Klomp wrote:How loose are the CBA rules about "voluntarily retirement"? If KG retires, what are the odds he stays on the books for 2016-17?
Source of the original discussion: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1374696&p=47768617#p47768411
(please quote me when you respond here so I get a notification)
Being that you used "voluntary retirement", I am assuming KG just walks away in this scenario. In that case, if they Wolves don't pay him anything, his salary could be wiped from the books. If they pay him anything, that amount would remain on the books and charged against the cap.
This is from the CBA FAQ
63. What are the rules for retired players? What if the player suffers a career-ending injury?
There's nothing binding about a player announcing his retirement. The player can still sign a new contract and continue playing (if he's not under contract), or return to his team (if he is still under contract) and resume his career.
The only exception to this is when a player is still under contract, wants to quit, and his team doesn't want to let him out of his contract. Under these circumstances the player can file for retirement with the league. The player is placed on the league's Voluntarily Retired list (see question number 79), forgoes his remaining salary, and cannot return to the league for one year. The latter requirement prevents players from using retirement as an underhanded way to change teams, and can be overridden with unanimous approval from all 30 teams. For example, guard Jason Williams signed with the LA Clippers in August 2008, then changed his mind the following month, announcing his retirement. He applied for reinstatement in early 2009, but his request was denied by a vote of 24-6. Williams later signed with the Orlando Magic once the one-year anniversary of his retirement announcement had passed.
Any money paid to a player is included in team salary, even if the player is no longer playing or has retired.
A recent situation where this happened was with Rasheed Wallace and the Celtics. He wanted to retire, but also wanted the opportunity to return if he changed his mind. Because of this, rather than going the "voluntary retirement" route, the Celtics and Wallace agreed to a buyout. Boston had no interest in a return and didn't want the money on their books, if he did choose to play again. So, they held a small amount on their cap while Wallace was "retired". Wallace ended up returning to the Knicks a couple of years later, but at that point all obligations to Boston were complete.
If a player walks away due to injury, the situation is far more complicated. It is outlined in the same question in the FAQ.
The short version is, as long as the Wolves don't want to hold him to playing (which I can't imagine they would at this point), they can get the space back if Garnett retired.
I may have missed something here and Dboys will correct me if I did. But as far as I know, as long as he leaves and stays away, there is no penalty to the Wolves.