretty much worse than anyone. Defense wins championships. (That said Steve Nash won multiple MVPs with crappy D). Truth is, all 4 of those players are young, and their stories haven't been written yet, so it's all prognostication at this point. Personally, I am going to side with BrianFromWa (as I often do), but not because of his brilliant statistical analysis. Kanter is a somewhat selfish, immature player who is not a hard worker. Would I take a risk on him? Absolutely, he has a high ceiling. However, he is less likely to reach that ceiling than the others (whose ceilings are lower). Culture-wise, Kanter is a risk to hurt everything you're trying to do as an organization, which is why Utah let him go on the cheap, but lavished large contracts on lesser players.
I see what you're saying. The trade packages will be big enough that they won't matter. If OKC wanted to trade him in year 2, as a taxpaying team they can take back 125% +100k. So in Year two they can take back 21.4M. But the team trading for him counts 19.8M coming in. So it's not an issue .
It's not OKC that has to deal with the kicker, it's the receiving team. In a lot of cases, the kicker is less than $100K I think Chandler Parsons' is less than $50K even.
Throwing a bunch of stats at me is not disproving my point, i'm done with stats. Stats depend on the team you play with,the coach you play for and the system you play in. How can you take ANYTHING from Davis' season playing for the walking abomination that is the Los Angles Lakers? When i judge young players i'm interested in what they can\can't do, how can they fill the need in their position and how they can develop. How can you compare Aminu to a guy like Tayshaun prince who could defend at an ELITE level and shoot much better? Who are you comparing Davis to? Ben Wallace who was a defensive+Rebound powerhouse or Antonio McDyess who was a former all star before his injury and could knock down shots from mid range? You talk about Miami but then you forget we don't have Lebron+Wade+Bosh , you look at 2001 Philly but than you remember we're playing in a much better conference and we don't have Allen Iverson who was an MVP ffs. Then you look at SAS, but you forget that Pop is probably the best coach in the history of the NBA while Terry is a 2nd tier coach. You rather have Davis than Tristan??! did you watch the Cavs AT ALL this year?! the guy is a rebounding monster who dominated the boards on the highest level (not when playing some pedestrian minutes for a sucky team like Davis). IF Aminu can improve his ugly ass jumpshot to around 37% from 3 then i guess he'll be worth it, i don't see it happening tho. Neil's vision was somewhere in the middle. He signed Hustle and D guys like Aminu and Davis, but he felt that we need more star power and talent so he went with Kanter so he can get a more balanced starting 5.
The issue is not that Davis/Aminu are worthless. They certainly are not. The issue is that their acquisition is a year behind the curve. These are the kind of guys we needed LAST summer. Now they are the leather seats and sound system on a car with no engine. They are the expensive carpet in a house with no roof. Edit: That said, I would still take them over Kanter.
