Trade & FA 2023-24: Paul George to Test Free Agency After No Contract Extension

[dirkfansince1998]

Would anyone be suprised if they use the TP-MLE to bring back Powell? Could also imagine that they split the MLE among 2-3 players and reduce the amount of vet min guys they have to add to the roster if it reduces the potential luxury tax bill.

[ItsGoTime]

Would anyone be suprised if they use the TP-MLE to bring back Powell? Could also imagine that they split the MLE among 2-3 players and reduce the amount of vet min guys they have to add to the roster if it reduces the potential luxury tax bill.

Why? Just wait till Powell is sitting with no more than vet min offers (if he even gets that) and offer him the vet min. So done with the Powell blindspot.

---

Cuban will pay tax money for Powell, guaranteed.

[dirkfansince1998]

Why? Just wait till Powell is sitting with no more than vet min offers (if he even gets that) and offer him the vet min. So done with the Powell blindspot.

Not about what I would like to happen. Just thinking about similar situations  and how they approached them in the past.

[ItsGoTime]

Not about what I would like to happen. Just thinking about similar situations  and how they approached them in the past.

Welp, if we’re going by past experience, Powell is getting extended.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Would anyone be suprised if they use the TP-MLE to bring back Powell? Could also imagine that they split the MLE among 2-3 players and reduce the amount of vet min guys they have to add to the roster if it reduces the potential luxury tax bill.

He has Bird Rights.  Are you saying they'll give him about that amount?

[dirkfansince1998]

He has Bird Rights.  Are you saying they'll give him about that amount?

I am thinking about the way they used the MLE or BAE in the last 5-10 years.
If Kyrie stays and they are facing the luxury tax again I wouldn´t be suprised if they take a cheaper approach in the summer. Resign Powell above the minimum. Don´t use the full TP-MLE or split it among multiple guys (maybe even to resign their own guys).

Not convinced that we will see Powell + MLE + vet mins.

[loki]

I expect them to re-sign Powell for something sub-MLE. I wish they would instead prioritize a younger center like Reid or Hayes who could potentially develop into a solid starter. I suppose you could do both, but it's going to be a bit of a logjam with 3 centers and Maxi on the roster.

[SkenfromLMF]

I know Powell has not made Dirk like money, BUT Powell on a 1 yr $2.5 million contract does a couple of things.
A) it keeps his Bird Rights rolled forward
B) it gives Powell a No Trade Option

This is how Dallas operated with Dirk the last 4-6 years of his career. He would sign a near minimum contract and then get about a $10 million contract. The idea being that Dallas could create cap space every other year.
IF we keep Kyrie, this strategy could be implemented from having to endure repeater tax issues.

Just a thought

[SleepingHero]

I know Powell has not made Dirk like money, BUT Powell on a 1 yr $2.5 million contract does a couple of things.
A) it keeps his Bird Rights rolled forward
B) it gives Powell a No Trade Option

This is how Dallas operated with Dirk the last 4-6 years of his career. He would sign a near minimum contract and then get about a $10 million contract. The idea being that Dallas could create cap space every other year.
IF we keep Kyrie, this strategy could be implemented from having to endure repeater tax issues.

Just a thought

Pretty sure that's the quickest way for the Mavs to get into a load of trouble for circumventing the cap. 

Larry Coon's CBA Faq point 106.

The CBA also has a general prohibition on circumvention which states that the rules exist to preserve the benefit derived by the teams and players, and that nobody shall do anything to defeat or circumvent the intent of the agreement. The league can use this prohibition to disallow a signing or trade that they feel circumvents the CBA, even though it is not specifically prohibited by the agreement.

Examples of conduct considered to be circumvention include:

A team owner allowing a player to invest in a business or investment fund controlled by the owner or a friend of the owner.
A team executive assisting a player in obtaining a product endorsement.
Any "under the table" promises for a future contract (see question number 30).
A team's arena renting retail space to a player on the team.
A team selling a sponsorship to a business in which a player has an interest.
A team hiring a player's relative or business partner as an employee.
A team owner allowing a player the use of his private plane.
A company affiliated with a team's owner making a home available to one of the team's players.

Whenever a contract is signed, extended, renegotiated or otherwise amended, the team, player, and player's agent must certify, under penalty of perjury, that there are no side agreements or understandings of any kind relating to:

Any future contract, or future extension, renegotiation or amendment of the player's current contract.
Any outside compensation, investment, business opportunity or anything else of value furnished to the player or any other person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting on behalf of the player.

It's a nice idea in theory, but the Mavs can't just manipulate their balance sheets like that using Powell.

[F Gump]

Pretty sure that's the quickest way for the Mavs to get into a load of trouble for circumventing the cap. 

Larry Coon's CBA Faq point 106.


It's a nice idea in theory, but the Mavs can't just manipulate their balance sheets like that using Powell.

You're right, but you're not. The rule about circumventing is basically about team and player having an off-the-books obligation - especially one put in writing (therefore, one that's binding), or there's side money changing hands -- in all cases, where someone could sue someone else.

Their objection is for there to be a possibility for anyone to come back later and say that X was promised, and it didn't happen, and now you owe me.

With this rule, no one who does a deal can say to the other party that you have to do another deal later, and we just didn't write it down. The NBA says no, that second agreement wasn't legal or allowed, so it didn't ever exist.

Other than that, NBA is fairly lax. Especially if team-player do a CBA-legal move, and then are planning a different one next time around that's CBA legal, and neither player nor team have a claim to be legally obligated to do the 2nd.

In fact, from time to time we see jinky deal situations happen, and it's fairly obvious the team and player are doing multiple deals together. But if each step is allowed within the rules, they don't stop it. Although, they may add a new rule in the next CBA to keep it from happening again. Such as (how I remember them) The Boomerang Rule, The Keith Van Horn Rule, the Buyout-and Re-sign (to save tax) Rule, the Stretch-Waive and Re-sign Rule (to save tax), and more.

The bigger issue is trust, because both sides have to be able to trust the other to do step 2, when they have no obligation, since 1 side benefits from step 1 and the other will benefit from step 2.

One other issue with the Powell idea is that the benefit to this is to manufacture cap room in certain years by sliding cap hits from one year to the next  -- almost 0 one year, and then 2 year's worth the next. But Powell's shouldn't be big enough to be that much of a difference maker. And do you want to have a double hit in a year when you are in the tax, maybe? And with giant contracts for both Luka and Kyrie, will you ever really have cap room years?

[loki]

[Mavs2021]

[SleepingHero]

One other issue with the Powell idea is that the benefit to this is to manufacture cap room in certain years by sliding cap hits from one year to the next  -- almost 0 one year, and then 2 year's worth the next. But Powell's shouldn't be big enough to be that much of a difference maker. And do you want to have a double hit in a year when you are in the tax, maybe? And with giant contracts for both Luka and Kyrie, will you ever really have cap room years?

I mean if we're going by the OP idea, creating just enough cap room to allow us to use the full MLE and/or avoid hefty repeater tax penalties, then a double hit of Powell in year 2 would pay itself no? 

I know the NBA tends to look the other way on deals like this. Dirk got away with it just fine, was paid quite well in his twilight, and the NBA didn't have much to say. 

Still this would be a more egregious case, especially because Powell's JAG status in the league. If the Mavs tried this strategy and somehow got a big impact player hypothetically I can see the league investigating and attempting to close/enforce this loophole very quickly.

[DanSchwartzgan]

I mean if we're going by the OP idea, creating just enough cap room to allow us to use the full MLE and/or avoid hefty repeater tax penalties, then a double hit of Powell in year 2 would pay itself no? 

Another question to ask in this is whether there is someone out there who is worth $11mm who can’t be had for $7mm.  Free agency gets pretty meh pretty fast this summer.  I think the value of trimming salaries (whether this idea or asking Kyrie to take a discount) would be to set yourself up to be able to go after a S&T for someone like Grant.  Even there, the players worth that kind of trouble (and being hard capped) are a pretty short list.

Another way to save money is to answer ‘none of the above’ to our UFA current centers.  If we trade for one and still have Maxi and McGee, do we need either Powell or Wood?

[KillerLeft]

Another way to save money is to answer ‘none of the above’ to our UFA current centers.  If we trade for one and still have Maxi and McGee, do we need either Powell or Wood?

Depends on the one they trade for, I suppose. If it’s a bonafide starter, someone who’s going to play 30-35 minutes like Turner (just an example, not who I think it would be) then no, I would think Kleber being the only higher priced backup big would make a ton of sense. In fact, in that scenario I’d STILL want to dump McGee in favor of a MINIMUM salary 3rd center.

[mvossman]

Depends on the one they trade for, I suppose. If it’s a bonafide starter, someone who’s going to play 30-35 minutes like Turner (just an example, not who I think it would be) then no, I would think Kleber being the only higher priced backup big would make a ton of sense. In fact, in that scenario I’d STILL want to dump McGee in favor of a MINIMUM salary 3rd center.

In your Turner example I think I would prefer to have Powell on a roughly 5 mil contract.  Both Turner and Maxi have injury histories and Maxi can play some 4 when everyone is healthy.

[KillerLeft]

In your Turner example I think I would prefer to have Powell on a roughly 5 mil contract.  Both Turner and Maxi have injury histories and Maxi can play some 4 when everyone is healthy.

Sure, you could make an argument for that type of approach. I guess my point was that I’d rather have Kleber/minimum/minimum behind this hypothetical real starter at center than Kleber/McGee/minimum. But yeah, replace McGee with Powell and I’m cool with it, for sure.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/76ers...er-report/

[SleepingHero]

Another question to ask in this is whether there is someone out there who is worth $11mm who can’t be had for $7mm.  Free agency gets pretty meh pretty fast this summer.  I think the value of trimming salaries (whether this idea or asking Kyrie to take a discount) would be to set yourself up to be able to go after a S&T for someone like Grant.  Even there, the players worth that kind of trouble (and being hard capped) are a pretty short list.

Another way to save money is to answer ‘none of the above’ to our UFA current centers.  If we trade for one and still have Maxi and McGee, do we need either Powell or Wood?

I think the list of guys that would meet the criteria needed for this route would be so exceedingly small that it makes this approach unrealistic from the outset like you mentioned. 

Sure, setting ourselves up for a SnT of Grant with this method is clever on paper, but I'm sure there are a multitude of other avenues that don't require this overcomplicated route. POR for instance would be ruined without Grant. The Mavs could give them THJ+Wood for Grant's presumed 30+ mil salary and they could remain competitive. 

To answer the way of saving money by rejecting our current centers, I think Wood has run his course in Dallas. I wouldn't be surprised if they just let him walk. I'd rather they find a creative deal where they find a team and swap "guys-who-are-going-to-leave-anyway" to try and get some value, but I'm skeptical given Wood's current market value from this past TDL.

 I think Powell has carved a niche role that the Mavs are going to try to get him back, as long as his next contract doesn't exceed an exorbitant number. I don't see his suitors throwing him a lot of money, so I think the simple answer of saving money is to retain our current guys for cheaper and spend more wisely elsewhere. We currently have almost 20 mil of dead cap of guys that do not play in Bertans and Frank. That desperately needs to be resolved ASAP imo.

[Dundalis]

You have to remember with Powell, it's been proven he can be played off the court in the playoffs. Soon as teams started playing drop defense against PnR, Powell was completely unplayable, as we were basically playing 4v5 on offense. His minutes fall off a cliff as the playoffs went on.

He's not remotely reliable in the playoffs for a any type of big minutes moving forward, unless he magically develops a 3 point shot. Def gotta take that into consideration in any extension discussions.