Picky Picky
by shrink on Nov 25, 2009 1:30 AM CST
44 comments
After last night's narrow loss increased our chances for keeping the future pick we owe the Clippers, I thought this would be a good time to review the Collective Bargaining Agreement's rules on picks. There are a lot of myths and misconceptions out there, and since picks will be an important part of Minnesota's future, it'd be worth a look.
Imagine being so bad an owner, that the NBA actually creates a rule to stop others from doing something so inept! The so-called "Ted Stepien Rule" arose after the owner of the 80-83 Cavaliers traded away several years worth of first round picks in bad trades, leaving fans with a team with no talent and no hope for the future. The rule prohibits teams from trading away future picks so that they may get no first round pick for two consecutive years.
This has been a source of confusion, so let me debunk some myths:
1. This rule only applies to future picks. Once a team drafts a player, they can still trade the player's rights.
2. The rule doesn't say you're required to retain one of your future picks.
Let's look at the Wolves situation, where they owe a Top 10 protected 1st to LAC. Even if they get to retain their 2010 pick, they can't trade it right now because they may have to give LAC their pick in 2011. However, there are ways to solve the problem if MIN wanted to trade the pick. To get past #1, they could simply draft the player, and trade his rights to another team. If Rule #2 was a problem, they may be able to trade their pick if they were keeping the CHA or UTA pick instead, or they could even try to buy a late pick from a championship team.
See if you know these ten other facts about picks
1. Picks carry no salary consequences when it comes to cap matching trades of teams over the salary cap. If a trade works financially within the 125% + $100,000, adding a pick doesn't affect it in any way. This $0 value disappears when the player signs a contract, and obviously that value is used.
2. First round picks are assigned a cap hold based on 100% of their rookie scale once they have been drafted. If MIN was to get the third pick in the 2010 Draft, the 2010 NBPA Rookie Scale would show we have a cap hold of $3,444,400 cutting into our available cap space
3. First round picks can be signed for a minimum of two guaranteed years, and two more with a team option before their they are restricted free agents their fifth season with a qualifying offer. The initial offer can be within 80%-to-120% of the rookie scale, though it is common to always use 120%. The actual salary would obviously replace the cap hold.
4. First round picks that do not play for an NBA team, like Ricky Rubio, carry a cap hold for their draft position, but only during the summer -- when most free agent find new homes. Last summer, Rubio's cap hold was $2,724,300. Next summer, his cap hold will reset to the 2010 5th pick, $2,812,200
5. First round picks that come over within three season of being drafted have salaries based on rookie scale. If they come over after three years and didn't play college ball, teams have the choice whether to use the rookie scale, or signing him like any free agent with an exception or cap space.
6. Second round picks, like Nikola Pekovic, do not carry a cap hold or guaranteed salary. This is what makes early second rounders more appealing to teams seeking to sign a prospect that may not be in the NBA for several years.
7. Picks can't be traded away more than seven years in the future. In the current season, we could trade a 2016 pick, but not a 2017. Teams rarely trade distant picks because of the uncertainty of their value.
8. Draft picks can't be traded for 30 days after they sign.
9. First round picks can be sold, but for no more than $3 million dollars in cash. Several late 1sts have been sold for $3 mil in cash in recent years, and its highly likely we'll see it again this year. Since these picks have guaranteed two-year contracts and cap holds that cut into cap space, 2010's falling salary cap and luxury tax may encourage more teams to sell their first rounder.
10. The current first round picks and protections for the Timberwolves are:
OWE LAC a MIN 1st, Top 10 protected through 2011
UTA PICK: protected top 17 in 2010, top 15 in 2011, top 16 in 2012, top 16 in 2013
CHA PICK: protected top 12 in 2010, top 10 in 2011, top 8 in 2012, top 3 in 2013, unprotected in 2014
Any other questions? Email me at nba_economist@yahoo.com and your question may appear in a future mailbag!
1 recs |
44 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Realistically
How many games will we win?
10-71? Or do we go on a streak and hit 20?
If we’re going to be bad, let’s be super bad.
Nets, you’re going down (up)
Percy Harvin is my dealer.
by y2jayjk on Nov 25, 2009 1:45 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
We'll win more than 10.
Once Love comes back, this team will suck only really bad, as opposed to horrifically, mesmerizingly bad.
by Princely Frank on Nov 25, 2009 2:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
We went through the whole 9-73 Philadelphia comparison
a couple of season back in a 22 win season.
We’ll win 20 no problem. I shouldn’t be pleased, though.
I’m of the understanding that if the protection remains on that Utah pick through to 2014 (unlikely) that it reverts to two 2nd round picks.
I think Stephen Jackson will be our friend this season; he should do just enough to get the Bobcats out of the top 12. A pick in the top 3, another in the 13-16 range and Utah’s pick in the late teens/early 20’s would seem a possibility.
Judd: "...I've since watched some Steven Seagal movies and I realise that pressure points are no laughing matter.".
by Auswolf on Nov 25, 2009 3:39 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
solid point about jackson..
….we need to root for the guy to get the cats to pick 13.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 25, 2009 8:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
If Charlotte implodes and Jackson does to Charlotte what he did to GS, this is a top 10 pick in two years. If this group does win this year, their salary structure leaves them with no options but to go down the tubes.
by Rumblebee on Nov 25, 2009 1:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Because I think...
…this is the year where you can do the most wheeling and dealing and I don’t see them hanging on to it anyway. If it turns into a better pick, fine, but I’m good with it either way.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 25, 2009 3:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Talk about a win-win. I can’t decide if I want them to defer it and hopefully get a much better pick at a time when we could use it (like Utah with NY’s pick) or to get another, earlier shot at talent in a deep draft. Either way it works out pretty well.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
by Xand1 on Nov 25, 2009 4:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That was the beauty of this trade
The Wolves trade #18 in a weak draft and worse case probably end up with a late lottery pick sometime in the next five years. This is why as frustrating as this season has been we need to remember Kahn made a lot of smart moves last summer while not exactly dealing from a position of strength.
I prefer to wait a couple years and hope for a top 8 pick. The NBA draft is difficult enough in the top 8, it really turns into a crapshoot when you start drafting in the teens. Also, I’d rather have a #8 pick for wheeling and dealing than the #14. A lot easier to move from #8 to #4 than #14 to #6.
Also, I am hoping Charlotte keeps the pick this year because I believe if they don’t make the playoffs they start to dismantle an expensive roster. I really don’t see a scenario where Charlotte misses the playoffs this season then makes a couple moves to become a playoff team the next couple years. As Shrink was saying, now that Charlotte has traded the picks the Wolves get, it is difficult if not impossible for them to trade another 1st rounder, so there only option to improve is within or by trading current players (most of whom have OK to bad contracts).
by Rumblebee on Nov 25, 2009 6:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Personally, I'd rather we didn't get the Bobcats pick this year
I am doubtful that the Bobcats current collection of players will be successful andif so they may be headed for a rebuild. As we know, these things take time, and often will result in several years of lottery picks, and Charlotte’s salary structure is as bad as ours was. Moreover, the team is losing money and their owner is searching for a buyer, and in these cases, teams often trade away talent to slash costs. This pick has the potential to become an elite prospect if we aren’t forced to liquidate it this year on a guy that would, at best, be at the tail-end of the lottery.
by shrink on Nov 25, 2009 8:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the above statement
but I hope that the pick is included in a deal for a fire-sale veteran, rather than adding one more raw 20 year-old to the line-up to see if he “gets it.”
by PoorDick on Nov 25, 2009 8:23 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It may be very useful trading it back to Charlotte
If Charlotte’s current roster doesn’t work (and it might), then I think the CHA pick would become a very valuable trade acquisition for the Bobcats.
First, our two teams would be going in different directions, with our team trying to acquire talent, and their team trying to lose it to gain youth and salary reduction.
Second, owning their own pick gives the team more flexibility and self-determination under the Stepien Rule.
Third, it makes the franchise more attractive. If a new owner buys the Bobcats, one of the first things they’ll want to do is mold it into a new team that fits their vision. The draft remains one of the best ways to add an impact player that will be an inexpensive part of your team’s future.
Trades work best when assets are exchanged that have more value to the receiving team than the sender, so in effect, both teams win the trade. The Bobcats pick may soon have more value to the Bobcats than to any team in the league. If we decide to trade that pick, in a two-team or multi-team deal, Charlotte should be one of the first places we call.
by shrink on Nov 25, 2009 8:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Can't trade back-to-back #1 picks...
but the league CAN take them away from you. I always thought that was the strangest thing about the whole Joe Smith fiasco.
Illinois: My governor is a bigger crook than your governor
by John H IL on Nov 25, 2009 8:38 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Interesting point
I always thought the strangest thing about the Joe Smith fiasco was that McHale and Papa Glen were so concerned about losing him (e.g. being outbid) that they felt compelled to sign him to overgenerous contract under the table.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Nov 25, 2009 9:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Especially since McHale didn’t care enough about losing Googs to trade him and Peeler to the Lakers for Elden Campbell and Eddie Jones (as was rumored). For a guy who supposedly didn’t give a f&ck, he sure was panicky.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 25, 2009 10:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
When McHale has been away from the team long enough, I would be interested to see if he would comment on how much Taylor drove some of the contract decisions. I am thinking Smith, Wally, Hassell, Hudson which were four of the killers.
by Punisher#8 on Nov 25, 2009 11:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree on Smith
But from the outside looking in, Wally’s deal was considered below-market at the time (he just never got better), and Hassell and Hudson were partially driven by KG.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 25, 2009 3:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair, Hudson had a fantastic first year here
He actually played better his first season here than Billups did, and torched the Lakers in the playoffs. If anyone let us down that season, it was Wally.
I think it’s hard to really judge Troy’s contract. What hurt him more than anything was…well, he was hurt. If he had stayed healthy, who knows? He did a lot of things very well on the floor.
by Oceanary on Nov 25, 2009 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That was the beginning of the end
as far as not maximizing the KG era.
I wonder if Chris Paul knows what he is going to go through if the Hornets don’t trade him.
by Rumblebee on Nov 25, 2009 1:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
One side is too protect fans from bad owners
the other side is to punish bad owners.
by Rumblebee on Nov 25, 2009 1:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There's plenty of players in the draft worth keeping our picks for
John Wall obviously is one. Evan Turner as well (another triple double last night). Lots of big men that would fit in….Derrick Favors, Ed Davis, Greg Monroe, Jerome Jordan….
So I think trading or selling our top pick isn’t a good idea. Possibly trading down if we single out a certain player and feel we can get him lower in the draft.
by Oceanary on Nov 25, 2009 3:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Turner...
…they need him. We’ve been talking about him on this site for about 2 years now and if they don’t get him I’ll be pissed. Aldrich and Turner. That’s what they need to walk away with.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 25, 2009 3:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We should also note the mass setbacks selling top draft picks can create
We’ve already seen what happens when we try to trade out picks (Brandon Roy, OJ Mayo, etc etc).
But selling picks is an even worse idea. For example, check out the players that could have been Suns if Phoenix hadn’t kept selling their draft picks:
Luol Deng
Nate Robinson
Rajon Rondo
Segio Rodriguez
Rudy Fernandez
Marcin Gortat
The Suns face the same problem we did after the Joe Smith fiasco….no young talent waiting in the wings.
by Oceanary on Nov 25, 2009 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Deng and Robinson were essentially traded for each other (Robinson was selected with the pick the Bulls gave the Suns), and Robinson was included in the deal for Kurt Thomas. Rondo and Fernandez were also essentially traded for each other (the Celtics gave the Suns a pick that they used the next year). So all of them could’ve been Suns but not together. They also traded a first-rounder to Charlotte to bribe them into taking Jahidi White in the expansion draft (could’ve been used on Danny Granger), gave away the 2010 Knicks first rounder, and gave away 2 #1s to then-Seattle to take Kurt Thomas, so it’s not over yet.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Nov 25, 2009 4:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m sure the Suns would gladly settle for just having Rondo and Deng right now
by Oceanary on Nov 25, 2009 4:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But
would you rather have Turner than Wall?
by LoveTo on Nov 25, 2009 5:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Kind of hard to say
Wall is certainly more athletic, and might have more potential because of that athleticism. But he’s also a point guard, and kind of a troubled kid, while Turner is a swingman and an ace citizen.
We already have two very good point guards with a third phenom one on the way, while we have really no wings to speak of.
by Oceanary on Nov 25, 2009 5:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a good problem..
…to have. I’d love to have a post in June all about it.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 25, 2009 5:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
BTW:
I’d go Turner all the way.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 25, 2009 5:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would too
If there’s any one year I would hope we DON’T get the #1 pick, it’d be this year. It’d be very very difficult to trade away Wall and possibly have to live with another situation where we send away a star guard, but Turner makes more sense basically every angle you look at it. We need a swingman, we need a shooter, we need someone who can play in the triangle, we need a defender. Turner fits all the criteria.
Just…how would we justify trading away a #1 overall pick? The chatter we sent away the next Derrick Rose and constant comparisons to the Roy/Foye trade would be endless.
by Oceanary on Nov 25, 2009 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It would be difficult
Thats why in my recent fanpost I suggested going all in on this draft and running away with Wall, Turner, AND Aldrich if we get the top pick (and their draft stocks don’t change too much). This was also predicated on Aldrich’s stock dropping like most seniors who are not incredible athletes.
I agree though, it’s tough to walk away from Wall. Even if we do get the top pick, it’d be hard to do a Memphis type deal where we get Evans and “Miller” for Wall. Wall has so much more upside than Mayo…
by Mplax on Nov 25, 2009 7:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you see the recent profile of the guy
on Esspin?
A. He’s referred to as “a point guard”
B. He’s even more likable than you imagine
C. Which means we’ll be even more pissed if he’s not in a Wolves uniform next year
by PoorDick on Nov 25, 2009 5:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Uhoh
The number 21 has sentimental value to him…
by Mplax on Nov 25, 2009 7:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How much would we mind...?
Garnett did a lot here, but didn’t win any rings…when his number gets retired, it’s pretty likely it’ll be his Celtics 5.
Plus he’s turned into an asshole since leaving. I don’t know if many Wolves fans really think all that highly of him.
by Oceanary on Nov 25, 2009 7:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe we could have a co-retired jersey
21: Garnett and Turner.
I wouldn’t mind someone using a retired jersey if it was something significant like that and not just because they liked the number.
by Mplax on Nov 25, 2009 7:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We lose enormous credibility as a franchise...
… if we don’t let Garnett make that call. Lots of rookies change their number, and I’m not gonna like it one bit if we let some unproven dude take away the chance of putting a jersey in our rafters.
by TheH on Nov 25, 2009 8:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
yep..
…on fsn
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 25, 2009 5:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, because I knew that it was taken off ESPN.
I didn’t know if it was on FSN or KSTC-45 though.
by KGMN on Nov 25, 2009 7:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Crappy Wolves or Crappy Wild?
I pick Dog the Bounty Hunter.
Percy Harvin is my dealer.
by y2jayjk on Nov 25, 2009 7:24 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
