rules question: if Pierce was waived by the Celtics...

[Jeff]

If the Celtics waive Pierce (on the hook for only $5M) does he have to go through waivers before he'd be a free agent?  In other words, any team could claim him if they were willing to take on his whole salary, right?

I think that's the case, though it would be pretty hard to imagine a team picking up his full $15M contract when they could bid on him as a free agent in just a couple of days.

Can I get a ruling?  Thanks.

[badshar]

If the Celtics waive Pierce (on the hook for only $5M) does he have to go through waivers before he'd be a free agent?  In other words, any team could claim him if they were willing to take on his whole salary, right?

I think that's the case, though it would be pretty hard to imagine a team picking up his full $15M contract when they could bid on him as a free agent in just a couple of days.

Can I get a ruling?  Thanks.

Yes, he would have to clear waivers first.
As for teams not claiming him when they can get him as free agent, here something to consider:

• Who is to say he will clear waivers in the first place? You have an opportunity and you want to instead take the high risk waiting and hoping that he becomes a free agent? Someone else would take him.
• There are a ton of teams who have enough space to take on Pierce's contract and are looking for that one player to put themselves over the top.
• When you can have an NBA legend who can still produce good numbers and lead the team and you can pay him, you have to be stupid to not take him.

[rondohondo]

do teams have to have 15 mil in cap space to pick him up ?

If so , I can't see anyone with that kind of cap space wanting to pick up his contract

Any contender won't have the cap space to pick him up if that's the case

And then I believe he would resign with the c's for a vet min or mle contract ...

Start Green and make PP the 6th man

[Roy H.]

You've got that right, Jeff. 

One interesting wrinkle to this, though, that I *think* I'm correct on.

Pierce needs to be waived by June 30, 2013; otherwise the contract becomes fully guaranteed.  Therefore, any team claiming him would have to have room under their 2012-13 league year cap (or have a trade exception available to fit Pierce's full remaining contract).

I know there isn't a team with enough salary cap room to absorb Pierce's contract.  I think the only team with a large enough trade exception to take on Pierce's contract is Orlando, but I could be overlooking someone.

[rondohondo]

You've got that right, Jeff. 

One interesting wrinkle to this, though, that I *think* I'm correct on.

Pierce needs to be waived by June 30, 2013; otherwise the contract becomes fully guaranteed.  Therefore, any team claiming him would have to have room under their 2012-13 league year cap (or have a trade exception available to fit Pierce's full remaining contract).

I know there isn't a team with enough salary cap room to absorb Pierce's contract.  I think the only team with a large enough trade exception to take on Pierce's contract is Orlando, but I could be overlooking someone.

If that's the case, then I have to believe PP will resign after clearing waivers.

This makes the most sense to me , unless you can trade him for expirings and a pick .

Other than that , it doesn't make much sense to trade him.

If he would take the vet min, we would still be able to ad an MLE contract I believe , is this right ?

[Jeff]

perfect, thanks

[Jeff]

thanks for helping me with my latest front page post guys

that is an interesting question rondohondo - could we waive Pierce and get him through waivers and re-sign him for the league min or perhaps the bi-annual exception?

basically he'd be leaving money on the table that he could earn elsewhere but he'd get to legitimately retire a Celtic

thoughts anyone?

still not sure the Celtics would be so up for it - they'd probably still rather trade him and get something in return - but if they can't get good quality for him, maybe they do this just to have him around another year

[Lucky17]

thanks for helping me with my latest front page post guys

that is an interesting question rondohondo - could we waive Pierce and get him through waivers and re-sign him for the league min or perhaps the bi-annual exception?

basically he'd be leaving money on the table that he could earn elsewhere but he'd get to legitimately retire a Celtic

thoughts anyone?

still not sure the Celtics would be so up for it - they'd probably still rather trade him and get something in return - but if they can't get good quality for him, maybe they do this just to have him around another year

Well, if Pierce is willing to take the minimum, he'd probably go where he thought he had the best chance to contribute meaningfully to a contender. Would that be Boston next season?

[mmmmm]

thanks for helping me with my latest front page post guys

that is an interesting question rondohondo - could we waive Pierce and get him through waivers and re-sign him for the league min or perhaps the bi-annual exception?

basically he'd be leaving money on the table that he could earn elsewhere but he'd get to legitimately retire a Celtic

thoughts anyone?

still not sure the Celtics would be so up for it - they'd probably still rather trade him and get something in return - but if they can't get good quality for him, maybe they do this just to have him around another year

That's an interesting idea.

It's a weird sequence - buying his 2013-14 contract out ... but within this 2012-13 season ... so he can technically be a UFA and sign any new 2013-14 contract ...

If this sequence were allowed, the C's might be able to get Pierce under a bargain price for next season (and possibly even extended into the following season).

But I don't know if the the NBA would allow that move, under the "general prohibition on circumvention" rule.  (http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q103)

Roy?  What do you think?

[CelticConcourse]

This is not based on anything but my own thoughts but I find it hard to believe that the NBA would allow a team to waive a player that it needs to pay $15 mil, and then to resign this player to a $5 mil deal...

Sure seems like circumvention of some rule, but I'm not so knowledgeable on this topic. Seems too weird

[LooseCannon]

In the summer of 2010, the Heat waived James Jones to free up cap space due to the unguaranteed portion of his contract, then signed him a few weeks later to the veteran's minimum.  So there is precedent for waiving a player to save money then re-signing him.

If a team waives a player, it allows other players to claim that contract and it loses Bird rights.  If the player passes through waivers, the team can sign him using available cap space or a salary cap exception.

I think the NBA would probably step in to prevent re-signing a player who negotiated a change in the guarantee as part of the buy-out, since this would be a way to work around the rule against renegotiating a change in salary.

Now that I say that, I think that may have been what happened with Keyon Dooling.  Negotiating a buy-out then re-signing him to the minimum would be the same as renegotiating his contract to a lower amount.  So, the league may have stepped in and said it wasn't allowed.