The second everyone heard about an amnesty clause in the new CBA, people rushed to find out who would get axed on every team. We all thought owners pushed for the amnesty clause so they could get out of these horrible contracts and just move on with their lives.
But it’s not working out that way. Even the perceived face of the new rule and owner of perhaps the worst contract in the NBA, Rashard Lewis, will not get cut right away. As of right now, Richard Jefferson of the San Antonio Spurs is the only name mentioned as an amnesty victim.
Why? Why did owners push for a way to get out from under bad contracts and not do it?
Because its not as simple as that. In a nutshell, amnesty allows a team to cut a player, pay him, but have his salary come off the cap and luxury tax calculation. But are owners willing to cut a player and pay him to pay for another team (since he gets his full salary, minus what a new team pays him) if they don’t realize any real immediate impact.
Let’s look at the Detroit Pistons, who will not be using their amnesty clause at the moment, vs. the Spurs.
| Pistons | Spurs | |
| Payroll | $48,263,032 | $73,181,595 |
| Player (salary) | Richard Hamilton $12,650,000 (’11/’12) $12,650,000 (’12/’13) |
Richard Jefferson |
| Post amnesty payroll (’11/’12) |
$35.6 million* |
$63.8 mil |
The amnesty clause makes much more sense for the Spurs than it does for the Pistons at the moment. By waiving Jefferson, the Spurs will move away from that luxury tax line. The Spurs can replace him with a cheaper option and fill out their roster more effectively without Jefferson.
The Pistons, unlike San Antonio, do not have any title hopes this season. They are squarely in a rebuilding process. Further, they are not near any luxury cap or tax line. Waiving Richard Hamilton would get the Pistons nothing. They’d still pay him actual dollars. They’d gain a ton of cap space this season, but for what? There are no real free agents worth pursuing for that kind of money. They’d pay Richard Hamilton to just go away and they’d get nothing in return.
If the Pistons keep Hamilton, they at least pay him to play. Then next season, the have a $12.65 million expiring contract as a trade chip. If a team or player insists on some kind of sign-and-trade, this could become a valuable tool. Should the Pistons need additional cap space at that point to perhaps sign another key free agent, they can THEN use the amnesty on either Ben Gordon or Charlie Villanueva to free up more space.
(*the $35.6 million reflects cap space. Players cut via amnesty will count towards the salary floor, or minimum payroll every team is required to meet, so that salary floor number would remain $48.26 million)
The Washington Wizards are in a similar situation as Detroit. Rashard Lewis’ contract for this year is $22.15 million, and it jumps to $23.79 million next season. The Wizards payroll right now is $40.68 million. Sure, they can cut Lewis now, pay him $46 million dollars and watch him walk off. But, like Detroit, that does nothing but appease fans who want to show him the door.
The Wizards aren’t going anywhere this season, and almost $24 million worth of expiring contract could be a decent trading chip. So it makes sense to keep Lewis, let him play, and see if a deal can be swung next season. If not, and you need the cap space, then you play the amnesty card.
Other rules regarding amnesty, laid out nicely by Zach Lowe at SI.
• Teams will not be able to use the amnesty provision on a player acquired in a trade going forward… The sides have agreed that teams can use the amnesty provision only on players they have now.
Look at your team rosters, fans. The players you see there now, under their CURRENT contracts, are eligible for the amnesty provision. It doesn’t apply to extensions or current players who are traded. The “stretch” exception does (teams can waive a player and spread the cap impact over a number of years, based on the remaining years of the player’s contract). BUT
• Teams will not be able to use the new “stretch” provision on players they acquire via the amnesty process.
Players waived via amnesty go through a waiver process where teams under the cap can bid on those players. So teams can bid on Richard Jefferson, who has three years left on his deal. If, say, the Pistons wanted him, and they bid $5 million, they are guaranteeing they’d pay $5 million per year for the remainder of his deal. The Spurs would pay the rest. But if they cut him afterwards, they eat the whole thing in one lump sum.
It’s a bit complicated, and it’s not the free agent free-for-all some people expected it to be. That’s because as much as owners want out of bad contracts, they also don’t want to pay problems to go away if they don’t have to. Amnesty will only be used by teams looking to avoid paying a luxury tax or gain valuable cap space to pursue a free agent. For some teams, it makes sense. For others, even though they are wildly overpaying certain players, it simply doesn’t.
