I heard him talk in his exit interview, seems like a smart kid
Wait no kidding lol, I think the song made me think he was gonna be a different guy
Really hoping we keep him, because I assume if the coaching staff saw red flags they wouldn't want him back. Seems like it'll be hard to find another 7 footer who can space.
Mo Bamba is pretty smart, wish he'd been healthy. Hopefully he works on his body continuously this off-season because we'll really need him this coming year. His shot blocking, rebounding and floor spacing at the 5 were missed by us. _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Mo Bamba is pretty smart, wish he'd been healthy. Hopefully he works on his body continuously this off-season because we'll really need him this coming year. His shot blocking, rebounding and floor spacing at the 5 were missed by us.
Exactly…he made mention of playing along side of Bron and AD so hoping they find a way to keep him under a reasonable deal or guarantee the $10.3 million and trade him if he doesn’t work out.
If we don’t pick up his guaranteed contract by June 29th, we would still have nonbird rights on his 10.3m salary this season…so technically we can re-up him for up to 12.4m in yr1 of a new deal, but I’m sure if he’s back they try to get him on a lower annual for up to 2 more years at least (ie something like 2yr/12m) in order to make up what he lost on his nonguaranteed deal. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
If we don’t pick up his guaranteed contract by June 29th, we would still have nonbird rights on his 10.3m salary this season…so technically we can re-up him for up to 12.4m in yr1 of a new deal, but I’m sure if he’s back they try to get him on a lower annual for up to 2 more years at least (ie something like 2yr/12m) in order to make up what he lost on his nonguaranteed deal.
Are you sure about that? As I understand it, we would need to waive him. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
^Yeah, sorry if I didn’t make it clear enough …but when I said “if we don’t pick up his guaranteed contract by June 29th, I meant that we would waive him before his guarantee trigger date of June 29th. And if we do end up waiving him, we’d still hold nonbird rights on dude towards a potential reup, as long as we do not also renounce his rights. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
^Yeah, sorry if I didn’t make it clear enough …but when I said “if we don’t pick up his guaranteed contract by June 29th, I meant that we would waive him before his guarantee trigger date of June 29th. And if we do end up waiving him, we’d still hold nonbird rights on dude towards a potential reup, as long as we do not also renounce his rights.
Again, are you sure about that? As I understand it, we would lose any Bird rights if he cleared waivers. He would not have completed his contract. There are some rules about the Bird rights of players who are actually claimed off of waivers. This came from some litigation with the union about ten years ago. That would not apply to us. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
^His contract is fully nonguaranteed if not picked up by June 29th. He would be essentially our own FA if he passes the wire. And I don’t think any team would pick him up unless they believe they couldn’t get him on a better deal (either more years or a better annual)…not to mention teams claiming him would need either cap space, a TPE or DPE in the amount of his 10.3m to do so. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
^His contract is fully nonguaranteed if not picked up by June 29th. He would be essentially our own FA if he passes the wire. And I don’t think any team would pick him up unless they believe they couldn’t get him on a better deal (either more years or a better annual)…not to mention teams claiming him would need either cap space, a TPE or DPE in the amount of his 10.3m to do so.
I'm not sure that you have this right. We do not have a team option. We have to waive him by June 29. As I understand it, the requirements for the Bird exceptions are that the player has not been waived and has completed his current contract. I am not going to invest the time to parse through the CBA, but it is not clear to me that we would have non-Bird rights. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
Once he clears waivers, he becomes our own FA, that has his last contract playing out the rest of the season for us.
Either way it’s a moot point since we wouldn’t be giving him a 20% raise from his previous deal….we’d be looking to sign him on a lower annual instead. All I’m point out, is we can give him that 12m in potential salary over two years. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Once he clears waivers, he becomes our own FA, that has his last contract playing out the rest of the season for us.
Either way it’s a moot point since we wouldn’t be giving him a 20% raise from his previous deal….we’d be looking to sign him on a lower annual instead. All I’m point out, is we can give him that 12m in potential salary over two years.
I don't think this is correct. Larry's FAQ has this language:
Quote:
Players who finished the season with a given team, who have played no more than one season without clearing waivers or changing teams as a free agent.
Larry is not a lawyer, and this likely not the actual wording of the CBA. I'm not going to invest the time to parse the actual wording of the CBA. If we waive Bamba, we'll find out what happens.
However, it's not a moot point because, if we have no Bird rights at all, we need an exception to sign him. We can't just give him $12M because he played for us this season. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
If we don’t pick up his guaranteed contract by June 29th, we would still have nonbird rights on his 10.3m salary this season…so technically we can re-up him for up to 12.4m in yr1 of a new deal, but I’m sure if he’s back they try to get him on a lower annual for up to 2 more years at least (ie something like 2yr/12m) in order to make up what he lost on his nonguaranteed deal.
I was under the impression that the Lakers would have to either:
1-guarantee his contract
2-use cap space or
3-use an exception.
Would non-bird rights allow the Lakers sign him without using 1,2, or 3? _________________ “When it looks as if it is a realistic possibility, I want to focus on winning a ship like it’s a goal that can’t be denied. I didn’t see that this off season.”
Non-Bird rights are an exception, if they are available. To be clear, I do not claim to have definitive knowledge as to whether they would be available. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
Non-Bird rights are an exception, if they are available. To be clear, I do not claim to have definitive knowledge as to whether they would be available.
By “exception” I meant Room, Bi-Annual, Non-Tax Payer, or Tax Payer. I thought we’d have to use cap space or one of “those” exceptions (not saying we’d have access to all of them) if we didn’t guaranty him, (vet min of course could be used). I stay as confused as informed lol! Could definitely be wrong, been there done that 😂 _________________ “When it looks as if it is a realistic possibility, I want to focus on winning a ship like it’s a goal that can’t be denied. I didn’t see that this off season.”
Once he clears waivers, he becomes our own FA, that has his last contract playing out the rest of the season for us.
Either way it’s a moot point since we wouldn’t be giving him a 20% raise from his previous deal….we’d be looking to sign him on a lower annual instead. All I’m point out, is we can give him that 12m in potential salary over two years.
I don't think this is correct. Larry's FAQ has this language:
Quote:
Players who finished the season with a given team, who have played no more than one seasonwithout clearing waivers or changing teams as a free agent.
I think you got to pay mind to the underlined portion.
I’m interpreting that as dude finished the season being on our roster. He did not play more than 1 season w/o clearing waivers, and obviously didn’t change teams. As a result, we got nonbird on him. Had he gone more than 1 year without clearing waivers or changing teams, he would be eligible for early bird. And one year is given to a player that even signs to one day with a team and remained on the roster once the season ended.
Quote:
Coon: A partial season counts as a full season for the tenure calculation related to Bird rights. If a team signs another team's free agent to a Rest-of-Season contract mid-way through the season, then at the end of that season the player is a non-Bird free agent.
Also pay mind to how they bring up waivers towards Full & Early bird players here, but not towards Non-Bird players..
Quote:
• Qualifying Veteran Free Agent Exception (aka the “Bird” Exception): A team may re-sign its own free agent to a contract with a first-year salary of up to the maximum player salary if he played for the team for some or all of each of the prior three consecutive seasons (or, if he changed teams, he did so by trade or by assignment via the NBA’s waiver procedures during the first of the three seasons).
• Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent (aka “Early Bird”) Exception: A team may re-sign its own free agent to a contract with a first-year salary of up to the greater of (a) 175% of the player’s salary in the last season of his prior contract, or (b) 105% of the average player salary for the prior season, if he played for the team for some or all of each of the prior two consecutive seasons (or, if he changed teams, he did so by trade or by assignment via the NBA’s waiver procedures). A contract signed using the Early Bird Exception must be for at least two seasons (not including any option year).
• Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent (aka “Non-Bird”) Exception: A team may re-sign its own free agent who is neither a “Bird” nor an “Early Bird” player to a contract with a first-year salary of up to the greater of (a) 120% of the player’s salary in the last season of his prior contract, (b) 120% of the player’s applicable minimum salary for the current season, or (c) if the player is a Restricted Free Agent, his Qualifying Offer amount.
So I’m pretty sure we retain his nonbird rights since he remained on our roster past the regular season buzzer. Also we wouldn’t be renouncing him with a waiver request. A waiver would be a termination of his existing contract, not his player rights. If we renounced dude to clear cap space (ie remove his caphold), then that is when we would lose any bird rights we had on him.
So in that regard I do agree with your point below, in that it wouldn’t be a moot point, since even at a lower annual, we’d still be utilizing non-bird rights on him. I meant to say it was a moot point considering an annual raise on dude when the object is to reduce his annual cap hit…so apologies for incorrectly representing my stance on that matter and causing confusion.
Quote:
However, it's not a moot point because, if we have no Bird rights at all, we need an exception to sign him. We can't just give him $12M because he played for us this season.
_________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
I don't think this is correct. Larry's FAQ has this language:
Quote:
Players who finished the season with a given team, who have played no more than one seasonwithout clearing waivers or changing teams as a free agent.
I think you got to pay mind to the underlined portion.
I’m interpreting that as dude finished the season being on our roster. He did not play more than 1 season w/o clearing waivers, and obviously didn’t change teams. As a result, we got nonbird on him. Had he gone more than 1 year without clearing waivers or changing teams, he would be eligible for early bird. And one year is given to a player that even signs to one day with a team and remained on the roster once the season ended.
At this point, we're interpreting Larry Coon, not the CBA. Maybe I'll work up the energy to parse the CBA.
Anyway, your opening sentence is wrong. How he finished the season is irrelevant to what I'm saying. What matters is "without clearing waivers." If we waive Bamba, he isn't our free agent anymore. We waived him. That's fundamentally different from just renouncing him for cap purposes. Furthermore, my recollection of the CBA is that a player must finish his contract to get Bird rights. Bamba would not have finished his contract. Otherwise, a two-year contract with the second year unguaranteed is identical to a 1 + 1 with the second year being a team option. That doesn't work under the structure of the CBA, which requires some contracts to be a minimum of two years and does not allow an option in the second year. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
Okay, I decided to look at the CBA. Fortunately, it didn't take a lot of time. My conclusion is that we would not be able to use the non-Bird exception on Bamba if we waive him. This is subject to three qualifications: (1) the CBA is almost 500 pages long, and I certainly didn't take the time to go through every last provision; (2) it is always possible that the parties to the CBA (the league and the union) have agreed to interpret the CBA in a particular way that is not expressed in the written words; and (3) I am looking at the old CBA, and it is always possible that the new CBA changes things in a way that would apply as of July 1 this year.
With that in mind, the starting point is the definition of Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, which is the class of players who can be signed using the non-Bird exception:
Quote:
(rr) “Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent” means a Veteran Free Agent who is not a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent or an Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent.
Okay, so what is a Veteran Free Agent?
Quote:
(hhhh) “Veteran Free Agent” means a Veteran who completed his Player Contract (other than a 10-Day Contract) by rendering the playing services called for thereunder.
If we waive Bamba, he will not complete his player contract, and thus he is not a Veteran Free Agent. If there is any doubt about this, it is resolved ty the definition of a Free Agent:
Quote:
(cc) “Free Agent” means: (i) a Veteran Free Agent; (ii) a Rookie Free Agent; (iii) a Veteran whose Player Contract has been terminated in accordance with the NBA waiver procedure; or (iv) a player whose last Player Contract was a 10-Day Contract and who either completed the Contract by rendering the playing services called for thereunder or was released early from such Contract.
Bamba would fall into category (iii), not category (i). Otherwise, category (iii) is duplicative of category (i). This is further confirmed by the preamble to the various Bird exceptions:
Quote:
(b) Veteran Free Agent Exception. Subject to the rules set forth in Section 6(m) below, beginning at 12:01 p.m. eastern time on the last day of the Moratorium Period following the last Season covered by a Veteran Free Agent’s Player Contract, such player may enter into a new Player Contract with his Prior Team (or, in the case of a player selected in an Expansion Draft that year, with the Team that selected such player in an Expansion Draft) as follows:
This season is not the last season covered by Bamba's contract.
That's how I read the CBA. If we waive Bamba, we could re-sign him only using one of the ordinary cap exceptions. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
@AH: I appreciate your effort & time in researching this, but I still don’t interpret it the way you do. Granted, you’re familiar with lawyer jargon/gibberish 😜, but I still am fully capable of reading comprehension.
I guess we’ll find out this summer in a particular scenario that we do retain him on a lower non-vet min annual, whose interpretation is correct or not. But I’m definitely not alone in how the CBA & the many resources that explain it choose to interpret it.
Quote:
Bird rights are reset if a player changes NBA teams via free agency; if he is waived and not claimed; if his team renounces them; or if he's selected in an expansion draft. If a player clears waivers and resigns with his previous team, his Bird rights are retained.
The Bird exception, named after Larry Bird, is a rule included in the NBA’s Collective Bargaining Agreement that allows teams to go over the salary cap to re-sign their own players. A player who qualifies for the Bird exception, formally referred to as a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, is said to have “Bird rights.”
The most basic way for a player to earn Bird rights is to play for the same team for at least three seasons, either on a long-term deal or on separate one- or two-year contracts. Still, there are other criteria. A player retains his Bird rights in the following scenarios:
1. He changes teams via trade. For instance, the Pistons will hold Marvin Bagley III‘s Bird rights when he reaches free agency this offseason, despite just acquiring him in February. His Bird clock didn’t reset when he was traded from Sacramento to Detroit.
2. He finishes a third season with a team after having only signed for a partial season with the club in the first year. The Warriors signed Juan Toscano-Anderson midway through the 2019/20 season, adding him to their roster in February 2020. When his contract expires this offseason, Toscano-Anderson will have Bird rights despite not spending three full seasons with Golden State, because that half-season in ’19/20 started his Bird clock.
3. He signed for a full season in year one or two but the team waived him, he cleared waivers, and didn’t sign with another team before re-signing with the club and remaining under contract through a third season. This one’s a little confusing, but let’s use Toscano-Anderson as a case study once more. After he finished the 2019/20 season with the Warriors, Toscano-Anderson was waived by the team in December 2020. Because the Warriors re-signed him shortly after cutting him and he didn’t join a new team in the interim, the swingman’s Bird clock picked up where it left off once he was back under contract, so he’ll have full Bird rights this summer.
A player sees the clock on his Bird rights reset to zero in the following scenarios:
1. He changes teams via free agency.
2. He is waived and is not claimed on waivers (except as in scenario No. 3 above).
3. His rights are renounced by his team. However, as in scenario No. 3 above, a player’s Bird clock picks up where it left off if he re-signs with that team renounced without having signed with another NBA team. For example, Taj Gibson had Early Bird rights last offseason, then had those rights renounced by the Knicks as the team attempted to gain extra cap room. Since Gibson eventually signed a new deal with New York, he remains on track to secure full Bird rights this summer — that wouldn’t have been the case if he had signed with a new team.
When bird rights reset, they go back to non-bird, where in order to get back to full, 2 more consecutive years without switching teams as a free agent gets a player back to full bird rights (or early bird with an additional year tacked on). When you parse through Coon’s FAQ it even specified that the player can’t clear waivers on their last deal heading into free agency towards early bird or full bird rights. But nowhere does he mention that applying to non-bird rights.
Quote:
Coon: The player must complete his contract immediately prior to becoming a free agent, which essentially means he can't have cleared waivers. If he signs a series of contracts, then this only applies to the last contract. If a team signs a player and waives him after one game, signs and waives him after one game again the next year, and in the third year signs him and keeps him the entire season (assuming he didn't sign elsewhere during those three seasons), then they will have full Bird rights following the third season.
The same is true for Early Bird rights. For example the Chicago Bulls signed John Lucas III to a one-year contract for 2010-11, but waived him in October, 2010. They signed him again to a non-guaranteed contract in November 2010, but waived him again in January 2011 (just before the league wide contract guarantee date). They signed him again in March 2011 to a two-year contract (with a team option for 2011-12, which the Bulls picked-up). Despite having three contracts and being waived twice over a two-year period, the Bulls have Early Bird rights to Lucas in 2012.
Once Bird rights are established, they don't go away unless the player is renounced or signs with another NBA team.
In many ways a fully nonguaranteed season functions as a team option and just like a team option when not exercised, the players rights remain with the team even after hitting free agency. The only difference between a team option and nonguaranteed deals is the ability to partially guarantee portions of the contract during that season, as opposed to a team option that's exercised, being fully guaranteed.
Quote:
Coon: A non-guaranteed season can be similar in function to a team option. Teams often prefer the additional flexibility provided by non-guaranteed salary -- the guarantee can change on a date of their choosing, they can guarantee partial amounts, and they can attach different conditions to the protection.
I still think you’re not completely understanding that the clearing of the waiver process does not mean you’re renouncing that player’s rights. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
No, you're misunderstanding what you are quoting. The quotes are addressing the Bird rights after the player re-signs. The writers are talking about a concept that we call a "break in service" in employment law. Does a break in service affect the accumulation of service time? What these sources are telling you is that, once the player is re-signed, the clock starts to run again for purposes of years of service for Bird purposes and that the prior service is included. What these sources are NOT telling you is that the team can use Bird rights before it has re-signed the player.
In the case of JTA:
Quote:
Because the Warriors re-signed him shortly after cutting him and he didn’t join a new team in the interim, the swingman’s Bird clock picked up where it left off once he was back under contract, so he’ll have full Bird rights this summer.
He was waived and then re-signed during the season, but he was a two-way player at the time. The team would not have had Bird rights when it re-signed him. However, despite the break in service, he gets two years credit for purposes of the Bird exception.
Quote:
Coon: The player must complete his contract immediately prior to becoming a free agent, which essentially means he can't have cleared waivers.
This is exactly how I read the CBA. The rest of what Larry says relates to breaks in service.
The first writer says that the Bird rights are "retained," which is the same thing. Once the player is re-signed, the Bird rights continue despite the break in service. They are "retained." But until then, there are no Bird rights to re-sign the player.
You keep talking about renunciation, but that's irrelevant. This is not a capology issue. This is a structural contract issue. It affects capology, but it's not the same thing. Capology is only a small portion of the CBA and the business of basketball in general. There are other interests built into the CBA. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
I’m not sure why Lakers would give up on Mo Bamba that quickly. To me, it seemed like he fit in and was a big shot blocker, and could stretch the floor with his threes. Isn’t that exactly what we need? He’s still young. Unless they saw something in practice we didn’t. Not enough of a sample size.
I’m not sure why Lakers would give up on Mo Bamba that quickly. To me, it seemed like he fit in and was a big shot blocker, and could stretch the floor with his threes. Isn’t that exactly what we need? He’s still young. Unless they saw something in practice we didn’t. Not enough of a sample size.
Exactly. Re-negotiate his contract and give him a real chance. Lets not overthink this.
I’m not sure why Lakers would give up on Mo Bamba that quickly. To me, it seemed like he fit in and was a big shot blocker, and could stretch the floor with his threes. Isn’t that exactly what we need? He’s still young. Unless they saw something in practice we didn’t. Not enough of a sample size.
Yeah, it could be this. I remember how annoyed I was at his performance in Game 6 of the Memphis series (?) before finding out he was probably still injured. But maybe there are attitude issues or something. I really liked his exit interview and was hoping to see him back, but maybe he's just good at media interviews. I trust our coaching staff.
I’m not sure why Lakers would give up on Mo Bamba that quickly. To me, it seemed like he fit in and was a big shot blocker, and could stretch the floor with his threes. Isn’t that exactly what we need? He’s still young. Unless they saw something in practice we didn’t. Not enough of a sample size.
Yeah, it could be this. I remember how annoyed I was at his performance in Game 6 of the Memphis series (?) before finding out he was probably still injured. But maybe there are attitude issues or something. I really liked his exit interview and was hoping to see him back, but maybe he's just good at media interviews. I trust our coaching staff.
I can't trust our coaching staff, at least not completely, which still included a rookie coach, until we all see Bamba getting some serious run against different teams and lineups. He may not have been useful against a team like GS, but it's hard for me to accept that he couldn't have been a nuisance against Jokic wth his long ass arms and 7'2 presence at the rim.
And then throw AD & Bamba at Jokic with periodic double teams and you change the whole dynamic of our defense. If Bamba hits anywhere near 38-39% from three, and you for a few minutes at a time run Bamba, AD & Vando at teams, you can dominate for stretches because of an insane defense.
We certainly were not going to beat them from an offensive standpoint.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
