Kings now below cap

[ReinadelosReys]

After the trade yesterday, they are below the mandated 75% of the cap minimum.

"So if the Kings don't make another trade in the final five hours before the trade deadline, they'll have two options:

1. Spend that $1,043,966 before the end of the season on new players, whether it’s D-League callups or a free-agent signing or two.

2. Distribute that $1,043,966 evenly to the players on their roster when the regular season ends April 13 to meet league spending requirements. "

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/25347/kings-below-75-percent-of-cap

 

[UK_King]

I wonder if any more moves are on the cards

 

[Kings Fan Gerard]

Damn, we have so little salary spent on players right now. lol

 

[Spike]

I'll play. The prorated amount for the rest of the season seems about what I would command on the open market.

 

[bajaden]

I'll play. The prorated amount for the rest of the season seems about what I would command on the open market.

Ahemmm! Good try, but I don't think I'd be expecting any checks in the mail anytime soon.

 

[bajaden]

There are a couple of teams out there that are over the luxury tax threshold that the Kings could help for a price. It could be as simple as taking on a 5 mil salary from a team thats 4 mil over the threshold and having that team pay the entire salary, thus saving them having to pay double because of the luxury tax. Only if that player is an expiring of course. What the Kings would get out of it might be a draft pick.

 

[Spike]

There are a couple of teams out there that are over the luxury tax threshold that the Kings could help for a price. It could be as simple as taking on a 5 mil salary from a team thats 4 mil over the threshold and having that team pay the entire salary, thus saving them having to pay double because of the luxury tax. Only if that player is an expiring of course. What the Kings would get out of it might be a draft pick.

I'm too lazy to do that research, but it sounds plausible. Wouldn't the Kings have to pay some of that salary to get above the minimum, or is just having the contract, on paper, enough?

 

[bajaden]

I'm too lazy to do that research, but it sounds plausible. Wouldn't the Kings have to pay some of that salary to get above the minimum, or is just having the contract, on paper, enough?

From what I've read, the contract is what would count against the cap. How you get the money to pay that contract is up to the team.

 

[kingsfan101]

Just read on DDL that we are getting Maquis Daniels from Boston for cash.

If true, this doesn't make any sense to me. Given that we need to add salary, I can understand. But why this move? He is apparently out for the season. If we are to pick anyone, wouldn't it be better to get some assets from a team over the LT, or even try out some D league guys?

 

[Spike]

It's all about money. Might as well bring in Keith Van Horn.

 

[Section 101]

Just read on DDL that we are getting Maquis Daniels from Boston for cash.

If true, this doesn't make any sense to me. Given that we need to add salary, I can understand. But why this move? He is apparently out for the season. If we are to pick anyone, wouldn't it be better to get some assets from a team over the LT, or even try out some D league guys?

Should be Daniels AND cash to the Kings not for cash.

 

[kingsfan101]

Should be Daniels AND cash to the Kings not for cash.

That would make sense, but not what I remember. Maybe I just read wrong, or the post was wrong. We shall find out soon. It's kind of tough to search on DDL.

 

[Section 101]

That would make sense, but not what I remember. Maybe I just read wrong, or the post was wrong. We shall find out soon. It's kind of tough to search on DDL.

You are correct in that is what was reported. But it doesnt make any sense that the Kings would send cash for a player that wont play. It only makes sense if they are receiving cash to take him.