The Celtics Cannot Claim Anyone Off Waivers

[LooseCannon]

Since people keep asking if it is possible, the answer is no, unless the waived player is signed to a minimum contract.  Just like in baseball, the team that claims a player off waivers assumes that player's contract.  Unlike baseball, there is a salary cap in the NBA, so the team would have to have salary cap space or an exception like the traded player exception in order to claim someone off of waivers.

Bonus info: the Celtics cannot get a disabled player exception for Jermaine O'Neal or Chris Wilcox and, if they could, it wouldn't apply until next season.  Since neither player is under contract next year, there is no way the NBA would grant such an exception, even if that player died.

[raynman]

Thanks for the clarification... So, that means we have to wait for buyout FAs to clear waivers , right? What if some team claims them but want to come to the Celtics, can they chhose not to sign with that team? thanks..

[LooseCannon]

You can't decline being claimed on waivers.  A team claiming a player means they are taking over the existing contract.  You are not a free agent until you clear waivers.  At best, you can vow to be a counter-productive pain in the rump if a team claims you instead of letting you become a free agent so you can sign with the team of your choice.

The Celtics would only have the minimum salary exception available to sign free agents.  Some teams have other exceptions, such as the MLE, available.

[RajonRondo9Dime]

Turiaf and Johnson. Book it.

[RyNye]

Are we sure about this?

When the Clippers grabbed Chauncey Billups off waivers at the beginning of the season, they only had to pay $2 million (which was their bid during the waiver process). The Knicks had to pick up the bill for the rest of his contract ($12 million).

Source: http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/7346801/los-angeles-clippers-claim-chauncey-billups-waivers

Unless something in the rules has changed since then, the situation should be no different for the Celtics vis-a-vis Turiaf or Hickson.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Turiaf and Johnson. Book it.

I reall don't mind having either one of them. Right now we could use any solid big man we can get.

[mmmmm]

Are we sure about this?

When the Clippers grabbed Chauncey Billups off waivers at the beginning of the season, they only had to pay $2 million (which was their bid during the waiver process). The Knicks had to pick up the bill for the rest of his contract ($12 million).

Source: http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/7346801/los-angeles-clippers-claim-chauncey-billups-waivers

Unless something in the rules has changed since then, the situation should be no different for the Celtics vis-a-vis Turiaf or Hickson.

Yes, the rules have changed but only in exceptional cases.  In this particular case, the Knicks had released Billups via the new "amnesty" claus, which allows teams to release players signed prior to this season and get immediate cap relief.  Each team may use this rule just once.   Under this rule, the team still pays the player but it doesn't count towards their salary cap number. 

The waiver process is also a little different than a normal 'waive'.  Teams that are under the cap can bid for the player by bidding to assume a portion of the remaining salary.  That's how the Clippers won Billups' rights.  They bid the most for him.

If no team under the cap bids on the player, he becomes unrestricted and can sign with any team for whatever they can pay him.  The original team is still responsible for paying out the original contract in full.