Why would Spurs amnesty Bonner after not waiving him?

[deibero]

Excuse my ignorance but just trying to understand all the articles and posts suggesting that the spurs could amnesty bonner to create more cap space.

The thing I dont understand and I need someone to explain is: they could have waive him and pay only the 1M guaranteed. Why would you guarantee the contract to later amnesty him and have to pay the full 4M.

I understand that the 1M guaranteed would have counted towards the cap and the 4M in amnesty wouldnt but still, dont find a reason in which amnestying Bonner could make sense.

[Jumi]

It doesn't!

[Holden_Caulfield]

because they fucked up and amnestying/trading is the only options we have left. or maybe they just love bonner way too much that theyre keeping him.

[ChumpDumper]

Because armchair GMs said so!

[spurraider21]

By waiving they pay 1 million out of pocket, but it counts against the cap.

By amnestying they pay the full 3.9 million out of pocket, but none of it counts against the cap, freeing up an additional million.

Not a move I'd expect Holt to make

[UZER]

By waiving they pay 1 million out of pocket, but it counts against the cap.

By amnestying they pay the full 3.9 million out of pocket, but none of it counts against the cap, freeing up an additional million.

Not a move I'd expect Holt to make

He might make it if hes drunk, and thats a high probability.

[deibero]

By waiving they pay 1 million out of pocket, but it counts against the cap.

By amnestying they pay the full 3.9 million out of pocket, but none of it counts against the cap, freeing up an additional million.

Not a move I'd expect Holt to make

I understand and I mentioned that in my post, but still your paying 3M more for 1M additional in cap space. No logic whatsoever!

[Bruno]

Another possibility is that Spurs and Bonner have agreed to push back the deadline for his contract to become fully guaranteed by a couple of weeks which will allow Spurs to amnesty Bonner without having to give him his full contract.

[DPG21920]

Because armchair GMs said so!

Why do you hate Bruno?

[spurraider21]

I understand and I mentioned that in my post, but still your paying 3M more for 1M additional in cap space. No logic whatsoever!
It's a move that helps the team at the expense of the owners pockets. Maybe holt is willing to spend as Timmy's career is coming to a close. One can (delusionally) hope, can't he? :lol

[spurraider21]

Another possibility is that Spurs and Bonner have agreed to push back the deadline for his contract to become fully guaranteed by a couple of weeks which will allow Spurs to amnesty Bonner without having to give him his full contract.
Hasn't it already been reported that Bonners contract has become fully guaranteed?

[Bruno]

Hasn't it already been reported that Bonners contract has become fully guaranteed?

I doubt it has been reported by someone in the know.

[DPG21920]

Hasn't it already been reported that Bonners contract has become fully guaranteed?

They could have made that logical assumption based on the fact the Spurs did not waive him. That doesn't mean the deadline was not pushed back (which may not have been reported yet). Doesn't necessarily make it likely that he isn't fully guaranteed at this point, but no news does not assure that as of yet.

[coyotes_geek]

Excuse my ignorance but just trying to understand all the articles and posts suggesting that the spurs could amnesty bonner to create more cap space.

The thing I dont understand and I need someone to explain is: they could have waive him and pay only the 1M guaranteed. Why would you guarantee the contract to later amnesty him and have to pay the full 4M.

I understand that the 1M guaranteed would have counted towards the cap and the 4M in amnesty wouldnt but still, dont find a reason in which amnestying Bonner could make sense.

The Spurs obviously find Bonner useful enough to keep around. Why cut a player you find useful for the purpose of creating additional capspace before you know whether or not you're going to find a player worthy of using that capspace on? The Spurs can amnesty Bonner anytime they want to. Basically keeping Bonner on past 6/29 costs $3 mil, but that $3 mil gives the Spurs some options they wouldn't have otherwise. Besides, depending how free agency plays out, "buying" an extra $1 mil of cap space for $3 mil could be a bargain.

[DPG21920]

The Spurs obviously find Bonner useful enough to keep around. Why cut a player you find useful for the purpose of creating additional capspace before you know whether or not you're going to find a player worthy of using that capspace on? The Spurs can amnesty Bonner anytime they want to. Basically keeping Bonner on past 6/29 costs $3 mil, but that $3 mil gives the Spurs some options they wouldn't have otherwise. Besides, depending how free agency plays out, "buying" an extra $1 mil of cap space for $3 mil could be a bargain.

Very smart post. Some teams pay a lot to get that extra cap space to make a run at free agents (giving up picks, good players or waiving good players for nothing). Like you said, the Spurs have until July 17th to amnesty Bonner which would give them more than enough time to decide on FA's considering you can sign on July 10th.

If there are no FA's available they like or that work out, the Spurs still value Bonner for 3M (because they would have had to pay 1M anyways, so the 3M more is the real cost) because he is useful. Not only that, you still have an expiring contract to trade and you can see shooters being used in trades all the time because they are valuable.

[Bruno]

And the amnesty costing $3M is only if no one claims him from waivers. Bonner is a decent vet with a good attitude. I can see a team making a big at $1.5M-$2M for him which would lover the over-cost of an amnesty by that amount.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't get why Bonner would agree to getting cut later, and my guess is we would have heard about it now through league sources.

[DPG21920]

I don't get why Bonner would agree to getting cut later, and my guess is we would have heard about it now through league sources.

Because he would get more money for his troubles and why would you not agree to it?

[ChumpDumper]

If both AK and Ellis rumors are true, that could point to a Bonner amnesty.

[ChumpDumper]

Because he would get more money for his troubles and why would you not agree to it?Why keep yourself off the market to help out a team that doesn't want you anymore?

[DPG21920]

If both AK and Ellis rumors are true, that could point to a Bonner amnesty.

Even if just one is true, the Spurs would have to amnesty Bonner to have the cap space (unless they traded players away without taking money back i.e. Boris/Nando/Patty...)

[ChumpDumper]

Even if just one is true, the Spurs would have to amnesty Bonner to have the cap space (unless they traded players away without taking money back i.e. Boris/Nando/Patty...)Depends on whom they are going to keep. I don't think Splitter's staying is a lock.

[DPG21920]

Why keep yourself off the market to help out a team that doesn't want you anymore?

Because it's only a couple weeks, so not going to change much considering you would likely be the last guy pursued in free agency any ways. Plus, the Spurs have taken care of Bonner so I would imagine he would help them out as long as it didn't really harm him. Plus, he would likely get a little extra money from the Spurs for his troubles.

[DPG21920]

Depends on whom they are going to keep.

True, I am operating under the assumption Manu is back and Tiago is more likely than not.

[ChumpDumper]

Because it's only a couple weeks, so not going to change much considering you would likely be the last guy pursued in free agency any ways. Plus, the Spurs have taken care of Bonner so I would imagine he would help them out as long as it didn't really harm him. Plus, he would likely get a little extra money from the Spurs for his troubles.How much would make it worth it?

Serious question.

[BatManu20]

They won't amnesty him. Bonner will die a Spur. Pop will make sure of it.

[DPG21920]

I'm not sure, the money part is likely a very small consideration in all honesty (just a couple hundred grand likely). The real key is delaying it doesn't put Bonner in harms way and the Spurs seem to have a great relationship with him so I just don't see the issue.

[coyotes_geek]

Why keep yourself off the market to help out a team that doesn't want you anymore?

Agreed. I don't see much of a reason for Bonner to go along with moving his date back.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not sure, the money part is likely a very small consideration in all honesty (just a couple hundred grand likely). The real key is delaying it doesn't put Bonner in harms way and the Spurs seem to have a great relationship with him so I just don't see the issue.It's such a small amount it doesn't seem worth it at all to Bonner.

[DPG21920]

Well, it's just a small perk of delaying, not the main idea behind it. It's more about he and the Spurs having a deal that doesn't harm Bonner but helps the Spurs. Bonner may feel differently but to me it's not a big deal for Bonner to do.

[tmtcsc]

Splitter is nobody's first option it seems. The Spurs can sit back and watch Tiago's value dry up. Portland expressed interest but seem to be pursuing UFA's or trades much harder.

[ChumpDumper]

What does it do for Bonner again?

[DPG21920]

Splitter is nobody's first option it seems. The Spurs can sit back and watch Tiago's value dry up. Portland expressed interest but seem to be pursuing UFA's or trades much harder.

His value won't dry up. He will be pretty high up on people's list after Dwight/Josh Smith/Al Jefferson.

[DPG21920]

What does it do for Bonner again?

:lol Don't be purposely obtuse. In the big scheme of things? Does nothing for Bonner. But it does not hurt him at all (in my mind). Even though he doesn't gain from it, sometimes people do things (as long as it does not hurt him) to help people out. With his seemingly great relationship with the Spurs, I can see him helping the Spurs out even though he doesn't gain from it (with the exception of good will, which goes a long way, especially in future potential roles.)

[DPG21920]

Now, odds are that the Spurs/Bonner didn't do this, just saying it would not be a shock if it happened.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Don't be purposely obtuse. In the big scheme of things? Does nothing for Bonner. But it does not hurt him at all (in my mind). Even though he doesn't gain from it, sometimes people do things (as long as it does not hurt him) to help people out. With his seemingly great relationship with the Spurs, I can see him helping the Spurs out even though he doesn't gain from it (with the exception of good will, which goes a long way, especially in future potential roles.)So Bonner would give up $3,000,000 to get a couple hundred thousand from a team that doesn't want him and keep him off the free agent market for days or weeks?

I'm trying to see how people think this would make sense. It just doesn't.

[DPG21920]

So Bonner would give up $3,000,000 to get a couple hundred thousand from a team that doesn't want him and keep him off the free agent market for days or weeks?

I'm trying to see how people think this would make sense. It just doesn't.

How would he give up 3M? The Spurs could have very well said to him: "Look, we would like for you to push back your deadline. We love you and we really appreciate everything you have done for us. However, because of the direction we are going, we are going to waive you since your contract is only 1M guaranteed. If you push back that date a few weeks, we will still get you your 1M plus some extra money for your troubles, but it would really help us out. If not, we understand and we will waive you by June 30th".

[DPG21920]

Either way, Bonner only gets his 1M.

[ChumpDumper]

How would he give up 3M? The Spurs could have very well said to him: "Look, we would like for you to push back your deadline. We love you and we really appreciate everything you have done for us. However, because of the direction we are going, we are going to waive you since your contract is only 1M guaranteed. If you push back that date a few weeks, we will still get you your 1M plus some extra money for your troubles, but it would really help us out. If not, we understand and we will waive you by June 30th".You just answered your own question.

[DPG21920]

You just answered your own question.

He's not giving up 3M.

[ChumpDumper]

No, if the Spurs have to wait for some reason, that's their problem. Bonner doesn't have to wait; the deadline passes and he gets all the money.

Otherwise, his agent could just say waive him by the deadline agreed to so he can find a new team. Keep your $20.

[ChumpDumper]

He's not giving up 3M.You just said he did.

[spurraider21]

He's not getting 3 mil in either of the scenarios described by DPG. Not sure why chump isn't understanding

[DPG21920]

The option wouldn't be for him to get his full salary in that scenario either through being traded or amnestied. The convo in pushing back the deadline always has him getting 1M. If he didn't agree to do that, he gets waived and only gets 1M. Him not agreeing does not get him an extra 3M.

[Juan]

Even if just one is true, the Spurs would have to amnesty Bonner to have the cap space (unless they traded players away without taking money back i.e. Boris/Nando/Patty...)

Can't Spurs go over the cap since they have bird rights? Weren't they over it this season? Why do they have to stay under the cap?

[DPG21920]

No, if the Spurs have to wait for some reason, that's their problem. Bonner doesn't have to wait; the deadline passes and he gets all the money.

Otherwise, his agent could just say waive him by the deadline agreed to so he can find a new team. Keep your $20.

Ok, but pushing back the deadline doesn't cost him 3M if he's going to get waived. That's the point. They may very well tell the Spurs "keep your 20" but that doesn't get Bonner more money and would be a pretty meaningless and petty stand for a team/player with a good relationship. You are making this into a bigger deal than it is. It's quite simple really. It doesn't hurt bonner at all to do the Spurs this favor even if he does not gain anything right away.

[ChumpDumper]

He's not getting 3 mil in either of the scenarios described by DPG. Not sure why chump isn't understandingExactly, so why would he agree to the one that hadn't been agreed to?

I can't see any player going along with this.

[ChumpDumper]

Ok, but pushing back the deadline doesn't cost him 3M if he's going to get waived. That's the point. They may very well tell the Spurs "keep your 20" but that doesn't get Bonner more money and would be a pretty meaningless and petty stand for a team/player with a good relationship. You are making this into a bigger deal than it is. It's quite simple really. It doesn't hurt bonner at all to do the Spurs this favor even if he does not gain anything right away.How do you know it doesn't hurt Bonner? He's off the market and can't talk to anyone during the actual free agent period. Again, it simply makes no sense for a player to do this for a team that expressly doesn't want him anymore.

[DPG21920]

How do you know it doesn't hurt Bonner? He's off the market and can't talk to anyone during the actual free agent period. Again, it simply makes no sense for a player to do this for a team that expressly doesn't want him anymore.

Well, we just agree to disagree on how it hurts Bonner. I already answered your question on why I don't think it's a big deal for him.

[ChumpDumper]

Well, we just agree to disagree on how it hurts Bonner. I already answered your question on why I don't think it's a big deal for him.Did you?

Your answer was you don't think it will hurt him because you don't think it will hurt him.

[spurraider21]

Exactly, so why would he agree to the one that hadn't been agreed to?

I can't see any player going along with this.
So either he gets waived and makes 1 million on June 29, or he agrees to wait until July 10, gets waived, and gets somewhere like 1.2 mil instead. Not like he was going to be a free agent priority for anybody. The week or 2 isn't likely to affect his interest from teams. He pockets more cash. That's why he would theoretically agree

[ChumpDumper]

So either he gets waived and makes 1 million on June 29, or he agrees to wait until July 10, gets waived, and gets somewhere like 1.2 mil instead. Not like he was going to be a free agent priority for anybody. The week or 2 isn't likely to affect his interest from teams. He pockets more cash. That's why he would theoretically agreeLesser free agents have already been called.

[DPG21920]

Did you?

Your answer was you don't think it will hurt him because you don't think it will hurt him.

Yes. I did. My answer was basically the opposite of why you think it would hurt Bonner. I said he would very likely be the last FA target for most teams. That would push his real time on the market IMO to not much of a difference. If he was a FA on July 1, it's not likely he would be widely sought after. What is more likely is that teams would court the main FA targets and once those deals get inked, teams would move onto guys like Bonner. So if that is the case, then pushing back his date, it would not really delay his real time on the market by much at all.

I've said about all I can on it, you don't agree and that's fine. I also believe that in reality, odds are he didn't push it back because we haven't heard. The main point was not to rule it out.

[ChumpDumper]

I've already ruled it out. No one could explain why Bonner's agent would do such a thing. No big deal if I'm wrong.

[DPG21920]

:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

Can anyone think of an example of this happening?

[TheGoldStandard]

Why put any thought into what the front office is doing in order to free up cap space, if it involves Bonner they'd shore him up in a second. He's not going anywhere. 14 Minutes a game to stretch the floor for 4M yeah, pop takes that all the way to the bank.

[Marcus Bryant]

And the amnesty costing $3M is only if no one claims him from waivers. Bonner is a decent vet with a good attitude. I can see a team making a big at $1.5M-$2M for him which would lover the over-cost of an amnesty by that amount.

True. Another contract Spurs fans mindnumbingly bitch about but is not terrible.

[Chinook]

Can anyone think of an example of this happening?

McDyess did it for the Spurs a couple of years ago. He was retiring, but as a favor to the club, he allowed them to push back his guarantee that until after the lockout.

Now you may say that that's a different situation because Dice wasn't going to play again, but he still had to wait around for longer than he wanted to and had the potential to have to fly out and take a physical for a club he was never going to play for. As far as I know, the team didn't offer him more money to do so; he just did it out of good will.

Players like Bonner don't go in the first week of free agency anyway. He doesn't really lose anything by not being available during the moratorium, and the fact that he was such a team player would do more to boost his stock around the league than being available early would. And as far as money goes, it shouldn't take much to get him to agree. If the team bumped up their guarantee to say $1.6 Million, then that plus a minimum deal would get Bonner $3 Million next season. Or he could get claimed on the amnesty waivers, which would guarantee his full contract, so he'd get $4 Million.

[coyotes_geek]

McDyess did it for the Spurs a couple of years ago. He was retiring, but as a favor to the club, he allowed them to push back his guarantee that until after the lockout.

Now you may say that that's a different situation because Dice wasn't going to play again, but he still had to wait around for longer than he wanted to and had the potential to have to fly out and take a physical for a club he was never going to play for. As far as I know, the team didn't offer him more money to do so; he just did it out of good will.

He didn't have a choice in the matter. Neither did the Spurs. It was a lockout.

[Chinook]

He didn't have a choice in the matter. Neither did the Spurs. It was a lockout.

The lockout started in July. His original guarantee date was in June like Bonner's. He pushed it back; the lockout wouldn't've affected anything.

[Strategic]

You folks are making me dizzy. Bonner was a Spurs, Bonner is a Spur, Bonner will be a Spur.

[BackHome]

I could see Bonner going with it he is a class act so as long as he is getting paid I doubt he has a problem with it.

[coyotes_geek]

The lockout started in July. His original guarantee date was in June like Bonner's. He pushed it back; the lockout wouldn't've affected anything.

You're right about the dates. But it's still not a relevant situation to Bonner. Dyess wanted to retire, but the Spurs wanted him to play one more year. All Dyess did was agree to let the Spurs give him more time to think about it. Completely different situation than the Spurs asking Bonner to give them more time to decide whether or not to make a decision that could cost him $3 million.

[pad300]

How do you know it doesn't hurt Bonner? He's off the market and can't talk to anyone during the actual free agent period. Again, it simply makes no sense for a player to do this for a team that expressly doesn't want him anymore.

Well, actually, he only can't talk to teams if the Spurs are going to make a complaint to the league office... I'm pretty sure that the Spurs might include Bonner's agent being allowed to look for a new job for him in such a deal. It really could be structured that it doesn't hurt Bonner any more than his option being taken by the Spurs would anyways.

[dallasmaverickslose]

Excuse my ignorance but just trying to understand all the articles and posts suggesting that the spurs could amnesty bonner to create more cap space.

The thing I dont understand and I need someone to explain is: they could have waive him and pay only the 1M guaranteed. Why would you guarantee the contract to later amnesty him and have to pay the full 4M.

I understand that the 1M guaranteed would have counted towards the cap and the 4M in amnesty wouldnt but still, dont find a reason in which amnestying Bonner could make sense.

Maybe we're KEEPING him? Ever thought of that?

[Chinook]

You're right about the dates. But it's still not a relevant situation to Bonner. Dyess wanted to retire, but the Spurs wanted him to play one more year. All Dyess did was agree to let the Spurs give him more time to think about it. Completely different situation than the Spurs asking Bonner to give them more time to decide whether or not to make a decision that could cost him $3 million.

It doesn't cost Bonner anything. If amnestied, at worst he either would get a little bonus plus a new deal from someone else or get his full deal. The conversation wouldn't be, "We don't know if we want to keep you, so can you extend your deadline?" It would be, "We're going to get rid of you. Can we rent your contract for a couple hundred thousand bucks?"

Bonner would have the choice of accepting and getting at least $2.4 Million this season (most likely in the $3 Million+ range or even his whole contract if someone picks him up off waivers) or declining and getting $2.4 Million with no real chance of getting more. Monetarily, it would be in his best interest, unless he thought he'd be a top free agent and would get a lot more money if he were available earlier in the process. He wouldn't be, so it would have been a good deal.

[deibero]

Maybe we're KEEPING him? Ever thought of that?

Haha smartass the question is for the people suggesting and amnesty could be in the works.

I got the answer i wanted. The truth is that bonner will probably be claimed if amnestied therefore not costing us much more than the 1M guaranteed, and in addition it gives us flexibilty for a trade plus the 1M in cap space

[bluebellmaniac]

Either way, Bonner only gets his 1M.

I see what Chump is saying. Bonner is guaranteed $1M. Why would he forego earning more money (in millions of $) by having the opportunity to catch on with another team by keeping himself off the market for only $100k or $200k?

I decided late in the season and early in the playoffs that Pop sees Bonner as value at his salary and what he provides throughout the season in stretching the floor. I'm not saying I support that, I'm just saying that's my interpretation of what Pop thinks. Wouldn't surprise me at all to see Bonner staying in place. He could go later in the season as an expiring however.

[Bruno]

Another factor that could have enticed Bonner to push his deadline is the payment schedule of his buyout. It's often spread into several months/years and Spurs could have change that to a lump sum payment. Instead of receiving $1M over a couple of years, his new buyout clause could be $1.2M/$1.5M paid immediately. To me, it's an incentive big enough for Bonner to agree at waiting two extra weeks before becoming a free agent but that's just my opinion.

[dallasmaverickslose]

Haha smartass the question is for the people suggesting and amnesty could be in the works.

I got the answer i wanted. The truth is that bonner will probably be claimed if amnestied therefore not costing us much more than the 1M guaranteed, and in addition it gives us flexibilty for a trade plus the 1M in cap space

Oops... My bad. I guess I misread your originial post. Sorry about that.

[ChumpDumper]

McDyess did it for the Spurs a couple of years ago. He was retiring, but as a favor to the club, he allowed them to push back his guarantee that until after the lockout.

Now you may say that that's a different situation because Dice wasn't going to play again, but he still had to wait around for longer than he wanted to and had the potential to have to fly out and take a physical for a club he was never going to play for. As far as I know, the team didn't offer him more money to do so; he just did it out of good will.

Players like Bonner don't go in the first week of free agency anyway. He doesn't really lose anything by not being available during the moratorium, and the fact that he was such a team player would do more to boost his stock around the league than being available early would. And as far as money goes, it shouldn't take much to get him to agree. If the team bumped up their guarantee to say $1.6 Million, then that plus a minimum deal would get Bonner $3 Million next season. Or he could get claimed on the amnesty waivers, which would guarantee his full contract, so he'd get $4 Million.I knew what dice did. So no one in Bonner's position actually did this before.

And again, lesser free agents have already been contacted.

By the Spurs if one believes the rumors.

Not convinced.

[Chinook]

I knew what dice did. So no one in Bonner's position actually did this before.

And again, lesser free agents have already been contacted.

By the Spurs if one believes the rumors.

Not convinced.

Convinced of what? That that agreement HAS been struck? You shouldn't be, since we have no reason to believe it has. But if you're not convinced it could happen and that it would be a pretty sound (or at least net-neutral) financial decision, I don't think you're looking at it from his perspective. Bonner is one of the best shooters in the NBA. He will get another contract, and probably a pretty substantial one ($10M/3 easily). Even a minimum deal is $1.4 Million for someone with his experience. If the team guaranteed him $600k more, then he'd make $3 Million. Also, if he gets claimed on amnestied waivers, he'd get all $4 Million guaranteed.

It's 11 days in real life, but it's actually just a blink of an eye for the off-season. We're talking about the Spurs amnestying Bonner before the first free agent inks a contract. There will be plenty of money left over.

So yeah, no one's saying that Bonner has agreed to this. But we are saying that he would really not be taking a gamble by agreeing to the extension. I don't know if anyone has agreed to this very thing before, since the amnesty waivers are such a new thing. But players tweak their contracts to help their teams out all the time.

[exstatic]

Hasn't it already been reported that Bonners contract has become fully guaranteed?

I think a lot of people assumed it has, because the date has passed.

[superbigtime]

Pop is going to keep bonner til the end of time so that the spurs can remain a collection of mentally fragile chokers for years to come. Thanks Pop!

[deibero]

Maybe we're KEEPING him? Ever thought of that?

no man, all good...

[ChumpDumper]

Convinced of what? That that agreement HAS been struck? You shouldn't be, since we have no reason to believe it has. But if you're not convinced it could happen and that it would be a pretty sound (or at least net-neutral) financial decision, I don't think you're looking at it from his perspective. Bonner is one of the best shooters in the NBA. He will get another contract, and probably a pretty substantial one ($10M/3 easily). Even a minimum deal is $1.4 Million for someone with his experience. If the team guaranteed him $600k more, then he'd make $3 Million. Also, if he gets claimed on amnestied waivers, he'd get all $4 Million guaranteed.

It's 11 days in real life, but it's actually just a blink of an eye for the off-season. We're talking about the Spurs amnestying Bonner before the first free agent inks a contract. There will be plenty of money left over.

So yeah, no one's saying that Bonner has agreed to this. But we are saying that he would really not be taking a gamble by agreeing to the extension. I don't know if anyone has agreed to this very thing before, since the amnesty waivers are such a new thing. But players tweak their contracts to help their teams out all the time.Then give me an example of one doing this.

[cjw]

You're right about the dates. But it's still not a relevant situation to Bonner. Dyess wanted to retire, but the Spurs wanted him to play one more year. All Dyess did was agree to let the Spurs give him more time to think about it. Completely different situation than the Spurs asking Bonner to give them more time to decide whether or not to make a decision that could cost him $3 million.

I don't think it ends up costing him $3 million. If he's amnestied, he will make the whole $3.9 million (pay split will depend on if someone else stakes a claim on him). If he's cut for $1 million, he will still get signed to at least the vet's minimum of $1.2 million for someone with 9 years experience. More likely he's out about a million bucks, if anything at all ... heck, Steve Novak got paid $4 million last year and couldn't sniff the court in the playoffs.

[coyotes_geek]

It doesn't cost Bonner anything. If amnestied, at worst he either would get a little bonus plus a new deal from someone else or get his full deal. The conversation wouldn't be, "We don't know if we want to keep you, so can you extend your deadline?" It would be, "We're going to get rid of you. Can we rent your contract for a couple hundred thousand bucks?"

Bonner would have the choice of accepting and getting at least $2.4 Million this season (most likely in the $3 Million+ range or even his whole contract if someone picks him up off waivers) or declining and getting $2.4 Million with no real chance of getting more. Monetarily, it would be in his best interest, unless he thought he'd be a top free agent and would get a lot more money if he were available earlier in the process. He wouldn't be, so it would have been a good deal.

Getting amnestied has nothing to do with it. The financial risk to Bonner was getting cut before his deal became fully guaranteed. Asking Bonner to agree to move his full-guarantee date back is just asking him to agree to give the Spurs more time to make a decision that could only impact him negatively. If the Spurs are going to cut him, a possibility which he immediately becomes incredibly concerned about if the Spurs approach him asking him to move back his full-guarantee date, the later it happens the worse it is for him. We're already seeing teams come to agreements with guys in Bonner's salary range. There's no incentive for Bonner to agree to put himself in a situation like that. If he did, he's pretty much the most loyal Spur ever.

[coyotes_geek]

I don't think it ends up costing him $3 million. If he's amnestied, he will make the whole $3.9 million (pay split will depend on if someone else stakes a claim on him). If he's cut for $1 million, he will still get signed to at least the vet's minimum of $1.2 million for someone with 9 years experience. More likely he's out about a million bucks, if anything at all ... heck, Steve Novak got paid $4 million last year and couldn't sniff the court in the playoffs.

Bonner drives a Pontiac Grand Prix. I'm positive he thinks $1 million dollars is a lot of money.

[TheGoldStandard]

Bonner is not going to be cut or amnestied.. The guy will be a spur forever, he'll take a front office job or coaching job when he hangs it up, shoot he might even be Pop's successor. He'll groom him for the job.