Larry Coon explains Paul Pierce's contract situation

[mcshane41]

With rumors of PP possibly being waived I asked the guru for clarity:

Celtics Fan
Larry, much is being made of Paul Pierce’s non-guaranteed contract next year and that BOS needs to waive him for cap savings. However, it would only free up the MLE, not “real” cap space right?
2nd part: couldn’t he simply decline his player option and sign a more cap friendly annual figure, staying in BOS and still creating room for use of the full MLE?

Larry Coon
"Correct, the Celtics wouldn’t gain any cap room by waiving Pierce, and it’s almost always better to trade someone than waive him anyway — assuming the player has trade value and the team can find an acceptable trade (i.e., not just taking back bad contracts). I think the Celtics could do much better by trading him, if they’re ready to blow up the current roster.
There is no player option, so the Celtics would have to waive him. But if they did so, they COULD mutually decide to re-sign."

Read more at http://www.hoopsworld.com/salary-cap-chat-with-larry-coon-532012#or6IMCZbIvzgQWLL.99

So there you go, no option for PP to opt out and re-sign like he did last time. He'd have to be traded or waived. Yet *Could* re-sign..

[Kane3387]

That's shocking. How could we still resign him?

[Celtics4ever]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

[Fafnir]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

[Eddie20]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

Actually, no. A team that has cap space only has to pay the guaranteed portion of the deal. Like the Suns did with Scola and the Cats did with Haywood. So the Mavs could basically claim for just 5M.

[KGs Knee]

That's shocking. How could we still resign him?

MLE, Mini-MLE, vet min

[Eddie20]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

Actually, no. A team that has cap space only has to pay the guaranteed portion of the deal. Like the Suns did with Scola and the Cats did with Haywood. So the Mavs could basically claim for just 5M.

[j804]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

Not sure how the cap works or much he'd want to leave on the table but something tells me Pierce would waive and re-sign to a friendlier contract to reload for one more run

[Chris]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

Not sure how the cap works or much he'd want to leave on the table but something tells me Pierce would waive and re-sign to a friendlier contract to reload for one more run

It wouldn't really help them, because it wouldn't create any cap space.  So, its not going to happen.

Plus, I think Pierce wants to win.  If the C's waive him, he will go chase a ring.

By far the most likely scenarios though, are they trade him, or they keep him. 

[nickagneta]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

Actually, no. A team that has cap space only has to pay the guaranteed portion of the deal. Like the Suns did with Scola and the Cats did with Haywood. So the Mavs could basically claim for just 5M.

That's for amnestied players I believe, which both Haywood and Scola were. The Celtics can't amnesty Pierce, he's not on the same contract he was during the lockout.

[Eddie20]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

Actually, no. A team that has cap space only has to pay the guaranteed portion of the deal. Like the Suns did with Scola and the Cats did with Haywood. So the Mavs could basically claim for just 5M.

That's for amnestied players I believe, which both Haywood and Scola were. The Celtics can't amnesty Pierce, he's not on the same contract he was during the lockout.

Yeah, you're right. I forgot they were amnestied not waived.

[Lucky17]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

Actually, no. A team that has cap space only has to pay the guaranteed portion of the deal. Like the Suns did with Scola and the Cats did with Haywood. So the Mavs could basically claim for just 5M.

That's for amnestied players I believe, which both Haywood and Scola were. The Celtics can't amnesty Pierce, he's not on the same contract he was during the lockout.

Pierce signed his current contract in July 2010, before the new, post-lockout CBA took effect. He could be amnestied. (Rondo and Avery Bradley are the only other two eligible candidates for amnesty.)

[j804]

I don't see him clearing waivers someone would sign him, is it like baseball?

If he's waived then a team would need enough cap space to absorb his entire contract I believe.

I can't see a team spending that much cap space for a single year of Pierce.

Not sure how the cap works or much he'd want to leave on the table but something tells me Pierce would waive and re-sign to a friendlier contract to reload for one more run

It wouldn't really help them, because it wouldn't create any cap space.  So, its not going to happen.

Plus, I think Pierce wants to win.  If the C's waive him, he will go chase a ring.

By far the most likely scenarios though, are they trade him, or they keep him.

Ahh ok got it it'll pretty much come down to KG's decision then. Theres no way we keep Pierce around if KG retires it'll be KABOOM. If KG gives it another go it he probably only does that with Pierce staying.

[Eddie20]

Larry Coon

Waivers are a temporary status for players who are released by their team. A player stays "on waivers" for 48 hours, during which time other teams may claim the player and assume his contract. If no team has claimed the player before the end of the waiver period (which is always 5:00 PM Eastern Time), he is said to have "cleared waivers." The player's contract is terminated and he becomes a free agent. The only way to terminate a contract early (other than with an ETO -- see question number 57) is through the waiver process.1 The waiver period includes weekends and holidays.

A team can claim a waived player before he clears waivers only if one of the following is true:

The team is far enough under the salary cap to fit the player's entire salary.
The team has a Disabled Player exception for at least the player's salary (see question number 25), and the player is on the last season of his contract.
The team has a trade exception for at least the player's salary (see question number 83).
The player has a minimum salary contract.
If a team makes a successful waiver claim, it acquires the player and his existing contract, and pays the remainder of his salary -- the waiving team is relieved of all responsibility for the player. There is a fee of $1,000, payable to the league office, for claiming a waived player. If more than one team tries to claim a waived player, the team with the worst record gets him.

If the player clears waivers he becomes a free agent, and is free to sign with the team of his choice. The player's roster spot is freed-up as soon as the team places the player on waivers. It can sign a new player or acquire one via trade immediately, without waiting for the player to be claimed or to clear waivers.

[snively]

That is an interesting idea.  Waiving him and then signing him to an MLE deal (I assume waiving him would involve renouncing our bird rights to him).  We'd wipe $5 mil off the cap in one fell swoop, though we'd also burn the MLE.

That would give us a lot more flexibility to pull off a sign and trade of Jeff Green for a higher paid player though.