Bobcats and the Amnesty Clause

[ziggy]

Diop by far is the obvious choice.

Story via ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates?google_editors_picks=true)


CHARLOTTE BOBCATS

Most likely amnesty cut: DeSagana Diop (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/992/desagana-diop)
How likely to use amnesty this season? Slam dunk
Other amnesty candidates: Matt Carroll (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2211/matt-carroll), Boris Diaw (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/2167/boris-diaw), Corey Maggette (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/497/corey-maggette)
Analysis: The Bobcats' roster is teeming with players making too much dough. Question is: Which one should Michael Jordan (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/1035/michael-jordan) cast aside?
Diop made nearly $6.5 million last season, played 13 games and averaged 1.3 points and 2.5 rebounds, resulting in a player efficiency rating of just 5.4. With two more seasons totaling $14.2 million left on the books -- and with Diop having never posted a PER higher than 12.4 in his nine seasons -- Jordan surely won't be able to resist shedding that contract. There will be calls to oust Carroll, Diaw and Maggette, too, but Diop is one of the easier calls on the board.

[Plowright]

Well Diop obviously. There is no question and whoever calls for Diaw or Maggette should shoot themselves. Diaw can contribute and play many positions + he has a massive expiring. Maggette will help our horrible offence

[spectre]

I don't see MJ paying Gana (or anyone else on our roster) his full salary to stay away just "because".

[Toocool]

It's obvious Gana would be the one to get cut. Carroll, Maggette and Diaw all produce at least, Gana just fails.

[Felton for Prez]

I don't see MJ paying Gana (or anyone else on our roster) his full salary to stay away just "because".

I don't think this gets enough play. It's not like we (or any other team) are just cutting these guys and getting out of the contract for free. They are paying them massive amounts of money to go away. Think about R. Lewis. Would you cut a check fro $30mm to send a good player away and the right to go spend more money? That's amazing to me.

For some guys, they might be thrilled to be amnestied (is that a word?). You get to front load a large part of your contract and then go sign another. Kinda like getting 2 paychecks.

[dav7z]

I could see MJ paying off Diop this season.
Puting Maggs on the list next season.
That leaves us around 21 to 25 milion in salries
With , Kemba, TT, Matt, DJ , Hendo , Smack , and a first round pick,
Even if we setting at 25 milion the cap should be at 62.
That leaves enough money to sign two top free agents, D Howard , CP3 could be done.
Could be instresting .
One gets the feeling we make a big move in the 2012 free agency

[SWedd523]

It will most likely be used by teams who are at or very near the LT and want to use that space to save money or bring in another player to get them over the top.

But at the same time, I think it's still possible that we cut a Diop. Remember, MJ has been doing everything short of selling cookies and lemonade to keep as much money in his pocket. Since Diop doesn't play anyway even when he's healthy, it makes sense to just go ahead and get rid of him. 25% savings is way more valuable than holding onto dead weight hoping to move him as an expiring.

[spectre]

It will most likely be used by teams who are at or very near the LT and want to use that space to save money or bring in another player to get them over the top.

But at the same time, I think it's still possible that we cut a Diop. Remember, MJ has been doing everything short of selling cookies and lemonade to keep as much money in his pocket. Since Diop doesn't play anyway even when he's healthy, it makes sense to just go ahead and get rid of him. 25% savings is way more valuable than holding onto dead weight hoping to move him as an expiring.

There would be NO savings to MJ's pocket...so that bolded part is exactly why no one will be amnestied.

The 25% is what would apply to our cap. The player gets paid 100% of his salary.

It does sound like the owners would get to spread the contract out over a period of years...but Gana (or any other amnestied player) would still get every penny.

I think MJ is way too cheap to pay someone their entire contract not to play, but what some of you guys are thinking is that he'll do that AND bring in other players with that extra capspace...basically paying out even more in salary than the actual cap.

No way in hell.

[ohara831]

I tend to agree with you Spectre. But we need to see what the final BRI split and also see about the Revenue Sharing. If MJ sees enough savings coming, I could see him maybe trying to do something. But right now I put it a less than 50/50 odds.

[SWedd523]

I thought the amnestied player gets 75% of his contract, with that amount being spread out. Not just cap space savings.

[spectre]

Nope.

Henry Abbott wrote a piece about this the other day:

Owners have funny ways of cutting costs (http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/32989/owners-have-a-funny-way-of-controlling-costs)


Chad Ford and Marc Stein have done a lot of hard work (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates) looking at how different teams are likely to deploy the upcoming, agreed-to-in-principle amnesty clause.

The clause gives every owner the right to pay off one player to go away. Owners won't wriggle out of paying the player, but they will wriggle out of any affiliated luxury taxes, while gaining cap room.

It's a very popular clause with fans, because it's a chance to reset all those bad contracts owners and teams have offered in the past.

It also exposes absurdity on the part of NBA owners. A good example here:



For instance, consider Rashard Lewis, the overpaid poster child of this clause. He is owed more than $43 million in the next two seasons. As an average NBA power forward, he's just not worth that kind of cash. Among power forwards, he had the NBA's 63rd best player efficiency rating last season.

But consider that he can actually play NBA basketball, and did so for 32 minutes per game last season. No, he doesn't rebound very well, but he can shoot and pass, and he doesn't turn the ball over very much. He can be part of a really good team, which we know because he recently was in Orlando.

If Wizards owner Ted Leonsis pays Lewis to go away, though, then Leonsis will be both out $43 million and in need of somebody who can play 32 minutes a game at power forward. There aren't a ton of those players around. Appropriate free-agent candidates include Glen Davis, Dante Cunningham, Craig Smith, Carl Landry or Jason Smith. By PER, Smith is the best of them, with the 42nd best PER. But he'd like to be paid too. Which means Leonsis will have paid Lewis' $43 million, plus another $5 million or $10 million over the next two seasons to have similar work to what Leonsis would have already paid Lewis for.

Would you pay $10 million to replace Rashard Lewis with Craig Smith and a bit of cap space? Abbott is right IMO that this provision doesn't help the "pro owner" faction at all in arguing that the League is losing money.

[dav7z]

Ok guys how does this work . B Davis stated he wanted to play for either LA, NY , or the Bobcats after hes cut by Washington. My question is does Washington have to pay his full salery. Or just the differance between the old and new contract? If both teems had to pay him in full it would seem like dubble dipping?

MJ has showed he would spend money on a contender . I belive if he could pick up a star player like a Howard and CP3 . Hes going to go for it. So cutting players like DIOP and Maggs isn't out of the question?



http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/33019/lakers-knicks-or-bobcats-for-baron

[spectre]

Davis (he's with Cleveland BTW) won't be cut as I think his last year is too valuable to his current team as it's mostly nonguaranteed (think DUST chip). Also, Cleveland isn't in jeopardy of a luxury tax hit and they're not one player away from contending...so why would they pay Davis just to leave?

But even if he was amnestied he'd most likely sign on with a contender at the league minimum.

To answer your question though...I'm pretty sure under the old CBA if a player was waived and then picked up by a new team 50% of his new salary was taken off his old contract that was due.

Brevin Knight was our only example I think.

There's only going to be a few amnestied, and I'd imagine it'll be teams trying to get under the luxury tax hit or at least reduce the hit they're going to get regardless.

[SWedd523]

I stand corrected then. We wouldn't have any use to cut Diop as we're far enough below the LT to not need it.


Dav, as far as the amnesty and Dwight/CP3 go:


we don't have to amnesty a player immediately. We have a window of a couple of years before we decide to amnesty somebody. So in the unlikely situation that they both want to come to Charlotte after next year and we're a few mil short, we can amnesty a player at that point in order to give us more room to sign the big boys.



For example, if we're 25mil under the LT and we want to sign D12/CP3 for 30mil, we can amnesty somebody worth over 5mil (Diop, Tyrus, etc) and use that space to get them.

[spectre]

I stand corrected then. We wouldn't have any use to cut Diop as we're far enough below the LT to not need it.

It's really confusing to a lot of people...and I'd think Ford and the rest would realize this and not be putting out that "list" like they did.

If they could theoretically have rolled back existing contracts like the rumors had it before all these negotiations you'd have thunk they'd be doing like what you thought...pay the player 75% to go away.

That would be worth something.

[SWedd523]

It seems like the amnesty clause (in it's current form) is just a way for the big market teams like LA and MIA to cut a bad deal. It doesn't really help the teams that are already penny pinchers like us. If the Lakers can cut a guy like Walton and not have it fully count towards the cap, they stand to save a great deal of money with these new OTC cash penalties

[spectre]

Bingo.

I bet it's a concession to the big market guys to "ease" them down to get below the LT.

It really won't effect us.

[dav7z]

Bingo.

I bet it's a concession to the big market guys to "ease" them down to get below the LT.

It really won't effect us.

I agree it helps large market teams the most . But i all so think this is a rare chance for us to sign 2 max contract players in 2012. If we get rid of Diop this season pay him off . And get rid of Maggs next season adding the 25% to our cap . We could add two max contract players and still have a quility young core. We one of only a few teams thet could pull off a move like that.


Spectre does this artical not say Davis is considering coming to Charlotte under this clause. My question is can we not pay him the NBA mimium and let Cleavland pay the differance. .
Im not real smart about thease things
ARTICAL
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/33019/lakers-knicks-or-bobcats-for-baron

[Scottley Crue]

From another standpoint on Diop...how much sense would it make to pay him to go away? Not just financially, but basketball-wise. I know he's no All-Star but he's currently the only center we have on the roster. We're not looking to pile up a bunch of wins this year (instead letting the young players learn and rack up ping pong balls in the process), so what's the harm in having Diop play in that instance? Then next year, his contract will be expiring and could garner something in the trade market. If you're going to pay him his full salary, why not wait one year and let his contract become somewhat of an asset to you? About the only way I'd say he should be cut is if dumping his salary helps facilitate a roster move that brings in someone that the front office sees as part of the future.

[spectre]

I agree it helps large market teams the most . But i all so think this is a rare chance for us to sign 2 max contract players in 2012. If we get rid of Diop this season pay him off . And get rid of Maggs next season adding the 25% to our cap . We could add two max contract players and still have a quility young core. We one of only a few teams thet could pull off a move like that.


Spectre does this artical not say Davis is considering coming to Charlotte under this clause. My question is can we not pay him the NBA mimium and let Cleavland pay the differance. .
Im not real smart about thease things
ARTICAL
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/33019/lakers-knicks-or-bobcats-for-baron

IF he gets amnestied Dav...IF.

Maybe there's more to it than I (and Henry Abbott just to name one of a few) see. If they give the owners a reduced rate then it'd be obvious. Paying someone their entire deal just to spread it over 4 years? I don't see the incentive.

If Jordan is truly convinced he can get 2 max FAs in 2012 then maybe he'd dump Gana. He's certainly done stupider things and it wouldn't hurt the team other than make us extremely thin on Cs like Scottley said.

[adam187]

Am I the only one thinking Tyrus?

[Chef]

Am I the only one thinking Tyrus?

i have been saying for two years now, we never should have given him that preposterous contract in the first place.

[ohara831]

Remeber that MJ would still have to pay the entire salary to TT. The only benefit is that his contract would come off the books at about 75%. The difference between TT and Diop is that TT produces for us on Defense and at least a respectable amount on offense. He might be overpaid, but he still is a significant player for us. Diop on the other hand just cannot play the game well at all.

[Chef]

Remeber that MJ would still have to pay the entire salary to TT. The only benefit is that his contract would come off the books at about 75%. The difference between TT and Diop is that TT produces for us on Defense and at least a respectable amount on offense. He might be overpaid, but he still is a significant player for us. Diop on the other hand just cannot play the game well at all.

yup. unless the rare 2 max player scenario comes up, we won't amnesty anyone. it makes no sense. the only teams under the tax that would would be a contender who can get rid of a bad deal ie spurs and jefferson to add a better player for a better chance at a ring.

[adam187]

i agree that we will probably not amnesty anyone (unfortunately).

if we did use the amnesty diop is clearly a good choice; if, however, one of the big men prospects turns out to be an absolute stud (anthony davis, andre drummond, etc) and we have a chance to get one of them in the draft i would definitely want tyrus gone. i just do not think having him and an up and coming prospect in the same position is a good idea and would probably cause a lot of trouble down the line.

[ohara831]

I wouldn't be so sure we wont use the Amnesty. If we resign Kwame, which I really hope we do, and someone else reasonable is available to us, MJ might bite the bullet and use that cap space to sign them if we Amnesty Diop. He really does absolutely ZERO for us. I really think it also heavily depends on the deal on the CBA regarding the BRI split and also the amount of Revenue Sharing. If MJ knows he has extra money coming, he might be more willing to part with some of it to make us stronger for the Playoff race.

[spectre]

Supposedly he lost 20 million last year. If that's true I don't see the new CBA & revenue sharing making that up right away.

We have around 7 +/- million under the cap to play with as is. I don't see us needing to clear more space (esp. if it comes by paying a guy the same amount to just leave), esp. with the FA crop this year.

[Felton for Prez]

I wouldn't be so sure we wont use the Amnesty. If we resign Kwame, which I really hope we do, and someone else reasonable is available to us, MJ might bite the bullet and use that cap space to sign them if we Amnesty Diop. He really does absolutely ZERO for us. I really think it also heavily depends on the deal on the CBA regarding the BRI split and also the amount of Revenue Sharing. If MJ knows he has extra money coming, he might be more willing to part with some of it to make us stronger for the Playoff race.

Love the enthusiasm but I don't see us being anywhere the playoff race this year. I hope I'm wrong.

[Sik Infant]

We will not amnestise anyone, that's a given.

[spectre]

We will not amnestise anyone, that's a given.

I was starting to think we'd have no choice with the possibility of the cap dropping instantly with a new CBA, but I'm now pretty sure the new deal won't come into effect for 3 years.

We ain't amnestying anyone.

Let's do utilize that cap space we have though.

[ohara831]

Seems the Amnesty is really only going to be used by the big market teams who are up over the Cap and would otherwise have to pay the Tax. Is this merely a bone the small market teams are throwing the big market teams in return for the Revenue Sharing deal? Kinda like saying "we'll let you avoid paying the Tax, but you have to share some more of that Revenue money with us". Would seem like that to me, but I am definitely not the brightest on this issue.

[spectre]

I've seen it said that this revenue sharing is all based on the new luxury tax...that Dr. Buss ain't sharing any of his new billion dollar TV deal.

Starting to think this might be why MJ/small markets are hating the deal as is.

[SWedd523]

I don't think we're going to be using that cap space for at least a year until Mike sees how much of a profit he can make under the new CBA. There will probably be an extended "feeling out" period to see how beneficial this new one is

[spectre]

I don't think we're going to be using that cap space for at least a year until Mike sees how much of a profit he can make under the new CBA. There will probably be an extended "feeling out" period to see how beneficial this new one is

You're probably right...he's going to be saving every penny he can.

[SWedd523]

...at least until we can show we have some potential to win

[Sik Infant]

I would rather we save our cap & slowly eat it up by resigning our core to long term deals, ala OKC.

The only way we will get higher level FA's here is by overpaying & I would rather not have them than have them by paying above market value.

The only players I would like to sign as FA's are prospects who haven't really had an opportunity to shine or amnestised vets that will be like playing coaches(& will not ruin our rebuild by winning too many games)

[SWedd523]

I would rather we save our cap & slowly eat it up by resigning our core to long term deals, ala OKC.

The only way we will get higher level FA's here is by overpaying & I would rather not have them than have them by paying above market value.

The only players I would like to sign as FA's are prospects who haven't really had an opportunity to shine or amnestised vets that will be like playing coaches(& will not ruin our rebuild by winning too many games)

That's exactly how it should be. Keep drafting, and when they need to re-up, we address adding to the cap then on a case by case basis. No need to sign outside help unless it's an extremely reasonable deal

[Sik Infant]

That's exactly how it should be. Keep drafting, and when they need to re-up, we address adding to the cap then on a case by case basis. No need to sign outside help unless it's an extremely reasonable deal

I guess we are in the same boat Swedd, as a smaller market team our margin for error with FA's is much slimmer & at least if we add through the draft we know from a first hand basis their value(how much to pay when re-upping) & character(how they fit with the culture of our team).

I also like the idea of keeping things in house & our core together as in this league familiarity=results.

[spectre]

Yeah but like Cho said it's also all about acquiring assets. Look at what OKC has done using your guys example. With a more restrictive cap coming it'd be nice if we could parlay that into our advantage.

[Sik Infant]

Yeah but like Cho said it's also all about acquiring assets. Look at what OKC has done using your guys example. With a more restrictive cap coming it'd be nice if we could parlay that into our advantage.

For sure Spectre but I'd like it if by acquiring assets we didn't have to overpay or get raped in the trade market.

We've traded away our two biggest assets in Crash & Jax & I'm quite happy with what we got but after them our biggest tradeable asset is DJA & I'm honestly not sure what his value is in the modern day PG saturated NBA, what we get for him is very important in terms of what hand we hold for the future, I hope we play our cards right.

Also if we can turn Diaw into a mid-late pick it would leave us in good stead.

[SWedd523]

Yeah but like Cho said it's also all about acquiring assets. Look at what OKC has done using your guys example. With a more restrictive cap coming it'd be nice if we could parlay that into our advantage.

No that's exactly what I'm saying. Keep drafting good players and handle them on a case by case basis. If we feel like they're a building block, keep 'em on. If not, get rid of 'em

[SWedd523]

Please give your reasons for why

[ND22]

Diop because he is a rock that is weighing down our cap and will likely never play another minute again.

[CrazyCarl139]

agreed with Diop for the same reasons.

[SWedd523]

Oops sorry guys, meant to add a poll.


It's been edited so get your votes in!

[CrazyCarl139]

are we even sure there is an amnesty clause at this point?

[SWedd523]

Yes sir it is.

[ohara831]

Diop because he is a rock that is weighing down our cap and will likely never play another minute again.

The man speaketh the truth!

[teej]

Diop. Carroll provides a shooter, which is always good. Maggs is the only consistent, proven offense on the team, Diaw is the only semi-consistent, proven facilitator on the team, and Ty is total upside. And if you're trying to develop Biyombo, don't have Diop around when they're the same player right now.

[Dcarnys]

Diop, this isn't even a debate.

[Plowright]

Diop will only take up Bismack's developments minutes, I would rather lose games and Bismack develop and get an amazing draft pick this year.

[tamburello]

Two amnesty related threads are merged, poll is kept.

...and, Diop for very obvious reasons.

[docend24]

Save it for later doesn't make sense. There should be one per year so... Bismack may not be around for a while (because of the Spaniards), till we sign Kwame Gana is our only true center. Still he is a prime candidate for amnesty although we won't get anything substantial back from bids on him so MJ won't save anything. Putting Diaw on C would open some minutes for our forward prospects though. Hard to tell whether Diop playing could get us some second rounder for him.

[SWedd523]

I don't know if I believe the yearly amnesty rumor. I'm going to wait and see if that's confirmed or not.

[dav7z]

Save it for later doesn't make sense. There should be one per year so... Bismack may not be around for a while (because of the Spaniards), till we sign Kwame Gana is our only true center. Still he is a prime candidate for amnesty although we won't get anything substantial back from bids on him so MJ won't save anything. Putting Diaw on C would open some minutes for our forward prospects though. Hard to tell whether Diop playing could get us some second rounder for him.
I don't see us going imto luxery tax this season at all so the amnesty clause shuldn't affect us this season.
But i could see us trading a amnesty player Diop?
I read a rumor [think on a realgm trade board]
Diop and Dallas 2012 first for Haywoods bad contract . Dallas has far less to pay out Diops contract . And we actually use Haywood during the rebuild ?

[docend24]

You can't trade for player's contract and then amnesty him if that's what you are suggesting. And if you not than hell no, Diop's contract is not toxic, is just that at the momment comng from an injury he is to prove that he is not useless. If there would be no amnesty we would just wait two years till he expires or trade him nexst season as an expiring. No need to bind our hands with longer bigger contract when we are goping nowhere at the momment and when we just drafted someone like Biyombo. Just bring Kwame back (on reasonable, maybe frontloaded contract).

I haven't read the summary linked there yet but speaking about new deal this thread is handy: http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1138477

[dav7z]

Im not saying that trade is something i like its something i read some where . I don't think we even consider amnisty at all. From what i read in your link amnisty could be one player cut per season per team . Am i reading this right?
I just posted on another thread We might have a chance scooping up Brown cheap . With teams having just 30 days to set rosters.

[docend24]

Yes, I understand it that way too. Of course that info can be wrong, who knows. We would have then chance to write off tow players in this and next season (next season Tyrus already or an expiring) and then Tyrus as he is the only one with contract long enough so he will be last players to use amnesty clause on. I mean i don't wish we cut Tyrus but as he is bit of a questionmark he either can become a bad contract (or we would need a capspace for someone else badly) or there is always a chance he would sustain a career altering injury or become even more injury prone.
y
We certaily should try to rather trade those players rather than cut them as most of them are expiring soon anyway. Some other teams will benefit from that more thus even some obvious ones may not got that way - Washington may not amnesty Lewis as they with their young core on rookie cotnracts (= low payroll) they would have to spend most of that money on someone else anyway.

[Chef]

waive tyrus. his deal is so completely stupid that it throws jordan's "competitive balance" argument in the toilet. here's a prime example why we aren't competitive. there is no reason to amnesty anyone else because the expire in the next two years anyway when we would be needing cap space for the possible paul/howard free agencies. if we don't go that route there is no point to get high priced FA's when we have a developing team.

oh, and if we take on brendan haywood in any form, i will be so far beyond pissed i may become a danger to myself and others.

[ammofan]

HELLLLLLLL NOOOOOOO to waiving Tyrus instead of Diop.

Seriously some of you people would waive Tyrus ahead of Diop? Wake up. Diop contributes NOTHING and gets paid 8 million a year. Tyrus is a good player, potentially a starter, and gets paid the same amount.

[Nata Fresh]

IMO it has to be Maggs, if the Bobcats are REALLY about cap flexibilty going forward, why not get rid of the worst contract on the books??

[SWedd523]

Maggette has way more trade value than Diop or Hammer. Amnesty one of them and trade Maggette.



Or simply don't amnesty anyone

[Nata Fresh]

Maggette has way more trade value than Diop or Hammer. Amnesty one of them and trade Maggette.



Or simply don't amnesty anyone

Yeah, but also the highest contract number on the team if I'm not mistaken, the only reason we traded for it was because we got Biyambo back in the deal....I'm not sure you can deal that contract again until next February..

[SWedd523]

we only have to wait a year if we want to send him back to Milwaukee

[Chef]

HELLLLLLLL NOOOOOOO to waiving Tyrus instead of Diop.

Seriously some of you people would waive Tyrus ahead of Diop? Wake up. Diop contributes NOTHING and gets paid 8 million a year. Tyrus is a good player, potentially a starter, and gets paid the same amount.

first off:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.tacomaworld.com/gallery/data/500/What_Do_You_Mean_You_People_by_EncasedxInxPorcelai n.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/guns-hunting/172742-dove-hunting-2.html&h=354&w=312&sz=16&tbnid=lZWUt1lzBUBcEM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=79&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwhat%2Bdo%2Byou%2Bmean%2Byou%2Bpeople %26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=what+do+you+mean+you+people&docid=YYQs3UKl7Bni5M&sa=X&ei=ucvSTvQHy5q3B5WsraYN&ved=0CD8Q9QEwAw&dur=7129

second:
tyrus is an ok player. he is not a starter on a good team and he is overpaid by about 3 million per year. and we have to overpay him for the next 4 years.

why amnesty diop? he expires this year and is a better trade asset than an amnesty player. we aren't looking to make cap room to sign a FA this year anyway.

[Scottley Crue]

I don't see the need to amnesty anyone this year. Diop, though he certainly hasn't lived up to his deal, will be off the books after next year. His expiring may be very valuable come trade time next year. The only real candidate I see is Tyrus, and that would be next year. And I believe that will only be after he's given room to show what he's got this year. If he was cut, it wouldn't be because Tyrus is terrible. It would be because his contract will eat up a lot of space that could go to other players. Also, Biyombo seems to be such a similar player to Tyrus and he costs much less. (I know Biyombo doesn't have the jump shot, but other than that, I think we'll find that they're similar)

Now, perhaps you could get more for Tyrus in a trade than you could in a cap-saving cut. Time will tell that. But I do believe that due to the size and length of his contract, you have to look at Tyrus as the main candidate for the amnesty clause. But I don't believe that will happen before he's given plenty of time to show what he's capable of. He's going to have to show that he's worth more than what you could get with the cap space he'd offer if cut, I believe.

[TheBeagle]

Save it for later. For reasons given in previous posts, I'd hang on to Diop and Maggette. Very tempting to use it on Tyrus right now, but I like Scottley's logic about seeing if the guy will ever get it. And really, if he can't do it under Paul, he never will.

From what I've read on links on the boards, you only get one amnesty for the duration of the CBA, so no reason to jump the gun right off the bat.

[Keetch]

I can't imagine the Bobcats paying TT $7M to $9M a year for the next 4 years to play for someone else.

[Sik Infant]

I voted save it for later, if we do use it however it will be bye bye Gana.

[docend24]

HELLLLLLLL NOOOOOOO to waiving Tyrus instead of Diop.

Seriously some of you people would waive Tyrus ahead of Diop? Wake up. Diop contributes NOTHING and gets paid 8 million a year. Tyrus is a good player, potentially a starter, and gets paid the same amount.

Just to be sure you are gettign it right - what would change if Bobcats use amnesty clause on him?

[docend24]

I can't imagine the Bobcats paying TT $7M to $9M a year for the next 4 years to play for someone else.
Unless career alterign injury happens that wouldn't be the case. Somebody will sign him and we would pay him only portion of that then.

[Plowright]

I don't see the need to amnesty anyone this year. Diop, though he certainly hasn't lived up to his deal, will be off the books after next year.

Diop will has another 2 years on his contract