Amnesty Clause could benefit the C's

[diconzo]

It wouldn't help us to release someone (we have no one to release) but it might help us to trade for someone and then release them. Like Orlando will want to release Hedo and Arenas. They'll most likely pick Arenas, but what if we traded them for Hedo, something like Hedo+Ryan Andersen or Hedo+a 1st rounder. We could then release Hedo and still have an extra player/pick.

[Chris]

I doubt the amnesty clause would allow for that.  It would most likely only allow teams to use it for players currently on their roster.

However, the Amnesty clause could benefit the C's, if a lot of teams take advantage of it, and there end up being a number of very talented players on the market, who might be willing to take a vet minimum type deal with a contender, since they are still being paid by the team that cut them loose.

[BballTim]

It wouldn't help us to release someone (we have no one to release) but it might help us to trade for someone and then release them. Like Orlando will want to release Hedo and Arenas. They'll most likely pick Arenas, but what if we traded them for Hedo, something like Hedo+Ryan Andersen or Hedo+a 1st rounder. We could then release Hedo and still have an extra player/pick.

  We don't really have any unwanted assets making that kind of money to trade them, do we?

[JSD]

The Amnesty Clause will only hurt the Celtics unless they can do one of two things:

1. Trade for a player to be released coupled with value, as the OP mentions.

Or

2. The ability to release Pierce and then resign him under a veteran minimum deal which would free that money for the free agent open market.

If neither of those two things can happen (which is the most likely scenario), this clause screws the Celtics. The type of players released will not be enough to benefit the C's as much as the team releasing the player getting out of cap hell, and there's no guarantee the talent released would come to the Celtics in the first place.

The C's should be against the Amnesty Clause or fight for the ability to have one of the two options I mentioned.

[MBunge]

The type of players released will not be enough to benefit the C's as much as the team releasing the player getting out of cap hell, and there's no guarantee the talent released would come to the Celtics in the first place.

Ben Gordon in Detroit.  Brandon Roy in Portland.  Tyrus Thomas in Charlotte.  Sideshow Bob in Cleveland.  Joe Johnson in Atlanta.  There are a LOT of guys out there on non-contending teams who would be considered for amnesty and Boston would have as good a shot at them as any and better than some, given the Celtics' future salary cap room.

Mike

[greenpride32]

I read a team by team aritcle (I believe on ESPN) about which players could be amnesty casualties, and for the Celtics they listed KG!  Prior to his injury KG was probably worth a little less than his salary as his performance is expected to decline with age.  But post injury he is defintely overpaid if you are truly looking at it from a unbiased angle.

The other stated something like this. "and for the Celtics <gulp> Kevin Garnett". 

[LooseCannon]

Teams that waive a player under an amnesty clause would not be able to clear enough cap space to compete with the Celtics for high-priced free agents.  Teams that waive players may be getting rid of the contracts they need to use to match salaries in trading for a big name.  The way that an amnesty clause hurts the Celtics is in making big payroll teams more able to resign their own free agents.

[BASS_THUMPER]

The Amnesty Clause will only hurt the Celtics unless they can do one of two things:

1. Trade for a player to be released coupled with value, as the OP mentions.

Or

2. The ability to release Pierce and then resign him under a veteran minimum deal which would free that money for the free agent open market.

If neither of those two things can happen (which is the most likely scenario), this clause screws the Celtics. The type of players released will not be enough to benefit the C's as much as the team releasing the player getting out of cap hell, and there's no guarantee the talent released would come to the Celtics in the first place.

The C's should be against the Amnesty Clause or fight for the ability to have one of the two options I mentioned.

doin number 2..

lol..

would we really get the best from him?

he would feel like crap..

lol..stop me im on a roll!!!

*drankin*

[nickagneta]

If you can't re-sign the player you cut and the amnesty clause can not be included for any player traded to your team in the off season, the amnesty clause is useless to the Celtics unless they can sign a player from another team to an MLE or lower contract.

So which center and/or PF is going to get cut that the Celtics could sign if cut:

Atlanta: Joe Johnson
Charlotte: Tyrus Thomas
Chicago: Kyle Korver
Cleveland: Baron Davis/Anderson Varejao
Dallas: Brendan Haywood/Shawn Marion
Denver: Al Harrington
Detroit: Ben Gordon
Golden State: Andris Biedrins
Houston: Hasheem Thabeet
Indiana: James Posey
LAL: Luke Walton
Miami: Mike Miller
Milwaukee: Drew Gooden/Corey Maggette
New Jersey: Travis Outlaw
New Orleans: Emeka Okafor???
Orlando: Gilbert Arenas
Philadelphia: Andres Nocioni
Phoenix: Josh Childress
Portland: Brandon Roy
Sacramento: Francisco Garcia
San Antonio: Richard Jefferson
Washington: Rashard Lewis


Really, except for Emeka Okafor, is there really anyone that the Celtics truly NEED or could use on this list? Biedrins? maybe but he doesn't play a lick of defense. Same for Harrington. Varejao would be great but I don't see a team devoid of good big men dumping him. Johnson would be a nice Ray replacement long term but is the MLE, if it exists, really going to get him and what does he really add for next year?

[BASS_THUMPER]

what happened to lettin our playas play till the wheels fall off..?

as talented as paul garrnet and ray is..

why we tryin to consider movin them..

right now....at the point of the big 3 game..life..?

they need each other...


if u move one move all and rebuild

[LooseCannon]

Players released in 2005 under the Allen Houston rule:
Jerome Williams -New York
Michael Finley - Dallas
Fred Hoiberg - Minnesota
Ron Mercer - New Jersey
Calvin Booth - Milwaukee
Troy Bell - Memphis
Clarence Weatherspoon - Houston
Alonzo Mourning - Toronto
Vin Baker - Boston
Derrick Coleman - Detroit
Wesley Person - Miami
Eddie Robinson - Chicago
Howard Eisley - Phoenix
Doug Christie - Orlando
Aaron McKie - Philadelphia
Brian Grant - LA Lakers
Derek Anderson - Portland
Reggie Miller - Indiana

Some players, such as Baker and Coleman, had already been waived or bought out and amnesty was a pure luxury tax savings.  Reggie Miller was waived because he was going to retire.  Only eight players had an NBA career, counting Aaron McKie, who had a contract but never played.  Only Finley, Mourning, Both, and Anderson played more than 40 games after being waived.

I don't expect teams to use the amnesty clause on a player who is overpaid but still has value.  For example, someone who is paid $15 million/year but is only worth $8 million/year is someone a team probably won't get rid of unless that deal was at least 3-4 years, the team is well into the luxury tax (and likely to remain there), the team has a capable replacement waiting in the wings, and the overpaid player is untradeable.

Of course, things may be a bit different since the proposal for this year may include salary cap relief and not just luxury tax relief.  Still, if you waive someone making $15 million who is worth $8 million when you are $10 million over the cap, then you are effectively downgrading from a player worth $8 million to a player worth, at most, $5 million (unless you get a steal of a contract) so that you can save $10 million.  Unless that $10 million helps you retain a free agent you would otherwise have to let go, you're probably becoming less competitive by waiving an overpaid but useful player.

The Celtics are probably most likely to benefit from signing a waived player if they a minimum salary gets them a player who is likely to miss more games than Jermaine O'Neal and likely to be worse than JON if both are healthy and they get lucky in the health lottery.

[heitingas]

If there is an amnesty clause could it only be used on a player already signed to the team or could you sign someone then use this on that player a year after ?

A hypothetical scenario,If we could we should try to sign Chandler who says he likes KG, that would be a real good thing if we could do that, Ainge and Chandler agrees it's for 1 year and Chandler get's all his guaranteed money and Celtics get him off their cap and we could still go after Howard or in the worst case Howard doesn't come here and Chandler stays for 3 years (if the MLE is only gonna be for 3 years).

and OT; assuming teams could offer extensions using bird rights for 1 player each year Glen Davis should obviousely stay for a year,and Green should take his qualifying offer.

[Chris]

If there is an amnesty clause could it only be used on a player already signed to the team or could you sign someone then use this on that player a year after ?

A hypothetical scenario,If we could we should try to sign Chandler who says he likes KG, that would be a real good thing if we could do that, Ainge and Chandler agrees it's for 1 year and Chandler get's all his guaranteed money and Celtics get him off their cap and we could still go after Howard or in the worst case Howard doesn't come here and Chandler stays for 3 years (if the MLE is only gonna be for 3 years).

and OT; assuming teams could offer extensions using bird rights for 1 player each year Glen Davis should obviousely stay for a year,and Green should take his qualifying offer.

It could be anything, thats the beauty of collective bargaining.  But, with that said, based on the rumored provision, and past precedent, not to mention the actual purpose of the provision, it will only be allowed to be used on players who are already under contract with that team prior to the new CBA. 

So, you likely will not be able sign someone and then use it on them, or trade for someone and use it on them. 

The whole point of the Amnesty clause is to give teams a 1 time chance to get out of a bad contract from the previous CBA, in order to make them more competitive under the new system. 

[action781]

Could we resign Big Baby with Bird Rights to a multi-year deal (say, 3 years $11 million) to make a good run at a title this season then see what happens with the Dwight Howard sweepstakes next summer?  If Dwight wants to sign here and we need cap space then we release Baby and if Dwight doesn't come here then we still have Baby at a reasonable price.

[heitingas]

If there is an amnesty clause could it only be used on a player already signed to the team or could you sign someone then use this on that player a year after ?

A hypothetical scenario,If we could we should try to sign Chandler who says he likes KG, that would be a real good thing if we could do that, Ainge and Chandler agrees it's for 1 year and Chandler get's all his guaranteed money and Celtics get him off their cap and we could still go after Howard or in the worst case Howard doesn't come here and Chandler stays for 3 years (if the MLE is only gonna be for 3 years).

and OT; assuming teams could offer extensions using bird rights for 1 player each year Glen Davis should obviousely stay for a year,and Green should take his qualifying offer.

It could be anything, thats the beauty of collective bargaining.  But, with that said, based on the rumored provision, and past precedent, not to mention the actual purpose of the provision, it will only be allowed to be used on players who are already under contract with that team prior to the new CBA. 

So, you likely will not be able sign someone and then use it on them, or trade for someone and use it on them. 

The whole point of the Amnesty clause is to give teams a 1 time chance to get out of a bad contract from the previous CBA, in order to make them more competitive under the new system. 

I see, thanks for the info.
So does this amnesty clause only allow teams to rid themselves of one bad contract in the new CBA ? Or is it allowed to be used every year on a player ?
This amnesty clause could end up being used up by teams in the first season and then no one hears about it ?