What's new

Amnesty Bell?

utahquad

Member
We still have the CBA provided Amnesty that we can use, so perhaps it is time to just amnesty Bell instead of trying to trade him. Now that Raja has run his mouth to the media and it is all over NBA.com, I doubt there are many teams out there that would want a player like him. We could use the Amnesty clause from the new CBA to just get him off the books and kick him to the curb, and free up the cap space. That amnesty clause has very specific allowances to it, meaning it can only be used on a player who was in the contract being amnestied at the time the new CBA was signed. While we do have quite a few players in that situation, a large portion of them are close to the end of their contracts or are ones we would not amnesty anyways, is it worth using that one-and-only-one amnesty on Raja and his contract, or are we better to try to trade him off as an expiring contract this next season?

My gut feeling is to try to trade him right at the start of the player movement period (I think thats in july), and if no one has accepted a trade in the first short time, then you amnesty him to get him gone. CJ should also be gone, but his contract is totally run out, so there is no worry there. With Raja's public whining and crying about mistreatment (he is slightly selfish and possibly mentally challeneged me thinks, I mean look how he dresses most of the time...) he should be gone one way or another. He was hurting the team with his 1-3 ppg, 1reb, 0ast, 0stl performances. He is slow on defense, not like he used to be, and has not hit on his shot in a long time. At the end of last year he flat out said he did not play up to his own level. Bell only got worse this year, and now somehow cannot understand why he wasnt playing? Well regardless, trade or amnesty him, I am done with raja, period!
 
His contract isn't worth an amnesty, but then again, he's not worth his contract.
 
Don't even amnesty him. Either trade him (if you could, and you can't), let him out of his contract for a buyout of $0, or sit him and make him the new designated high-fiver. What ever you do, don't play him.
 
I don't think amnesty is anyway the Jazz want to do business. They have very rarely bought out players. I would expect him to be dealt in a package deal with another player. I doubt you could get much for him straight up.
 
If you amnesty him you still have to pay his entire salary, or at least the remaining amount after someone picks him up off of waivers. He will not be picked up.

The way that I look at it is talking to a contender and offer up Bell and cash for their last first rounder. Pint out that he will expire after this year and that he could play a few minutes off the bench to give guys a rest. The other team will probably not do a first rounder but they might offer up a second rounder and maybe more in the deal.

Amnestying Bell a huge waste of money.
 
His contract is expiring so it has value in terms of being a trade filler - that's the optimal scenario.

If they haven't amnestied him by now - they probably never will.
 
I think they will try and trade him for sure first. If that fails they may have to amnesty, or buy him out.
 
I think they will try and trade him for sure first. If that fails they may have to amnesty, or buy him out.

When was the last time the Jazz bought out a player THEY signed? I know they have bought out Glen Rice and a couple other guys they have traded for with no intention of actually keeping.
 
When was the last time the Jazz bought out a player THEY signed? I know they have bought out Glen Rice and a couple other guys they have traded for with no intention of actually keeping.

Derek Fisher? I know that was a different situation and stuff and he was relieved of his contract, not bought out.

I really don't know though. I'm trying to think of the last time Utah had a disgruntled vet on the bench. I still don't hate Bell though. It's not like he goes seeking out controversy. A reporter ask him a question and he answers it pretty straightforward and honestly without being a complete drama queen about it.
 
When was the last time the Jazz bought out a player THEY signed? I know they have bought out Glen Rice and a couple other guys they have traded for with no intention of actually keeping.

This is why I think they won't amnesty him.

KOC gave this clown 3 years coming off a season where he played, what, 5 games?

The market for Bell could have not possibly demanded 3 years. KOC knows this but he'll never swallow his pride and admit it.
 
3 million isn't something you amnesty. Why? It doesn't help our cap situation and it doesn't free up money that we would sign anyone with. You amnesty someone for those purposes. If those purposes can't be accomplished, you waive them or negotiate a buy-out to retain your amnesty for someone (i.e. 5+ million) where the amnesty may hold benefit.

Bottom line: amnesty is a financial strategy. It is not for getting rid of someone just because you don't want them. Sometimes you can accomplish both, but with Bell we'd only accomplish the latter, which would effectively be no different than a buy-out.
 
That would be a waste.

First option should be to trade him - if you can get a 2nd rounder for him, do it.
Second option should be to buy him out - most likely cheaper than amnesty.
Third option should be amnesty.

Obviously you shouldn't amnesty him just for the sake of it, but I hope people realize that you can only amnesty somebody that was under contract with your team when the CBA was signed. No way we amnesty one of the 4-horsemen, Harris/Millsap/Al all expire at the end of next year, so unless DWill calls up KOC and says he wants to come home, there's no way we amnesty those big contracts. So the only player I can ever see us amnestying is Raja (albeit that would be the last option).
 
This is why I think they won't amnesty him.

KOC gave this clown 3 years coming off a season where he played, what, 5 games?

The market for Bell could have not possibly demanded 3 years. KOC knows this but he'll never swallow his pride and admit it.

3 years is the reason they got him. I think LA & others were only willing to do 2 years.
 
3 million isn't something you amnesty. Why? It doesn't help our cap situation and it doesn't free up money that we would sign anyone with. You amnesty someone for those purposes. If those purposes can't be accomplished, you waive them or negotiate a buy-out to retain your amnesty for someone (i.e. 5+ million) where the amnesty may hold benefit.

I agree with your post; but it should be noted that The Jazz will have no veteran players eligible for amnesty after next season. If they don't use it on Bell they'll probably lose it.
 
3 years is the reason they got him. I think LA & others were only willing to do 2 years.

Maybe. But I dunno about that. In two years Bell got just under 100 starts in Utah. It's readily obvious the starting 2 was his to lose from day 1.

How many starts would he have gotten in LA? Or anywhere else for that matter?
 
In NBA 2K12 I was able to get rid of Raja via this deal:

Devin Harris + Raja Bell + 2013 1st round pick

for

Louis Williams + Evan Turner + 2012 2nd round pick

Also, I got rid of Al Jefferson AND Josh Howard:

Al Jefferson + Josh Howard

for

Deron Williams

I've got a contender in Utah.. check out this lineup:

Deron Williams
Brandon Roy
Gordon Hayward
Paul Millsap
Derrick Favors

On the bench:

Louis Williams
Richard Hamilton
Alec Burks
Kyle Korver
Jeremy Evans
Enes Kanter

CHAMPIONSHIP!!!
 
Top