thecampster

Breaking some radio silence on something you've heard some of us talking about. On June 9th I bounced the following off the other insiders in the insider thread. I was on a strict don't talk about this publicly until the draft but I don't see the point in holding it any further. My post to the other guys on June 9th, slightly truncated. " Just had a very interesting conversation that I thought I'd bounce off of you guys. It is quite possible that anything we've heard, anything you are hearing in the media is false right now. I talked with the old source who is still being fed info even though he's out of his old job but that info is now 2nd/3rd hand. He states the Hawks are engaged in a major obfuscation campaign right now in order to hide their actual offseason activities. Per my guy, the org has been more active than in any other year past in spreading false information. Per the source, they do have a major fish lined up and they don't want anything to ruin it. So they and their partners are actively pushing false narratives out through their media leak partners and even unaware journalists. Even he isn't aware who the big fish is. Says its being kept very hush hush. Closed door phone calls only. My guy says it could drop around draft night and would involve 16 and future assets. I spoke with my only remaining full time source by chat who said, no...nuh uh...oh man that would make some sense and asked if he could get back to me. That was a while ago, no word. He went from "no way" to "holy crap" in about 8 prolonged seconds..... There might be something secret brewing." This was back on June 9th and discussions were had. I won't speak for the other guys. I tried checking in with whoever I could talk to over the ensuring days, every few days and kept getting a "we don't talk about fight club" answer. Up until June 9th, the only "big fish" we'd heard about were either Gobert or Ayton and something that had legs for a day or two about Simmons. The Hawks had continued to push the idea they were looking for a trade partner for Gallo so they didn't have to waive him. There was no other noise coming out of the org, just the constant dribble of rumors about swapping Clint for another big man. A week+ in to this, Travis went on the radio and stated we weren't making wholesale changes, everything was overblown. There was really no reason to say this publicly and immediately there after, the rumors about JC began to surface. My guy (guys) stopped returning calls until the primary guy today (not the guy feeding me this) when he said, something will drop tonight, I don't have details (stated earlier today). Since June 9th, he's confirmed something is up but hasn't brought forward anything new. In my years of being on the board and for many years hoarding info only for myself, I've never been shut out of info like this or been told something secret squirrel is going on for this long without details. One thing I gleaned, the desire to move on from JC is mutual but not combative or beyond repair. JC's fit with Clint is easily questioned but the proposed trades are mostly centered around John's desire to be in a more mature situation and the Hawks regretting all of the spending last year. The team was in a rebuilding phase since John arrived. Its been more unstable than he's comfortable with. The Hawks feel hamstrung. John is the 2nd highest paid player on the team, holds the most trade value and is arguably the easiest to replace with a free agent (like Portis), a year more of Gallo or a move to JJ. Neither party is happy with the potential split but both feel it may be the easiest path to their goals. Both would be happy if he doesn't move on by Thursday. It would be the least happy divorce in history. John loves Atlanta, Atlanta loves John. Its a matter of fit from both perspectives. It isn't a sure thing he's moved. They've shopped him aggressively to gauge his value against what they've already been offered for him. The original thinking was the best way to keep John was to pair him with a different center. That is no longer the only path forward. One thing driving the Hawks thinking is the Miami series. Its not that they lost but a number of things that happened in that series outlined below. 1. Trae being grabbed, manhandled by Butler. Nobody got in Butler's face. Hunter stepped in and separated them, pushed them both back but went straight at Trae talking to him. Bogi and Gallo meandered about but nobody got in Butler's face. What I'm being told is team executives, ownership watched that over and over and that no one took the tech to give Butler a shove, take the heat from the Heat bothered them and questioned their team psychological makeup. Mentioned was the shoulder chuck given by Solo the previous year to Taj. We lacked that moment. 2. The dirty play of the Heat targeting Young and Hunter repeatedly in the series was a further focus of the lack of an enforcer on the floor. Remembering that Clint was out the first 3 games and JC was hurt throughout the series. The lack of both a star who could bait a call and a goon to give a hard foul. Leadership has talked about the psychology of winning a championship and the effect the goon tactics of Draymond Green had for GS. They're aware. 3. That the Hawks 3 point shooters clenched during the Miami series was on notice. Leadership noticed the lack of clutch. The general feeling is the team played soft, played scared. That is the driving force behind their offseason plan. To get tougher.

Thought bubble for everyone here. One interesting player who rumors are won't get drafted is Scottie Pippen Jr. Concerns about his height, shot selection, handles. I could honestly see us taking him in the 2nd round or signing him after the draft to a G-League deal. He's got a very high BBIQ and patience which IMHO is greater than most measurables.

On Simmons, Nets have waffled back and forth but they are considering turning the PG duties over to him next year, walking away from Kyrie and back filling talent. Chance of landing Simmons right now is <5%, if that. Probably shouldn't even be discussed.

About 2, but this is a bit long.

Take this for what its worth but the current and 2 old sources are not returning my messages on the current media rumors. I've enjoyed radio silence for going on 3 days now. In my experience, this is the calm before the storm. Happens often right before something goes down.

JJ will be a 4 for us mostly but will be a combo forward. He is a 3/4 skill wise and can play both. He played the 4 throughout most of G-League.

Here's the question: By season's end, what's the drop off from JC to JJ (if any)? Can you spend JJ's $23 million somewhere else and slide JJ into JC's slot? Its not an LT question, its a best use of resources question. You currently have JJ, JC, Gallo on the roster. JJ costs less than 3 million. JC+Gallo = $45 million. I'm not saying I agree with the concept (not without seeing what comes back) but I am saying $45 million is a lot of money tied up in 2 players when you have a 20 year old player, locked in at $3 million / year for 3 more years (give or take) who may end up better than either. If you get rid of both and let JJ take over, you have a whole bucket full of money to upgrade the rest of the roster with.

This is very possible. There was a lot of smoke screening going on the last few weeks. Being 80 hours from the draft, we're definitely in the media rumors to hold front offices feet to the fire country. I would not trust anything you've heard the last few weeks but anything in the news this week probably is based in something, just not exactly what it seems.

The Kings rumors are based off old rumors but of course 2/3rds of the teams in the league would have interest in JC so it could be renewed interest. The Minny rumor is not old, its new. It hadn't hit the media yet but I mentioned it to a person or 2 privately a few days ago. I didn't see it as viable yet so I hadn't even discussed it with @Sothron or @NBASupes. I was only speculating what Minny might be willing to swap as I didn't know. I do know that Minny loves Huerter and always has. I know they love JC and always have, so any interest in Clint could be part of a bigger deal.

Part 2: Given our salaries, that the apron grows slower than the cap and that all of our current player salaries (save Bogi) have raises built in that are growing faster than the cap, we end up in a perennially higher than the Apron position. Meaning no use of exceptions. Our only way to improve/get better players is through consolidation trades, adding more minimum players. If we go another route this year, we can add that salary this year while we have other salary to add (the use of our our free agents in sign n trade). Above the apron removes the ability to use exceptions....this year we have assets to cobble together for others to go higher....Ayton doesn't give us this flexibility. The end result is not only this year but effectively capping us going forward to only veteran mins.

I worded that very poorly. I worded the result as opposed to the rule. Lets start with the rule. "A Veteran Free Agent and his Prior Team may enter into a Player Contract pursuant to an agreement between the Prior Team and another Team concerning the signing and subsequent trade of such Contract, but only if (i) the Veteran Free Agent finished the prior Season on his Prior Team’s roster, (ii) the Contract is for at least three (3) Seasons (excluding any Option Year) but no more than four (4) Seasons in length, (iii) the Contract is not signed pursuant to the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception or the Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception, (iv) the first Season of the Contract is fully protected for lack of skill, (v) the Contract is entered into prior to the first day of the Regular Season, (vi) with respect to any 5th Year Eligible Player (as defined in Article II, Section 7) who met one of the 5th Year 30% Max Criteria (as defined in Article II, Section 7), the Contract may not provide the player with Salary (plus Unlikely Bonuses) in excess of twenty-five percent (25%) of the Salary Cap (as calculated pursuant to Article II, Section 7) in effect at the time the Contract is signed, and (vii) the acquiring Team has Room for the player’s Salary plus any Unlikely Bonuses provided for in the first Season of the Contract. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the preceding sentence, a Team shall not be permitted to acquire a player pursuant to a Contract entered into in accordance with this Section 8(e)(1) if the Team’s Team Salary (as calculated pursuant to Section 6(m)(3) above) following the proposed transaction would exceed the Tax Level for such Salary Cap Year plus the Tax Apron Amount, and if a Team acquires a player pursuant to this Section 8(e)(1), then the Team’s Team Salary at all times thereafter during the Salary Cap Year may not exceed the Tax Level for such Salary Cap Year plus the Tax Apron Amount."

His initial thought here of "it can be done" isn't wrong. But he's missing the point of my initial post. Of all 3 options (nothing, Ayton, Gobert), Ayton is the most constricting because it institutes a ceiling just above our current salary level. I give him more props than all of RealGM, most congressmen, or any woman who thought Bill Clinton really wanted to discuss her career. Here's the rub: Minimum NBA salary 0 years experience Experience 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 0 $925,258 $1,563,518 $1,836,096 $1,988,598 1 $1,489,065 $1,752,638 $1,902,137 $2,057,646 2 $1,669,178 $1,815,677 $1,968,182 $2,230,253 3 $1,729,217 $1,878,720 $2,133,285 $2,402,862 4 $1,789,256 $2,036,318 $2,298,390 $2,575,475 5 $1,939,350 $2,193,920 $2,463,498 $2,748,090 6 $2,089,448 $2,351,521 $2,628,607 $2,761,767 7 $2,239,544 $2,509,123 $2,641,690 $3,037,946 8 $2,389,641 $2,521,613 $2,905,862 $3,037,946 9 $2,401,537 $2,773,776 $2,905,862 $3,037,946 10+ $2,641,691 $2,773,776 $2,905,862 $3,037,946 So with somewhere in the neighborhood of a max $19 million in salary and 8 salaries available, that's $2.375 million per player. So the current team minus Wright, Gallo, Knox, Mays, TLC, Cooper, Lou, etc.... replaced with 8 minimum salary level vets that you can convince to come. Or Gobert and there's no cap on what you can add in salary except that you can use your contracts in Dec/Jan on your roster to cobble together and pick up higher priced players. Its about flexibility and it only gets worse as the raises kick in for Collins, Trae, Huerter, Hunter. And that's the big one. Your ability to resign Hunter who you will have just hung your team on, goes to a capped rate. So even though you hold his rights, if someone offers him more than you can in RFA, you can't even match because you're locked at the apron.

Not a lawyer, that's @AHF and a few others. I'm a 25 year IT pro working in Cyber Security .

Did you look at the numbers? 7-8 players, 136-147 mil. 7-8 players left to add to the roster, 7-19 million in salary to allot to those 7-8 players.

You must be new.

Same math applies with the 154 mil hard cap no matter what scenario you craft

Snt, byc....you can only send about 19 mil out for his 30 mil salary because due to byc status, only about 19 mil will count.

For the Ayton crowd, please remember that a trade for Ayton effectively hard caps the team at a max $154.36 million (ish) in salary (apron 22-23) and caps us at the apron every year for the next 4 years. If the Hawks snt trade for Ayton, you can say goodbye to getting anything of value back for Gallo, keeping Gallo this year an/or keeping more than Wright when any player comes up for free agency. Let me simplify it. Waive Gallo, snt max Ayton for Capella...no other moves....we're at $146.88 million in salary with 9 players on the roster and only 7.5 million in room left under the apron. Take a second and think that through. Stretch Gallo and you get 3.3 million more this year. Trade Bogi for a few scrubs and you get more players and can build the roster with min vets. But the cap gets/stays very tight. Technically, trading 2 players for Gobert (or other) and waiving Gallo leaves you with no hard cap and less money spent on the cap to build off of. See below (Make sure you understand it before championing 1 or the other). Total $136,339,507 $146,882,610 $136,805,024 Apron 154360000 154360000 154360000 Room under Apron N/A ($7,477,390) N/A LT 149000000 149000000 149000000 Amount under LT $12,660,493 $2,117,390 $12,194,976 Players on Roster 8 8 7 No change, waive Gallo minus Capela, Gallo minus Capela, Bogi, Gallo Plus Ayton Plus Gobert

Jinx..you owe me a coke.

Do you have a link you can post to Mitchell/Collins?

I'm less than optimistic we'll complete a sign n trade because of the cap limitations associated with a sign-n-trade. Limiting yourself to not being able to go above the tax apron (hard capped). "The Tax Apron amount increases (or decreases) each year at one-half the rate of increase (or decrease) in the Salary Cap." https://cbabreakdown.com/ Now read that up top. Although the apron amount increases, it increases slower than the cap. Unlike the LT level which increases equal to the cap, the apron increases less. It's always more than the LT and the amount more increases but the % more than the LT is always shrinking. Because contracts normally progress at 8% annual increases, this makes maintaining salary at or below the apron increasingly difficult and for the life of the sign and trade agreement. Translation: If we completed a 4 year SnT deal for Ayton, we get progressively less and less free salary to work with until the deal expires. If an opportunity to acquire a star comes about, we may be handcuffed from acquiring due to the trade rule and not our willingness to pay the LT. Teams willing to pay the LT to win championships don't do SnT deals because it shortens their windows. Can it be done? Yes! Is it a gamble? Yes. Best way out of the handcuffs? Trade the player you acquired via SnT.

when something can be multiple players, the CBA is very good about saying player(s). For ex: "Room A team may sign players to the extent it has “Room.” Room is either: (i) the amount by which a team’s Team Salary is less than the Salary Cap; or (ii) the amount of an “Exception” to the Salary Cap. Examples: (1) (2) (3) D. Salary Cap = $101.869 million; Team Salary = $85 million Team has Room of $16.869 million and may sign player(s) for up to $16.869 million. Salary Cap = $101.869 million; Team Salary = $110 million Team has $8.641 million Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception. Team has Room of $8.641 million and may sign player(s) for up to $8.641 million. Salary Cap = $101.869 million; Team Salary = $130 million; Tax Level = $123.733 million Team has $5.337 million Taxpayer Mid-Level Salary Exception. Team has Room of $5.337 million and may sign player(s) for up to $5.337 million. "

The language is important in understanding this. The language states, the team signs and immediately trades him to another team. The signing and trading is 1 action. Signing then packaging, then trading is 3 separate actions. The language is meant to be understood the act of signing is to trade the player to his preferred destination. One reason you can't "include" other players is to get around the matching requirements (ie byc). This is why all multiplayer deals from the sending team in a sign n trade are completed as 2 simultaneous trades. Although you may see some deals (sign n trade) that look like multi player, its actually 2 separate deals. I talked last week about the order trades are processed and it mattering. In a simultaneous trade, the 2 separate trades happen at once in order to satisfy salary trade rules. This is one way to get around salary x doesn't line up with salary y. If Trade 1 pushes a team under the cap, their half of trade rules don't apply and then trade 2 can go through. In most cases, the media reports this as one trade but you can see it in their language. They'll usually say, "GW send Bob and Mil send harry, sally, Barney. GW will also receive Fred and send a 2nd round pick to Mil." Although it seems like 1 deal, its actually 2. http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap05.htm The language in SnT situations is: 79. Can a free agent be signed and immediately traded? Under no circumstances can a team sign and then trade another team's free agent. But there is a rule that allows teams to re-sign their own free agents for trading purposes, called the sign-and-trade rule. Under the sign-and-trade rule, the player is re-signed and immediately traded to another team. This is done by adding a clause to the contract which stipulates that the contract is invalid if the player's rights are not traded to the specific team within 48 hours. A sign-and-trade deal can be made even with players who have been renounced, but cannot be made when the player is signed using the Mid-Level, Bi-Annual or Disabled Player exceptions. Sign-and-trade contracts must be for three years or longer, but only the first season of the contract must be guaranteed. The three year minimum (even though the last two seasons may be non-guaranteed) ensures that the new team will not acquire Bird rights to the player any sooner than if they had signed him directly, because they would have to waive him, after which they wouldn't be able to use Bird rights (see question number 26). One complication with sign-and-trade deals is that the signed player can immediately become a BYC player (see question number 76 for more information on BYC), so the player's BYC value must be used when determining whether the trade is allowed. If a sign-and-trade contract contains a signing bonus, then either team can pay it. By default the team that signs the player pays the signing bonus (as with any other contract), but since a sign-and-trade is in essence a contract with the receiving team, the teams can agree that the receiving team will pay it. However, any portion that is paid by the signing team counts toward the $3 million limit for cash included in a trade (which in effect limits the portion of a signing bonus that can be paid by the signing team to $3 million). If a sign-and-trade contract contains a trade bonus, then the bonus is not earned upon the trade that accompanies the signing, but rather on the first subsequent trade. See question number 83 for more information on how long a team must wait after signing a contract before they can trade a player. Language from the CBA: https://cdn.nba.com/manage/2021/03/2018-19-CBA.pdf "Additional Trade Rules (1) Sign-and-Trades. Teams are prohibited from signing a free agent pursuant to an agreement that the player will later be traded to another team unless the free agent being signed is the team’s own free agent. In addition, these “sign-and-trades” are permitted only if (i) the contract is for three or four years, (ii) the first year of the contract is fully guaranteed, (iii) the contract is entered into prior to the first day of the regular season, and (iv) the player finished the prior season on the signing team’s roster. The maximum annual salary increase for a sign-and-trade is 5% of the salary in the first year of the contract. A team may only acquire a free agent via a sign-and-trade if the team’s Team Salary post-transaction and at all times thereafter during that Salary Cap Year 10 --does not exceed the Tax Level for the then current Salary Cap Year plus the Tax Apron Amount (see Section I.F.(3)(e) above). " Now let me uncomplicate this: Logically speaking a sign n trade is team B's way of signing a player they could not otherwise afford. When you sign a player, you don't get 3 players for 1. Sign n trade is an agreement to sign n trade that player. Not an agreement to sign n trade a player but take my garbage. The language of the CBA prohibits circumvention of the CBA. Therefore a simultaneous trade where 2 separate trades happen is the only way to follow league rules. The media doesn't always report it, but that is what happens. The main reason for "other players" is that team B has rules related to the apron and the luxury tax. The language is and at all times thereafter during the salary cap year. So in many cases, the trade of a player (say Capela for Ayton) would count 19 million for trade purposes but would increase the team's salary by another $11 million. On a cash strapped team, that would/could push them over the apron. The simultaneous trade allows them to send extra salary they might not be permitted to in clean up that room. Since the trade is "simultaneous" at no time is the team above the apron. If the trade was the player (and assets) they would have written the language as "or with other players or picks" but they didn't. You can trade "the player" any other shenanigans to make the trade work is a separate, simultaneous trade. Nobody argue...I won't respond.

Dallas was considered a top suitor for and interested in Gobert. Reduced the number of teams that could take Gobert and send back something Utah needed by 1.

Dallas getting Wood shortens the market for Ayton/Gobert. Might make trading for them cheaper now.