"Brandon Roy" rule won't be used on Brandon Roy (and that's good)

[Mediocre Man]

Completely foolish if they don't use it on Roy

 

[PapaG]

Completely foolish if they don't use it on Roy

Not if you can't replace Roy, though.

 

[Natebishop3]

Not if you can't replace Roy, though.

Roy can't replace Roy. What are we replacing at this point? Certainly not the All-Star player that he once was. I would love to see Roy return to the player of old, but I don't think he can do it. Either way, it's not my choice but I think at this point the team can't afford to hold onto hopes so that he can eat up cap space for the next four years.

 

[PapaG]

Roy can't replace Roy. What are we replacing at this point? Certainly not the All-Star player that he once was. I would love to see Roy return to the player of old, but I don't think he can do it. Either way, it's not my choice but I think at this point the team can't afford to hold onto hopes so that he can eat up cap space for the next four years.

What cap space? In the scenario Rasta hypothesized about, waiving Roy accomplishes nothing outside of saving some potential tax money. The other option, and I'm not even sure it is possible, is to bring on a similar contract from a team that wants to rebuild in exchange for Roy, and then that other team could waive Roy to clear cap space for a rebuild.

 

[Natebishop3]

What cap space? In the scenario Rasta hypothesized about, waiving Roy accomplishes nothing outside of saving some potential tax money. The other option, and I'm not even sure it is possible, is to bring on a similar contract from a team that wants to rebuild in exchange for Roy, and then that other team could waive Roy to clear cap space for a rebuild.

Will the NBA allow that? I would deal Roy as an "expiring" contract in a heartbeat but I vaguely remember that not being allowed back in 1999 and I don't think it would be allowed now. Maybe I'm wrong and my memory is off.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Wow.

Many of you are still thinking in terms of the current soft cap. Hard cap = Roy must go...period.

Ding

 

[jlprk]

The only way keeping him is a bad thing is if he is completely deluded about his new limitations and demands a larger role or more mpg than his abilities are worth.

A second reason is that he's a distraction. McMillan spends time practicing contingency plans for if he can play someday. Management spends time fishing around the league for his trade value. If he has one great quarter, all plans are off the rest of the playoff series.

Same for Oden. There's a mental cost to keeping them both. It's like a business with one profitable line and one product line kept in reserve. Energy is expended on "just in case" scenarios, so real situations get less attention.

 

[Nikolokolus]

A second reason is that he's a distraction. McMillan spends time practicing contingency plans for if he can play someday. Management spends time fishing around the league for his trade value. If he has one great quarter, all plans are off the rest of the playoff series.

Same for Oden. There's a mental cost to keeping them both. It's like a business with one profitable line and one product line kept in reserve. Energy is expended on "just in case" scenarios, so real situations get less attention.

Ding, ding, ding!!!

 

[jlprk]

Why thank you, and may all your dings in life be happy ones.

 

[e_blazer]

Not so fast on the idea that Brandon won't be in a Blazers uniform this season:

Sources say that there’s a determined push led by San Antonio Spurs owner Peter Holt to allow teams to have at least two years to decide whether or not to amnesty one player, with multiple sources telling ESPN.com this week that they believe the concept -- with restrictions that are still being haggled over -- has indeed won sufficient support to be included in the new labor deal.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/32935/more-flexible-amnesty-clause-on-way

This would be great for the Blazers, IMHO, because it would let them look at what Roy, or potentially Oden if they sign him to a new contract, can do this season before having to decide whether to waive them for cap reasons.

 

[e_blazer]

Ding, ding, ding!!!

Always knew you and jlprk were dingy.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Marc Stein of ESPN.com reports that the amnesty clause that would allow an NBA owner to waive a player and pay him his contract outright in order to free of salary cap flexibility might take a new form.
-----------------------------
Sources say that there’s a determined push led by San Antonio Spurs owner Peter Holt to allow teams to have at least two years to decide whether or not to amnesty one player, with multiple sources telling ESPN.com this week that they believe the concept -- with restrictions that are still being haggled over -- has indeed won sufficient support to be included in the new labor deal.

Six years ago, teams had only two weeks to decide whether to use the amnesty clause or lose it forever. Now? There is a growing likelihood that teams will be able to "save" their amnesty clause through next season, or perhaps beyond.

http://www.blazersedge.com/2011/10/28/2520835/stein-amnesty-clause-could-be-used-now-or-later


If that's the case then I think we'll keep Roy and see how he does.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Not so fast on the idea that Brandon won't be in a Blazers uniform this season:



http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/32935/more-flexible-amnesty-clause-on-way

This would be great for the Blazers, IMHO, because it would let them look at what Roy, or potentially Oden if they sign him to a new contract, can do this season before having to decide whether to waive them for cap reasons.

I would be surprised if they allowed any "new" contracts to be included. So I doubt Oden would fall under this scenario.
Overall it would be a smart clasue for the owners to approve. Since they have to pay the player regardless.

 

[e_blazer]

I would be surprised if they allowed any "new" contracts to be included. So I doubt Oden would fall under this scenario.
Overall it would be a smart clasue for the owners to approve. Since they have to pay the player regardless.

Hard to say at this point how it will work out, but there's some interest in making it more open-ended:

Some teams want to restrict amnesty eligibility to the players on a team’s roster when the lockout ends. Others want the freedom to use it on any player they acquire over, say, a three- or five-year span, arguing that there are teams out there which currently don’t have an ugly contract to shed but should have the right to atone for a future mistake.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

If that's the case then I think we'll keep Roy and see how he does.

If that's the case then YOU OWE ME A BEER!

 

[SlyPokerDog]

If that's the case then YOU OWE ME A BEER!

I have no problem buying you a beer because you're a Blazer fan but you never did finalize or agree to the bet.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Hard to say at this point how it will work out, but there's some interest in making it more open-ended:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/s...but-last-hurdle-is-a-big-one.html?_r=2&src=tp


¶ Amnesty clause: Each team will be permitted to waive one player, with pay — anytime during the life of the C.B.A. — and have his salary be exempt from the cap and the luxury tax. Its use will be limited to players already under contract as of July 1, 2011.

I think this is fair.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I have no problem buying you a beer because you're a Blazer fan but you never did finalize or agree to the bet.

It would be hard anyway, as I live in Michigan and have no immediate plans to visit Portland anytime soon...

 

[SlyPokerDog]

It would be hard anyway, as I live in Michigan and have no immediate plans to visit Portland anytime soon...

Dude don't hint around, if you want me to send you some Oregon KGB just say so.

 

[e_blazer]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/s...but-last-hurdle-is-a-big-one.html?_r=2&src=tp


¶ Amnesty clause: Each team will be permitted to waive one player, with pay — anytime during the life of the C.B.A. — and have his salary be exempt from the cap and the luxury tax. Its use will be limited to players already under contract as of July 1, 2011.

I think this is fair.

I agree. The Oden idea seemed a stretch to me, but it was at least on the table at one point to make the amnesty clause open ended. It's nice that the Blazers have the option of seeing what Roy can do before having to make the decision to waive him.