We break down everything you need to know about the expansion draft that will stock the WNBA's new franchise, from basic rules to complicated technicalities
You mean how many can they sign from the expansion draft? Well like I said above, there's nothing locking them in to keeping everyone. The salary cap tweak for expansion teams means they're even less locked in to any given player in December than anyone else. There's very little harm in taking as many as possible, doing as well as they can via the expansion draft and whatever deals are on the table, *then* seeing how well they can do in free agency and cutting people as and when necessary.
But obviously, most expansion teams are bad to start with. Their big opportunity may be in 12 months when most of the league will be free agents.
I was wondering how about the math -- or maths -- when it comes to the cap and max salaries. Could GS sign three max players and still fill out the roster with more than minimum wage players? What is reasonable, given what will happen in 2026? (And of course, two new expansion teams will be competing for those UFAs then as well.)
You can look at our cap sheets for existing teams as possible scenarios. But Seattle, for example, have Loyd at supermax, SDS at max, and Ezi at 186k. They can still bring Nneka and GWilliams back at the max (not supermax) and have enough room for a legal roster. But virtually everyone else would have to be dirt cheap.
I imagine most free agents are also only going to be signing one-year deals in Golden State, of course. This could be a pretty temporary roster.
So, in theory, if a team only has six players under contract next year can they protect their six contracted players and only make available UFAs and RFAs? Is there any minimum number of players that a team has to have available for the expansion draft?
No minimum available. There are teams that can do this, if they want. Seattle only have five players under contract for next year, Phoenix only have four (plus a load of reserved players). Some teams, Golden State are not going to get much from.
Wow! So thorough - and I am still confused. Hopefully the teams are not. It will be interesting to see what 6 players are protected by each team. I am surprised you can only lose one as some teams have a deep bench.
How many max players can Golden State sign and still have a reasonable roster?
You mean how many can they sign from the expansion draft? Well like I said above, there's nothing locking them in to keeping everyone. The salary cap tweak for expansion teams means they're even less locked in to any given player in December than anyone else. There's very little harm in taking as many as possible, doing as well as they can via the expansion draft and whatever deals are on the table, *then* seeing how well they can do in free agency and cutting people as and when necessary.
But obviously, most expansion teams are bad to start with. Their big opportunity may be in 12 months when most of the league will be free agents.
I was wondering how about the math -- or maths -- when it comes to the cap and max salaries. Could GS sign three max players and still fill out the roster with more than minimum wage players? What is reasonable, given what will happen in 2026? (And of course, two new expansion teams will be competing for those UFAs then as well.)
You can look at our cap sheets for existing teams as possible scenarios. But Seattle, for example, have Loyd at supermax, SDS at max, and Ezi at 186k. They can still bring Nneka and GWilliams back at the max (not supermax) and have enough room for a legal roster. But virtually everyone else would have to be dirt cheap.
I imagine most free agents are also only going to be signing one-year deals in Golden State, of course. This could be a pretty temporary roster.
So, in theory, if a team only has six players under contract next year can they protect their six contracted players and only make available UFAs and RFAs? Is there any minimum number of players that a team has to have available for the expansion draft?
No minimum available. There are teams that can do this, if they want. Seattle only have five players under contract for next year, Phoenix only have four (plus a load of reserved players). Some teams, Golden State are not going to get much from.
Wow! So thorough - and I am still confused. Hopefully the teams are not. It will be interesting to see what 6 players are protected by each team. I am surprised you can only lose one as some teams have a deep bench.