Amnesty

[NUMBERICA]

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.

We have nearly 15 years of Grizzlies vast incompetency to compare to one season where they caught fire halfway through the season. I don't think cutting Gay (who is a very good player) and still paying $80 million more for him on top of what will be at or close to a max deal for Gasol is a move that will be wise for them. Whether they amnesty Gay or not, they are faced with paying a ****-load of money based on one half of a good season and little in the way of future assurances, or they can try and find a way to grab another C and ride out the contracts they ****-****ed themselves into (does anyone really think the slothful, drug-dealing, locker-room menace that won't pass the ball and couldn't give less of a **** whether his team wins or loses won't be back? Let's bear in mind he just played a contract year and got his last big paycheck and to that point, all he's cared about was his $).

If teams are allowed to shed their least-desired contract, some team out there is going to give Gasol A LOT of money. Matched or not, it's going to happen.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

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.

This. Great post. An amnesty clause without restrictions would basically reward owners with deep pockets to gamble on expensive free agents. If the player doesn't live up to expectations, the owner can take the player off the cap and try again on another player. Maybe if the maximum length of contracts is shorter, it makes the cost of gambling on a player less and keeps the cheaper owners in the game. Maybe if the team can only apply the Amnesty clause once in two or three seasons, there is less impact.

Either way, Amnesty could have a big impact on the game. Just imagine if teams like the Knicks could have unscrewed themselves at the rate of one bad contract per year. If Orlando could get out from under Arenas' contract and use the cap space on Chris Paul, it saves that franchise from losing Dwight Howard. Big changes.

 

[Qman]

This. Great post. An amnesty clause without restrictions would basically reward owners with deep pockets to gamble on expensive free agents. If the player doesn't live up to expectations, the owner can take the player off the cap and try again on another player. Maybe if the maximum length of contracts is shorter, it makes the cost of gambling on a player less and keeps the cheaper owners in the game. Maybe if the team can only apply the Amnesty clause once in two or three seasons, there is less impact.

Either way, Amnesty could have a big impact on the game. Just imagine if teams like the Knicks could have unscrewed themselves at the rate of one bad contract per year. If Orlando could get out from under Arenas' contract and use the cap space on Chris Paul, it saves that franchise from losing Dwight Howard. Big changes.

But if it only happens ever 8-10 years when a new CBA is negotiated- it isn't that big of advantage.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

But if it only happens ever 8-10 years when a new CBA is negotiated- it isn't that big of advantage.

Yeah, this is a one time deal to help teams clean up their mistakes made with bad contracts. This is not an annual amnesty they're proposing.

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

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.

the Jazz are probably counting on Memo to show Kanter the ropes, right?

 

[NUMBERICA]

the Jazz are probably counting on Memo to show Kanter the ropes, right?

I don't think the Jazz have been counting on Memo to do anything since April of 2010.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Yeah, this is a one time deal to help teams clean up their mistakes made with bad contracts. This is not an annual amnesty they're proposing.

The Amnesty the league is discussing is not necessarily annual, but I think it's more than a 1x thing like the Allan Houston rule that was introduced five or so years ago.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

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.

Really? I didn't think it was that bad.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

If the Jazz could sign Wilson Chandler that would be awesome. He would give us a legitimate starting SF. And it would be funny to sign a Denver player.

 

[billyshelby]

I kind of doubt the Jazz would pay off Memo and then turn around and sign a FA.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I kind of doubt the Jazz would pay off Memo and then turn around and sign a FA.

They wouldn't amnesty Memo and then do nothing, either.

 

[Ben10]

They wouldn't amnesty Memo and then do nothing, either.

Well I think they would be forced to do "something" because they would have to fill out the roster. But if the roster was full and they amnesty Memo it would be for tax/cap reasons. Not just to go sign someone else. I don't think they would do that ether.

 

[billyshelby]

They wouldn't amnesty Memo and then do nothing, either.

My larger point is they would Amnesty Memo if it meant avoiding a penalty or clearing room for minimal vets under the new CBA to then avoid penalty. But clearing Memo to sign a 5 million dollar player? I don't see them doing that.

 

[Ben10]

My larger point is they would Amnesty Memo if it meant avoiding a penalty or clearing room for minimal vets under the new CBA to then avoid penalty. But clearing Memo to sign a 5 million dollar player? I don't see them doing that.

This is what I was trying to say in my post. Billy as usual put it much better than I could.

 

[carolinajazz]

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

...ONLY is the league minimum is $100,000 bucks!

 

[NUMBERICA]

The only reason to amnesty a player is if you're dodging the LT or trying to get under the cap enough to spend a lot of money in free agency. If the Jazz amnesty Memo, they're doing it to throw $7-$15 million around. I don't see them doing that either, which is exactly why this is a racket for the haves.

 

[Park Bites]

I could see them cut bell. The reason being to free up more cap space for 2012. They would have a lot of money to spend that summer to make a great run with some serious talent.

 

[GVC]

I could see them cut bell. The reason being to free up more cap space for 2012. They would have a lot of money to spend that summer to make a great run with some serious talent.

It looks to me like the target is 2013. If, however, Jefferson plays more like he did in the first half than the second half of last season, and they can move him for some good young pieces, then dropping Raja to make a move in 2012 free agency could make some sense.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

My larger point is they would Amnesty Memo if it meant avoiding a penalty or clearing room for minimal vets under the new CBA to then avoid penalty. But clearing Memo to sign a 5 million dollar player? I don't see them doing that.

Avoiding what penalty? Any penalty would likely not match the fact that they're paying a guy 8 figures to not be around the team.

 

[billyshelby]

Avoiding what penalty? Any penalty would likely not match the fact that they're paying a guy 8 figures to not be around the team.

We don't know the new CBA. But assume a similar LT system and say Memo makes 10 for easy math. If the Jazz are over the tax by 3 million, that's 16 million for Memo. Alternatively, they pay Memo his 10 upfront (a sunk cost in either scenario) and they save the 6 they would have paid in LT (not to mention the money they later get as payment for being under the LT).

The bottom line is if the Jazz are going to be taxpayers in a new system with Memo, I would expect them to exercise the amnesty clause on him and go forward with the guys they have.