2018 Roster Discussion

Maxi is on a 3 year deal? I thought it was just 2. Fuuuuuck.
I thought it was 4. No kidding
My spirits are somewhat raised!
giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam and Kjbert
Maxi is on a 3 year deal? I thought it was just 2. Fuuuuuck.
That's when we finally cut him loose...
I thought it was 4. No kidding
My spirits are somewhat raised!

There's always the offseason one contract buyout!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert
Well, the Jack Harrison transfer would cover the cost of Maxi's buyout of Year 3
 
Not quite. The non-GAM bulk of the transfer fee (in your example, the $1.65m) can't be used to buy down a DP to non-DP status, only to pay a DP. The buying down part has to be done with GAM or TAM.

This is why LionNYC is reminding us that we can't buy down Maxi. There are rules reasons and budgetary reasons why this is true—I think he's pointing us to the former. I don't know how to quote a second post, so:

"Players making above $1.5M cannot be bought below the DP line."

This is on the right track. The rule outside the summer transfer window is that players making above $1m can't be bought down with TAM (GAM has other restrictions, but we almost definitely don't have enough GAM anyway). There's a separate rule for the summer transfer window: in July and August you can buy down a DP who's making $1.5m on a prorated basis, or about $3m for the year.

So it could be that we could hang onto our TAM and buy down Maxi then. Whether he's in range for the prorated-$1.5m rule will depend on how the "compensation ceiling" part of the TAM limit works, which I touch on in the Harrison post.
Here's a stupid question (and some wishful thinking).

Are transfers in are "official" for MLS purposes until the MLS window officially opens in February (was Feb 14th last year)?

Point being, if Medina is not yet a current DP for MLS purposes, can't the Harrison transfer kitty (3.35 million in your scenario) be used to pay down his transfer fee for MLS budgeting purposes? That would then allow then to fairly easily use the Team TAM to pay him down out of DP range and give them the ability to go after a 3rd DP.
 
Here's a stupid question (and some wishful thinking).

Are transfers in are "official" for MLS purposes until the MLS window officially opens in February (was Feb 14th last year)?

Point being, if Medina is not yet a current DP for MLS purposes, can't the Harrison transfer kitty (3.35 million in your scenario) be used to pay down his transfer fee for MLS budgeting purposes? That would then allow then to fairly easily use the Team TAM to pay him down out of DP range and give them the ability to go after a 3rd DP.

There is a limit to how much budget relief we get from the Harrison transfer. It is $650,000. There is no way to use any of the other money to buy down anyone for budget purposes.
 
There is a limit to how much budget relief we get from the Harrison transfer. It is $650,000. There is no way to use any of the other money to buy down anyone for budget purposes.

But aren't their two parts? That 650K is the first part which I agree is for pure budget relief. But the amount the club is allocated above that (i.e the amount over 650K) is for:

The remaining balance of the club's share (if any), and which cannot be traded, will be available to be used by clubs in the following ways:​
    • Against the expenses incurred by the club in relation to the costs of an existing or new Designated Player
Granted they don't define "costs", but if Medina isn't officially NYCFC property for MLS purposes until the new window opens, why couldn't they use the extra Harrison money on Medina's 4 million dollar transfer fee to lessens the budgetary hit that causes?
 
But aren't their two parts? That 650K is the first part which I agree is for pure budget relief. But the amount the club is allocated above that (i.e the amount over 650K) is for:

The remaining balance of the club's share (if any), and which cannot be traded, will be available to be used by clubs in the following ways:​
    • Against the expenses incurred by the club in relation to the costs of an existing or new Designated Player
Granted they don't define "costs", but if Medina isn't officially NYCFC property for MLS purposes until the new window opens, why couldn't they use the extra Harrison money on Medina's 4 million dollar transfer fee to lessens the budgetary hit that causes?
My thought on this is that money can be used to pay that amount, but that payment wouldn't necessarily relieve the cap hit of it.

BUT, it's possible that it could be as you lay it out, and I've even speculated as much in an earlier post (not sure if in this thread or elsewhere).
 
My thought on this is that money can be used to pay that amount, but that payment wouldn't necessarily relieve the cap hit of it.

BUT, it's possible that it could be as you lay it out, and I've even speculated as much in an earlier post (not sure if in this thread or elsewhere).

Right. The Club gets the cash, but no salary cap relief. The Club can use the money to pay a DP's wages, but the money doesn't buy down those wages so that the person is no longer a DP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert and canchon
Right. The Club gets the cash, but no salary cap relief. The Club can use the money to pay a DP's wages, but the money doesn't buy down those wages so that the person is no longer a DP.

This. Basically you get $650k of GAM even if you sold a player for one billion dollars. The extra fee can be used to save the actual club cash payout to a DP - example: right now Club pays Villa $5m (or whatever) over his 500k cap hit. If the club “nets” $2m from the sale above that GAM, they could use that to pay Villa and only pay him $3M out of the club’s $$$.

Basically, if you are a cheap team this can offset your DP club costs. This is a rounding error to CFG and really doesn’t make a difference whether the club lays out $3M or $5M for Villa.
 
Bingo. They give you $650k of GAM and the remainder is given to you in cash proceeds.