The Bulls could have made a deal to a team under the cap and gotten a trade kicker (which would have been like a 7 mill excemption) but it would have been hard considering I don't think we would have been able to do any sort of sign and trade with Orlando.

I still think this is moot...Memphis couldn't have gotten both of them and I'll still take Noc and Smith over Darco simply because I know what to expect out of Noc and I think people really underestimate his value (I still would have loved Darco and would have had no problem if the Bulls had a realistic way to get under the cap to get him).

I think on paper I'll take Noc and Smith over Darko as well, for a number of reasons. First, I'm not concerned about JR having to pay the luxury tax. Second, I'm just not as high on Darko as others here seem to be: IMO, if people were judging him to still be a potential star, and not just a role player, I don't think the Magic would have let him go, and he'd certainly be signing for more than $7 mil. And third, the Bulls have enough youth. Noc and Smith are much more of an experienced presence. Both of them have seen action repeatedly in the playoffs. And a stabilizing, playoff-experienced presence is still going to be important on this team next year, where hopefully it ends up being Deng, Gordon, and Thomas who are the key pieces carrying us.

in the end it was a good signing of noc. i now know that pax wouldnt have made this signing if it would affect signing BG or luol.

You wanted to know so I'll explain it to you. The Bulls salary was at $46.78 million before the Nocioni signing. That included Sweetney's qualifying offer of $3.654. Even though Nocioni was a free agent his salary still counted against the cap. I believe he made around $5 million last year although that number may be slightly off. So even though Nocioni was a free agent, that $5 million still counted against our cap. Also, if another team offered him a new contract, that number would count against our cap instead of the $5 million until we either re-signed Nocioni or until we renounced his qualifying offer.

So the Bulls could have released Sweetney (who they have no intention of playing put probably think his expiring contract will be valuable in trade talks next year), and they could have released Nocioni. That would have cleared up at least $8 million probably closer to $9.

$46.78 - $8 million = $39.78 + the rookie contracts which probably total $3.5 million and the Bulls would have a total salary of $43.28 which is $11.72 million under the cap. The Bulls could have pulled it off they just didn't want to.

But enough dwelling on the what if. I'm happy with the team going into next year.


Good website that talks about the cap.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#41

28. I just saw that a team signed a player for more money than it has under the cap. It was another team's free agent, so the Larry Bird exception wasn't used. What gives?

If one of the other exceptions wasn't used, it may just be the way the deal was reported. Only the first season's salary must fit under the cap, but signings are often reported using the total salary for the entire contract. For example, if a team is $10 million under the cap, they can sign a player to, say, a five-year contract for $10 million, $10.5 million, $11 million, $11.5 million and $12 million, respectively, for the five seasons. The deal then gets reported as five years for $55 million. But the first year salary is what counts, and it fits perfectly.

29. Can a team sign all the free agents it wants (up to the cap limit) and THEN re-sign its own free agents using the Bird exception?

Yes, but there's a restriction. A team's free agents continue to count as team salary (against the salary cap). This charge is called the "free agent amount." So there may not be enough money under the cap to sign another team's free agent, because the team's own free agents are taking up all their cap room.


A restricted free agent counts against his team's salary cap by the greatest of:

His free agent amount (as defined in the table above)

The amount of his qualifying offer (see question number 36)

The first year salary from any offer sheet the player signs with another team (see question number 36)


31. Why do free agents continue to count against a team's cap?

It closes another loophole. Teams otherwise would be able to sign other teams' free agents using their cap room, and then turn their attention to their own free agents using the Bird exceptions. This rule restricts their ability to do that. It doesn't close this loophole completely -- for example, in 2005 Michael Redd's free agent amount was $6 million, even though the Bucks intended to re-sign him for the maximum salary. By waiting to sign Redd last, the Bucks were able to take advantage of the difference by signing Bobby Simmons. Had they signed Redd first, they would have had no cap room to sign Simmons.

32. 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)

Damn, I think we get the point... jk... Seriously, thanks for posting that info. I definitely learned a new thing or two about salary cap

Yeah, my bad about the 15 posts in a row. The internet connection where I'm staying is bad. I've been using someone elses wireless internet. Anyway, each time I push sent yesterday it went to an error page like I had lost connection. I figured that the information didn't post so I kept trying.

Oh, I know. I was just messing with ya. Hell, the same thing happened to me in some other thread. I think the site was a little finicky last night b/c I know more than 1 person had trouble with pages loading, etc.

Ya, I am running massive queries in the background on the main server (the queries are taking up something like 60% of the server power) which means we are running on this thing with less than one leg (it will be that way until the Soxtalk work is complete early on this week).

They couldn't. You can go over the cap to resign your own guys, but not to sign other teams guys. Either Darko had to take the MLE or the Bulls could not sign him. The only other way we could have done this is if Orlando was interested in a sign and trade for Nocioni. The Bulls were not going to be able to sign Darko Milicic to a free agent contract at 3 years $21 million by themselves. You have to understand the salary cap rules in these situations before getting all upset about things that couldn't happen in the first place.

Well it has been pointed out that the Bulls could have, if they opted to withdraw themselves from Nocioni (kind of like what Orlando did with Darko in the first place) as that (combined with doing the same for Sweetney) would have given the Bulls ~ 11 million in cap room.

So I guess the question is whether Darko is better than Nocioni/JoeSmith. It is also important to bring up that the Bulls would have had to let Nocioni go when they didn't actually know for sure whether they could get Darko (which would be a risky proposition). Of course I'm sure if they wanted to take this approach they could have went hard for Darko immediately and gotten a verbal and than withdrew anything with Noc (not the contract, but just withdrew his rights making him a UFA).

I really have a hard time understanding all the sentiments sentiments on this board.

What has Darko done to warrant so much love?? Forget the fact that he was a #2 pick. Nocioni >>> Darko. How can you all forget about Noch's incredible passion and energy? He's a 15ppg player. In the playoffs, he's a beast (except for this season due to obvious reasons). He's a valuable player to the team. I wouldn't trade Noch for Darko anyday. Forget about need. We have Tyrus and Joakim to fill those shoes, and I am confident they will do so effectively.

APPRECIATE NOCH!

Oh, I appreciate Nocioni I just think we overpaid to keep him. We gave him starters money and he's a bench player except when we go small then he plays the 4. Not to mention he's a SF. SF bench players shouldn't be making starters money.

Anyway, I love Nocioni and I'm okay with him staying. I just think you underestimate how good Darko is going to be and how good he already is. He's not going to be the best big man in the league but that's not what we need. Darko's got and will continue to develop a sound low post game. Isn't that what everyone on this site including yourself think is what is best for this team? Anyway, I think Darko would have made more sense if we were going to pay either player $7 million. We can and will win without him but his low post scoring and defense would have made it easier.

Basically, what it comes down to is, would you rather pay 7 million for a really good starting PF or 7.6 million for a really good backup SF.

Sure it comes down to that... If you have both options equally easy, which the Bulls did not.

Sure it comes down to that... If you have both options equally easy, which the Bulls did not.