RealGM

Jazz could still use the amnesty clause right? I believe it was for any player on their roster signed to a contract at the time that the clause was invoked...

Somebody help me with this question...would it have to be someone on the current Jazz roster? or just any NBA roster?

...if it's somebody on an NBA roster, i'd have to think it would be Raja Bell. Who would give up an asset for Raja Bell and agree to pay him $3M for next year? Unless the Jazz offered cash incentive on top of the trade...in which case, just amnesty him and use the money to buy a pick.

...if it's a player on ANY nba roster, that trade exception could be interesting. Send the trade exception to another team for a player with a bad contract and a draft pick, then amnesty the bad contract and you've acquired a draft pick for nothing but the trade exception.

Somebody who is more plugged in to the intricacies of the amnesty clause might need to set me straight if i'm off in my question and scenarios.

Wouldn't the other team just amnesty the player themselves, instead of giving up a draft pick so we could it?

The59Sound wrote:Wouldn't the other team just amnesty the player themselves, instead of giving up a draft pick so we could it?

Wouldn't it be basically a cash for 2nd round pick type of trade?

You can only amnesty a player who was on your roster at the CBA signing.

kebutah wrote:You can only amnesty a player who was on your roster at the CBA signing.

This. Since the Jazz have a stated policy of not paying players to not play, the only way we will use are amnesty is if we need the cap space to sign a FA. For instance if we wanted to sign D-Will to a max contract and needed an extra 8.5mil under the cap, we could amnesty Harris to get that.

However, almost all our guys under contract (except maybe Bell) could likely be traded for a 2nd rounder + cap space if we wanted, so it likely doesn't make sense for us to use at all.

Per Larry Coon's FAQ:

For a player to be eligible for the Amnesty provision he must be on his team's roster continuously from July 1, 2011 to the date he is amnestied, without any new contract, extension, renegotiation or other amendment to his contract in the meantime…Teams cannot amnesty players they sign, receive in trade, extend, renegotiate, or otherwise amend after July 1, 2011.

Ideally the Jazz would be able to trade Raja Bell for some asset (in a package for a player, or for draft picks). If that fails the Jazz could amnesty Raja Bell. Under the waiver provision they would waive him and his $3,480,000 salary.
At that point, other teams could:
a) place a full waiver claim, taking the entire salary onto their team, or
b) place a partial claim--a bid if you will on how much they would give for him. Then the highest partial waiver claim would win and the new team would pay the amount of their bid towards Raja's salary and the Jazz pay the rest.
If no waiver claim is made, the Jazz pay the entire salary and the player is free to sign elsewhere. If there are teams willing to pay a small partial payment for Raja but not take him on in a trade, that is a possibility--but could result in the Jazz paying someone to not play for them.

I dont think the Jazz amnesty any player unless there was a specific free agent out there they really wanted and could not get underneath the cap enough. Say the Jazz fell in love with Eric Gordon. We could trade away Big Al or Millsap to a team with cap for a pick allowing us to throw a max contract on Gordon. If a trade is not available you could amnesty Big Al and simply sign Gordon to a max contract, probably unnecessary as the Jazz could simply do a sign and trade with Millsap and Harris to New Orleans and Gordon to the Jazz. He is a good fit for the Jazz but a little risky bc of his injury background. To get him definitely going to have to be a Max contract so that New Orleans simply doesnt match the Jazz offer as he is a restricted free agent.

Simply I dont see the Amnesty clause coming into effect for the Jazz unless they simply cant buy out or trade Bell.

The problem with amnesty-ing someone like Big Al is the Jazz are then paying $15 mill to have him play somewhere else--then signing another player (like in this example) to the max. That would be far less likely to me than using the amnesty to resolve a situation like with Bell--where keeping him on the team would cause issues. I do agree trading is the best solution though.

On a side note--if the Jazz do not amnesty anyone this year they won't amnesty anyone--since the only contracts that are eligible that currently extend beyond this coming season is Favors, Kanter, Hayward, and Burks on their rookie contracts with year to year team options.

An expiring deal like Raja's could be useful to make salaries match in a trade based around other players.

Aside from that I'm having a hard time envisioning a team giving up even a 2nd round pick for him.

here the link with the amnesty thread we discussed two week ago.

you can find info on the players we can amnesty

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1177555

bottom line, the unique player useful to amnesty is Bell, and that was before his comments about Corbin... if Utah can't use him as a trade chip (A-plan , his still an expiring contract and a veteran so has some market value), they'll negotiate a buyout (B-plan , with Raja leaving some money on the table) or simply amnesty him (C-plan, arguably the last minute he can be amnestiated saving to save some cap space, i think after the all star pause)

all other "amnesty available" players has a good market value so it could be fool to amnesty them (besides a major injury; i dont' know if the new CBA has an injury exception for salary cap like the old CBA, someone knows more?)