Amar'e's contract:
2011-2012 $18,217,705
2012-2013 $19,948,799
2013-2014 $21,679,893
2014-2015 $23,410,988
SlimChin wrote:Amar'e's contract:2011-2012 $18,217,705
2012-2013 $19,948,799
2013-2014 $21,679,893
2014-2015 $23,410,988
Who cares ... Amare is awesome if he plays or not!!
Melo on the other hand is a GANGSTA!! I think he once had corn rows.
SlimChin - it ain't your money.
misterearl wrote:SlimChin - it ain't your money.
you seemed to have missed the point.
Point Missed
SlimChin wrote:you seemed to have missed the point.
There was no point. You simply listed Amar'e salary.
misterearl wrote:Point MissedSlimChin wrote:you seemed to have missed the point.
There was no point. You simply listed Amar'e salary.
If he can't play and since this is uninsured we won't be able to use a large chunk of our salary cap for the foreseeable future.
He should've been traded at the deadline.....Just on high salary and lack of performance alone! Now we couldn't give him away!
blkexec wrote:He should've been traded at the deadline.....Just on high salary and lack of performance alone! Now we couldn't give him away!
We're stuck with him. He is a heavy bag of rocks at this point.
To my brain, there is no chance he will ever return to his MVP form of last season.
If this is career threatening, what happens to the cap if he can't play anymore? Do we get something similar to what we got for H20?
assuming the worst, it's really only a big deal until Amar'e's contract becomes Amar'e Stoudemire's Expiring Contract
and Bocker, I don't remember the rules exactly with Houston, but if I remember correctly, after two years of not playing (and maybe practising--can't remember), then a retirement becomes a medical retirement and then that figure gets lifted from the cap
NYKBocker wrote:If this is career threatening, what happens to the cap if he can't play anymore? Do we get something similar to what we got for H20?
The problem is that it is not career threatening. He will come back and ball. But it is threatening to playing at a maxcash level, and this is what will sink us like big ship.
I see him coming back but I don't see him ever regaining maxcash form.
It took Gallinari something like 2 years to really start getting his groove back after the back surgery. He was jumping with anger this season. Gallinari never got up in New York the way he is getting up in Denver.
This is an injury that will linger in the back of the player's brain, and everything he does on the court will be affected by the lingering.
loweyecue wrote:misterearl wrote:Point MissedSlimChin wrote:you seemed to have missed the point.
There was no point. You simply listed Amar'e salary.
If he can't play and since this is uninsured we won't be able to use a large chunk of our salary cap for the foreseeable future.
Does not matter the insurance or not.
Even if his back is covered (we know the knees and the eye is not) most of the policies I have read about cover 80% of the salary but he has to be out like a full season.
If he is, then the insurance kicks in.
It still does not matter because it still counts against the cap.
Only Amnesty would have taken it off the books.
The is relevant because we could use that space for another player.
The insurance is to protect the liabilty, not the salary space.
IM not sure if the new CBA allows it but teams can get an exemption to bring in a replacement player if he is out for an extended period. But its not gonna be for that kind of money!
Here's for another amnesty. Come on NBA. You know you want to do it.
Nalod wrote:loweyecue wrote:misterearl wrote:Point MissedSlimChin wrote:you seemed to have missed the point.
There was no point. You simply listed Amar'e salary.
If he can't play and since this is uninsured we won't be able to use a large chunk of our salary cap for the foreseeable future.
Does not matter the insurance or not.
Even if his back is covered (we know the knees and the eye is not) most of the policies I have read about cover 80% of the salary but he has to be out like a full season.
If he is, then the insurance kicks in.
It still does not matter because it still counts against the cap.
Only Amnesty would have taken it off the books.
The is relevant because we could use that space for another player.
The insurance is to protect the liabilty, not the salary space.
IM not sure if the new CBA allows it but teams can get an exemption to bring in a replacement player if he is out for an extended period. But its not gonna be for that kind of money!
Yep you are right it will count towards the cap no matter what. I was very much in favor of holding on to the amnesty but I understand what they did and why. We just bet our future on Amare, we haven't lost yet but it's looking increasingly more likely that we will.
Just another day in the life of us Knicks fans.
loweyecue wrote:misterearl wrote:Point MissedSlimChin wrote:you seemed to have missed the point.
There was no point. You simply listed Amar'e salary.
If he can't play and since this is uninsured we won't be able to use a large chunk of our salary cap for the foreseeable future.
I googled Brandon Roy to see what happened with his contract. I think this is related to the cap specifically and not insurance. I believe the start date for the one year clock is the last game Amare would have played. Personally I think he will continue to play but he maybe much more limited. Here is the stuff on Roy's situation.
Roy’s retirement would eventually give the Blazers salary-cap relief. League rules call for a waiting period of one year from the date of the player’s injury or illness, after which the Blazers could get Roy’s contract off their books.Since Roy played all the way into the playoffs last season, that date will likely be April 28, 2012 — one year from the day the Blazers were eliminated from the playoffs.
According to NBA rules, a league physician will have to confirm that Roy is unfit to play for the Blazers to get the salary-cap relief.
this pretty much means the Knicks are dead in the water when it comes to player acquisitions in the future. So who made the move for this crazy contract?
sdsucwsl wrote:this pretty much means the Knicks are dead in the water when it comes to player acquisitions in the future. So who made the move for this crazy contract?
Yea, that's pretty much it. But if Melo can continue to really improve his game every summer, we can make it. Like if Melo comes in dropping 30 with 9 boards and 4 dimes, like 2 steals, I think he can do that if he focuses. And then you dump Amar'e's deal eventually or you buy him out or you just tell him to go away forever and pay him, so he'll take a medical.
sdsucwsl wrote:this pretty much means the Knicks are dead in the water when it comes to player acquisitions in the future. So who made the move for this crazy contract?
Walsh had to do something. The Knicks had given up draft picks, players, prospects and seasons to be players in 2010. The lure of NY and playing for D'Antoni was supposed to bring the big names in. Walsh did the best that he could.
CrushAlot wrote:sdsucwsl wrote:this pretty much means the Knicks are dead in the water when it comes to player acquisitions in the future. So who made the move for this crazy contract?
Walsh had to do something. The Knicks had given up draft picks, players, prospects and seasons to be players in 2010. The lure of NY and playing for D'Antoni was supposed to bring the big names in. Walsh did the best that he could.
No one else would come to NY. Amar'e put NY back on the map. Players want to come here now. None of that happens without Amar'e. So I don't agree that Amar'e leaves the Knicks dead in the water. NY was dead in the water before Amar'e resurrected the franchise
