Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
NJHAWK

Smooves trade kicker

39 posts in this topic

He has 48 mil left on his deal ( after year one is complete) so the most his kicker could be is 7.2 mill right? I dont think it is that high though because I think that added to his salary would take him over what he would be allowed to make under the cba. Anyway my ? is how does this make him harder to trade? Using the Chris Bosh deal as an example wouldnt a kicker bring Smooves salary closer or equal to what Bosh's # would be in a trade. The kicker doesnt accompany him to Toronto so it wouldnt deter them or any other team from trading for him. The only thing I can see holding up a deal is the ASG being cheap and not wanting to pay the kicker. Nevermind were not getting Bosh, lol.

Edited by NJHAWK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well its pretty hard to say anything about Smoove's deal since I don't think anyone on this board has specific information on the contract. All we can really do is make assumptions that are pretty safe to make:

Smoove's deal is for 5 years and worth $58 million. It was originally an offer sheet from the Grizzlies which means that the Max raises could be 8%. It is safe to assume that Max raises were used meaning the contract should look like this:

  1. $10,000,000 remaining value: $58,000,000
  2. $10,800,000 remaining value: $48,000,000
  3. $11,600,000 remaining value: $37,200,000
  4. $12,400,000 remaining value: $25,600,000
  5. $13,200,000 remaining value: $13,200,000

A big question with the contract is if there are any early termination options (ETO), team options, or player options. I haven't seen anything about those, so I can only assume there are none of those because it is usually explicit when a player has that in their contract (see: LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Amare...). So under the assumption of no options, here is what the trade kicker would look like for cap implications:

  • If Smoove is traded after Year 1 but before Year 2, 15% = $7,200,000. You take that and divide by the number of remaining seasons (4) and add that number ($1,800,000) to each of the remaining seasons. So it would be as if Smoove had a salary of $12,600,000. That is legal because it is under the Maximum salary for a player in the 0-6 years experience category.

  • If Smoove is traded after Year 2 but before Year 3, 15% = $5,580,000. You take that and divide by the number of remaining seasons (3) and add that number ($1,860,000) to each of the remaining seasons. So it would be as if Smoove had a salary of $13,460,000. That is legal because it is under the Maximum salary for a player in the 7-9 years experience category.

  • If Smoove is traded after Year 3 but before Year 4, 15% = $3,840,000. You take that and divide by the number of remaining seasons (2) and add that number ($1,920,000) to each of the remaining seasons. So it would be as if Smoove had a salary of $14,320,000. That is legal because it is under the Maximum salary for a player in the 7-9 years experience category.

  • If Smoove is traded after Year 4 but before Year 5, 15% = $1,980,000. You take that and divide by the number of remaining seasons (1) and add that number ($1,980,000) to each of the remaining seasons. So it would be as if Smoove had a salary of $15,180,000. That is legal because it is under the Maximum salary for a player in the 7-9 years experience category.

In the event that Smoove is traded during the season it becomes more complicated because you need to pro-rate his salary. It isn't hard to calculate, it would just be a waste of my time to put that in here. Also note that the trade bonus/kicker is paid immediately when the trade is made much like a signing bonus is. But for cap implications, it is counted evenly throughout the life of the contract much like a signing bonus is.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/...th-offer-sheet/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if Sekou said he is the guy in Atl why would they want to trade him. Also wondered if that meant they would be willing to give JJ less than max?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well its pretty hard to say anything about Smoove's deal since I don't think anyone on this board has specific information on the contract. All we can really do is make assumptions that are pretty safe to make:

Smoove's deal is for 5 years and worth $58 million. It was originally an offer sheet from the Grizzlies which means that the Max raises could be 8%. It is safe to assume that Max raises were used meaning the contract should look like this:

  1. $10,000,000 remaining value: $58,000,000
  2. $10,800,000 remaining value: $48,000,000
  3. $11,600,000 remaining value: $37,200,000
  4. $12,400,000 remaining value: $25,600,000
  5. $13,200,000 remaining value: $13,200,000

A big question with the contract is if there are any early termination options (ETO), team options, or player options. I haven't seen anything about those, so I can only assume there are none of those because it is usually explicit when a player has that in their contract (see: LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Amare...). So under the assumption of no options, here is what the trade kicker would look like for cap implications:

  • If Smoove is traded after Year 1 but before Year 2, 15% = $7,200,000. You take that and divide by the number of remaining seasons (4) and add that number ($1,800,000) to each of the remaining seasons. So it would be as if Smoove had a salary of $12,600,000. That is legal because it is under the Maximum salary for a player in the 0-6 years experience category.

  • If Smoove is traded after Year 2 but before Year 3, 15% = $5,580,000. You take that and divide by the number of remaining seasons (3) and add that number ($1,860,000) to each of the remaining seasons. So it would be as if Smoove had a salary of $13,460,000. That is legal because it is under the Maximum salary for a player in the 7-9 years experience category.

  • If Smoove is traded after Year 3 but before Year 4, 15% = $3,840,000. You take that and divide by the number of remaining seasons (2) and add that number ($1,920,000) to each of the remaining seasons. So it would be as if Smoove had a salary of $14,320,000. That is legal because it is under the Maximum salary for a player in the 7-9 years experience category.

  • If Smoove is traded after Year 4 but before Year 5, 15% = $1,980,000. You take that and divide by the number of remaining seasons (1) and add that number ($1,980,000) to each of the remaining seasons. So it would be as if Smoove had a salary of $15,180,000. That is legal because it is under the Maximum salary for a player in the 7-9 years experience category.

In the event that Smoove is traded during the season it becomes more complicated because you need to pro-rate his salary. It isn't hard to calculate, it would just be a waste of my time to put that in here. Also note that the trade bonus/kicker is paid immediately when the trade is made much like a signing bonus is. But for cap implications, it is counted evenly throughout the life of the contract much like a signing bonus is.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/...th-offer-sheet/

Ok so the kicker can be spread over the years of the deal cap wise. The Hawks are the ones paying the kicker right? It goes on the Hawks cap even though Smoove isnt here anymore. Also if Smoove is traded does his salary # in a trade = salary + the whole kicker? Again for example in a Smoove Bosh trade just guessing the kicker is 5 mil. Smoove salary 11mill + 5 mill kicker = 16 mill to Toronto for Bosh 16 mill. Am I right in saying a kicker would actually make Smoove more attractive to the team he is being traded to because they can send more salary to us then they have to pay for Smoove? I can see Toronto jumping at that.

Edited by NJHAWK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smoove wasn't going anywhere in the first place anywayz.... Thank you Memphis!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smoove wasn't going anywhere in the first place anywayz.... Thank you Memphis!!!

Hey if we can get Chris Bosh using Marvin, Speedy, Acie and picks Im all for it. Thing is they are prolly going to want Smoove and for discussion sake I just want to know all about this trade kicker. You are prolly correct though and Sekou said it about Smoove staying. Woody's exact words after game 7 vs Miami were that he loved Josh Smith and wouldnt trade him for anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok so the kicker can be spread over the years of the deal cap wise. The Hawks are the ones paying the kicker right? It goes on the Hawks cap even though Smoove isnt here anymore. Also if Smoove is traded does his salary # in a trade = salary + the whole kicker?

The Hawks don't pay the trade bonus, whatever team receiving Smoove does. The trade bonus has nothing to do with the Hawks cap except it increases the amount the Hawks will have to take back in a trade if they are trading with a team over the salary cap.

Again for example in a Smoove Bosh trade just guessing the kicker is 5 mil. Smoove salary 11mill + 5 mill kicker = 16 mill to Toronto for Bosh 16 mill. Am I right in saying a kicker would actually make Smoove more attractive to the team he is being traded to because they can send more salary to us then they have to pay for Smoove? I can see Toronto jumping at that.

No, you spread the trade bonus over the life of the contract. In your scenario you are failing to do that. In no way does a trade bonus make it "more attractive" for another team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Hawks don't pay the trade bonus, whatever team receiving Smoove does. The trade bonus has nothing to do with the Hawks cap except it increases the amount the Hawks will have to take back in a trade if they are trading with a team over the salary cap.

No, you spread the trade bonus over the life of the contract. In your scenario you are failing to do that. In no way does a trade bonus make it "more attractive" for another team.

Thanks for clearing this up for me. I thought the Hawks would have to pay for trading Smoove and it would make it easier for another team to take him. There is no way a team like Toronto would pay an extra 7.2 mil over the corse of 4 years. Maybe if it was smaller then that lets hope. Im sure there are teams like Dallas that wouldnt mind shelling out extra but those teams dont have Chris Bosh. Sekou is right then Smoove is the man HERE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Hawks don't pay the trade bonus, whatever team receiving Smoove does. The trade bonus has nothing to do with the Hawks cap except it increases the amount the Hawks will have to take back in a trade if they are trading with a team over the salary cap.

That basically shuts the door on the trade (the whole purpose of a kicker). For instance, For argument sake...

Smoove's salary is 10 million (just for argument).

A team trading for Smoove would have to be able to come up with 11.5 Million in their cap while only sending us 10 million. Right?

The only way it can work is if they have an exemption...

or

We have capspace to take on more of their salary.

right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That basically shuts the door on the trade (the whole purpose of a kicker). For instance, For argument sake...

Smoove's salary is 10 million (just for argument).

A team trading for Smoove would have to be able to come up with 11.5 Million in their cap while only sending us 10 million. Right?

The only way it can work is if they have an exemption...

or

We have capspace to take on more of their salary.

right?

I dont think so. I still think it plays out like this. Smoove salary 10mil + lets say a 5 mil kicker would have to be traded for a player or players in range of 15 mil. The problem is since the team your trading him to has to pay the bonus its going to make it tough. Boston did it to get Garnett but I believe he waived some of it. I dont think you can waive all of it legally but thats another tale for another day. A financialy struggling team like Toronto is prolly not going to pay a trade kicker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're talking about a <$2M difference/year, guys. It's not something to be overlooked, but I remain more shocked that the Grizzlies had the chutzpah to put it in the contract than it's actually effect on a trade.

Didn't think Memphis had it in them (this was prior to the Miles signing).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think so. I still think it plays out like this. Smoove salary 10mil + lets say a 5 mil kicker would have to be traded for a player or players in range of 15 mil. The problem is since the team your trading him to has to pay the bonus its going to make it tough. Boston did it to get Garnett but I believe he waived some of it. I dont think you can waive all of it legally but thats another tale for another day. A financialy struggling team like Toronto is prolly not going to pay a trade kicker.

No, and I've explained this already so I am getting a little annoyed. There is no $5 million in the context of the trade, that money is paid upfront but for cap purposes it is spread throughout the life of the contract. Like I explained earlier you take the trade bonus and divide it by the number of years remaining and spread it evenly throughout the contract. I have no idea where you get this idea of $15 million.

D all the trade kicker does is increase the salary of Smoove. Originally Smoove would have a salary of $10.8 mil in the offseason. That means we can take back within 125% +$100,000 of $10,800,000(*) if Smoove does not have a trade kicker. Now because Smoove does have a trade kicker that means if we wanted to trade him this offseason we actually are bound to the rules of 125% + $100,000 of a salary of $12,600,000 instead of $10,800,000.

What it appears is that people are confusing a trade kicker with a BYC. These are not the same thing, a trade kicker is like an additional signing bonus given in the middle of the contract and treated like a signing bonus. BYC has to do with the first year of a contract where a player receives a substantial raise. Smoove's BYC status will wear off at the beginning of this offseason.

*Edit on second paragraph.

Edited by hawksfanatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, and I've explained this already so I am getting a little annoyed.

Stay patient with us.

Your input is really needed on this board. We need a poster with a degree in "captology."

I am glad to hear its just a "trade kicker" and not some no trade clause like we see in baseball with Jake Peavy.

Not saying I want to trade Smoove for just anybody but it does keep the Chris Bosh dream alive or atleast not totally impossible...........even though it does lower the, already slim, probability of him being moved.

Edited by coachx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We're talking about a <$2M difference/year, guys. It's not something to be overlooked, but I remain more shocked that the Grizzlies had the chutzpah to put it in the contract than it's actually effect on a trade.

Didn't think Memphis had it in them (this was prior to the Miles signing).

Hey they're a small market struggling to survive, they'd do anything within their power to knockout the competition. At this rate FAs would have no choice but to sign there soon enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HF,

I hate to even mention this after all the work you've put into this, but do you think Sekou simply confused "trade kicker" with "BYC?" That would make more sense in the context of his quote...

I'll tell you what. I'll go check with the 'captologists' over on RealGM. Maybe someone can find out for us...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll tell you what. I'll go check with the 'captologists' over on RealGM. Maybe someone can find out for us...

LOL !

That will get him going. He seems to have a deep brewing hatred for RealGM.

Mrhonline, I thought you were a pretty good captologist in your own right. This board would be lost in dreamworld trades and transactions if it were not for you two guys.

Many thanks to both of you for your cap related posts over the years.

Seems we may have a really good follow up question for Sekou if he comes back for a round 2.

Edited by coachx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^Ha ha. That's why I offered to do it for him. :)

There are a couple of guys on RealGM that apparently have connections in the league office. The problem is that most of them are jerks. (No joke). At times, I've even emailed Larry Coon directly for clarification. He seems like a really nice guy.

But, in this instance, unless someone has access to the contract details, there's no way to know. I do find it odd that ESPN didn't mention it in their trade checker...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^^Ha ha. That's why I offered to do it for him. :)

There are a couple of guys on RealGM that apparently have connections in the league office. The problem is that most of them are jerks. (No joke). At times, I've even emailed Larry Coon directly for clarification. He seems like a really nice guy.

But, in this instance, unless someone has access to the contract details, there's no way to know. I do find it odd that ESPN didn't mention it in their trade checker...

Ya, I read realgm but do not post on the Hawks forum. The mods their run it like Nazis. There is a real dictator type of feel over there.

I love the freedom the squawk's give us. Props to the mods for that !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HF,

I hate to even mention this after all the work you've put into this, but do you think Sekou simply confused "trade kicker" with "BYC?" That would make more sense in the context of his quote...

I'll tell you what. I'll go check with the 'captologists' over on RealGM. Maybe someone can find out for us...

Certainly possible, I lean towards him not confusing the two but it would make sense in the context of "not going anywhere". And as you put it, those RealGM people are jerks but they are some of the few knowledgeable people on the website. Outside of the people on the CBA/Business Related Forum, I can't think of a RealGMer with a brain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think so. I still think it plays out like this. Smoove salary 10mil + lets say a 5 mil kicker would have to be traded for a player or players in range of 15 mil. The problem is since the team your trading him to has to pay the bonus its going to make it tough. Boston did it to get Garnett but I believe he waived some of it. I dont think you can waive all of it legally but thats another tale for another day. A financialy struggling team like Toronto is prolly not going to pay a trade kicker.

Garnett was a special case. His contract was on the old CBA and they allowed him to waive some. However, if Smoove's kicker kicked in, a team would have to come up with the funds to pay him and it counts on the cap like KG's did. Some even said that KG couldn't have been sent to the Suns because of his kicker and their lack of exemption to get him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.