AZ/PHI Hoops Again

AZ gets:

Dwyane Wade PG/SG MIA 7.5 *Phi paying 7.5*


PHI gets:

Pick 15
Pick 22
Pick 23
2015 PHI 2

Lol we all played hot-potatoe with Wade this off-season haha

Accept

Darrin you have been so questionable this offseason.  Did you really trade for Wade so you could pay on his salary and ship him away for 2nd rounders?  I have no idea what you are doing.   

Only approving if Dan and JI come on and apologize for saying AZ 2014 2nd was equal to a 2015 1st rounder.  We all know JI doesn't sit by and watch his team lose.

Approve

i have been up n down this offseason too!!

threw wade n rubio out, only to deal for em again!!

just couldnt commit to a total rebuild at all!! at least this way, i can fight for the year, and i still have a few picks to have a franchise future

now that im gonna be somewhat good, that 2015 1 def is much more than 2014 2 now, haha

SMH

I wanted Thais 2025 1st hoping it would be a piece to get Mich 2014 1st and I thought I would try to make a run but decided to stick to a rebuild thus Bynum and wade being moved

They're gonna help me finish 5th place-- just out of the playoffs!

I don't really understand the money part on this though. Acquiring wade for a slew of late second round picks and a single first rounder is fine I guess but having half of his salary paid too?

I remember when people were in an uproar when Michigan was receiving a top 10 pick in the draft (Austin rivers) and Brandon knight while paying half of wades contract.

I can understand a buck or two but $7.5? That means wades contract is currently only 38% of what it originally was. I mean I try to get creative at times too like by having darrin include Jason Kidd to help "pay" some salary but this I dunno....

i understand

but with darrin totally bowing out, saving 7.5 is kind of an asset

no one was touching wade from him, so he gets 4 assets + 7.5 vs using wade the yr for nothing

i totally agree with having some kind of limit tho

I approved but

I agree with Thai, paying off 7.5 mil of Wade was too much.

If you wanted Wade JI, you should be willing to pay for him and if you can't afford him, then don't acquire him.

This is a lopsided trade mainly because Darin doesn't care about his money spent this year because he decided to commit to rebuilding.  But Wade going from 20 mil to 7.5 mil is a bit ridiculous and makes him a much better asset to JI.

JI can essentially turn around and demand more than what Darrin received for Wade.  Because of course, DWade at 7.5 mil is worth more than DWade at 15 mil.  Heck someone could go around trading for guys and getting teams that didn't care about salary for that year to pay on salaries and then flip the players for more.  It shouldn't be allowed.  And frankly we wouldn't have to worry about it if the rules didn't constantly keep getting pushed. 

We may have to look at modifying our rules.

We are going to have to think about making a rule where the max a player can be paid on is 50% of his yearly salary or something of the sort.

It's really frustrating having to have a conversation about every Philly trade.

I def agree...and that's why I didn't process til you reviewed as I figured it'd be tricky.

7.5 was pushing it, and I def wasn't gonna go any further than that.

I'm thinking about this

1) A players salary can never be less than 50% of that year's yearly salary
2) If you acquire a player through trade where the other party paid on that player's salary.  You may not trade that player until the end of the current year.  (Essentially until the next offseason)

DmanofGod1 wrote:We are going to have to think about making a rule where the max a player can be paid on is 50% of his yearly salary or something of the sort.

It's really frustrating having to have a conversation about every Philly trade.

I have always agreed, but am done trying to fight every trade like this.

I know sam is commish but with he's sch right now, not sure why D can't just take over and fix the rule. i think if we have roll over the should be a max paid to players OG contract. Wade going form 20M to 7.5M is a little funny

50 % of the salary they are at, or were originally at?

and, id say a 50 perc but gotta keep def works, as that way i cant take a wade n flip him n get more since his rate is considerably less

DmanofGod1 wrote:I'm thinking about this

1) A players salary can never be less than 50% of that year's yearly salary
2) If you acquire a player through trade where the other party paid on that player's salary.  You may not trade that player until the end of the current year.  (Essentially until the next offseason)

Now your talking!

Wether or not darrin is competing or not shouldn't have any impact on Wade's value at all. That's like saying you're gonna trade Durant for three second rounders while paying $10on his contract because you're out of the playoffs.

And I'd be fine with having a new rule prohibit me from moving Wade-- even tho the rule would be after the fact.

Tho my plan was that if I sucked/struggled, move Wade at the deadline, where his 3.75 contract would net a sweet return.

50% of his orginal contract.  At some point Wade was worth 20 mil.  So he can never go under 10 mil or under what a buyout could provide for that year

For example:
Player A Original contract - 10/12/14/16/18

The most that can be paid on player A PER YEAR is - 5/6/7/8/9

And yes #2 is so you can't turn around and flip Wade for more.  I have no problem with this trade if JI keeps Wade the whole year but if he's flipping him later, it's just not right.

i agree with both

id agree if the trade can stand, id keep him for the whole yr

n future deals would mean 50% of original....but i should be allowed to keep him at 7.5 since it was before any new rule

tho id agree to keep the whole yr, so both sides get something

Personally I'd say just limit the amount an owner can pay per year overall such as $5 per year.

Say London wants to pay $5 each year for the next three years on Danny Granger, he's used up his "allowance" and can no longer pay on any outgoing contracts. I would think this would be an easy excel to maintain. 

It would make your get a little bit more creative with trades by having to have player contract move as opposed to "here's a boatload of cash"

I like the allowance idea, but I'd say 10...that way it's just about 10perc of our cap

Paying on players in trades

1) A players salary each year can never be less than 50% of that year's original salary when first signed.
2) If a team acquires a player where the other respective trading team paid any amount on that player, that player may not be traded until the following off-season.


Buyouts to retain their value are 50% of the current salary owed but if it gets out of control, we may have to think about changing buyouts to only being 50% of the original salary owed.  Thus Wade could never be bought out because 50% of the this year's orginal salary is 10 mil and he is already less than that.  Thoughts?

And I think that's a good compromise JI.  If you agree to keep him the whole year, you can have him at 7.5 mil.

much more reasonable for $$$ to go around in a sport like baseball but basketball/football is a bit diff

so 10% be fair, imo

MistaDuMa wrote:Personally I'd say just limit the amount an owner can pay per year overall such as $5 per year.

Say London wants to pay $5 each year for the next three years on Danny Granger, he's used up his "allowance" and can no longer pay on any outgoing contracts. I would think this would be an easy excel to maintain. 

It would make your get a little bit more creative with trades by having to have player contract move as opposed to "here's a boatload of cash"

 I'm open to this idea but the only thing i don't like is it's another thing we have to keep track of for each darn team

Hmm... Thai's idea prevent teams from paying like 30 mil of their cap on players from other teams.  I like that idea.

yep!

still say 10 tho since 10perc is a lil more fair n fun

Paying on players in trades

1) A players salary each year can never be less than 50% of that year's original salary when first signed.
2) If a team acquires a player where the other respective trading team paid any amount on that player, that player may not be traded until the following off-season.
3) The most any given team can pay each year on contracts for players not on their team is 10.5 mil, 10 % of that year's cap.  (This does not include buyouts used as that is separate)

I think 10% sounds good.  Have to run these by Sam and the rest of the league but this may be something we can vote on.