Tim W. wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Possible Amnesty Signings for the Raptors..? Richard Jefferson (post 53)
Collapse
X
-
If and when players start getting cut through amnesty, only players below the salary cap (not luxury tax) are able to bid. These teams are:
11. Utah Jazz
$55,614,192
12. Cleveland Cavaliers
$55,457,657
13. Philadelphia 76ers
$54,858,763
14. Oklahoma City Thunder
$53,605,750
15. Milwaukee Bucks
$51,849,140
16. Phoenix Suns
$49,182,654
17. Golden State Warriors
$49,105,952
18. Minnesota Timberwolves
$48,355,542
19. Detroit Pistons
$48,263,032
20. Charlotte Bobcats
$47,481,490
21. Houston Rockets
$47,306,218
22. Toronto Raptors
$46,879,433
23. Los Angeles Clippers
$44,919,031
24. New Orleans Hornets
$42,066,057
25. Washington Wizards
$40,682,282
26. New Jersey Nets
$39,814,161
27. Memphis Grizzlies (Matt52: Randolph's extension not included)
$37,363,810
28. Indiana Pacers
$36,957,444
29. Sacramento Kings
$29,903,965
30. Denver Nuggets
$28,883,142
Read more: http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm#ixzz1fxDRF8tb
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostWhich is why I said 'at the expense of UPWARDS of $30M'.
so, yes, they'll have to pay his replacement (my guess is it'll be butler, but...given his injury history, could he not be had for around mid-level type money ($5M/yr; note: i'm not suggesting that the spurs use the MLE to sign butler, because they don't have the full MLE available to them); but they're under no obligation to match the term (i.e. it can be any length allowed, doesn't have to be 3 yrs), and they're only on the hook for $5M/yr for RJ. so if they sign butler to a 2-yr deal for $12M (total; $6M/yr), then their total expenditure for the next 3 yrs for RJ & butler is $27M. it's unlikely that this is what plays out, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.
obviously, if he clears through the auction with no bids, he becomes a FA...and i have no idea what happens at that point. i assume that there are still protections built in for the team doing the amnestying, though as a FA signing, a team that signs him wouldn't be required to match the length of the deal. in such a case, if he signed for, say, the vet minimum, then my guess is that SA would be responsible for the net difference between what they owe him & what his new team owes him, averaged over 3 yrs. so, if he signs a 2-yr deal for $6M (total), then SA would be on the hook for $24M (or $8M annually over the next three years). does that make sense? fuck, i'm confused...paging larry coon...TRUE LOVE - Sometimes you know it the instant you see it across the bar.
Comment
-
yertu damkule wrote: View Postok...he's owed $30M over the next 3 years. SA amnesties him; winning bid in the amnesty auction is for $15M (the length of the deal remains the same, so it works out to $5M/yr - not sure if that's reasonable or not, but it's at least plausible; doubt any team would bid higher, and it could certainly be lower, but let's go with this for my hypothetical scenario). SA is only on the hook for whatever isn't covered by the team that wins the bid...in this case, $15 (over 3 years).
so, yes, they'll have to pay his replacement (my guess is it'll be butler, but...given his injury history, could he not be had for around mid-level type money ($5M/yr; note: i'm not suggesting that the spurs use the MLE to sign butler, because they don't have the full MLE available to them); but they're under no obligation to match the term (i.e. it can be any length allowed, doesn't have to be 3 yrs), and they're only on the hook for $5M/yr for RJ. so if they sign butler to a 2-yr deal for $12M (total; $6M/yr), then their total expenditure for the next 3 yrs for RJ & butler is $27M. it's unlikely that this is what plays out, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.
obviously, if he clears through the auction with no bids, he becomes a FA...and i have no idea what happens at that point. i assume that there are still protections built in for the team doing the amnestying, though as a FA signing, a team that signs him wouldn't be required to match the length of the deal. in such a case, if he signed for, say, the vet minimum, then my guess is that SA would be responsible for the net difference between what they owe him & what his new team owes him, averaged over 3 yrs. so, if he signs a 2-yr deal for $6M (total), then SA would be on the hook for $24M (or $8M annually over the next three years). does that make sense? fuck, i'm confused...paging larry coon...
Lets break it down:
If no team places a bid San Antonio pays $30M.
If a team places a bid, San Antonio pays the difference.
So, theoretically, San Antonio could be on the hook for UPWARDS of $30M.
My apologies if I have not been clear.
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostAgain I point out I said SA is on the hook for UPWARDS of $30M.
Lets break it down:
If no team places a bid San Antonio pays $30M.
If a team places a bid, San Antonio pays the difference.
So, theoretically, San Antonio could be on the hook for UPWARDS of $30M.
My apologies if I have not been clear.TRUE LOVE - Sometimes you know it the instant you see it across the bar.
Comment
Comment