RealGM

Per J.Jones via posted on twitter :

Jason Jones‏@mr_jasonjones

I'm also still under the impression the Kings will NOT use the amnesty clause. Already under cap, won't pay a player not to be on their team


Very interesting .....

Crazy, I thought Salmons would be amnesty for sure. Definitely shows how cash poor our owners are

Last year the Maloofs said amnesty was a waste of money. Of course they wont use it.

Wow, I just can't see how John Salmons comes back, and if he does what the heck does that mean?

SacKingZZZ wrote:Wow, I just can't see how John Salmons comes back, and if he does what the heck does that mean?

Well if they have to pay his salary if they amnesty him, why use it if they won't go over cap?

Have a feeling he will be packaged in a deal here on draft day.

He goes to the bank either way.

LAWL. That's the perfect picture for that post.

But yeah, that sucks. What's a waste of money is paying a guy to sit on the bench. If you can clear more cap space to actually accomplish something, that's money well spent.

I think that Petrie recently said something to the effect of "amnesty is worthless if you aren't going to spend with your cap space" so I'm not expecting anything.

Found the interview: http://blogs.sacbee.com/sports/kings/ar ... qus_thread

AlexG2012 wrote:Crazy, I thought Salmons would be amnesty for sure. Definitely shows how cash poor our owners are

Very few owners are willing to amnesty large, long term deals. Even the big gun billionaires rarely have.

Amnesty was designed to help teams near or over the luxury tax. Teams like ours that consistently pay league minimum will Never use it.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

It's just too bad. We could really have a ton of capspace right now with it.

BOOGIE-MONSTER wrote:

AlexG2012 wrote:Crazy, I thought Salmons would be amnesty for sure. Definitely shows how cash poor our owners are

Very few owners are willing to amnesty large, long term deals. Even the big gun billionaires rarely have.

Yet, they lump sum buyout players all the time? I thought they would use the amnesty for one reason, TO SAVE MONEY. Don't forget, if they amnesty Salmons there is a good chance that another team bids on him and whatever they bid the Kings don't have to pay him. This is actually a good sign if you think the Maloofs are just being cheap bastards because they end up spending more money.

pillwenney wrote:It's just too bad. We could really have a ton of capspace right now with it.

Read the article Inigo linked to, worst case is realized, Petrie still smoking the Salmons pipe. He seems to not understand how 5 guys wanting and needing the ball to be effective had trouble working together. Later on, Salmons did play well enough to cast doubt as to whether or not he's completely worthless however.

This team using amnesty is a pipe dream so folks may as well forget about it. Amnesty is teams that are serious about contending and need cap space. As long as we're stuck with owners who are content to sit at the league minimum salary every year, amnesty isn't even an option.

SacKingZZZ wrote:Wow, I just can't see how John Salmons comes back, and if he does what the heck does that mean?

All this Salmons hate is a bit ridiculous. Yes he was terrible the first half of last year (so were other players on the team, though( but he got better and his career overall has been pretty solid. I could see using amnesty on him if the Kings were at the cap and needed the money but they aren't. They're hovering around minimum salary and Salmons is their best SF option and one of the better defenders on the team. No reason to get rid of him right now.

pillwenney wrote:It's just too bad. We could really have a ton of capspace right now with it.

They have a lot of cap space anyways. Problem is, they have no intention of using it.

deadenddude wrote:

pillwenney wrote:It's just too bad. We could really have a ton of capspace right now with it.

They have a lot of cap space anyways. Problem is, they have no intention of using it.

We really don't. In fact, once we sign JT, the amount of capspace we have will be negligible to actually signing someone.

pillwenney wrote:

deadenddude wrote:

pillwenney wrote:It's just too bad. We could really have a ton of capspace right now with it.

They have a lot of cap space anyways. Problem is, they have no intention of using it.

We really don't. In fact, once we sign JT, the amount of capspace we have will be negligible to actually signing someone.

Kings salaries, according to HoopsHype
John Salmons $8,080,000
Marcus Thornton $7,632,500
Francisco Garcia $6,100,000
Chuck Hayes $5,486,250
Tyreke Evans $5,251,824
Jason Thompson $4,129,766
DeMarcus Cousins $3,880,800
Travis Outlaw $3,000,000
Jimmer Fredette $2,406,240
Tyler Honeycutt $850,000
Hassan Whiteside $847,307
Isaiah Thomas $762,195

Total $48,426,882

Then you have the Thomas Robinson cap hold. I know the rookie scale contract is worth $2,812,200
for the #5 pick, but most players get 120% of that. However, I think the cap hold is just the rookie scale.

Total Salary plus Robinson Hold = $51,239,082

The NBA salary cap last year was $58,044,000. The predictions say it will be the same this year. So, before signing JT, the Kings will have:

Cap Space: $6,804,918

Note, we cannot sign a player for that money and then sign JT, because of cap holds.

Conclusion
The Kings have no salary cap room if they sign JT and make no other moves.

In this case, I believe we are limited to a midlevel exemtion, so I am not positive on the exemption.

If only we would **** amnesty Salmons.

Why do they need to amnesty Salmons? It would be a waste because the Maloofs would not spend that money. I rather save it until this team actually needs it.

I don't think it would put us below the minimum if we were to re-sign JT. It would only help right now.