Most Likely Amnesty Clauses: Mehmet Okur

[freakazoid]

In simple terms: (Assuming that after signing a full roster next year we are well over the new cap)

We owe Memo ~11mil (or whatever) next season. We are over the luxury cap by more than that.

Wait, what? We don't know yet where the tax will be, but last year it was about 70 million. By my count, Utah will have about 62 million committed with 11 players. That includes the rookies. They'll probably carry 14 players. I'm guessing they'll pick up a fairly cheap FA and a couple of minimum contracts. I don't think AK will be back unless it's on the cheap. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see Utah being in a position where they have to dump 10 million to get under the tax.

Could we possibly trade for a player to amnesty?.

From what I've read, that won't be an option. Obviously it's all speculation until a deal gets done.

 

[margodydek]

How is avoiding luxury tax not saving money at all?

I guess it depends on how a team uses the amnesty clause. In our case, say we amnesty Memo, not sure what that's going to do to our salary cap/luxury tax situation, but then we go ahead and sign someone to a $5MM/yr contract to fill his spot. The Jazz are now basically paying $17MM in 2011-2012 for basically one roster spot. I know only $5MM goes towards the cap, but the Jazz are stilly paying $17MM

 

[ultimatefrizzdude]

Can we use the amnesty on Memo, then sign him for the league minimum?

 

[Park Bites]

I think that the amnesty clause prohibits this.

 

[twentytwo]

Can't do that, and it is unlikely you will be able to trade-amnesty.

 

[AlaskanAssassin]

Does anyone know if you have to use the Amnesty in year 1 of the CBA, or can you wait for a future bad contract to cut?

 

[margodydek]

Does anyone know if you have to use the Amnesty in year 1 of the CBA, or can you wait for a future bad contract to cut?

I've heard conflicting reports on this. Most people say that the amnesty clause must be used on someone that is currently under contract. However, I have heard that there are a good number of teams that want to be able to use it some time in the future given that they currently do not have a bad contract on the books - this idea makes the most sense to me as it does not totally favor teams who gave out horrible contracts - (I'm looking at you Washington and Orlando).

 

[AlaskanAssassin]

I've heard conflicting reports on this. Most people say that the amnesty clause must be used on someone that is currently under contract. However, I have heard that there are a good number of teams that want to be able to use it some time in the future given that they currently do not have a bad contract on the books - this idea makes the most sense to me as it does not totally favor teams who gave out horrible contracts - (I'm looking at you Washington and Orlando).

I worry that if the amnesty clause can be used in future years that it will encourage large-market teams to a large and lengthy contract with then intention to cut the player after 1-2 seasons. Maybe it could be used to sign someone looking for more money than you can offer, with a promise to release after 1-2 seasons. For instance, signing Garnett for 1 season at $10 mill might sound OK, but if you have an amnesty clause, you could offer a 4 year deal at 3 million a year with an under-the-table promise to release him after 1 season. This would provide KG the $ he's looking for, and the team would be on the hook for less $ that counts towards the cap.

 

[freakazoid]

Top choices among amnesty candidates

Mehmet Okur. On the wrong side of 30 and a couple of years removed from being a productive player, Okur is at a crossroads in his career. Although injuries limited him to 13 games last season, there's still the question of how effective he can be if fully healthy. But he's worth a chance, especially as a fourth big man.

Mehmet Okur. Another comeback candidate trying to prove he's not cooked. Okur brings legitimate size and shooting from the 5-spot, so he'll get his chance.

https://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-111102/nba-top-amnesty-clause-targets

I'm still betting Utah won't amnesty anyone, but it seems like many people around the league believe Memo is likely.

 

[vslice02]

I'd understand why the Millers would want to part ways with Okur's $10.9 million salary but I'd rather axe Raja. My logic being that our roster is pretty much set for next season (whenever that may be) and Okur only has 1 year left so his contract will come off the books after next season anyway - while Raja has 2 years left and from a roster-building sense, it may be more beneficial to have that $3.5 million off the books 2 offseasons from now than $10.9 million for the upcoming season.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I'd understand why the Millers would want to part ways with Okur's $10.9 million salary but I'd rather axe Raja. My logic being that our roster is pretty much set for next season (whenever that may be) and Okur only has 1 year left so his contract will come off the books after next season anyway - while Raja has 2 years left and from a roster-building sense, it may be more beneficial to have that $3.5 million off the books 2 offseasons from now than $10.9 million for the upcoming season.

I think you still have to pay the guy. His salary just won't affect the cap.

 

[vslice02]

I think you still have to pay the guy. His salary just won't affect the cap.

Understood, but it sounds like the new CBA will still contain a luxury tax system that actually imposes stiffer penalties depending on how far a team is over the cap. As the roster stands now - Utah has around $60 million committed to next season for 11 players - so Okur's contract is likely to cost the Miller's dearly if it's still on the books.