PDA

View Full Version : NBA may offer amnesty



DenButsu
07-17-2009, 04:53 AM
NBA may offer amnesty
By Chris Tomasson
Pro Basketball News

LAS VEGAS - Could NBA owners whose teams have bad contracts be getting another mulligan?

It's possible the NBA could end up bringing back the amnesty rule that resulted in teams saving millions of dollars in luxury tax during the summer of 2005.

When the NBA reached an agreement on its current collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that summer, teams were allowed a one-time opportunity to waive one player and not have to pay any luxury tax on him. The player, though, got the full amount remaining on his contract, and that counted against the salary cap.

In all, 18 of the NBA teams used the rule, saving about $212 million in luxury-tax payments. Players waived included Michael Finley, Derek Anderson, Brian Grant and Ron Mercer. Finley's release from Dallas proved the most beneficial to another team as he helped San Antonio to the 2007 NBA title.

With NBA economy in peril and the luxury tax next summer possibly dropping by more than $5 million from $69.92 million, NBA commissioner David Stern has spoken to owners about the possibility of the amnesty rule again surfacing, although any possible resurrection of that rule likely wouldn't be put on the table until late in the collective bargaining process.

If such a rule were to be implemented prior to the summer of 2011, which is when the current CBA will expire if the NBA doesn't pick up the 2011-12 option, it likely would have to be approved by both players and owners. But it could end up being part of the next CBA, and there's a chance the current one could be torn up and a new one implemented prior to 2011.

Denver Nuggets coach George Karl said he's heard about the possibility of the amnesty rule returning in some form, and he believes it's a good idea.

"I think it could be something like we did (in 2005)," Karl told Pro Basketball News at the NBA Summer League. "It could be something that resurfaces (similar to the one 2005). Or it could be resurrected in a different way. Is there a way to address both the owners about the financial situation and the players association, where everybody could come to a happy conclusion?"

However, according to those in the know, there could be serious debate among the owners about whether they would want the return of such a rule. There are some owners of teams who haven't given out as many outlandish contracts that might not want to help out teams that have. Teams that have been more responsible then would be at risk of receiving less money back in luxury-tax payments from the big spenders.

Then again, the Spurs usually have kept contracts in check. And the amnesty rule benefitted them after rival Dallas let Finley go.pbn (http://probasketballnews.com/story/?storyid=647)

Beno7500
07-17-2009, 05:19 AM
Would you agree with it Den?

RocketsFan4Life
07-17-2009, 05:44 AM
if it does happen then would ppl sign players in 2010 to huge contracts and if they dont work out let them go in 2011 hmm idk about this

GSW fan
07-17-2009, 05:47 AM
i dont like it. if you sign a contract, either keep him, or trade him.

all it does is bail out teams like the lakers and magic

Kyle N.
07-17-2009, 05:54 AM
They better not do this. It's just stupid. You can't just bail out teams cause they give out stupid contracts. If you sign a guy, stick with him or trade him. Don't just let him walk with a bunch of cash.

Beno7500
07-17-2009, 06:09 AM
I don't agree with doing this.

lakerboy
07-17-2009, 06:18 AM
I like it. It works both ways. Players still get their money, and more if they sign to other clubs.

Teams are bailed out.

I hope this is goodbye to Luke!

DenButsu
07-17-2009, 06:49 AM
Would you agree with it Den?

I don't know yet. I haven't thought enough about it yet.

PennyMy#1
07-17-2009, 07:04 AM
But, Karl is right. You'll never ever can make Players, Owners and Stern happy by the same time ... Don't like this "amnesty".

DenButsu
07-17-2009, 08:30 AM
Thinking about it some more, I think I would be afraid of this as a bailout of teams that were majorly irresponsible in loading themselves up with bad contracts. I think I would only support this if there were some kind of conditions (and maybe pretty strict conditions) that limited what kind of amnesty teams could get.

Basically, looking to the Nuggets as an example, if amnesty kicked in this summer, I think I'd support the kind that allowed Denver to jettison Steven Hunter's $4 million expiring. But I wouldn't support letting them get off the hook for Kenyon Martin's insane contract (as much as I would love to see that happen as a fan, teams that make big mistakes should have to live with them to a certain extent).

So maybe if the conditions were:

-amnesty can only be used on a single player
-that player can have no more than 2 years remaining on his contract
-the total amount of the contract cannot exceed the MLE (meaning if the player has 2 years remaining on the contract the sum of both years' salaries can't be more than the MLE)

I think something along these lines would benefit just about every team in the league, and potentially many of the players as well (players with no role or future on their particular teams would be free to seek other chances). And the amnesty would be limited enough so that teams that have gotten themselves into trouble through poor management won't receive get out of jail free cards. But most teams would be able to do just enough fat trimming to either give themselves a little more breathing room and flexibility, or actually enough clearance to sign another player.

Hellcrooner
07-17-2009, 10:14 AM
im all for it sine the player gets payed the full contract and can sign another contrac for another team.

specially since they are goihng to lower the cap for 2010 wich is something no one was expecting when singning contracts.

in fact i would want a full amnesty with the player being removed from the books in terms of saolary cap

Trouble87
07-17-2009, 01:15 PM
I'm for it as long as there are certain restrictions and conditions to go along with with it

IBleedPurple
07-17-2009, 01:20 PM
Thinking about it some more, I think I would be afraid of this as a bailout of teams that were majorly irresponsible in loading themselves up with bad contracts. I think I would only support this if there were some kind of conditions (and maybe pretty strict conditions) that limited what kind of amnesty teams could get.

Basically, looking to the Nuggets as an example, if amnesty kicked in this summer, I think I'd support the kind that allowed Denver to jettison Steven Hunter's $4 million expiring. But I wouldn't support letting them get off the hook for Kenyon Martin's insane contract (as much as I would love to see that happen as a fan, teams that make big mistakes should have to live with them to a certain extent).

So maybe if the conditions were:

-amnesty can only be used on a single player
-that player can have no more than 2 years remaining on his contract
-the total amount of the contract cannot exceed the MLE (meaning if the player has 2 years remaining on the contract the sum of both years' salaries can't be more than the MLE)

I think something along these lines would benefit just about every team in the league, and potentially many of the players as well (players with no role or future on their particular teams would be free to seek other chances). And the amnesty would be limited enough so that teams that have gotten themselves into trouble through poor management won't receive get out of jail free cards. But most teams would be able to do just enough fat trimming to either give themselves a little more breathing room and flexibility, or actually enough clearance to sign another player.

^I think this should be sent to the NBA. It would be much better for the league, if in fact an amnesty program is enacted.

If it does happen without restrictions, Jermaine O'Neal would be a free agent in about 30 seconds.

lakers4sho
07-17-2009, 01:23 PM
i dont like it. if you sign a contract, either keep him, or trade him.

all it does is bail out teams like the lakers and magic

and the Knicks

RiLoc
07-17-2009, 01:51 PM
Originally I thought this was an okay idea. However, thinking about it more, teams that are responsible deserve the payout from the irresponsible teams, especially when you think about small market teams that stay below the cap and struggle with ticket sales. Perhaps I would be more comfortable if it was a reduction from luxury tax rather than a total exemption.

AntiG
07-17-2009, 02:01 PM
what is the league suddenly turning into, Barack Obama?