Reply With Quote
The Spurs have about as much chance of granting RJ "amnesty" as Peter Holt and Pop have of getting Vietnam draft dodgers amnesty.
Once upon a time the NBA contract had an amnesty provision. If a team made a bad contract, they could holler 'slipsies' and get a do-over. Of course they had to pay the player for their mistake, but he could be released without penalties in the luxury tax or count against the cap.
That's how we acquired Michael Finley from the Mavs. We paid him a pittance while they paid out the balance of his $100,000,000 contract and he contributed to a championship. Is it any wonder Mav fans and Cuban hate us?
Here is a good explanation of the old amnesty plan I found on line:
http://www.48minutesof .com/richa...-provision-cba
The Spurs don't appear to me to be a team that would pay a released player all that cash. They might elect to keep him on the roster as a backup if Leonard takes his job away.
But this is the only reasonable approach I've heard yet about moving him.
Pray for Amnesty. God, we've learned our lesson about over-paying and we'll never never do it again if you'll help us out this one time.
The Spurs have about as much chance of granting RJ "amnesty" as Peter Holt and Pop have of getting Vietnam draft dodgers amnesty.
RJ salary
2011: 9,282,000
2012: 10,164,000
2013: 11,046,000 *player option*
Assuming the Spurs cut him because of amnesty, would they only have to pay him for 2011 and 2012? RJ would sign with another team so does that throw away the player option?
No way Holt forks over that cash just to let him walk.
That's what I was thinking. Why let the player walk when you can try and get something for him? They had a chance to utilize the provision a few years ago and did not.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 06-30-2011 at 05:29 PM.
STEIN_LINE_HQ Marc Stein
Closest thing to good news heard today: Cavs still very open to making another trade before midnight using their $14.6M trade exception
2 minutes ago
Hey, I tend to agree. Just wishful thinking.
This. You can forget about RJ going out via amnesty.
If it saves potential luxury tax money, there's a chance Holt would go for it.
The only scenario under which I see that happening is if the tax equaled his contract amount, and I don't see that happening. Even if the NBA gets their hard cap, they'll have to phase it in. We have the Lakers to more or less protect us, since they are in WAY worse shape, payroll-wise than we are. The NBA is never going to hammer- LA.
The only danger for the Spurs being over the LT is this year. If there is a lockout, no need to worry about that and after next year, the guaranteed money dips well below the current cap so the Spurs can easily manage that.
The LT is not ever going to come into play for this scenario.
But, I don't see them dumping RJ and just paying him because if that was the case, they could have just done the same thing last year by asking him not to opt out. They were paying RJ's current contract amount regardless last year so the decision they made was to get 4 years instead of 1 for the same money.
Maybe we can pay RJ to play for the Mavs. They should get something back for Finley.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
