You can take a smaller contract, perform well, and then take a big contract after. What you can’t do is take two vet minimums in a row, have the worst season of your career, and then get a contract for $⁶⁴⁄₄. If Gary Trent Jr. had a good season, played decent, it wouldn’t be an issue.

The legal distinction isn’t really about the salary sequence, more so about whether there was an agreed future reward.

Literally every player in the league has the right to sign for a minimum contract if they want to, but a team can’t ask a player to sign for a minimum with the promise of an enhanced contract down the road.

The difference would be that Barkley took a below market rate to make room for another player, then went back to market rate. He wasn’t promised extra money, he actually lost money in the whole thing.

Trent took a below market rate in exchange for an above market rate to compensate the difference. If Trent just signed a 2 year $15M deal, which is still above market rate for him, nobody would batted an eye at it.

But 4/$64M for a guy with one above average NBA level skill is indefensible. Especially coming off such a horrible season.

Some people in here are being intentionally dense. Trent’s current contract in isolation isn’t what causes investigation, it’s that he signed the last two years when they were salary strapped at the minimum. Now all of a sudden signs his third contract, with the same team, after his worst year, for multiples more? Come on….

There was an investigation into Hardens situation with the 76ers. Harden was just unwilling to cooperate with the NBA and get punished himself, so that investigation ended up going nowhere.

Both Harden and Barkley were former MVPs with clout, also they were all nba caliber still

When the Timberwolves got caught with Joe Smith, Kevin McHale infamously said “there are 8 to 10 teams that do this all the time. They’re good at it. We’re bad.”

The NBA felt like they were forced to confront cap circumvention because the scheme between the Wolves and Smith’s camp became public knowledge during discovery after his agents sued each other. David Stern decided to make an example out of the Wolves, and language was added to the CBA spelling out in detail what would be considered cap circumvention and what the penalties would be.

The Gary Trent Jr situation all but begged for investigation, because of how egregiously bad the contract is and the circumstances around it. Two years ago, GTJ was seeking $20M/year, then signed with the Bucks for a minimum. At the time, it was just “he misjudged his market” and life went on. Then he played well-definitely above minimum contract level, at least-and signed another minimum contract. Last year, he was one of the worst fulltime players in the league and probably didn’t earn another NBA deal, so the Bucks signed him to the maximum amount they could offer him with Early Bird rights. The circumstantial evidence of collusion is very strong.

FWIW, I bet James Harden has been paid under the table to participate in cap circumvention multiple times as well, going back to his Brooklyn days. He just hasn’t been caught.

In the case of Barkely, he took less for 1 year to help the team, and then declined to do so the following year, instead signing for what he was worth. In the case of harden, the Daryl Motey is a liar quote came after picking up his option with the sixers, him drclining his option happened inbablater season with the Clippers. Harden picked up his option with the ubderstanding that he would be traded because he didn’t want to risk free agency where he would be limited to teams with cap space and could get screwed. He did take less 1 season with the sixers in a contract negotiation, but it was not with the ubderstanding that they would pay him more than he was worth later. This is because everyone understood he was an elite player worthy of a max amd paying him more than he’s worth was mathematically impossible. He took less as a way of personally investing into the well being of the team long term, with the ubderatandong they would be similarly invested in him, but they weren’t.

In the case Gary Trent, Gary Trent is very obviously and unambiguously not worth what he just signed as a free agent. 2 years ago he was, and it was surprising at the time that he would accept a minimum contract. The new contract makes it clear that the 2 sides made a handshake deal 2 years ago that the team would be signing him for a total of 6 years at 70 million but it would be back loaded for cap reasons, which is in violation of the cba.

So the difference is that the Gary Trent situation is the only one where player was recoeving something in return rather than simply being genorous, and the only one that would be in violation of league rules. To put it in other terms, the difference here is equivalent to a situation in politics where a billionair donates to a politician who he believes will have policies that peraonally benefit him, which is definitely unfair to other voters but also generally accepted and happens all the time, and a different billionaire donating to a different politician in exchange for said politician appointing said billionaire to personally head a whole new government agency and give him unprecedented control over the federal budget. The difference is the clear quid pro quo and violation of rules.

Also with Harden, clearly there wasn’t an actual agreement that Philly followed through on haha the nba doesn’t need to investigate because Morey did not hook him up.

The money isn’t as important as the circumstances surrounding the contract. As long as there’s not a written contract saying “we will pay you x as soon as we get your bird rights” then they won’t be punished. Teams are free to give out bad contracts. Teams aren’t allowed to structure a 6 year deal by linking together a 1+1+4 year deal to get around the cap rules. 

They didn’t play like ass on their small contracts and Gary Trent Jr did, in fact, play like ass

The other players took a temporary pay cut but then later signed for a contract that they were worth. They didn’t get reimbursed for the pay cut. They actually made a sacrifice. Yes they got new deals but those deals were what you’d expect them to get anyway. 

Gary Trent is not worth the new contract he signed so it looks like he is actually being paid to reimburse him for signing minimum contracts previously. Nobody in free agency would have paid him anywhere near that amount and better players got way less. So it looks like he isn’t being paid for future production and instead it was a part of a deal to avoid the salary cap by delaying his payments until later. 

same with Bobby Portis. Difference is they actually lost money in the process, they were paid their market rate later, they didn’t get overpaid. It was just a pure salary cut.

The difference is that Barkley was good

The league did investigate the harden/sixers.

Well one happened 30 years ago for starters.

Barkley wasn’t obviously establishing Bird rights.

Nobody gives Gray Trent credit for his locker room presence. Such a presence.

that was then this is now.

What if someone forces their way to San Antonio for the promise of a max extension, but then under performs those expectations? Should that contract be investigated and possibly voided?

The smart way to do this is how Riley took care of Haslem when Udonis took less money so the big three could form. 

Dude spent an extra 7 years in the league on the Heat payroll as a player after one of his worst seasons in 2016. 

(Playing in 64 games over that 7 year span)

…And then hired him as a coach!

The difference is in the caliber of player. Barkley is HOF, Harden probably will be as well.

Gary Trent, at his peak, was maybe worth ⁴⁄₆₄. But absolutely not coming off his worst season ever. He simply doesn’t have the gravitas to demand that type of money after taking a paycut…and that’s what they’re looking into, because that’s the difference between circumvention and just working an angle.

I’ll never not find it funny the way Charles pronounces MJs name

Makka Joadin

🤣

Difference was Barkley made the NBA a lot of money and Gary Trent and the Bucks don’t and are easy PR targets for a league that has lost it’s way.

Well you see the issue is this time it’s the Bucks.

30 years of union labor law being dismantled, mainly.

David Stern vs Adam Silver

Stern sees Barkley doing a deal like this and just sees the Barkley, Olajuwon and Drexler team up as an opportunity to have 3 star players playing together. He wouldn’t let stuff like this get in the way of good ratings.

Silver is much more focused on the integrity of the sport and is much more under a microscope from reporters and fans than Stern was. Albeit, a lot of his focus on integrity is kinda bs considering how he spent the whole season sweeping the Kawhi situation under the rug and how the league is now fully in bed with the gambling sites