Most Likely Amnesty Clauses: Mehmet Okur

[Gyp Rosetti]

"The New York Times and Sports Illustrated.com subsequently reported Saturday that the owners and players have reached tentative agreement on an amnesty provision that will allow teams to release one player -- with pay -- at any point during the life of the next collective bargaining agreement."

So what the hell is the upside for the team here?

 

[margodydek]

How does amnesty work exactly? I've seen people saying that even if we use the clause on Okur, we'd still be on the hook for his salary. So how the heck does it work?

How it works: Take Okur for example. He's on the books for ~$12MM. If the Jazz decide to amnesty his a$$ then we'd essentially let him go (cut him). While the Jazz would still have to pay him his $12MM, his salary would not go towards the salary cap. I would think the players would be all over this.

 

[margodydek]

"The New York Times and Sports Illustrated.com subsequently reported Saturday that the owners and players have reached tentative agreement on an amnesty provision that will allow teams to release one player -- with pay -- at any point during the life of the next collective bargaining agreement."

So what the hell is the upside for the team here?

Um...if a team has a ridiculous salary on their books that basically prohibits them from doing anything to improve their team (Orlando/Washington immediately jump to mind) this provides them an escape from previous mistakes. It's not a money saver at all, in fact it's the exact opposite, but it would allow several teams to improve their teams ability to compete.

 

[silesian]

question

Um...if a team has a ridiculous salary on their books that basically prohibits them from doing anything to improve their team (Orlando/Washington immediately jump to mind) this provides them an escape from previous mistakes. It's not a money saver at all, in fact it's the exact opposite, but it would allow several teams to improve their teams ability to compete.

How is avoiding luxury tax not saving money at all?

 

[NCJazz]

Looks like Memo is playing pretty well in Turkey so he may indeed have some trade value this year. That is why it would make a lot of sense to get rid of Bell and save some money under the salary cap next year as well.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Could we possibly trade for a player to amnesty? A lot of teams have TWO bad contracts, meaning they can only amnesty one. Then they ship the other one, along with other valuable assets to us. Then we use our amnesty on the bad contract and get the good stuff.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Could we possibly trade for a player to amnesty? A lot of teams have TWO bad contracts, meaning they can only amnesty one. Then they ship the other one, along with other valuable assets to us. Then we use our amnesty on the bad contract and get the good stuff.

Never thought of it, but this seriously makes sense. Curious about this as well, now.

 

[JimLes]

I think the idea would be to get under the cap to avoid luxury payments rather than use his space to sign someone else. Hopefully Kanter can take most of his bench minutes.

I don't know how this slipped my mind. Especially seeing as the luxury cap rules promise to be much, much tougher in the next CBA.

 

[twentytwo]

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, so we pay 1 dollar extra for every 1 dollar of Memo's salary (to the league, as tax). Also, under the new CBA, it is likely that will increase to anywhere from 1.25 dollars - 2 dollars per every 1 dollar over the cap.

So yes, if we waive Memo, we need to pay him ~11mil and lose him.

But if we keep Memo, we need to pay his ~11mil salary, plus a likely 13.75mil - 22mil in tax (again, depending on the new CBA). Unless he SERIOUSLY returns to form or we can somehow use him as a REALLY nice trade chip, I think he gets waived.

 

[InGameStrategy]

Could we possibly trade for a player to amnesty? A lot of teams have TWO bad contracts, meaning they can only amnesty one. Then they ship the other one, along with other valuable assets to us. Then we use our amnesty on the bad contract and get the good stuff.

That's a creative idea that would be fun to have included in the CBA. Hopefully they do.

 

[billyshelby]

As long as we don't give up on Raja, I'll be happy. After 38 minutes he starts to get a little ineffective I admit. But you don't get the benefits if he doesn't play 35.

 

[GoJazz]

So the owners want a higher % to protect themselves from there own decisions to write bad contracts. So they get the extra money then add a provision into the CBA so they can write another bad contract and ditch it via amnesty. Awesome.