Amnesty:

[bajaden]

Just read a New York Times piece on what has, and what has not been agreed upon by the Union and the league. The Times estimates that the deal is 95% agreed upon, with the BRI spit being the only big obstacle left. Also according to the article, a amnesty clause will be apart of the agreement. As currently written, the amnesty clause will be good one time only, and can be used anytime during the life of the new CBA. Unfortunately, it can only be used on players already under contract as of july 1st of 2011.

That of course shoots a hole in my Greg Oden idea. But that aside, the question is, whom should the Kings use the amnesty clause on, and when. John Salmons and Francisco Garcia immediately spring to mind, but arguments could be made for both players having value to the team. There's no doubt that Cisco brings some of those, you can't see, intangibles. But aside from that, if judged solely on his on court performance, he's probably overpaid.

The question about Salmons is, did we make the trade simply to open up time for Fredette? Or because we really wanted Salmons? I don't know the answer to that question, and whatever the answer is, could determine his fate on the team. However, the team is in such good cap related financial shape, that the Kings have the luxury of giving Salmons a try for a year to see how he fits, and perhaps have a better freeagent market to choose from as well.

If and when we have a season, these are some of the exciting questions that need to answered. The fact that I used the word exciting shows how frustrated I'am. Thoughts anyone?

 

[NoBonus]

Kenny Thomas?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

The question about Salmons is, did we make the trade simply to open up time for Fredette? Or because we really wanted Salmons? I don't know the answer to that question, and whatever the answer is, could determine his fate on the team. However, the team is in such good cap related financial shape, that the Kings have the luxury of giving Salmons a try for a year to see how he fits, and perhaps have a better freeagent market to choose from as well.

I think we really wanted Salmons. I remember reading that Westphal pushed for that trade because he was frustrated with our SF options and wanted some solid perimeter D. Keep in mind that we made the move before drafting Fredette, so we weren't 100% opening up space for another PG (though I get the impression we were pretty much fixated on Fredette or Walker under the assumption that one of them would fall to us at #10).

I don't really think we're going to be in any rush to use the presumed amnesty clause. Marc Stein and Chad Ford (link) did a piece today on who they thought would get the axe under an amnesty scenario, and I agree with them that the Kings won't be in a hurry to use it. We have a ton of cap space and a lot of young, talented players, so we don't really need to send a guy packing just because we can.

My guess is that we'll sign our second-rounders, match any offer sheet tendered to a restricted Marcus Thornton, and go hard after one of (Nene, Chandler, M. Gasol, Dalembert) to solidify our frontcourt. Then we'll probably bring in a scrapper big man like Darnell Jackson on the cheap for emergencies and garbage time and call it an offseason. To do that, we don't need to clear cap space, and if the amnesty is keep-it-until-you-use-it as suggested, there's no real harm in holding off, in my opinion.

 

[Telemachus]

The question about Salmons is, did we make the trade simply to open up time for Fredette? Or because we really wanted Salmons? I don't know the answer to that question, and whatever the answer is, could determine his fate on the team. However, the team is in such good cap related financial shape, that the Kings have the luxury of giving Salmons a try for a year to see how he fits, and perhaps have a better freeagent market to choose from as well.

I think that the primary reason for the trade was to open up playing time for Fredette, but do think that using Salmons to upgrade our SF was part of it. That being said, I think the Kings should try to sign a player like Shane Battier. If they succeed, then use the amnesty clause on Salmons.

 

[bajaden]

I think we really wanted Salmons. I remember reading that Westphal pushed for that trade because he was frustrated with our SF options and wanted some solid perimeter D. Keep in mind that we made the move before drafting Fredette, so we weren't 100% opening up space for another PG (though I get the impression we were pretty much fixated on Fredette or Walker under the assumption that one of them would fall to us at #10).

I don't really think we're going to be in any rush to use the presumed amnesty clause. Marc Stein and Chad Ford (link) did a piece today on who they thought would get the axe under an amnesty scenario, and I agree with them that the Kings won't be in a hurry to use it. We have a ton of cap space and a lot of young, talented players, so we don't really need to send a guy packing just because we can.

My guess is that we'll sign our second-rounders, match any offer sheet tendered to a restricted Marcus Thornton, and go hard after one of (Nene, Chandler, M. Gasol, Dalembert) to solidify our frontcourt. Then we'll probably bring in a scrapper big man like Darnell Jackson on the cheap for emergencies and garbage time and call it an offseason. To do that, we don't need to clear cap space, and if the amnesty is keep-it-until-you-use-it as suggested, there's no real harm in holding off, in my opinion.

I tend to agree with you. I'm not even sure we need a scrapper big man. Especially if they plan on getting anything at all out of Whiteside this season. If they manage to get one of the four you listed to go with Cousins, Hickson, and Thompson, there aren't going be many minutes left to go around. If Whiteside isn't in their plans this season and they have him penciled in as a D-Leaguer, then I can see them adding someone like Jackson.

If Salmons doesn't work out as planned, then they can always use the amnesty clause after the season. Its a nice insurance policy to have around.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I tend to agree with you. I'm not even sure we need a scrapper big man. Especially if they plan on getting anything at all out of Whiteside this season. If they manage to get one of the four you listed to go with Cousins, Hickson, and Thompson, there aren't going be many minutes left to go around. If Whiteside isn't in their plans this season and they have him penciled in as a D-Leaguer, then I can see them adding someone like Jackson.

I do hope that Whiteside is in the plans to get a little time here and there. That said, I really do like having a sixth big man who can be stashed on the ineligible list so that even if (when) you get hit with an injury you can still have five active bigs to give you some cover for foul trouble and emergencies. I don't want to give the impression that I wanted a scrapper in lieu of Whiteside, but in addition.

If Salmons doesn't work out as planned, then they can always use the amnesty clause after the season. Its a nice insurance policy to have around.

That's a good point - maybe not for this year, but down the road, it could be useful for either Salmons or Garcia. I would assume that Garcia's '13-'14 team option would not vest if we were to amnesty him prior to the '12-'13 season, if we felt that was a good play. If for some reason we had to pick the option up to amnesty, it would never make any sense.

 

[Kingster]

Just read a New York Times piece on what has, and what has not been agreed upon by the Union and the league. The Times estimates that the deal is 95% agreed upon, with the BRI spit being the only big obstacle left. Also according to the article, a amnesty clause will be apart of the agreement. As currently written, the amnesty clause will be good one time only, and can be used anytime during the life of the new CBA. Unfortunately, it can only be used on players already under contract as of july 1st of 2011.

That of course shoots a hole in my Greg Oden idea. But that aside, the question is, whom should the Kings use the amnesty clause on, and when. John Salmons and Francisco Garcia immediately spring to mind, but arguments could be made for both players having value to the team. There's no doubt that Cisco brings some of those, you can't see, intangibles. But aside from that, if judged solely on his on court performance, he's probably overpaid.

The question about Salmons is, did we make the trade simply to open up time for Fredette? Or because we really wanted Salmons? I don't know the answer to that question, and whatever the answer is, could determine his fate on the team. However, the team is in such good cap related financial shape, that the Kings have the luxury of giving Salmons a try for a year to see how he fits, and perhaps have a better freeagent market to choose from as well.

If and when we have a season, these are some of the exciting questions that need to answered. The fact that I used the word exciting shows how frustrated I'am. Thoughts anyone?

In answer to the Salmons and question: yes. Petrie wanted Salmons and Fredette and was willing to give up Beno.

As far as the amnesty question, it has to be Garcia they use it on. We've seen enough history to know that he's injury prone and overpaid. I love his competitive spirit and he's a good guy in the lockeroom, but that doesn't compensate enough for overpaying an injury prone mediocre talent. That said, letting Garcia go will make me more worried about lockeroom dynamics, but I have a feeling Petrie is going to bring in some solid veteran talent that also are good lockeroom guys to make up for that.

 

[mr. moustache]

In answer to the Salmons and question: yes. Petrie wanted Salmons and Fredette and was willing to give up Beno.

As far as the amnesty question, it has to be Garcia they use it on. We've seen enough history to know that he's injury prone and overpaid. I love his competitive spirit and he's a good guy in the lockeroom, but that doesn't compensate enough for overpaying an injury prone mediocre talent. That said, letting Garcia go will make me more worried about lockeroom dynamics, but I have a feeling Petrie is going to bring in some solid veteran talent that also are good lockeroom guys to make up for that.

WTF!??! If Garcia is overpaid playing 50 games a year for us; he'll be REALLY overpaid playing 0 games a year for us. This is not waiving a player and their salary. This is simply waiving their impact on the cap. Amnesty is a nightmare for the Kings. It allows teams to create cap room. The Kings have the most cap room in the league and this advantage will be negatively affected by any rule that allows a team to "undo" mistakes.

 

[bajaden]

WTF!??! If Garcia is overpaid playing 50 games a year for us; he'll be REALLY overpaid playing 0 games a year for us. This is not waiving a player and their salary. This is simply waiving their impact on the cap. Amnesty is a nightmare for the Kings. It allows teams to create cap room. The Kings have the most cap room in the league and this advantage will be negatively affected by any rule that allows a team to "undo" mistakes.

Putting it as a rule that allows teams to undo mistakes is technically correct. I think its also fair to say, that in a lot, if not most cases, the team thought it was making a good investment, and in a lot of the cases, the players effectivness was affected by an injury, such as in the case of Brandon Roy. The whole idea of the league wanting to reduce the amount of years a player could be signed for, was to limit the effect of such a player on a team. In lieu of not being able to get the contract lengths they wanted, they opted for an amnesty clause.

Note that the clause can only be used on players already under contract as july 1st 2011. So a team can't save its amnesty clause and then go out and take a gamble on a player with the thought of just cutting him if he doesn't work out. I grant you that the clause will open up some cap room for a few teams that don't have any, and thereby increase the competition for some of the freeagents. But I don't think it will affect things as much as you might think. A team like Miami might use it on Mike Miller, but the still wouldn't have much money under the cap to work with. The Lakers for instance could cut just about anyone on the team and still wouldn't be under the cap.

I haven't looked at it team by team, but I will in the next few days. Here's the thing. The good upcoming teams like the Thunder, Memphis etc, are mostly young and with fairly low payrolls by comparison to the Heat, Lakers etc. So any cut wouldn't be huge, and in some cases they wouldn't cut anyone, but would save the amnesty clause for the future. Which is what I think the Kings will do.

 

[jdbraver]

Does this help us get 2 max players? Not that there is even one out there

 

[LPKingsFan]

but I have a feeling Petrie is going to bring in some solid veteran talent that also are good lockeroom guys to make up for that.

My humble request:

 

[est.1999]

Tyson chandler already said that he thinks it's unlikely that he signs with Dallas. Being a California baby I wouldn't be surprised if he gave us a serious look.

 

[Telemachus]

WTF!??! If Garcia is overpaid playing 50 games a year for us; he'll be REALLY overpaid playing 0 games a year for us. This is not waiving a player and their salary. This is simply waiving their impact on the cap. Amnesty is a nightmare for the Kings. It allows teams to create cap room. The Kings have the most cap room in the league and this advantage will be negatively affected by any rule that allows a team to "undo" mistakes.

Something not to be overlooked is that a lot of good players (but overpaid) could be on the market for teams like the Kings to pick up as a result of the amnesty clause. It could make the FA market a lot more intersting.

 

[The Hammer]

Tyson chandler already said that he thinks it's unlikely that he signs with Dallas. Being a California baby I wouldn't be surprised if he gave us a serious look.

Would you rather have Chandler or Dalembert?

 

[Dime Dropper]

Something not to be overlooked is that a lot of good players (but overpaid) could be on the market for teams like the Kings to pick up as a result of the amnesty clause. It could make the FA market a lot more intersting.

Yeah, that's certainly a positive that would be brought about by the amnesty rule. Rashard Lewis wouldn't be a bad fit at SF, all he'd need to do is spot up and hit shots.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Would you rather have Chandler or Dalembert?

Absolutely. He brings everything Dalembert does plus championship experience.

 

[est.1999]

I'd go Chandler. Not only is he more mobile and active than Dally, but he also brings much needed passion and energy to a team that really needs it.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'd go Chandler. Not only is he more mobile and active than Dally, but he also brings much needed passion and energy to a team that really needs it.

The flipside is that he also brings an injury prone nature that has caused him to be ineffective for whoel season in the past, and probably a 50% greater salary hit. I have always liked Chandler. Like Nene, who is also out there, been jocking him long before it became fashionable. But he's a risky investment when you have a potentially could have a similar style player who you already know fits and is cheaper.

 

[bajaden]

The flipside is that he also brings an injury prone nature that has caused him to be ineffective for whoel season in the past, and probably a 50% greater salary hit. I have always liked Chandler. Like Nene, who is also out there, been jocking him long before it became fashionable. But he's a risky investment when you have a potentially could have a similar style player who you already know fits and is cheaper.

Well in the ten years he's been in the league, he's had seven years where he's played in 71 games or more. so he's only had 3 injury plagued years, but tow of those came just before last season. The good news is that none of his injuries have been of the career ending type, like Brandon Roy's. The bad news is, that he isn't any younger, and the older you get, the more prone you are to injury. So yes there is risk, and if we were to sign him, I'd certainly consider signing another player that can play the center position just in case.

I like Dalembert, but my gut tells me he's not inclined to come back. I hope I'm wrong, but if not then I'd still consider Gasol. He's a much better defender than he gets credit for, and as I've said before, he averaged 1.7 blocked shots last season on a good defensive team. Thats despite Randolph being on the team. I'm sure Memphis will do everything it can to retain him though.

 

[Hoovtrain]

Well in the ten years he's been in the league, he's had seven years where he's played in 71 games or more. so he's only had 3 injury plagued years, but tow of those came just before last season. The good news is that none of his injuries have been of the career ending type, like Brandon Roy's. The bad news is, that he isn't any younger, and the older you get, the more prone you are to injury. So yes there is risk, and if we were to sign him, I'd certainly consider signing another player that can play the center position just in case.

I like Dalembert, but my gut tells me he's not inclined to come back. I hope I'm wrong, but if not then I'd still consider Gasol. He's a much better defender than he gets credit for, and as I've said before, he averaged 1.7 blocked shots last season on a good defensive team. Thats despite Randolph being on the team. I'm sure Memphis will do everything it can to retain him though.

I don't disagree, but isn't MEM pretty strapped right now with Randolph's extension and Gay's massive contract? It may not be up to them whether they can sign him back or not. Not that it would bother me, as I would love you have Gasol.

 

[bajaden]

I don't disagree, but isn't MEM pretty strapped right now with Randolph's extension and Gay's massive contract? It may not be up to them whether they can sign him back or not. Not that it would bother me, as I would love you have Gasol.

Well after visiting four different sites, there seems to be a disparity on some of the salaries. So I'm rounding it out and saying that Memphis team salaries without Gasol and Hadadi add up to around 46 to 47 mil. Its been stated by one of the owners that the salary cap will remain the same as last year, which means somewhere around 58 to 59 mil. So that gives Memphis a little wiggle room. The could use the amnesty clause to get rid of Tony allen and save themselves another 3 mil. So my guess is that they could have around 11 mil under the cap with which to resign Gasol and Hadadi.

 

[Hoovtrain]

Well after visiting four different sites, there seems to be a disparity on some of the salaries. So I'm rounding it out and saying that Memphis team salaries without Gasol and Hadadi add up to around 46 to 47 mil. Its been stated by one of the owners that the salary cap will remain the same as last year, which means somewhere around 58 to 59 mil. So that gives Memphis a little wiggle room. The could use the amnesty clause to get rid of Tony allen and save themselves another 3 mil. So my guess is that they could have around 11 mil under the cap with which to resign Gasol and Hadadi.

Well damn it! I guess its all contingent on whether they would use the clause this year (I think?)

 

[Sac.1989]

My humble request:

Yep get us chandler. We wil have to outbid everyone to get him but im fine with that. He will be the difference for us and a great mentor to whiteside and the youngsters.

If he breaks down then Amnesty his contract.

 

[ParniValjak]

Yep get us chandler. We wil have to outbid everyone to get him but im fine with that. He will be the difference for us and a great mentor to whiteside and the youngsters.

If he breaks down then Amnesty his contract.

Forgive my dumb question but I cannot be bothered reading up on the new CBA...

Is Amnesty only and option this year or can it be used some time in the future?

 

[ParniValjak]

Tyson chandler already said that he thinks it's unlikely that he signs with Dallas. Being a California baby I wouldn't be surprised if he gave us a serious look.

He was also very close with Bobby Jackson when they both played in NO. Their families were also very close...wives get along well and kids went to same school and were close so that might be a major card for us to draw on.

Especially considering that Chandler has said pre-lockout that he would like to stay with Dallas BUT he would not make any "home town" discounts and will chase the $$$$.

I think we are more of a chance with Chandler than many people believe.

 

[whozit]

Forgive my dumb question but I cannot be bothered reading up on the new CBA...

Is Amnesty only and option this year or can it be used some time in the future?

Amnesty is for anytime during the new CBA before the season starts but the player must be under a contract that was prior to the start of the current CBA (I'm not sure the specific date that was stated possibly July 31st?). Not sure if you can amnesty a player that was under contract but you traded for after the start of the new CBA (I think most reports say you can't but?).

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

He was also very close with Bobby Jackson when they both played in NO. Their families were also very close...wives get along well and kids went to same school and were close so that might be a major card for us to draw on.

Especially considering that Chandler has said pre-lockout that he would like to stay with Dallas BUT he would not make any "home town" discounts and will chase the $$$$.

I think we are more of a chance with Chandler than many people believe.

Yes agreed...but is he really on Petrie's radar at this point??

 

[Sac.1989]

Amnesty is for anytime during the new CBA before the season starts but the player must be under a contract that was prior to the start of the current CBA (I'm not sure the specific date that was stated possibly July 31st?). Not sure if you can amnesty a player that was under contract but you traded for after the start of the new CBA (I think most reports say you can't but?).

Ahh i see. My understanding was it was for any player during the CBA with the team able to use this option once - more than likely wrong though.

I guess that leaves us with sending Cisco or Salmons on his way. Doubt we ship the latter off and unless Donte and our 2nd pick do amazingly well we might very well keep Cisco

 

[Section 101]

Ahh i see. My understanding was it was for any player during the CBA with the team able to use this option once - more than likely wrong though.

I guess that leaves us with sending Cisco or Salmons on his way. Doubt we ship the latter off and unless Donte and our 2nd pick do amazingly well we might very well keep Cisco

Before any of the next 6 seasons or 10 if neither side opts out after 6 years.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Before any of the next 6 seasons or 10 if neither side opts out after 6 years.

Except that the contract to be amnestied has to have been signed under the 2005-2011 CBA, so the effective end date of the amnesty provision is the summer of 2015 - there aren't any current contracts that run beyond the 2015-2016 season.