2013 Amnesty Candidate: Pau Gasol

[Richie]

I'm never going to understand this idea of a player not leaving because of the extra year.

They aren't losing that money, because it's money they will get in the next contract. The only way it makes sense is if the player is planning on the chances of suffering a career ending injury.

Look at Harden as an example. People say he signed with the Rockets because he got an extra $25m or whatever, but $17.5m of that is in his 5th year. Barring a major injury he will eventually get that money on his next contract, so signing with OKC was only going to cost him $7.5m because they didn't offer him the max. A lot of money, but he could walk away with 4 rings in that time.

[pad300]

I'm never going to understand this idea of a player not leaving because of the extra year.

They aren't losing that money, because it's money they will get in the next contract. The only way it makes sense is if the player is planning on the chances of suffering a career ending injury.

Look at Harden as an example. People say he signed with the Rockets because he got an extra $25m or whatever, but $17.5m of that is in his 5th year. Barring a major injury he will eventually get that money on his next contract, so signing with OKC was only going to cost him $7.5m because they didn't offer him the max. A lot of money, but he could walk away with 4 rings in that time.

You need to think about the timing.
Player X, college senior joins the NBA at 22. He plays 4 years on his rookie contract - he's 26. If he signs a 4 year contract, his next contract starts with him being 31 years old. Is he still worth max money at 31? History says likely not. If he's on a 5 year max contract, he's collecting 17.5 million in that 5th year. By comparison, 31 year old players starting a new contract, might only see $10 million - even if he's still really good, as teams don't expect him to be as good at 34.
And of course, there is alway the potential for career limiting injuries...

[exstatic]

There is even more of a chance that Kobe is amnestied, sits out the 2013-14 season in the name of recuperation; and then signs with the Lakers for 2014 and beyond. That way, the Lakers save $80 million (?) in luxury tax bill, get someone worthwhile to play for them considering their savings and then reboot the team in 2014-15 with Kobe and Howard.

That makes it less likelier that they will amnesty Gasol, IMO.

He'd have to sign for the minimum. Bird rights are gone if you get amnestied.

[Chinook]

Instead of being amnestied, Pau may just get bought out. If he thinks a team will offer him around $10 Million next season, him taking a 50-percent buy-out may be a good option for everyone. He gets the same amount of money and gets to pick his next team, and the Lakers pay less money and still have the amnesty to use on Metta World Peace.

[Chinook]

He'd have to sign for the minimum. Bird rights are gone if you get amnestied.

They'll have cap space then. They wouldn't need Bird rights to re-sign him, although he could only get what's left.

In an interesting twist, a team could claim him from the amnesty waivers and then sign-and-trade him to the Lakers the next off-season for more than the minimum depending on other cir stances.

[exstatic]

They'll have cap space then. They wouldn't need cap space to re-sign him, although he could only get what's left.

In an interesting twist, a team could claim him from the amnesty waivers and then sign-and-trade him to the Lakers the next off-season for more than the minimum depending on other cir stances.

They STILL won't have cap space, even if they amnesty Kobe. THAT'S how far over the tax they are.

[exstatic]

I'd put in a bid for Gasol if the Splitter deal goes south this summer. He was the LA big man who DIDN'T quit in game 4.

[Bruno]

Instead of being amnestied, Pau may just get bought out. If he thinks a team will offer him around $10 Million next season, him taking a 50-percent buy-out may be a good option for everyone. He gets the same amount of money and gets to pick his next team, and the Lakers pay less money and still have the amnesty to use on Metta World Peace.

If you do the math, it will save a little less money than simply amnestying Gasol and it will let them without both Gasol and Artest. I don't see how it could be a good move for Lakers.

[Chinook]

They STILL won't have cap space, even if they amnesty Kobe. THAT'S how far over the tax they are.

In 2014, they'll have a lot of cap space. That's the season the poster you quoted was talking about. The Lakers couldn't re-sign him at all in 2013, since a team can't re-acquire amnestied players for the remaining length of their contracts.

[Chinook]

If you do the math, it will save a little less money than simply amnestying Gasol and it will let them without both Gasol and Artest. I don't see how it could be a good move for Lakers.

I guess it depends on how much the buyout would be for. Under the scenario I laid out, you're right. He'd have to take less than World Peace would make next season. If his buyout was for, say, $4 Million instead of $10 Million (which he may do for the freedom to pick his team and to secure a long-term deal while he still has value), it would save the Lakers money. That may not be worth losing two core players, but maybe it would if Nash and Bryant don't think they can come back next season. The Lakers could really use a bad season to purge contracts and restock talent.

Although in that case, then it would make much more sense to amnesty Bryant instead of World Peace, so my idea is probably not that realistic.

[exstatic]

LA is never amnestying Kobe. It's fun to run the scenarios and say they should, but they just won't.

[Bruno]

To me, the outlooks of what will happen are quite simple:

If Dwight sign elsewhere, Gasol will stay with Lakers.
If Dwight stay and Lakers owners aren't fine with spending a tons of money for a so-so team, Gasol will be amnestied.
If Dwight stay and Lakers owners don't care on spending $185M for their team, Gasol will stay or be traded.

I'm a huge Pau Gasol fan so I would be thrilled to see him ending with Spurs but, even if it doesn't happen, I wish he will leave Lakers and land in a good situation. He clearly doesn't deserved to be treated like he is by the Lakers.

[Chinook]

How long is amnesty window? I could see Dwight wanting to milk his free agency. Would anyone really be surprised if he did an ESPN special like Lebron did?

[SpursBills]

can lakers just trade gasol to a team way under the cap? salaries don't have to match in that scenario right? then they could amnesty MWP as well

[Bruno]

can lakers just trade gasol to a team way under the cap? salaries don't have to match in that scenario right? then they could amnesty MWP as well

Yes, they can.

Now, if you are a team with a lot of cap space, that is to say likely a team in rebuilding mode, do you really want to spend $22.2M for a 33 years old injury-prone Gasol?

[CGD]

Would the lakers ever do a trade with a conference rival like the spurs though? Spurs only hope I think is if that he is amnestied. I would absolutely love Paul in SA.

[TD 21]

Players the caliber of Gasol (even in his current state) don't get amnestied and they especially don't by a franchise as wealthy and in a constant win now mode as the Lakers. It doesn't even matter how much it would save them, it's not happening. And why would it? Even with his bloated salary and declining game, he's only got one year left and he's the second most skilled all around big in the league, so amnestying him would be a waste of an asset.

Besides, if Howard re-signs and they're that determined to get rid of his salary without taking much back, there's no reason to think the spurned Hawks, Mavs and Rockets, wouldn't turn to either Gasol (or Bynum) next. Even if the best they could do is something minor, like Jenkins, Crowder, one of Smith/Jones/Motiejunas and picks, that's a lot better than nothing.

[exstatic]

Players the caliber of Gasol (even in his current state) don't get amnestied and they especially don't by a franchise as wealthy and in a constant win now mode as the Lakers. It doesn't even matter how much it would save them, it's not happening. And why would it? Even with his bloated salary and declining game, he's only got one year left and he's the second most skilled all around big in the league, so amnestying him would be a waste of an asset.

Besides, if Howard re-signs and they're that determined to get rid of his salary without taking much back, there's no reason to think the spurned Hawks, Mavs and Rockets, wouldn't turn to either Gasol (or Bynum) next. Even if the best they could do is something minor, like Jenkins, Crowder, one of Smith/Jones/Motiejunas and picks, that's a lot better than nothing.

You don't understand how much a player who is well on the wrong side of 30, on a team that has no chance to ring, will cost. The FULL tax penalty kicks in this summer. LA is in the top bracket of > $15M over the tax and they are a repeat offender. That means for every $1 they are over the tax, they have to pay $4.25. Gasol makes $18.71M. Figure out the tax on top of THAT. If they were compe ive, that would be one thing. They're not. Even getting Kobe back, they will struggle to get into the top half of the Western Conference draw next year. They're not very ing good. Nash isn't injured, he's 40 and will not get much better or healthier than he is now.

He's unhappy, and a terrible fit for D'Antoni's system. They could get what D'Antoni uses him for, elbow jumpers and rebounding, from someone a lot cheaper.

[Chinook]

Gasol has a 15-percent trade kicker, I believe. That makes him almost impossible to trade.

[CGD]

It's kinda ridiculous to talk about money like this bc of the amounts involved, but the Lakers are the Buss family's main source of wealth. The latest figure I saw on the late Jerry Buss was that his net worth was around $350 million. Sure they'd be fine, but the tax hit is no joke for the Buss family. They aren't exactly Paul Allen.

If there are rumblings of Kobe being amnestied if he's hurt most if next year, then anyone is on the table...

[TD 21]

You don't understand how much a player who is well on the wrong side of 30, on a team that has no chance to ring, will cost. The FULL tax penalty kicks in this summer. LA is in the top bracket of > $15M over the tax and they are a repeat offender. That means for every $1 they are over the tax, they have to pay $4.25. Gasol makes $18.71M. Figure out the tax on top of THAT. If they were compe ive, that would be one thing. They're not. Even getting Kobe back, they will struggle to get into the top half of the Western Conference draw next year. They're not very ing good. Nash isn't injured, he's 40 and will not get much better or healthier than he is now.

He's unhappy, and a terrible fit for D'Antoni's system. They could get what D'Antoni uses him for, elbow jumpers and rebounding, from someone a lot cheaper.

So because I disagree, I don't understand?

Chinook, the trade kicker doesn't matter either, as teams like the Hawks and Mavs will have tons of cap space, little quality to use it on and at least in the Mavs case, a real sense of desperation/urgency. He may not be what they're looking for necessarily (probably isn't, in fact), but if they can't make something better happen and can get him for Crowder and some picks, they're doing it in a second.

[exstatic]

So because I disagree, I don't understand?

Chinook, the trade kicker doesn't matter either, as teams like the Hawks and Mavs will have tons of cap space, little quality to use it on and at least in the Mavs case, a real sense of desperation/urgency. He may not be what they're looking for necessarily (probably isn't, in fact), but if they can't make something better happen and can get him for Crowder and some picks, they're doing it in a second.

If you think they're keeping him for like a +$80M price tag to finish between 5 an 8 in the WC you don't.

[T Park]

So because I disagree, I don't understand?

Chinook, the trade kicker doesn't matter either, as teams like the Hawks and Mavs will have tons of cap space, little quality to use it on and at least in the Mavs case, a real sense of desperation/urgency. He may not be what they're looking for necessarily (probably isn't, in fact), but if they can't make something better happen and can get him for Crowder and some picks, they're doing it in a second.

No your just wrong.

[Bruno]

After looking more closely at numbers, Gasol 15% trade kicker should be almost fully, if not fully canceled. A trade kicker can put a player above the max salary and Gasol is just under it.

It doesn't change that trading Gasol without taking back a lot of salary will be damn difficult to do for the Lakers. I just don't see teams wanting Gasol with his $20M salary.

[Chinook]

So because I disagree, I don't understand?

Chinook, the trade kicker doesn't matter either, as teams like the Hawks and Mavs will have tons of cap space, little quality to use it on and at least in the Mavs case, a real sense of desperation/urgency. He may not be what they're looking for necessarily (probably isn't, in fact), but if they can't make something better happen and can get him for Crowder and some picks, they're doing it in a second.

I get what you're saying. But it's hard enough to justify Gasol at $18 Million; it's impossible (in my opinion) to justify him at $22 Million. Committing more than a third of your cap to a declining player AND giving up assets? It seems unlikely to me, especially since if the Lakers attempt to trade him, they won't be able to keep him.

The only team that might do that is Dallas. Everyone else would just re-sign their free agents.