A modified waiver process will be utilized for players waived pursuant to the Amnesty rule, under which teams with Room under the Cap can submit competing offers to assume some but not all of the player's remaining contract. If a player's contract is claimed in this manner, the remaining portion of the player's salary will continue to be paid by the team that waived him.

So if the Spurs waived Jefferson, teams with cap space -- like the Sacramento Kings and Indiana Pacers -- could put in silent bids to take over a portion of his contract, with the biggest bid getting his services. The entire contract would be wiped off SA's cap sheet, and the Spurs would be responsible from the difference in his contract and the winning bid in actual salary paid out. The bid amount (say it's 50 percent for the Pacers) would then be paid by the winning bidder, and that amount would also go on that team's cap sheet.


Will it make a difference? Will teams bid on players that don't want to play for them?

I suppose it would makes sense to scoop them up for bargain prices and attempt to turn them into possible trades.

Also, those players don't need to be waived before this season. Amnesty players can be before any season of the new CBA (as long as contract was signed under the old CBA).

I like that rule. I bet Cuban wish it was in place when they bought out Finley who still receives a paycheck from the Mavs.

The only reason why I don't think the Spurs will use the amnesty on Jefferson this season is because even in doing so, they will still be over the cap. Basically as it stands right now, the Spurs have a $3MM MLE due to their luxury tax position (this is assuming the newly bargained CBA structure passes). Buying out Jefferson would get them out of the luxury tax and they would then qualify for the full $5MM MLE, but that's it. And I don't think it's worth it.

quote:

---

The only reason why I don't think the Spurs will use the amnesty on Jefferson this season is because even in doing so, they will still be over the cap.

---

But will it get them under the luxury tax? Paying Luxury tax means you miss out on the 2.5mm lux tax payment from Cuban and Buss (although they have slightly modified that, and I am not real sure how.)

Cut Jefferson
Save about 3mm in luxury tax+ get luxury tax=about 5mm.
If Jefferson gets picked up for 4-5mm/year, the Spurs could be at 9-10mm saved. That's a lot of jack.

I believe it does get them out of luxury tax, Soup, maybe if they can find a replacement at small forward, like a butler or howard, I could see them doing it. As much as I want to see Jefferson gone, we would be very thin at the three (Kawhi still unproven) without him.

Also though, Jefferson stock is really low right now. You think a team would pay him $5MM?

Depends who is available at SF and what they are commanding and how much a contending team needs a SF. Butler should set the market.

The number of bidders for amnesty players is pretty small, and I do think those guys will go for much less.

Only teams currently under the salary cap can make claims, so it seems worth it to put in a bid for Jefferson at
$1 million.

quote:

---

As much as I want to see Jefferson gone, we would be very thin at the three (Kawhi still unproven) without him.

---

I don't know what you're talking about, the Spurs still have Steve Novak.

SF lineup:
Kawhi Leonard
Danny Green (listed as G-F)
Davis Bertans (6-10 rookie SF)
Da'Sean Butler
Adam Hanga (listed as G-F)
Steve Novak

I don't know anything about Hanga and Bertans. Leonard and Butler could both be good, but they are rookies. It would be nice to have some proven NBA experience at the position... but then again, RJ is pretty much just proven to be bad at the position. Not sure the there is anything to lose by getting rid of him.

[This message has been edited by Ulrich (edited 12/2/2011 2:44p).]

Lets be serious. The Spurs aren't winning a title. If making Leonard the starting SF would help his development, you drop RJ. If it would stifle his development, you keep RJ.

I really like this amnesty rule and the owners should be allowed to do it three times a decade.

quote:

---

I don't know what you're talking about, the Spurs still have Steve Novak

---

SF lineup:
Kawhi Leonard
Danny Green (listed as G-F)
Davis Bertans (6-10 rookie SF)
Da'Sean Butler
Adam Hanga (listed as G-F)
Steve Novak

Novak is a free agent (The Spurs will let him walk). Hanga and Bertans are overseas. Green and Butler won't get many minutes. This leaves Leonard as our only viable option who hasn't played one NBA game. That's what I'm talking about...

quote:

---

Lets be serious. The Spurs aren't winning a title. If making Leonard the starting SF would help his development, you drop RJ. If it would stifle his development, you keep RJ.

---

While it's true that the spurs don't have a good shot at winning the title, you don't want to predicate a rotation on the development of a rookie at the expense of Tim and Manu's final seasons.

If Butler is anywhere near what he was in college, he'll probably end up with a fair amount of minutes. I wasn't making the point that the Spurs have great depth at SF, but what do they really gain by putting RJ out there over any random rookie? Might as well give Leonard and Butler their shot. Ginobili can play the three some if they really feel like they want some experience there, just go Parker, Hill/Anderson, and Manu at the 123.


...and if you didn't get that the Steve Novak comment was sarcasm, that's all on you.

[This message has been edited by Ulrich (edited 12/2/2011 9:24p).]

Yes, Butler was a good college player, but he is coming off of a serious injury recovery and has not played NBA minutes. He barely got to sniff the court in the Latvian league. By having Jefferson in the lineup, it gives the Spurs an advantage of having players on the court that know the system which will able them to get out to a good start compared to the other competition.

And I apologize I couldn't see through the Novak sarcasm. But when you list him with two other players who aren't coming to the team for at least two more years, you will understand why I was slow on the take.

[This message has been edited by ItalAggie (edited 12/2/2011 9:41p).]

But I also agree with you that we'll see small ball with parker neal and manu/anderson.

I say you have to keep him.

Minimal gain by dropping him + little/no time for rookies to learn the offense & defense. I agree with the previous poster who said that you can't throw a season away with Tim & Manu's windows closing like they are.

As mentioned in other thread:

RJ first candidate/casualty of amnesty. 3 years, $30.5 remaining, now can be had dirt cheap.

haha Didn't even notice that. Looks like the "Novak was a joke" was a coverup after all.