RealGM

Big question, been discussed before, but we really need to decide before free agency opens up.

1. We can amnesty CV, which opens up another 8.5mil in cap space. So the question is, can we spend 8.5mil and get a better player than CV? I sure think so.

2. The alternative is to keep CV, and not that I think he'll be productive, but at the trade deadline, that's a pretty big expiring, and maybe we can swap his contract for a solid player on a longer contract.

So, if you are Joe Dumars, or Phil Jackson , what do you do?

Amnesty!!!


There are some teams that are going to be driven to make some lopsided salary dumps, instead of overpaying for Smith/Iggy/Mayo lets open up as much cap as possible and let the salary dumps roll in.

Keep him(& Stuckey). Hopefully, there will be a nice trade offer at the deadline.

What's the point of giving CV free money? It's not like there are lots of top FAs out there.

Why don't people realize the 8.5 million of raw cap space CV31 represents is more valuable than an $8.5 expiring?

Piston Prince wrote:Why don't people realize the 8.5 million of raw cap space CV31 represents is more valuable than an $8.5 expiring?

Because it's real money? Do Gores and co. $8.5M to give away for free?

If we need his money to sign a difference maker, amnesty him. if not keep him as our stretch 4 next year.

a lot of my thinking behind keeping CV and Stuck on the roster next year is that their contracts coming off the books will cover Mooses extension and leave us a little cap room to add another guy next year. Their expiring contracts also leave us the flexibility to make a move during next season. and it doesnt hurt that theyre both in contract years and should be motivated.

We dumped Prince and wasted a pick to dump BG and open up more cap space this offseason. Amnesty CV is a must to justify those 2 deals.

I think they should amnesty him.

But when you look at the free agent market, it reminds me of when we signed CV, Gordon, and all that crap. This isn't an impressive free agent year. So unless the Pistons are going for a big splash move, I can see them hanging onto him.

I think it's kind of telling that his minutes went down from Feb to Mar to Apr. But he also seemed more useful when Drummond was available because you could CVs problems. Something you never really want to say about a guy making $8 million.

Pistons may need to keep CV and Stuckey to hit the salary cap floor then work towards freeing up as much money as possible for next off season.

Anyways, if people actually think CV is tradeable by the trade deadline, they are delusional. There are 31 teams out there of which you almost never see way overpaid expiring bums being traded. Maybe, every once in a blue moon. Thus, thinking of keeping someone because you think they are tradeable is not a real reason not to cut them. I think most teams in the league have at least one of those players already.

The answer to this question hinges entirely on what the free agent opportunities shape out to be.

It may be the case that we have nothing worthwhile to use that extra cap space on (as we already have a considerable amount of cap WITHOUT amnesty). In that case, there really isn't much incentive to amnesty him. May as well keep him and see if his expiring can be leveraged into something interesting at some point.

We're not going to amnesty Charlie V...Both Charlie V or Stuckey might be traded this summer or before the trade deadline though...

Snakebites wrote:The answer to this question hinges entirely on what the free agent opportunities shape out to be.

It may be the case that we have nothing worthwhile to use that extra cap space on (as we already have a considerable amount of cap WITHOUT amnesty). In that case, there really isn't much incentive to amnesty him. May as well keep him and see if his expiring can be leveraged into something interesting at some point.

To another posters point, just because we Amnesty him does not mean we have to use the cap space on a FA. We could use the Cap space to simply absorb a larger salary in trade, creating a TE that would be even more enticing than CV's expiring contract. Particularly for a team looking to shed immediate salary.

But I certainly understand Gores reluctance. IF you Amnesty him and take on another contract of equal value you are essentially paying $17 mil instead of $8.5 to that one player for a season. Personally, I think the best of both worlds is to use the Amnesty, save the cap space and then try to make a trade at the deadline so you are only taking on a pro-rated share of the incoming players salary. It will only cost about 1/3 of the salary and may get us the best value. But patience is hard to sell and many fans would be asking why we aren't doing something dramatic in the off-season, which could certainly affect ticket sales.

Worst case scenario is of course we Amnesty CV then blow all our capspace again. In which case we're better off just hanging onto CV for a while longer.

rmfc wrote:Keep him(& Stuckey). Hopefully, there will be a nice trade offer at the deadline.

What's the point of giving CV free money? It's not like there are lots of top FAs out there.

I love your thinking. Don’t rush it. If the possibility of a “big” acquisition comes along, then you make the move. Too many people are hasty to invoke the amnesty clause. As bad as CV is, his contract is going to look real good to a team looking to get under the salary cap or to free up more cap space for next season.Though I didn’t like the BG trade too much, few people thought he was untradeable.

Gores preferred losing a first round pick (which may yet be a lottery pick) over paying Ben Gordon not to play for another year.

This contract isn't as large and doesn't have 2 more years on it, so there's still the possibility that he chooses to use the amnesty if a major opportunity presents itself, but I think short of that it isn't going to happen.

The Magic are still paying 20 mil a year to Gilbert Arenas so he doesnt play for them.

Charlie has proved time and time again that he is almost totally useless, he is strictly a 3 pt shooter.

Capspace + room and time for better players to play in the frontcourt >> keeping Charlie (expiring contracts are overrated) the Pistons want to retool THIS summer, trade him now or amnesty him, keeping him another year is just not the best option.

Joe Asberry wrote:The Magic are still paying 20 mil a year to Gilbert Arenas so he doesnt play for them.

Charlie has proved time and time again that he is almost totally useless, he is strictly a 3 pt shooter.

Capspace + room and time for better players to play in the frontcourt >> keeping Charlie (expiring contracts are overrated) the Pistons want to retool THIS summer, trade him now or amnesty him, keeping him another year is just not the best option.

My retort as a person who never wanted CV from the beginning and has always been overly critical of CV, there may not be a need to cut CV being the Pistons are under the cap and my keep him to meet the salary floor if the Pistons don't make a splash in the FA market this year, but want to next year. CV may have been useless the overwhelming majority of his tenure as a Piston, but he had a few solid games last year and could still play a role on this team his last year hear if he is kept to meet the salary floor. I am sure he will get in shape to promote himself for his last contract somewhere in the NBA next year.

I don't disagree that from a purely basketball perspective amnestying him is the right thing to do.

I'm merely commenting on the actual reality of the situation.

Unless there's a very, very special opportunity I don't expect Gores to be willing to "double pay".

If Gores is telling us the truth, CV will be gone.

If he's still here, we'll know Gores is full of ****.

CV > 15th man in the NBA. So again, why amnesty him unless a trade is impossible with his cap on the payroll?

Han Solo wrote:If Gores is telling us the truth, CV will be gone.

If he's still here, we'll know Gores is full of ****.

Is this the "ready to spend" comment or whatever?
I would feel the same way too unless it was part of a 2-years ready-to-spend plan. We are young, so why not?
But, yea it would still sound shady if Chuckles stays. I mean every owner has to spend the minimum cap at least and we have hella cap space, so duh.

I wouldn't be surprised if CV is bought out for $6m or something tho. Then Gores "spends" but doesn't double-dip too much. And there is a nice cap-hold before Moose's extension. Which actually is a big deal. Then there will be Knight's extension. Then Drummond's which is 99% sure to be a max extension.