PDA

View Full Version : IF ATL decides to Amnesty Joe Johnson, where does Joe Johnson go? What does ATL do??



JOSKOMANG4
12-06-2011, 03:41 PM
Looking over the ATL Hawks salaries, it shows Joe Johnson takes over 1/3 of their salary. By the Hawks using the amnesty on Joe Johnson, the hawks will create cap space; as much as 18mill under the projected 58mill cap this season.

If the Hawks decide to amnesty Joe Johnson, where would Joe Johnson go??


- IMO, he'd be a perfect fit for the Chicago Bulls, but no way they would be able to afford him(unless they amnesty Luol Deng).


- I believe a team like the Washington Wizards, upcoming squad, could make a big splash by signing Joe Johnson. Wizards, after using the amnesty clause on R.LEwis, will have over 40mill to spend; They can offer Joe Johnson 5yr 82.5mill.

Wizards lineup:

C- McGee/Booker/Ndiaye
PF- Blatche/Vesley/Seraphin
SF- FA/Singelton
SG- J.Johnson/J.Crawford
PG- J.Wall/S.Mack

In regards to the future of the Atlanta Hawks.

1- Not sure how the amnesty works, but would they be able to amnesty Joe Johnsons current contract and possibly sign him to a much less-type deal? 5yr 82.5mill??

2- With 18mill to spend, they can focus on resignin Jamal Crawford and possibly bringin in a center to team up with horford in the front court.

C- T.Chander(4yr 40mill)/Zacha
PF- Horford/Benson
SF- Josh Smith/M.Williams(6th man)/Sy
SG- Jamal Crawford(3yr 25mill)
PG- Teague/Kirk.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

GhostfaceDrilla
12-06-2011, 03:43 PM
They're not going to cut their best player...

DLeeicious
12-06-2011, 03:47 PM
You think the Hawks owner wants to drop one of his best players, still pay him the bazillion dollars he is owed just to add players who wont be as good and pay them too. So in other words get worse and spent a **** ton more money in the process?

nolafan33
12-06-2011, 03:51 PM
Here come the "Bulls, Knicks, Lakers, etc."

Just the expected responses from the delusional members of PSD.

Chi StateOfMind
12-06-2011, 03:55 PM
Why would they cut their best player.

DLeeicious
12-06-2011, 03:56 PM
Here come the "Bulls, Knicks, Lakers, etc."

Just the expected responses from the delusional members of PSD.

What does this even mean?

MJ-BULLS
12-06-2011, 03:58 PM
There is no way that the Atlanta Hawks will cut their best player.

avon_barksdale
12-06-2011, 04:10 PM
Lakers should amnesty Kobe too

justinnum1
12-06-2011, 04:13 PM
Why not amnesty him in 2 years when he is making 20+ mil

beasted86
12-06-2011, 04:17 PM
Hawks will not amnesty Joe Johnson





...yet.

miller
12-06-2011, 04:19 PM
Not until he is around 34 or unable to contribute anymore. Right now he's still amongst best they've got. So I don't think its likely.

Vincent
12-06-2011, 04:20 PM
Why not amnesty him in 2 years when he is making 20+ mil

I have a feeling that quite a few Heat fans really don't understand how the MLE or Amnesty Clause work.

I've been hearing all sorts of random interpretations of the rules.

Amnesty Clause is only for this year to prep teams for the new CBA by cutting old deals that hamper teams from being competitive with the new CBA terms.

It's not something you can use later, or something that is renewed every year.

nolafan33
12-06-2011, 04:30 PM
What does this even mean?

It means that a lot of NBA fans are delusional.

DAL*CWB
12-06-2011, 04:34 PM
I have a feeling that quite a few Heat fans really don't understand how the MLE or Amnesty Clause work.

I've been hearing all sorts of random interpretations of the rules.

Amnesty Clause is only for this year to prep teams for the new CBA by cutting old deals that hamper teams from being competitive with the new CBA terms.

It's not something you can use later, or something that is renewed every year.

They will have 2 years to use the clause on any player currently on the roster, so they can wait until next off season to cut him with the clause. Also when a player is cut with the clause he won't be free to sign with any team, the players contract will be auctioned off to team will cap room.

DLeeicious
12-06-2011, 04:37 PM
I have a feeling that quite a few Heat fans really don't understand how the MLE or Amnesty Clause work.

I've been hearing all sorts of random interpretations of the rules.

Amnesty Clause is only for this year to prep teams for the new CBA by cutting old deals that hamper teams from being competitive with the new CBA terms.

It's not something you can use later, or something that is renewed every year.

This doesn't sound right. But things may have changed from last time I read about it. Link?


It means that a lot of NBA fans are delusional.

In the context of this thread your post made zero sense whatsoever.

VillaMaravilla
12-06-2011, 04:38 PM
why would they do that this year? I can see it happening in a couple of years though

thephoenixson28
12-06-2011, 04:38 PM
Phoenix

PacersForLife
12-06-2011, 05:09 PM
Yeah, I don't wanna sound like a dousche, but the Pacers might as well amnesty Danny Granger and the Grizzlies should go ahead and amnesty Zach Randolph.
:D

Iron24th
12-06-2011, 05:18 PM
It seems you don't get how amnesty works.

Bruno
12-06-2011, 05:25 PM
JJ won't be amnestied.

Rockice_8
12-06-2011, 05:39 PM
Not just for JJ but for all guys just so everyone knows for future reference. When a guy is amnestied the first teams to have a shot at that player are teams under the cap. It basically goes to a blind lottery every team under the cap makes a 1 time offer and that said player goes to the winning bidder. The amnestied player has zero say in where he goes. If no claim is placed on said player he then becomes a FA where any team can bid on him and he can pick and choose where he wants to go.

Most people have no idea how that works and now you do.

Iodine
12-06-2011, 05:41 PM
I have a feeling that quite a few Heat fans really don't understand how the MLE or Amnesty Clause work.

I've been hearing all sorts of random interpretations of the rules.

Amnesty Clause is only for this year to prep teams for the new CBA by cutting old deals that hamper teams from being competitive with the new CBA terms.

It's not something you can use later, or something that is renewed every year.

Except it can be used next year.......

sep11ie
12-06-2011, 05:47 PM
Why would they cut their best player?

Rockice_8
12-06-2011, 05:49 PM
Except it can be used next year.......

Yes it can be used for the life of the new CBA but can only be used on players who have contracts signed before this year. So the guys have to be currently under contract so you can't sign a FA now and amnesty him in two years.

beasted86
12-06-2011, 05:54 PM
I have a feeling that quite a few Heat fans really don't understand how the MLE or Amnesty Clause work.

I've been hearing all sorts of random interpretations of the rules.

Amnesty Clause is only for this year to prep teams for the new CBA by cutting old deals that hamper teams from being competitive with the new CBA terms.

It's not something you can use later, or something that is renewed every year.

Yes it is.

It is for any current contract on a team for the life of the CBA. It can be used prior to the start of any season. If ATL wants they can wait until the last year of his 6yr contract and waive Johnson if they so wish.

And I have full understanding of how the MLE works.

JOSKOMANG4
12-06-2011, 05:55 PM
Not just for JJ but for all guys just so everyone knows for future reference. When a guy is amnestied the first teams to have a shot at that player are teams under the cap. It basically goes to a blind lottery every team under the cap makes a 1 time offer and that said player goes to the winning bidder. The amnestied player has zero say in where he goes. If no claim is placed on said player he then becomes a FA where any team can bid on him and he can pick and choose where he wants to go.

Most people have no idea how that works and now you do.


So basically it's like..

Lets say the hawks place the amnesty clause on Joe Johnson. Hawks currently owe Joe Johnson 5yr 107.5mill. So this auction happens and the best offer on the table, based on current cap space, you have the Pacers offering 5yr 82.5mill. So Johnson would then have to go to indy? I'm assuming, based on your informatiion, that the hawks would have to eat the remaining 25mill.

Iodine
12-06-2011, 06:03 PM
So basically it's like..

Lets say the hawks place the amnesty clause on Joe Johnson. Hawks currently owe Joe Johnson 5yr 107.5mill. So this auction happens and the best offer on the table, based on current cap space, you have the Pacers offering 5yr 82.5mill. So Johnson would then have to go to indy? I'm assuming, based on your informatiion, that the hawks would have to eat the remaining 25mill.

They would eat as much as INDY would NOT pay so in that scenario yes

smith&wesson
12-06-2011, 06:05 PM
You think the Hawks owner wants to drop one of his best players, still pay him the bazillion dollars he is owed just to add players who wont be as good and pay them too. So in other words get worse and spent a **** ton more money in the process?

THIS....


as a matter of fact i wonder when the heat will amnesty wade so he can join the bulls too. and maybe mj will come back.

I know that bulls fans are excited to see who their new sg will be but this is getting out of hand now.

NYY 26 to 7
12-06-2011, 06:06 PM
This would not happen this year and why wouldn't they just trade him? But I actually would like more clarity on how the clause works through this thread I've seen a lot of different things. Does this protect the Knicks then if Amar'e's body breaks down? It was my understanding that you still have to pay the full contract and then the player can still sign elsewhere.

Vincent
12-06-2011, 06:06 PM
Yes it is.

It is for any current contract on a team for the life of the CBA. It can be used prior to the start of any season. If ATL wants they can wait until the last year of his 6yr contract and waive Johnson if they so wish.

And I have full understanding of how the MLE works.

I believe I am mistaken then.

I assumed it was similar to the amnesty clause provided in 2005. And when the deal was first announced, many reports claimed that the amnesty would be a replica of what happened in 2005.

But it seems more and more information about the amnesty clause is being leaked as it becomes more developed.

And my comment towards Heat fans wasn't directed at all of them.

Sorry for the misinterpretation.

Iodine
12-06-2011, 06:12 PM
I believe I am mistaken then.

I assumed it was similar to the amnesty clause provided in 2005. And when the deal was first announced, many reports claimed that the amnesty would be a replica of what happened in 2005.

But it seems more and more information about the amnesty clause is being leaked as it becomes more developed.

And my comment towards Heat fans wasn't directed at all of them.

Sorry for the misinterpretation.

It isnt like 2005, because it's part of the whole idea to allow for teams to fully understand how stupid it was to give Gooden 30 mil

beasted86
12-06-2011, 06:13 PM
I believe I am mistaken then.

I assumed it was similar to the amnesty clause provided in 2005. And when the deal was first announced, many reports claimed that the amnesty would be a replica of what happened in 2005.

But it seems more and more information about the amnesty clause is being leaked as it becomes more developed.

And my comment towards Heat fans wasn't directed at all of them.

Sorry for the misinterpretation.

Understood.

All teams get 1 amnesty for the life of the CBA on any existing contract (basically means 5 yr life even though CBA is 10 yrs). And this time it doesn't count against a teams' salary cap as well as luxury tax.

The 2005 version was a one-time waiver over a short 2 week period for luxury tax relief only, but still counted against the team's cap space.

Muttman73
12-06-2011, 06:13 PM
UM, if they "Amnesty" him doesn't he still get paid?

yeah so if they do that he will go to the place that gives him the best chance to win a championship... //hence// Chicago, Miami, LA...

Unless he is really greedy and doesn't mind losing...hello Washington, Detroit...whatever

knicks=love
12-06-2011, 06:13 PM
so the nba forum has no turned into: "do you think ____ will amnesty ____" or "OMFG the _____ might sign _____".

this is why mainly i stay OUT of the nba forum.

Chronz
12-06-2011, 06:25 PM
They're not going to cut their best player...

Of course not, but this thread is about Joe Johnson, he makes way too much money to be cut tho

Chronz
12-06-2011, 06:26 PM
so the nba forum has no turned into: "do you think ____ will amnesty ____" or "OMFG the _____ might sign _____".

this is why mainly i stay OUT of the nba forum.

LOL what else would you expect in the off-season?

Iodine
12-06-2011, 06:28 PM
LOL what else would you expect in the off-season?

AIDS outbreaks

YoungOne
12-06-2011, 06:43 PM
there wasnt even a rumor that they might cut him!?

GhostfaceDrilla
12-06-2011, 06:45 PM
Of course not, but this thread is about Joe Johnson, he makes way too much money to be cut tho

I assume you are referring to Al Horford? Or is it Josh Smith?

phoenix_bladen
12-06-2011, 07:06 PM
the amnesty clause is for the duration of the CBA under current deals

it seems most of you don't know how it works

as for cutting joe johnson i wouldn't do it this year

HOWEVER towards the end of his contract if he sucks and say he still has 2-3 years left then you could consider doing it

it also wouldn't make sense to cut him on his last year of his contract because then why wouldn't u just let it expire?

3mikee_
12-06-2011, 07:13 PM
No way in hell Johnson is cut... probably their only play maker and guy to go to in crunch time. It's not like he's not living up to his contract, had a bad season last year cause of injuries but other then that I think he's done fine as a Hawk.

*Silver&Black*
12-06-2011, 07:14 PM
Joe doesn't need to be cut this year, he is still the best player on the team and still an All-star. I would wait until a couple years when he finally starts going down hill and then use it, that's if we don't get lucky first and just trade him.


Question, can you use amnesty on a player you traded for? Say like Joe Johnson gets traded to another team and in a couple years that team can use it on Joe? If that is the case, Joe Johnson's contract wouldn't be that bad anymore to trade to a team wanting to win a ring right?

Vincent
12-06-2011, 07:28 PM
Of course not, but this thread is about Joe Johnson, he makes way too much money to be cut tho

Haha, I see what you did there.

Smash-N-Dash
12-06-2011, 07:31 PM
You must not understand how the amnesty clause works...