Amnesty

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

https://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7026680/welcome-amnesty-20-nba

According to the Oregonian's John Canzano last week, the owners have already decided to include an amnesty clause in the yet-signed labor agreement. The big difference: Teams can pick one player to waive, then pay off the rest of his contract … only this time, that player's deal won't count against the salary cap (not just the luxury tax).

Simmons and Abrams are both predicting the Jazz would use the new amnesty clause to dump Memo:

UTAH JAZZ

Abrams: Mehmet Okur, who suffered through an injury-plagued 2010-11 and would save the Jazz $10.9 million in 2011-12 by being Curry Cured.

Simmons: Agreed. Could more things be falling Utah's way? It fleeced New Jersey with the Deron Williams trade, won a top-three lottery pick and shed Andrei Kirilenko's onerous salary, now it's dumping Memo's last year … oh, wait, we're not going to have an NBA season. I keep forgetting.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Memo is the only one that makes any sense here, and that is only if the Jazz have serious designs on the free agency market in a very immediate way (Marc Gasol?).

One interesting possibility is Memo just re-signing for the league minimum for a year as part of the waive (if that's permissible).

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

One interesting possibility is Memo just re-signing for the league minimum for a year as part of the waive (if that's permissible).

it was not permissible last time:

Q: Can a team re-sign its own amnesty player at a later date?

A: No. Amnesty players are strictly prohibited from re-signing with the team that released them for the life of the terminated contract.

The league also snuffed out the possibility that teams might try to trade around this stipulation by including the June 21 deadline for players to be eligible to be released via the amnesty clause.

Let's say Dallas wanted to trade Michael Finley to Toronto in exchange for Jalen Rose, with the Mavericks and Raptors agreeing to use their amnesty slot to release each player so both could sign back with their original teams at a reduced price. Because such a trade couldn't be completed before June 21, neither player could be released with amnesty, meaning that the Mavericks and Raptors would get no tax break from such an arrangement.

https://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2112912

 

[NUMBERICA]

Nice work. Sounds about right.

 

[NUMBERICA]

And for the record, I am not a fan of there being an amnesty provision such as this (besides that it clearly shows just how full of hot air and bull **** the owners are, anyway). It rewards the richest of the owners and the most hapless of management.

 

[Karadrys30]

Who would not have used this kind of clause on Ak. I would have and I like Ak. He is a good player but his contract stunk.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

If the Jazz could have dumped AK's contract under an Amnesty clause a year ago, they would probably have been more able and willing to keep Wesley Matthews.

 

[trigg3r]

There should be a prediction thread about what players around the league will be subject to this when the season starts. I think it is obvious that Rashard Lewis and Gilbert Arenas would be guys that fall into that category. Any other guesses?

 

[Archie Moses]

"I just think people wanna save money."


Indian guy from Geico commercial from 2002.

 

[NCJazz]

Memo is the only one that makes any sense here, and that is only if the Jazz have serious designs on the free agency market in a very immediate way (Marc Gasol?).

One interesting possibility is Memo just re-signing for the league minimum for a year as part of the waive (if that's permissible).

I agree it would probably be Memo, but remember a guy named Raja?

 

[BabyPeterzz]

I agree it would probably be Memo, but remember a guy named Raja?

3 million/year is not hurting the Jazz cap wise as much as Okur. It's Memo no question.

 

[NCJazz]

3 million/year is not hurting the Jazz cap wise as much as Okur. It's Memo no question.

That is why I said it would probably be Memo, but if for some reason we did not use him, then I believe it would be Raja.

 

[freakazoid]

3 million/year is not hurting the Jazz cap wise as much as Okur. It's Memo no question.

Actually, it's nobody.

Memo is going to be an expiring contract. If Utah used the amnesty on him, they'd still have to pay him. Why would they do that when they can just wait a few months and then trade him as an expiring contract? I just don't see Utah spending like the Cubans of the world.

 

[YB85]

Actually, it's nobody.

Memo is going to be an expiring contract. If Utah used the amnesty on him, they'd still have to pay him. Why would they do that when they can just wait a few months and then trade him as an expiring contract? I just don't see Utah spending like the Cubans of the world.

Who's to say that expiring contracts will be worth anything? Losing Memo's salary off the cap is as valuable to them as using him as an expiring contract. I like Memo but if there is an anmesty clause as rumored, he is the guy.

 

[freakazoid]

Who's to say that expiring contracts will be worth anything?

They may not be, and if there's an amnesty, they may be almost worthless, but I tend to believe there will still be opportunities out there. If not, then Utah just let's Memo expire.

Losing Memo's salary off the cap is as valuable to them as using him as an expiring contract.

Maybe I'm missing something here. Let's say Utah Curry cured Memo, and used the cap room to sign a free agent. That would mean they'd be paying Memo in addition to the new player. If they instead traded Memo as an expiring (assuming they could), they wouldn't be getting it from both ends salary wise. Again, if I'm missing something, please fill me in. Obviously none of us can see into the future, so we can't really know what the details of a new CBA would be. Having said that, I'm betting Utah would just decline to use the amnesty, rather than pay Memo not to play.

Believe me, as much as I like Memo, I think the rest of his days will be as a role player off the bench in very limited minutes. I would be happy to see Utah throw some money around and gamble on getting another FA. Don't know who that'd be though.

I think it's far more likely that Utah waits to see how the new team starts to come together, and then try to get something for Memo if they can.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Yeah, the Jazz will get ten million on the salary cap for?

A chance to front load an RFA contract to see it be matched? (Gasol)

Lose out on Free agents? (Nene)

Jazz have a plan for the 2012 and 2013 off season, not the 2011 off season. They'll sign either older vets, or cast out bench players for no more than two year contracts, likely one year, and see who they can attract or trade for when they have gobbles of cap space in 2013.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Jazz or not, I think someone is going to throw money at Gasol that the Grizzlies won't match. Gay and Randolph will tie up at least 50% of the cap for the next four seasons, and that's not even considering Conley's sizable deal, Mayo's (current or future), and the rest of the roster (which is mostly rookie-scale guys that will probably get a raise [Vasquez, Arthur, Henry if he gets his **** together and/or minutes]).

For the right price (and/or if Gasol gifts them a hometown discount), the Grizzlies will keep him. But when it comes down to it - and ESPECIALLY if there's an amnesty clause like this - there will probably be a deal available to Gasol that Heisley will blink at and try to find another answer at C.

 

[//r00t 4 Jazz]

My main point in thinking (if the Jazz even decide to use it) is they would use it on Raja is he still has 2yrs left at around 3.3Mil for a total over 6mil saved (he signed a 3yr deal for 10mil) and if Memo proves to be healthy enough to play while he is currently playing in Turkey than I don't think the Jazz would dump him with him being in his last year.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Since most contenders in the NBA are major markets, the amnesty exclusively favors the entitled NBA teams.

-Free agents tend to gravitate towards bigger cities (as they should)
-Teams with a better ability to absorb paying a player to leave are more likely to do that in order to bring on a player they want
-If players like Jose Calderon, Brendan Haywood, Rip Hamilton, Brandon Roy, Biedrins/Lee, are released, a team like Miami is going to be very pleased.

I am and have been telling you, the owners are full of **** and this proves that. All of this talk of making the league more competitive and the owners losing money hand over fist makes absolutely no ****ing sense if there's an option on the table allowing teams to lose more money at their own discretion to give an even larger competitive advantage to those with the most as it is.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

Jazz or not, I think someone is going to throw money at Gasol that the Grizzlies won't match. Gay and Randolph will tie up at least 50% of the cap for the next four seasons, and that's not even considering Conley's sizable deal, Mayo's (current or future), and the rest of the roster (which is mostly rookie-scale guys that will probably get a raise [Vasquez, Arthur, Henry if he gets his **** together and/or minutes]).

For the right price (and/or if Gasol gifts them a hometown discount), the Grizzlies will keep him. But when it comes down to it - and ESPECIALLY if there's an amnesty clause like this - there will probably be a deal available to Gasol that Heisley will blink at and try to find another answer at C.

Really? Knowing how difficult it is to obtain a solid, defensive C (especially for a team like Memphis), you think they'd even consider letting him go? I don't think so. I see them using their Curry Cure on Gay and riding the roster that played very well in the playoffs.

I think Gasol's availability is no more than wishful thinking.