cybergates

14 hours ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

I like the prediction “?”

With the way the scoring works (more points for longer correct picks), I don't see why anyone would pick "?", just make a guess or don't log a pick, but what do I know?

1 hour ago, Seeking6 said:

So he grew up an Iowa fan and is from Ohio. I love Archie making the offer but seems uphill. Guess Ohio is just as loaded with high school talent as Indiana is in 2021 class. Plenty to go around for all!

Watching the video of his sophomore highlights on TDH's article, I think he would be a good fit at Iowa. Looks like some of their players over the past few seasons. I trust in Archie, but I'm not excited about this offer (yet having only seen one video) with Kaufman and Furst still available. 

11 minutes ago, The Daily Hoosier said:

I am guessing that somewhere in a journalist's training it says that it is public record and thus you should publish it.  In my opinion there is always room for basic human decency to prevail.  Hell, if someone cannot do it for coach Knight, then do it for the neighbors.

Cool you didn't publish address but saw another article that did. Don't want to speculate too much, but it is across the street from an Alzheimer's Center. 

41 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

I'm not conveniently leaving anything out -- and you're just glossing over the main point here, there are only so many guys a team can pay, and again you have Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka and Harden. Do you think they should have moved Westbrook or Durant or paid them less? Of course not. All of this is hindsight and then of course there's the simple fact that Harden and Westbrook basically play the same position and both are extremely ball dominant guards. Convenient? Ok.

Your next post strengthens my argument. Thanks for that.

He wasn't a FA so they didn't have to move him, Westbrook or Durant or pay them less. They jumped the gun.

Of course Harden's numbers wouldn't match what they ended up in HOU if they kept him, but in OKC he could have been more of SG and left PG to Westbrook.

Winning cures (almost) everything, if they brought back a Finals team intact, there is a good chance they would have reached/won the Finals in 2013 compensating the owners well enough to consider going into the luxury tax to keep everyone (which they ended up going into the luxury tax anyway in subsequent years without Harden anyway I'm guessing). With Bird rights, no hard cap, limitations on max salary, etc it certainly was possible for them to keep them all. The unknown/upcoming spike that allowed GS to sign Durant would have helped them out as well. 

Obviously a ton of what ifs, but even without hind sight, many (maybe even most) thought it was a mistake to trade Harden, especially coming off a Final appearance. I remember being shocked by it and trying unsuccessfully to trade for him in my dynasty fantasy basketball league at the time. I can't remember one person saying that they thought OKC did the right thing at the time. 

17 hours ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Again, it was his third season, he was averaging under 17 PPG, and they had to pay Westbrook, Durant and Ibaka. It's their fault?? OK. Absolutely no reason in the world they should have moved Westbrook then. 

You conveniently are leaving out that they just played in the Finals. Making the Finals is too hard to justify breaking the team up by trading a 6th man of the year, age 22, player averaging 16.8/4.1/3.7 in 31.4mpg. It clearly was a mistake then, in hindsight it became a disaster. Those 3 guys loved playing together and would have likely won multiple championships if they were kept intact. 

On 7/6/2019 at 1:21 PM, Seeking6 said:

One word I want officially retired from all platforms at ESPN and other talking heads. "Sources" 

Every single sports journalist in America was dead wrong. Not one had an inkling this was going to happen. In fact my guess is Jerry West somehow let it be leaked that Raptors or Lakers stuff was solid to provide a smokescreen for the deal. No clue where this trade ends up historically but this has a Herschel Walker feel to it. 

To take it to another level, I saw on Friday that the Clippers were out and it was down to Lakers/Raptors. After the fact, there were reports that it was really the Raptors who felt they were out and Kawhi was heading to the Lakers unless the Clippers or Raptors traded for George (which obviously the Clips did).

1 hour ago, Zlinedavid said:

They're under contract to their employer, which is presumably based in the city that the team is based in. They wouldn't be liable for out of state taxes.  I'm not sure if NBA players are considered W2 or 1099 employees, but if normal withholdings apply, they would either be withheld for the state that their employer exists in or their primary state of residence, provided that their state of residence has a reciprocal agreement with the state they are employed in.  If withholdings don't apply, then they would be taxed purely on their state of residence.

Perfect, real life example: I live in Northern Kentucky, and work in Ohio.  I spend at least two weeks (one pay period) per year working in Texas, and probably a 2 weeks worth in various other states (CT, PA, among others).  I don't owe taxes based on 4% (roughly one pay period) of my income to Texas or any other state.  I also don't have any Ohio withholdings, due to a reciprocal agreement between the two states.  The only state income taxes I pay are to Kentucky, my primary state of residence.

The one point that may be correct is on the municipality/city taxes.  100% of my state income taxes go to Kentucky, but I do have withholdings for the city of Cincinnati.  Local taxes are often based on the physical location of the job.  However, I'm not liable for those taxes on days that I'm out of the office.  So if I'm out of the office for 30 days throughout the year, I can get 10% of those taxes back.  The 3.x% to the city may only apply for days where they have home games or practices within the city. 

They absolutely are taxed out of state. Google Jock Tax. There are plenty of articles about it. States only go after people who make enough money in a public fashion that it is easy to track and go after. They don't how many days people like you and me work in their state/city, so they don't bother. 

As you illustrate, all states are different. I had to pay taxes/file in NY after only working there for 3 weeks max (usually 2 wks). I probably wouldn't have filed if EY didn't w/h on me and I wasn't a Tax Professional since it cost me more to file 4 separate returns than it was worth (Fed, IN, NYS, NYC). I wasn't aware of reciprocal agreements between states, so I learned something new today. It makes sense since plenty of people who live on state lines will tend to live in one state and work in another across the country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jock_tax

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2017/04/18/income-taxes-for-pro-athletes-are-reminder-of-how-complicated-u-s-tax-code/#18d9a651411e

15 minutes ago, BobSaccamanno said:

Interesting.  I’m hardly an accounting person, but it seems like a nightmare for a pro athlete to file state income in 20 plus states?  That seems like something fixable.  Sure you play for Indiana and half your games take place in another state.  But you still are employed in Indiana.  It’d be like an Indy lawyer on a litigation and he takes a deposition in Delaware.  He is still employed in Indiana. His employer is in Indiana.  

It is a nightmare, but given that states operate with their own rules that's the way it currently is.

Regarding your lawyer example, I'm not sure, but as a CPA in Indiana, when I worked for EY in the Indianapolis office, but spent time (sometimes up to 3 weeks working the NYC office), EY withheld taxes for NY and I had to file a return there. Not making anywhere close to NBA $ either so you can imagine how much the states want their piece of that action. Applies to musicians as well, so wherever they perform they would pay taxes.

To take it one step further before I drop it and/or put most people to sleep, if you invest in an investment partnership, where the income generated from that partnership comes from flows to you as the investor and could end up requirinig you to file state returns in multiple states as well. The nice/"fixable" part of that though, is there are composite returns in some states where the partnership can file a return for all the investors opting in, and then pay the taxes directly to the state for you (unfortunately usually at a higher rate). 

On 7/1/2019 at 2:18 PM, Zlinedavid said:

I think the answer is that he left some money on the table, but it's not as if he gave Miami a discount either. $35.5M/year in Miami vs $38M/year in Philly.  That's about 6.5% less per year.  However, Florida has 0 state income tax.  The state of Pennsylvania has a flat 3% tax on all income, and the city of Philadelphia is an additional 3.8%.  So for those 4 years, he's even or slightly ahead. 

The 5th year is what he left.  But, this isn't his first big payday.  At the end of this 4 year contract, he'll have made well over $200M.  Maybe he values the flexibility for the last year or two in his career, if he wants to go after a ring should he not win one in Miami.  Maybe it's worth $30M to him to spend 2/3rds of the year in Miami vs Philly; he can afford to pay for a choice like that.  Maybe he's still playing at a level to warrant more than just the minimum.  If he's a year younger, maybe he gets a team to go for a few years longer instead of just the vet minimum. 

 

Not exactly even or slightly ahead due to the fact that half of the games are played on the road and taxed by that location/state's. Gets even more complicated since they don't play the same schedule (more games vs. ORL helps MIA, more games vs. NY teams hurts PHI), but your overall is valid that the 6.5% difference is pretty dramatically reduced living in FL. I threw it together quickly on a SS and found that the tax rate would have to be 97% in the road games with the same schedule for it to break even.

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

You are about the only one that doesn't like the signing because everyone I have heard talked about it loves the pickup for the Pacers.  No way I would have given Joseph that much money because he is not a starter and really don't understand what Sacramento is doing with their money.

Yes, that's what I'm in the minority means. 

Guess I'm in the minority here, but I don't like the Brogdon pick up. I like him as a player, but given that what we signed him for (4yr/$85mil), that we traded 2020 1st rd pick and two 2nd rounders, and his injury history, I'd rather have re-signed Cory Joseph for 3y/$37mil that he got with the Kings. Per 36min #s for both through their same age seasons are similar enough that I don't see why you'd pay that much $ and picks for the upgrade to Brogdon. Add in the fact that you have Holiday and hope he's your PG of the future and the move doesn't make much sense to me. If they'd done the deal with Joseph instead they could have paid Bojan the 4yr/$73mil he got from the Jazz (saving 12mil and 3 picks over the Brogdon deal). Not sure if that leaves enough for the Lamb deal, but I think Joseph, Bojan (more room for Holiday to grow) > Brogdon, Lamb, minus 3picks.

Thru same age (26years old):

Career (Brodgon 26 years old-3 seasons, Joseph 27 years old-8 seasons):

Edit - after seeing how heavily protected the 1st round pick is and my feeling of the relative lack of value in 2nd rd picks, I feel much better about the deal given Brogdon stays healthy, not that anyone cares...

1 hour ago, Seeking6 said:

Just a thought on what Pacers would give up to get Gordon. If they believe with him and a healthy Vic (after January 1st) they are better than this year's team I'd say offer up next year 1st round choice. Assuming we improve that pick would be in the 20's....I'd take what I know we're getting in Eric Gordon vs the unknown of a 1st round pick in the 20's.

To add to this, the Rockets are rumored to be shopping those guys for 1st round picks to flip to Philly in the sign and trade for Butler. So it would depend on if they think/know that Philly would want our pick.

1 hour ago, IU Scott said:

Just saw something on ESPN.com that said the Knicks owner might be hesitant to give Durant a max deal

Not surprised, Dolan's history of bad decisions is well documented. 

13 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

You might be right but at this time I would go with a guy who has some inside info that works in the NBA

The "everyone else" hoopster refers to includes many people that have inside info that work in the NBA.

On 6/12/2019 at 6:27 PM, IU Scott said:

Turner is a one dimensional player who is soft as a babies bottom.  The only thing he does well is block shots but other than that he is pretty mediocre.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/carmelo/myles-turner/

Counting this year 18-19 and the next four at 18mil Pacers will pay Myles "only" $75mil which is a bargain for a player of his caliber. CARMELO projects his value at 1.7x that.

Tuesday Throwback

On 4/8/2018 at 10:08 AM, rico said:

Does anybody have a list of how many former Hoosiers have rings?