I think you're right Isaac, it has always seemed odd to me how people who are involved in specific clubs but not directly with the NBL have very reliable information about salaries/breaking of the cap yet the NBL either doesn't admit it or can't see this.

Should/could an external body from the NBL be employed to monitor the salary cap?

Also should we look at allowing teams to break the cap but pay a tax on it back to the NBL? The system the NBA uses.

I don't mind teams pushing the cap a bit, especially if it's to retain their players, but watching Cairns steal Abney from the Crocs is a bit much, or Brisbane trying to get Saville from the Hawks, etc.

Luxury tax could work, but not without the cap being policed. Everyone knows that Brisbane, Cairns, etc are busting the cap, but who's doing anything about it?

With Luxury tax though if the club can play the amount of money over the cap whats stopping them doing a NY and just spending big?

As if Cairns was busting the cap..LOL Luke Martin,Scott Cook,Matt Smith,Kane Oakley,Stewart.

There's half the team getting peanuts.

Qldr, you have no idea. Year before last, three of their players were getting $750,000 between them.

This coming season, they have almost the same amount wrapped up in three players again.

Made this point in the Pennisi thread so apologese for doubling up.

IMO opinion the issue is not the cap but "external" employment. Working in Maccas in Cairns,Child Care in Brisbane and Construction in Melbourne.

My take is that the teams are under the cap as far as their official basketball salary is concerned but blow outs occur in secondary income.

I would like the NBL to enforceable see all players tax returns to see what income they are actually earning.

If a player / club wants to risk issues with the ATO they risk alot more than being wrapped over the knuckles by the NBL.

If a players secondary income is far and above the norm for that role in the profession then that income should be added to the teams cap.

Lets say Darnell is being paid 100k to play ball and earning another 120k to cook hamburgers and manage a Mcdonalds store.
That money is above the norm and so therefore his salary for the NBL would be 220k.

What if it was a condition of playing in the league?

Chas it is already,
Players contract 6.1(e). So is total disclosure of all outside contracts and agreements 6.5(e) and total disclosure of all tax records 6.6 (b).
Owners and management are unwilling to investigate and enforce--much too much embarasment.

isnt that interesting. So it can be done just not the done thing.

Is it legal for teams to cheat the salary cap this way:

First Example:

You want to sign a young gun, let's say Patrick Mills. He wants to continue college unless he gets offered a big amount of money!

Let's say he wants to play in Europe after the coming up season.

Adelaide offers Mills the minimum 30,000 for the Rookie year and 200,000 the next year. The Sixers give him a european+nba clause. Under the contract, if he leaves Adelaide still has to pay him out.

Patrick plays one year in the NBL and then goes to europe and ends up getting $230,000 from one year!

Second Example:

Star player Glen Saville is available, other clubs are offering him the max allowed(and over). Adelaide has no chance of getting him unless they pay big cash over the salary cap. Phil Smyth offers Saville a two year contract. 200,000 dollars each year. After the first year, 36ers release Saville and pay him the 400,000.

Then they resign him to another deal worth 200,000. In two years, Saville gets payed $600,000

Third Example:

Adelaide want to sign this great import from europe. Adelaide offers the player a three year contract of $200,000 and after one year, releases the player who ends up getting $600,000 after one year.

------------------------------------

Is this possible or legal to do? Ofcourse you would have to make a deal with the players that you would release them and resign them etc. and it would be risky but is it within the rules? You would be inside the salary cap however you are paying them mega money.

I doubt many teams (if any) could afford to do this but they could get quality players.

Grapes tasting sour there I see....

Players don't get paid if they leave. Clubs will usually negotiate a different pay out for those they cut.

Isaac, the whole point of them being payed when they choose to leave is that they are guarenteed to get lots of money. They get lured by the money and clubs can offer that much without doing it illegally.

If you want $600,000 after one year, instead of having to stay for three years or quit and get nothing if the club double crosses you, you can get $600,000 after one year and be guarenteed it.

Example:

Brad Newley- Tigers offer $400,000 for one year.

Adelaide offers the max- $200,000 for three years with a european/nba outclause. He will choose to leave after one year, so the deal isn't as good as the Tigers offer. 36ers add to the clause that if Newley decides to leave with the outclauses, that he gets payed out.

Tigers offer- 400,000 -1 yr
36ers offer- 200,000 -1yr but with the option of leaving after one year and getting 600,000. That would lure him to the Sixers for that season!

Right, got you - sure, they probably could. Can't see anyone doing it though. If it wasn't in a contract, the player wouldn't trust it. If it was in a contract, the NBL would see it.

Also what is to stop the player pulling a Stiffy going to Euro not getting a decent gig and then popping up at Tigers? Gets into the NBL at market rate plus has bled the team dry that he has left.

Me like outside the box thinking though.

Issac,
It can not be done under the rules -- covered under 5.11(c) Long Term Contracts
5.11(d) Sign on payments, 5.11(e) End of Contract Fees. The rules are in place there is just no will to investigate and enforce.

Your really talking about a honest/gentlemans agreement.

Where Player X is officialy signed to play 1 season for $200K but after that one season the under the table deal of $600K is paid out.

The only way that would work is someone just lumping them $400K after the first season is done, but that kind of $$ would have to be declared somewhere. Plus if someone is leaving you and you've already got your 1 year $200K out of him how many clubs would still honour paying another $400K to see them off?

Offer the player a three year deal worth 200k a year (600k overall), in the contract, have a european outclause that includes the entire contract being payed out if clause is exercised.

Havlicek J, could you get me a link to the rules?

Sorry there is no link that allows the public access to rules or rule updates that I know of. I dont understand why it isnt available -- perhaps it would keep us all up at night trying to figure which rules are enforced and why. You could try the NBL but dont hold your breath. My hard copy was a gift. In general all balloon payments are averaged which means a payout as part of an out clause could put you retrospectively over the cap for a number of seasons and incur huge fines. If only someone was watching. Not likely. So young yet so cynical.

What club is going to sign someone to a multi year contract and still payout the full term even if the player leaves after a portion of that time due to the outclauses? The club is left out of pocket for so much money and no money left to replace the player that has left. Its absurd to think that clubs would hand out those sorts of contracts. As Isaac said, the NBL would see the contracts and therefore the clubs would not get away with anything that's not above board. As for checking player's tax returns, there are forms of payments that do not attract tax and therefore would not be shown on your tax returns. They are payments such as living away from home allowance (most players are not local to their teams). Not sure that these payments would be included in the salary cap but they can be as much as $250 per day (an additional $65K over the 8 months NBL season from commencement of training in the pre season).

Leaves the club out of pocket?

1.) You would expect that they would only play for a year (ie. Newley)

2.) What's the difference between a team paying 400k legally to another paying the same amount illegally (Kings, Tigers, Bullets, Taipans)

It would be very complex and both sides would have to keep to their word (probably can't ever happen.)

Can't you sign a player and guarentee that you will release them and payout their contract after 1 year?

No 123abc you cant sign a player and guarentee you will release them after one year, as the NBL approves all signings they would simply see this as Team A paying Player X $600K for 1 year. or $200K for one year and $400K for 2 years but a guarnetee that he will be released after 1 year. Just dosnt work.