Reply With Quote
It will depend on the details of the next CBA.
If it's close to the latest owners proposal, RJ won't be cut. He will be cut during the 2013 summer.
I would assume the amnesty clause is going to be part of this new CBA, if it is, does it get used on Jefferson this season?
I hope it does.
It will depend on the details of the next CBA.
If it's close to the latest owners proposal, RJ won't be cut. He will be cut during the 2013 summer.
One of the important questions is how long teams will have to use the amnesty.
-If teams only have until December 25, 2011 to use the amnesty, I'd say there's about a 75% chance the Spurs drop RJ. Pro: More minutes for youngsters, significant amount off of cap and potentially luxury tax, Spurs more likely to use full MLE. Con: Significant decrease in experience at the wing going into a shortened and hectic season.
-If teams have a longer period of time, e.g.- two seasons, or perhaps even the life of the CBA, here's how I have it pegged:
50% chance- Spurs keep RJ this season, then dump him in the summer of 2012 or 2013
40% chance- Spurs amnesty RJ immediately
10% chance- Spurs never use amnesty, or use amnesty on another player
After giving it more thought, I'm not even sure RJ will be cut in 2013.
As strange as it sounds, using the amnesty rule on RJ could be more expensive than keeping him. In 2013-2014, the minimum team salary will be 90% of the cap and Spurs have very little money committed to players. If RJ is amnestied, Spurs could struggle reaching that minimum team salary.
Spurs best option might be to used the amnesty clause on Dice. Using it on RJ could be only interesting if there is another team ready to re-sign him for about half his salary.
The details of the new CBA haven't been leaked yet. Where'd you get this info?
Dice's contract is unguranteed for the coming season, why would would you amnesty that? My first choice would be to amnesty Duncan and then resign him for cheap if that is allowed. RJ is a no brainer but as you pointed out its not that easy with his contract.
In the owners offer made 2 weeks ago, there were a minimum team salary of 85% in year 1 and 2 and 90% after that. It's likely still the case because I don't see why players would have pushed to remove a rule that is in their favor.
Dice contract is partially unguaranteed, about 50% is guaranteed. Waiving him should allow Spurs to go under the tax this season.
I highly doubt teams will be allowed to re-sign amnestied players.
Could the Spurs' decision about RJ depend on who else gets amnestied? If someone like James Posey in Indiana gets cut loose, it could be well worth spending $2-3M on him and letting RJ go.
Posey would have been a good get three years ago, but he's ing done.
The team is relieved of the cap/tax figure, but not the financial cost of the contract. They still owe RJ $30M no matter what. I think they only "amnesty" RJ if they think Kawhi, a cheap replacement, is ready. If he isn't, you probably keep RJ, since you owe him the money anyway. Why would they pay RJ, Posey (or someone else), AND Kawhi?
My guess is that they keep RJ for now, only owing him 66/82 of his salary this year, and amnesty him next summer, dependent of course on what Tim wants to do going forward. If Tim wants to play another year or two, you almost have to amnesty RJ off the cap.
I don't think Stern would let the owners amnesty and then re-sign their own guys. He's taken a really hard line in the past with owners regarding cap cir vention.
I hope Spurs cut RJ and I suggest they start on his throat.
I hope they use the amnesty as well on Jefferson but remember the Spurs owner was pushing for an extended period to decide who to use it on. I doubt they would use it this season. They may want to see how the season goes but I much rather see the younger players given more court time.
per Adrian yahoo:
Amnesty clause is in deal, just matter of form it takes. Last proposal allowed teams to use it on a current contract at anytime during CBA.
They'd have to get through his hands first.
Thats exactly right...Why cut RJ just to have rookies stepping in on a playoff team. Wait one season, let the younger players get at least 1 season under there belt and then cut RJ. This and TD's contract expiring at the same time would open alot of cap room for the next offseason. No need to waste this cut this season in my opinion as well..
$2.6 mil. I believe.
I can't see the Spurs cutting Jefferson.
Although he's clearly overpaid, the Spurs definitely need him. It's not like there are a lot of starting-level small forwards out there.
Another option would be changing the system enough to allow RJ to play his game. He was averaging 20ppg at the beginning of the season when the Spurs were winning. They are a much more dangerous team with an aggressive RJ. In fact I think they're better of that way than trying to find a 3 and D(efense) player to replace RJ. Allowing RJ to play his game makes everyone else more dangerous because the defense doesn't know who to stop.
The whole reason the Spurs got RJ was because they didn't believe they had enough offensive firepower with Bowen's declining defense and Finley's non-existent defense. I think the Spurs best chance at competing is to go back to that running game and then focus on improving the defense. Play JA and Splitter and less Bonner (definitely no Bonner and Blair at the same time) will also help the defense. They can also look for a cheap good backup defensive big. That's a very realistic plan that allows them to compete and maintain team chemistry. It doesn't make sense to mess with team chemistry if you're just shuffling players around. It's much easier to change the gameplan.
If the amnesty clause is like in owner's offer that was made public, waived players will go through a special waiver procedure were teams can claim him for only a fraction of his salary.
I can even see a team like Clippers unofficially contact Spurs to tell then that if they use the clause on RJ, they will claim for a certain fraction of his previous contract. Waiving RJ and paying only 60% or even 50% of his salary could be a good opportunity for Spurs.
Great idea. Hope something like this happens.
can't see spurs cutting him. Spurs aren't a high spending team that is willing to throw $30 million out the door.
Now that the details of the new CBA are known, I doubt Spurs will waive RJ this year. It makes little sense basketball wise and financially wise.
IMO this is the only scenario where the Spurs amnesty RJ. If they still are on the hook for his entire salary I don't believe they let him go. He is a servicable SF who in the right system can be very good. The Spurs are not in the biz of paying players large sums to play for someone else.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
