Just a thought, not a trade

[DanTown8587]

I was gonna post this in the CBA portion, but I wanted to get a feedback from the traders since everyone visits this board. Do you think there is any chance the league and players union come to terms on like an amnesty clause for a team that wants to cut a player they made a mistake on. My example is Player A is Signed by New York. New York has player A, but wants to cut some cap room and roster spot. So they "insert name here clause" Player A from the payroll. Instead of paying his entire contract, they save 50% of the salary cap, but still owe the player 100%. So if he was making 10 million, and they cut him, they pay him 10 but the cap number is 5 million. Say player A then signs with Chicago for 1million dollars, the team still has the cap hit of 5 million, but only pays 4 million (5-1) to him off the cap. You can only do this with one player per year, so if player A had years 08-09 and 09-10 with New York, New York could not "insert name clause here" anyone until the 10-11 season. I think this makes it more competitive in the league. I don't think the PU cares (guys dont lose money) and owners dont care (get to save cap room). Mods, feel free to lock, i just wanted to get a lot of people to weigh in.

[DeezXXnutZ]

Then we could dump Darius Miles....

[SacKingZZZ]

Interesting idea but I just don't know if the league would want to bail out teams, or more importantly GM's of their own "mistakes". I don't think the NBA itself is too high on teams signing away other players do to being under the cap. They typically want star types to remain in their destination because a lot of hype, promotion, and money typically goes into that individual player, and cap space is historically about signing away another teams franchise, or close to franchise, player.

[WarFan]

I would not be surprised at all if the next CBA includes a clause like this, I'm almost expecting it. Teams would probably only be able to use the clause once every 3 or 4 years or so. There are just too many players locked into longterm contracts who don't fit their teams any more but would probably be useful somewhere else if not for their contract.

[warriorfan650]

This doesn't sound bad from a logical standpoint, but if GMs waive a player they feel was a "mistake", yes, it saves the organization money and a headache, but it makes the front office look weak admitting mistakes. It's kind of bad from a PR standpoint, but it definately should be set in.

[DanTown8587]

I mean, I find it amazing that the NFL ever got non-guaranteed contracts into its CBA. But with that not gonna happen, I feel teams should be able to save money in some instances and my feeling is this makes teams MORE aggressive and allows players to play in much better situations. I mean, as a Bulls fan, who loses if they get 7 million the next two years on the cap if Wallace where gone, and then he signs with LA. I mean, a player goes to a team that needs him and would get more PT. I also don't think this makes GM's weak, just like the amnesty clause didn't make any of those guys weak.

[warriorfan650]

I agree that the NBA should be able to break contracts like the NFL does for productivity, or lack thereof. That's why players in free agency cost so much and do so well their free agency year. If they always have to play for a check, we'll get a much better result.

[shrink]

In the 2005 Collective Bargaining Agreement, the NBA did initiate an amnesty clause, so I don't think your proposal is farfetched at all.

Dubbed the "Allan Houston Rule," this exemption allowed each team the right to drop one player from their roster. He would still receive his full salary, and he'd count against the salary cap, but his salary would not count against the lux - the painful soft cap that causes owners to pay a dollar-for-dollar penalty for every $1 they are over the lux. Ironically, NY didn't choose the overpaid and injured Allan Houston for the Allan Houston Rules, and instead went with Jerome Williams I believe.