Randy Rigby doesn't understand the amnesty clause

[colton]

...and apparently Gordon Monson and Spencer Checketts don't either, because they didn't call him on it.

I was just listening to yesterday's interview with Randy Rigby, available here: https://1280thezone.com/index.php/audio/listen/the_big_show_randy_rigby_president_of_the_utah_jazz1

The last few minutes involve him talking about the amnesty clause in the new CBA, and how wonderful it is compared to the previous amnesty clause, and how great it was that the Jazz are only one of 14 (?) teams that haven't used their amnesty card because "this way, if we pick up a contract that turns out to be bad, we can amnesty the player any time in the next six years" (paraphrasing). Granted he's not the GM, but it was still quite troubling that he didn't have a clue that only players who were under contract last year when the CBA was signed can be amnestied.

 

[NAOS]

Isn't that guy just Mormon PR?

 

[colton]

No.

 

[larryselbows]

I am offended.

 

[nightmare3983]

I am offended.

By?

 

[nightmare3983]

Rigby Rigby Rigby. I guess as long as Lindsey and KOC understand how it works the Jazz will be OK. Maybe Monson and Checketts just didn't want to embarass Rigby on-air.

 

[theNBAnerd]

it doesn't "worry" me, per se. it's not randy's job to know how that works. it is funny, though.

that just tells you how useless the rigby interviews they do on wednesdays are. i used to listen in case rigby was plugged in enough on the basketball side to shed some insight, but clearly he's just not. rigby is a businessman only, and he's more involved with running the enterprise than with anything that has anything to do with basketball.

 

[colton]

Maybe Monson and Checketts just didn't want to embarass Rigby on-air.

Good thought. Might well have been the case.

 

[NAOS]

Isn't that guy just Mormon PR?

No.

I guess you didn't see the comedy. I see comedy when I just hear Rigby speak.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Randy Rigby is an imbecile.

 

[UGLI baby]

Isn't that guy just Mormon PR?

This x a bazillion million.

 

[Hotdog]

We are screwed.

I wonder if they even know that they can trade Al. Maybe they are under the assumption we can't. It would explain a lot.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Perhaps this is the reason KOC is assuming more upper-level responsibilities and the Jazz brought in Lindsey to handle the day-to-day grind.

Rigby can concentrate on amnestying some of the existing Toyotas the Millers may still have in stock; you know, the ones that refuse to brake. And he can leave the basketball affairs to KOC.

On a positive note, it IS wonderful the Jazz did not have to use their amnesty clause. KOC did a credible job of rebuilding the team while getting rid of some bad salaries (Boozer, AK, etc.) and only having to take back one big contract in return (Harris) which wasn't really long-term. Jazz are/will be in great shape heading into the trade deadline and next summer.

 

[theNBAnerd]

harris wasn't really a big contract.

and what about al's?

 

[Stifle Tower]

harris wasn't really a big contract.

and what about al's?

Harris' contract wasn't huge, but it was still one that KOC really didn't want. Remember, he talked about the Jazz trying to flip Devin at the deadline, but simply running out of time.

Didn't include Jefferson because that was a trade KOC wanted to make. It was worth a shot, IMO. And his contract is up at the end of the year. In any case, KOC set the Jazz up to be players in the FA market this summer (or via trade). Will that mean different players? Or will that mean primarily re-signing a Millsap (or Jefferson), Mo, Marvin, etc.? I don't know. And I'll bet KOC couldn't (even IF he were willing to) answer that question.

I think it will be a combination of retaining players, adding TWO first-rounders (and hopefully one in the mid-to-late lottery) and perhaps getting 1-2 quality FA's.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

Rigby can concentrate on amnestying some of the existing Toyotas the Millers may still have in stock; you know, the ones that refuse to brake. And he can leave the basketball affairs to KOC.

This was classic.
I absolutely laughed my *** off! Lol

 

[theNBAnerd]

Harris' contract wasn't huge, but it was still one that KOC really didn't want. Remember, he talked about the Jazz trying to flip Devin at the deadline, but simply running out of time.

well they had to take something back because they were trading a max-contract guy.

Didn't include Jefferson because that was a trade KOC wanted to make. It was worth a shot, IMO. And his contract is up at the end of the year. In any case, KOC set the Jazz up to be players in the FA market this summer (or via trade). Will that mean different players? Or will that mean primarily re-signing a Millsap (or Jefferson), Mo, Marvin, etc.? I don't know. And I'll bet KOC couldn't (even IF he were willing to) answer that question.

whether they wanted him or not, you can't say they didn't "take back big contracts" when they acquired jefferson at 3 yrs and 42M remaining.

I think it will be a combination of retaining players, adding TWO first-rounders (and hopefully one in the mid-to-late lottery) and perhaps getting 1-2 quality FA's.

yeah, next summer will be big, but i hope they do something before then. if they hold onto paul & al until the summer, then at least one of them is going to walk with no compensation. instead, use al's value as an expiring contract, and you could really accelerate the plan.

 

[Stifle Tower]

whether they wanted him or not, you can't say they didn't "take back big contracts" when they acquired jefferson at 3 yrs and 42M remaining.

RE: Jefferson: They didn't "take back" that contract. It was acquired in a trade for Boozer's TPE. So that's what I meant by not "taking back" big contracts. For example, like many wanted to do by trading Boozer for Rip.

yeah, next summer will be big, but i hope they do something before then. if they hold onto paul & al until the summer, then at least one of them is going to walk with no compensation. instead, use al's value as an expiring contract, and you could really accelerate the plan.

Letting both expire MIGHT be the best scenario. Allows the Jazz to go after who they want vs. who a team wants to get rid of in exchange for an expiring contract. Yes, it would be nice to get a solid 4/5 and a pick in exchange for Al. But it may also mean the Jazz take on 1-2 players who are overpaid. In the absence of having Al's (or equivalent) salaries on the books after the season, Jazz might be able to get 2 quality FA's. There are a lot of teams that will be limited to only offering the MLE. If the Jazz have cap space to offer $7-8M to a couple of FA's (i.e. $2M more per season), that may be enough to attract some very good players instead of just an overpriced backup and perhaps a highly protected or late 1st-round pick Jazz might get by trading him at the deadline..

 

[theNBAnerd]

RE: Jefferson: They didn't "take back" that contract. It was acquired in a trade for Boozer's TPE. So that's what I meant by not "taking back" big contracts. For example, like many wanted to do by trading Boozer for Rip.

semantics. the jazz traded boozer for jefferson, they just did so in a non-simultaneous trade. literally, technically, legally and in every other way, that's what they did. they had an opportunity to get rid of boozer and take nothing back, or get rid of boozer and take jefferson back. they took jefferson back. now, if you want to discuss whether or not that was a smart move, that's a different conversation. but by definition, they DID take salary back for boozer.

Letting both expire MIGHT be the best scenario. Allows the Jazz to go after who they want vs. who a team wants to get rid of in exchange for an expiring contract. Yes, it would be nice to get a solid 4/5 and a pick in exchange for Al. But it may also mean the Jazz take on 1-2 players who are overpaid. In the absence of having Al's (or equivalent) salaries on the books after the season, Jazz might be able to get 2 quality FA's. There are a lot of teams that will be limited to only offering the MLE. If the Jazz have cap space to offer $7-8M to a couple of FA's (i.e. $2M more per season), that may be enough to attract some very good players instead of just an overpriced backup and perhaps a highly protected or late 1st-round pick Jazz might get by trading him at the deadline..

i understand this argument and it's not an invalid one. but it only really rings true if the jazz can get something BETTER than al/paul (or better than an al/paul trade haul) with those free agent dollars. i have a hard time seeing them get a marquee free agent... more likely, they'll retain one of the two (i hope it's paul) and use the other one as trade bait or let him expire and have some FA flexibility next summer.

also, one benefit to the trade deadline route is you can get picks out of people. you can't do that if you just let al/paul expire at the end of the year, and honestly, future picks may be as attractive as anything right now, given the fact that the organization is going to have to extend favors & hayward and has shown an interest in keeping both paul and mo.

 

[freakazoid]

Letting both expire MIGHT be the best scenario. ..

If the goal is to maintain a middle-of-the-road team, then absolutely. Unfortunately, I think that question has pretty much been answered at this point.