Tracking designated rookies & vets

I think Joni has already found the answer, but double-checking here:

forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2214541&p=100615762#p100615762

Copy of post just in case:

TLDR: after only 4 years in the , a free agent resigns with his old team for 5y, above 25% of the cap, because he's eligible.
Do you call him:
A) a designated rookie?
B) a designated veteran?
C) or neither?

Long version:

www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q24 ends with a table. I'm asking about the 2nd case in it (LBR 5y contract above 25% max). I don't think this situation has ever taken place under the 2017 CBA, thus theory is all I have. Thus my opening question: is that a designated rookie, a designated veteran, or neither i.e. just a designated player, not counting against these limitations also pointed out in Q24:

"There is a limit to the number of designated players a team can have on its roster at a time. A team can have up to two designated rookies (who received a longer rookie scale extension) and up to two designated veterans (who received higher than the 30%* maximum salary) at any time. However, only one designated rookie may have been acquired from another team in a trade."

* - thus not B?

www.hoopsrumors.com/2022/07/players-on-designated-rookie-extensions.html seems to suggest it's not A either: "The designated rookie rule says that a team can’t carry two players acquired via trade if those players have signed designated rookie extensions that apply to a “current or future” cap year, so even though the extensions for Morant, Garland, and Williamson won’t take effect until 2023/24, the rule would apply to them as soon as they officially sign. Only a player who signs a rookie scale extension can become a designated rookie. The rule doesn’t apply to players who reach free agency, even if they sign a five-year, maximum-salary contract at that time."

Thus I'm leaning C.

Yes.


I'm afraid I don't understand your argument.


That would be a logical extension of the wording, but the CBA doesn't need to be logical. It's not A according to www.hoopsrumors.com/2022/07/players-on-designated-rookie-extensions.html cited above.

You're correct, as confirmed by the RealGM guys! Woohoo, one less thing to keep track of

"Only a player who signs a rookie scale extension can become a designated rookie. The rule doesn’t apply to players who reach free agency, even if they sign a five-year, maximum-salary contract at that time."

pretty sure your example is C. Jokic would be an example in our since he reached FA before re-signing with his current team