And, yes. Of course I made an error. I was looking at the Salary Cap FAQ maximum salary for LAST year, rather than 09-10. According to the FAQ, the max salary is $13.52m this year, so would make the extension (if it kicked in this year, which it does not) look like this: Code: Year: 1 2 3 4 5 Raise Total Dollars: 13520000 14939600 16359200 17778800 19198400 1419600 81796000 The salary cap FAQ might be wrong, but I trust it more than Quick here. Ed O.
How will they know what it is? isn't his contract 25% of the cap next year? or is it this coming years number?
I think the high amount is basing it on what the S/C is right now and the low is what it is predicted to be next year.
The tone of negotiations seemed to change (in the media, anyway) around the same time the new CBA agenda was released (to the media, anyway). Probably coincidence, but i wonder if Paul was waiting for a certain detail to appear or not appear in that agenda before pulling the trigger on Roy's contract.
The respect of Oden/LMA/Rudy/Batum's agents for taking such a "tough stand" yet ultimately yielding to the player? If the idea was to show those players that the Blazers meant hardball, this contract doesn't exactly reinforce that assumed tactic.
Well, you were wrong earlier on the Deron Williams' extension, and how the lowered cap actually lowered the contract's value.
they were going to stone wall him until he signed a low offer, but ODENISGOD was able to change their minds through his posts.
Indeed I was. It is unfortunate that you weren't able to find any evidence of it and we had to wait for someone else to correct me. Ed O.
I think that Quick is pulling his first year amount from 25% of the ACTUAL salary cap (based on 51% of BRI, with subtractions for some benefits), not the cap based on 48.04% of projected BRI, which is the cap used to figure maximum salary. Those cap numbers are not the same thing according to Larry Coon. Ed O.
I said you were wrong all along, Ed. It was up to you to prove your case, which you did not do. Unless you want to hire me as a paralegal, of course.
We won't know until the maximum salary is established for the first year of his extension. The $87m/$82m is a different discussion in terms of accuracy of what's being reported. Ed O.
Actually it wasn't up to me. You said I was wrong. I pointed you to evidence I was correct and asked for evidence that I was wrong. You did not show me ONE thing that supported your position. I don't take many people--especially you, no offense--who disagree with me merely at their word when I have what I believe is evidence that I am correct. Ed O.
Chad Ford reported the $87 million earlier today. He's since edited the number to the correct $82 million. The error people are making is that they don't take into account that the base number for calculating the team salary cap and the base number for calculating maximum salaries are two different figures in the current CBA (they were the same number in the previous CBA). The one used to calculate maximum salaries is lower than the other. Those saying $87 are using the incorrect (higher) number.
