Skip navigation
Favorites
Sign up to follow your favorites on all your devices.
Sign up

Report: Pacers run out of cap room for Monta Ellis (but will sign him, anyway)

Indiana Pacers Introuce New Players during a Press Conference

INDIANAPOLIS - JULY 14: Monta Ellis of the Indiana Pacers speaks to the media at Bankers Life Fieldhouse on July 14, 2015 in Indianapolis, Indiana. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this Photograph, user is consenting to the terms and condition of the Getty Images License Agreement. Mandatory Copyright Notice: 2015 NBAE (Photo by Ron Hoskins/NBAE via Getty Images)

Ron Hoskins

The Pacers agreed to sign Monta Ellis to a four-year, $44 million contract.

They also traded Roy Hibbert to the Lakers and agreed to sign Lavoy Allen, Rodney Stuckey and Jordan Hill.

Somewhere along the way, they made a mistake.

Zach Lowe of Grantland:

Former Nets general manager Bobby Marks:

It’s not clear where the Pacers messed up.

They signed second-round pick Joseph Young to a contract starting at $1,007,026, according to Basketball Insiders. Had they waited, they could have used the room exception and had Young count $0 against the cap in the meantime. (Update: As Nate Duncan helpfully pointed out, the room exception can be for just two years. So, the Pacers needed cap space to give Young this deal.)

It’s unknown how Allen’s three-year, $12 million contract is structured, but his lowest possible starting salary is $3,720,930. Until signed, his cap hold is/was $947,276.

It’s also unclear how the Pacers fix this issue – whether the NBA just lets them undo completed deals and the re-execute them in the proper order or whether they’ll have to change someone else’s deal. Ellis won’t be the casualty, but that doesn’t mean Indiana won’t pay some price for its error. (Or it might not. I’m unsure how forgiving the NBA is.)

This is different than the Kenneth Faried contract extension Lowe mentioned, because that was just plain illegal. There was no alternative order of events that would made that legal.

The Pacers’ problem is more of a bookkeeping issue, one that wouldn’t have affected anyone’s end result. I guess we’ll learn how seriously the NBA takes this.