# SunTimes: Boozer will be amnestied



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/2844...ime-with-bulls-all-but-over.html#.U7TC4bF5FsN



> Officially, the Bulls still have several weeks to decide if they want to invoke the amnesty provision for Carlos Boozer.
> 
> But they don’t need it.
> 
> A source said Wednesday that Boozer’s departure is a “done deal,” adding that Boozer’s camp already has been informed.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

The one thing I find a little frustrating is why the Sixers aren't interested in a 1-year rental of Boozer. The Sixers are very far under the cap, and not even sure they are that close to the required minimum team salary threshold. They aren't about to land any major free agents. They have NOBODY to play on the front line this season except for Nerlens Noel who is a rookie coming off a major injury and may not even be physically ready for the NBA. Boozer could make them avoid historical badness while still being a shoe in for a top 3 pick in the next draft. And yet, apparently they are going to absorb Jeremy Lin from Houston for nothing, even though Lin makes almost the same salary as Booz next year, yet plays the same position as their only good player. Yeah that makes sense. 

On a more positive note, am I correct that teams can claim Booz off waivers with a bid, and whatever the winning team bids is deducted from what the Bulls have to pay him? So let's say a team wins a bid for $5M, the Bulls only have to pay Booz like $11M, right?


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Just shows you how much value boozer has. None.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

He still has value - just not for the Bulls. He's still a good player. Not great by any means but he's fully capable of being a starter in this league. Interested in who signs him.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Basel said:


> He still has value - just not for the Bulls. He's still a good player. Not great by any means but he's fully capable of being a starter in this league. Interested in who signs him.


Yeah, my point though was that he has 0 value to the bulls.

I'm pretty sure some team will put in a 5 million dollar bid.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

3 reasons Lin has more value than Boozer.

1. For 76ers future. Lin can sign 5 years 10 million contract next summer, then turn out to be Linsanity. Boozer is the money-oriented guy. 76ers future can't rely on him.

2. He is only 25. Boozer is 34. The younger the better.

3. Ticket sales: Top 5 Chinese populations in US.

Asik has more value than Boozer too.


----------



## DaBabyBullz (May 26, 2006)

Finally. With him gone and Rose healthy along with the new additions, the Bulls will be watchable again. They've been hard for me to stomach lately.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Just shows you how much value boozer has. None.


I wager he will be snagged up quickly on the amnesty bids....

He does have value, just teams don't want to pay his 1-yr, $16M. 

However look at Philly's books: http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/sixers.jsp

I wouldn't say overpaying a guy is a problem for Philly right now, especially a veteran known as a good locker room guy who can still produce some. 

If I'm the Sixers, I easily take Boozer over Jeremy Lin.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

yodurk said:


> I wager he will be snagged up quickly on the amnesty bids....
> 
> He does have value, just teams don't want to pay his 1-yr, $16M.
> 
> ...


The Sixers are just on another planet in terms of doing some dumb crap. They don't care to win at all next season and I would be very surprised if they even win 15 games next season.

Whats funny is, Boozer sure sounds like the kind of guy we would love to have come off the bench as an amnesty pick up lol.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> The Sixers are just on another planet in terms of doing some dumb crap. They don't care to win at all next season and I would be very surprised if they even win 15 games next season.
> 
> Whats funny is, Boozer sure sounds like the kind of guy we would love to have come off the bench as an amnesty pick up lol.


If there was a way for us to keep Boozer for a few million bucks as a backup 4, I would not mind that at all. Not in the cards, though.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Man, I would be mildly ticked if this happens. How the heck can the Sixers take Amare, who is more expensive & more likely to be injured -- but they cannot take Boozer? It is not like Iman Shumpert is that great as a trade sweetner. 


http://nypost.com/2014/07/07/knicks-76ers-talking-amare-deal-and-possibly-shumpert-too/



> Knicks president Phil Jackson is still trying to clear this year’s payroll and has looked at avenues to try and trade Amar’e Stoudemire’s expiring contract, already having contacted the obvious team, the 76ers.
> 
> The Sixers have $30 million in cap space and have made it known they’d be willing to accept an undesirable expiring contract if a pawn is thrown in. That extra pawn likely would be Iman Shumpert — something the Knicks prefer not to do.


But whatever, it is not my $10M being used here if we amnesty Boozer and it won't count against the cap.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Yeah, there's nothing there saying the "pawn" the Sixers would take is Shumpert, just that that's who NY would offer. To me, I would think the Sixers would want a pick, and NY doesn't have much in that regard to give.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I would be surprised if Phil pulls off that trade, honestly.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Basel said:


> He still has value - just not for the Bulls. He's still a good player. Not great by any means but he's fully capable of being a starter in this league. Interested in who signs him.


Sneaky Heat signing?


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

R-Star said:


> Sneaky Heat signing?



If Bosh leaves, sure. But if he stays, I don't see it happening. McBob would be pissed, haha.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Sneaky Heat signing?


I thought of that too, but later realized it's highly unlikely.

Amnestied players can be bid upon by the other 29 teams. Boozer is not dead weight, he is still good for some quality production. I guarantee he will elicit bids.

The highest bidder will get Boozer, and the Bulls will only have to pay the difference between Boozer's $16M salary and the winning bid. 

Now I"m not positive if the Heat would need to use some/all of their exception money to make a bid, however I think that is the case. Because they already have deals for Granger & McRoberts, they basically only have vet minimum money to bid, which is unlikely to land Boozer. Besides I don't think they'll want Boozer after signing McRoberts.

Actually, I kinda realize now why we can't unload Boozer to Philly in a trade. Philly could simply pick him up via a winning amnesty bid. Philly might do a trade if we include a future 1st rd pick, however I bet the Bulls said no to that. Don't be surprised if Boozer is wearing a Sixer uniform this season, they have a ridiculous amount of cap room to spend and nobody to spend it on. A bid of $7-8M would be a drop in the bucket for them.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Boozer value is around $10 million this year. He is just overpaid by $6.8 million, you will need to pack w/ a first round late pick which is about $5 million, and cash 1.8 million.

Like Amare, Boozer has zero future value, Jeremy Lin has some future value.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Ballscientist said:


> Boozer value is around $10 million this year. He is just overpaid by $6.8 million, you will need to pack w/ a first round late pick which is about $5 million, and cash 1.8 million.
> 
> Like Amare, Boozer has zero future value, Jeremy Lin has some future value.



I'd be surprised if Boozer got anything significantly more than the MLE.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> I'd be surprised if Boozer got anything significantly more than the MLE.


How do you compare value of Boozer to Omer Asik?


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Ballscientist said:


> How do you compare value of Boozer to Omer Asik?


Personally, I think Boozer's value is higher than Asik, but it does depend on fit. A young team collecting talent won't want him, but a team wanting to make the playoffs or a splash in the playoffs will value him higher.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> Personally, I think Boozer's value is higher than Asik, but it does depend on fit. A young team collecting talent won't want him, but a team wanting to make the playoffs or a splash in the playoffs will value him higher.


If Boozer has higher value, Bulls can easily deal him to Bucks for unprotected first round.

Actually Suns like Boozer, but hate his overpaid contract.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Ballscientist said:


> If Boozer has higher value, Bulls can easily deal him to Bucks for unprotected first round.
> 
> Actually Suns like Boozer, but hate his overpaid contract.


On that I disagree. Why would the Bucks want Boozer who would just decrease lottery ping pong balls for no benefit?

The Suns on the other hand might be a fit.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> On that I disagree. Why would the Bucks want Boozer who would just decrease lottery ping pong balls for no benefit?
> 
> The Suns on the other hand might be a fit.


Rockets trade Asik for NOP 4-19 picks (likely top 10 picks). That is huge!

Boozer to Suns? Suns would ask for 2 first round picks from Bulls.

No, Boozer's value is 5 times less than Asik.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Everyone knows that the Bulls will amnesty Boozer. If they have cap space and want him, they can just wait to bid on him.

The Pelicans would not want Boozer because they already have Anthony Davis.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

if you put a bid on him (during the waiver period) don't you have to take over (and relieve the Bulls of) that contract?


----------



## KFitz14 (Jun 3, 2014)

e-monk said:


> if you put a bid on him (during the waiver period) don't you have to take over (and relieve the Bulls of) that contract?


I'm pretty sure the bidding team pays whatever their bid is and then the Bulls pay the rest.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

e-monk said:


> if you put a bid on him (during the waiver period) don't you have to take over (and relieve the Bulls of) that contract?



No, just the portion or that contract that equates to your bid. So if he's making $16M, and you bid $6M, then the Bulls pick up the remaining $10M.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

got it


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

KFitz14 said:


> I'm pretty sure the bidding team pays whatever their bid is and then the Bulls pay the rest.


Yes, this is correct. The more teams are willing to bid for Boozer, the better for the Bulls. It doesn't affect our cap situation, but we all know Reinsdorf will be more willing to dip further into luxury tax territory if we are paying Boozer less to go away.

My prediction is Philadelphia gets Boozer. They desperately need help...honestly looking to be one of the worst teams in league history, IMO. They are waayyyy under the cap and could easily absorb $5M for 1 season of Boozer. That would put the Bulls on the hook for $11.8M.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

There are a lot of teams with cap space and at five or six million Boozer makes sense for all of them basically.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Here is Philly's cap situation: http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/sixers.jsp

I think I saw somewhere that a team's minimum salary requirement is around $50M. They currently sit at $25M. That number will go up after signing Joel Embiid, however I don't think Saric is coming over this year from Europe. They also have several team options that could easily get declined. 

I don't know who they plan on spending this money on, but they are required to pay someone...I would think Boozer makes sense b/c it's only for 1 season and helps get them to that minimum number. 

I wonder if the Bulls could arrange a handshake deal where Philly picks up a large part of Boozer's salary, like $10M, and the Bulls agree to return the favor some time in the future. I think the Bulls & Jazz have done these types of informal deals in the past, e.g., Erik Murphy trade last year.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

handshake deal = no-no


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Here is Philly's cap situation: http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/sixers.jsp
> 
> I think I saw somewhere that a team's minimum salary requirement is around $50M. They currently sit at $25M. That number will go up after signing Joel Embiid, however I don't think Saric is coming over this year from Europe. They also have several team options that could easily get declined.
> 
> ...


I would definitely rather see him as the 3rd big on a competitive team bringing offense off the bench. I hope he doesn't wind up as filler to reach the cap floor.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/489778640255995904


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Lakers won the Boozer amnesty bid w/ a winning bid of $3.25M. Bulls are on the hook for just over $13M of Boozer's salary this year, fortunately none of it counts toward the salary cap.

Was hoping for something more like $5M but I think only teams under the cap were allowed to bid, which I forgot about before. So that drastically reduces the bid competition.

The Bulls are set up pretty well to absorb the revenue hit, though. I don't think we'll be a luxury tax paying team this year and we're also getting pretty good deals on several of our players, so that should help offset it in Reinsdorf's mind, IMO.

I am still confused what the hell the 76ers are doing this off-season. They should've been first in line to sign up Boozer, if for no other reason to fill out their roster, meet the minimum team salary requirement, and not be as epically terrible. They are going to be sooooo terrible this year.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

By the way, just in terms of the "the front office is cheap" narrative, I think it's worthwhile to acknowledge that the amnesty took place at all! People grumbled they didn't believe Reinsdorf would allow GarPax to pull the amnesty trigger if need be, and I'm glad that turned out to be incorrect.

Have fun on the Lakers, Booze.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Was hoping for something more like $5M but I think only teams under the cap were allowed to bid, which I forgot about before.





> Had Boozer, who was made an amnesty waiver by Chicago this week, not been claimed, the Rockets would have moved in to land him as a free agent.


http://blog.chron.com/ultimaterocke...n-boozer-but-would-have-chased-as-free-agent/


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Top 5 best, worst moments of Boozer era



> *The Best *
> 
> 1. Too much for the Heat: The best game I ever saw Boozer play for the Bulls was Jan. 4, 2013, in a win over the Miami Heat. He had 27 points and 12 rebounds while leading his teammates to a surprising win over LeBron James & Co. But the stats told only part of the story on this night; it was the most active Boozer had been defensively in a while. He was diving on the floor for loose balls and seemed completely engaged all night. The performance capped his best statistical week on the team, considering he racked up 65 points and 37 rebounds combined in the three games prior.
> 
> ...


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

Lakers at $3.25mil. Good value for the Lakers.


----------

