Childress really goes to Greece

[Skates]

Three year deal per ESPN.  Iggy to Bulgaria next (inserted for sarcasm purposes only).  Hawks remain a class A franchise.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3501488

[jemagee]

I like the part in the AJC article where it says that the hawks offered a 'big deal' and then since chidlress didn't agree fast enough switched it to an MLE deal...

I still think on all levels, since it's the hawks, the greece deal is a great one for childress...who reportedly has the right to opt out after each season to return to the NBA.

Sadly the hawks will still own his rights.

So since this has never happened, can the hawks now trade his rights?  If the hawks don't renounce his rights, does the cap hold 'permantnetly' stay on the hawks...i mean, this has got to be something they didn't cover in the CBA, right?

[shadowTerp]

So since this has never happened, can the hawks now trade his rights?  If the hawks don't renounce his rights, does the cap hold 'permantnetly' stay on the hawks...i mean, this has got to be something they didn't cover in the CBA, right?

That's a great question.  Anyone? 

[jemagee]

Like I said, I bet the CBA doesn't cover it...but can you imagine the chaos if the nba decides you have to keep the cap hold to keep the players restricted rights...a guy not even on your payroll...playing for another team?

A new way to get unrestricted free agency quickly and still make more money is opened up to anyone who wants to risk a year or two in europe...this could open a whole new can of worms for the NBA.

The ruling that kind of makes sense to me is that the hawks retain his Restricted rights, but it has no cap hold effect unless he's attempting to come back and sign with an NBA team...while he's under contract in greece it's like 'draft rights'.

[Skates]

So since this has never happened, can the hawks now trade his rights?  If the hawks don't renounce his rights, does the cap hold 'permantnetly' stay on the hawks...i mean, this has got to be something they didn't cover in the CBA, right?

That's a great question.  Anyone? 

They either retain his rights or renounce him, you can't have it both ways.  If they don't renounce him the cap hold stays.

Here is the FAQ on this subject:

When do free agents stop counting against the team's cap?

When any one of the following three things happen:
The player signs a new contract with the same team.  When this happens, the player's effect on his team's team salary is based on his new salary.


The player signs with a different team. As soon as this happens, the player becomes the new team's problem, and his salary no longer counts against his old team.


The team renounces the player.  (See question number 33)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


33.  What does renouncing a player mean?

As detailed in question number 30, free agents continue to be included in team salary.  By renouncing a player, a team gives up its right to use the Larry Bird, Early Bird, or Non-Bird exceptions (see question number 19) to re-sign that player.  A renounced player no longer counts toward team salary, so teams use renouncement to gain additional cap room.  After renouncing a player, the team is still permitted to re-sign that player, but they must either have enough cap room to fit the salary, or sign the player using the Minimum Salary exception.  The exception to this is in the case of an Early Bird free agent who is coming off the second season of his rookie scale contract.  Such players, when renounced, are treated as Non-Bird free agents. After renouncing a player, a team can still trade the player in a sign-and-trade agreement (see question number 76).

The team in Greece does not count as signing with a new team since they are not an NBA, if they did the Hawks would not have the option of retaining his rights.  I am not sure the renouncing issue is a big one for them.  Given their current salaries and Josh Smith's cap hold they would not be under the cap even if they renounce Childress.  The cap hold does not count for luxury tax purposes, so I see no need/advantage for them to renounce him.

[jemagee]

But let's take this to a bigger step.

Let's say when greg oden - the first round pick in the draft - hits restricted free agency...he signs a one year deal for 15 million dollars in greece...at the beginning of free agency...fine the blazers don't renounce him but they have that cap hold preventing them from doing as much off season work as they want to do?  Do they keep that 'dead space' on their books, preventing pursuing other free agents?

The cap hold does not count for luxury tax purposes, that's great, when's the last time a cap hold lasted more than one off season though?

[Derek Bodner]

The cap hold does not count for luxury tax purposes, that's great, when's the last time a cap hold lasted more than one off season though?

Um...

the Sixers just renounced Rick Mahorn.

[jemagee]

When was Rick Mahorn a restricted free agent under the CBA?

[Derek Bodner]

You don't have to be a restricted free agent to have a cap hold.

Here's a pretty good list of guys you wouldn't expect to still have cap holds, but do.  Some of the headliners: Sam Mitchell (yes, head coach sam mitchell), Detlef Schrempf, Danny Manning, Rik Smits.
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-30-10/Aaron-McKie-is-Not-the-Only-NBA-Coach-Who-Could-Get-Traded.html

[Skates]

But let's take this to a bigger step.

Let's say when greg oden - the first round pick in the draft - hits restricted free agency...he signs a one year deal for 15 million dollars in greece...at the beginning of free agency...fine the blazers don't renounce him but they have that cap hold preventing them from doing as much off season work as they want to do?  Do they keep that 'dead space' on their books, preventing pursuing other free agents?

The cap hold does not count for luxury tax purposes, that's great, when's the last time a cap hold lasted more than one off season though?

At least the rookie hold is much smaller than the hold for Childress whose hold is 300% of his fourth year salary.

When was Rick Mahorn a restricted free agent under the CBA?

He wasn't restricted, it had something to do with renouncing their Bird rights in Mahorn (insert joke about Mahorn's bird at your own risk, the dude even gets ejected in WNBA brawls) who had not filed his retirement paperwork yet.

[jemagee]

Yes, and I understood that, and the point is I still think childress is a different issue than all the names you mentioned as that even with cap holds, they are unrestricted free agents, if they wanted to sign with another team the team holding their rights couldn't do anything about it, restricted free agents have a special 'tool' attached to them that ALL the names you mentioned (I'm pretty sure) don't have...so yeah,it's a different kind of thing to me

[jemagee]

But let's take this to a bigger step.

Let's say when greg oden - the first round pick in the draft - hits restricted free agency...he signs a one year deal for 15 million dollars in greece...at the beginning of free agency...fine the blazers don't renounce him but they have that cap hold preventing them from doing as much off season work as they want to do?  Do they keep that 'dead space' on their books, preventing pursuing other free agents?

The cap hold does not count for luxury tax purposes, that's great, when's the last time a cap hold lasted more than one off season though?

At least the rookie hold is much smaller than the hold for Childress whose hold is 300% of his fourth year salary.

I'm actually referring to when greg oden becomes a restricted free agent, iisn't the cap hold of the first round pick (at 300%) like 15 million dollars?  That's kind of a big hold...if he signs in europe and the blazers don't renounce him his cap hold limits their ability to be a player in free agency because it is for all intents and purposes, dead money during free agency...just in the way.

[Derek Bodner]

Yes, and I understood that, and the point is I still think childress is a different issue than all the names you mentioned as that even with cap holds, they are unrestricted free agents, if they wanted to sign with another team the team holding their rights couldn't do anything about it, restricted free agents have a special 'tool' attached to them that ALL the names you mentioned (I'm pretty sure) don't have...so yeah,it's a different kind of thing to me

How?

You asked when was the last time a cap hold extended more than 1 year.  I provided the answer.

From a cap perspective, the hold on a restricted free agent is equivalent to an unrestricted free agent. 

These guys aren't being renounced because their teams can then use their bird rights to re-sign them as filler for trades.  This happened twice this past year (Aaron McKie in the Gasol deal, KVH in the Kidd deal).

The reasoning to keep the cap holds is even more for restrictive free agents, because not only do you get the ability to s&t to match salary, but you also retain the ability to match.  Renouncing restricted free agents would be an even dumber move for a team over the cap.

Now, if you want to ask: "When was the last time a team carried over a restricted free agents cap hold", ok, but that's not the question you asked.

Restricted free agents, 99% of the time, are guys coming off the rookie scale contracts.  That's why you're not going to see many cap holds carried year to year in this situation.  Most of the cap holds that teams hold onto are guys who retire, without officially signing the paperwork.  There really is no precedent for a player after only 4 years in the league retiring/leaving the league.  I don't believe that makes it less likely the hawks retain his cap hold/bird rights.  In fact, I think it makes it more likely.  There's no benefit for the Hawks to renounce his rights unless they get over the cap.

[jemagee]

Ah I get it now, the fact that tthe entire thread was about a restricted free agent (until you made it not about a restricted free agent) wasn't enough to infer...

Since it's an unheard of situation it's possible that the NBA treats it differently, that's all i was thinking...obviously, you already know how they'll deal with the situation that hasn't happened before?

[Derek Bodner]

Ah I get it now, the fact that tthe entire thread was about a restricted free agent (until you made it not about a restricted free agent) wasn't enough to infer...

Here I thought the discussion was about the cap hold.  Not sure how I got that idea.  You know, except that I quoted a post about cap holds.

I also posted a link that shows players with cap holds extending with a higher amount than Childress.

If you want to make it a different case, even though Childress's $8+ million cap hold has the same effect as an unrestricted free agents $8 million cap hold, be my guess.  But it's not, and what I posted is entirely relevant, and answered your question.

The beautiful thing about the CBA is it's available for the public to see.  some of us chose to inform ourselves about the rules the CBA sets forth.  If you wish to ignore it and be ignorant of it, that's your choice, but yes, we do know how they'll deal with a situation before it's happened.  Hence the purpose of rules and the CBA.

(using a bit of jem argument style).