2020-2021 ROSTER TALK: Archived

[DanSchwartzgan]

What I don't understand in both of your posts is the "we don't have the cap room in '21 to do this" part. If they went the Chandler route, wouldn't they have just the difference between his cap hold and his non-guaranteed salary affecting things and then could pay him whatever salary needed as you said earlier? It would seem that cap room then isn't an issue at all. 

That’s exactly what I wrote.  Reread the last paragraph where I say “don’t have to have cap room”.  

Yesterday’s conversation where I said cap room would be needed (if the approach is CBA legal) referred to doing what Chicago might do with LaVine.  They have the same 120% (in LaVine’s case of previous salary). Eric Pincus has written that Chicago could renegotiate LaVines 21 salary AND THEN extend him based on the new salary.  But, Chicago would have to have cap room to do this.

I see 4 ways the Brunson situation could resolve itself:

1. Let him get to UFA in 22 and take your chances (this is just stupid cap management in my opinion)

2. Trade him so you don’t have to deal with this

3. Renegotiate his 21 salary and extend based on that number (the LaVine model).  To repeat, I’m not sure this is legal.  There are differences between LaVine’s situation and Brunson’s.  I’ve just not taken the time to research yet.

4. Renounce his small 21 salary making him RFA and resign him using cap room and a small cap hold that is just a little more than his renounced 21 non-guaranteed salary.