Bell is bought out

I think its safe to say the Raja Bell signing was a flop. (Pun intended)

I thought Bell would be both a better player and a better locker room guy for us than he turned out to be. I am assuming the the tiff with Corbin was mostly Bell's fault, and even if it wasn't, Bell probably shouldn't have gone to the media with it.

Do you think he could end up on the *****? MJ wannabe wanted him there last time he was a free agent, and with his old assist man Nash there now, it might be worth it for the ***** to offer him a small contract on the chance that he could come off the bench, defend a little bit and hit some wide open three feeds from Nash.

therawns wrote:

I think its safe to say the Raja Bell signing was a flop. (Pun intended)

Ya, I consider that one of the things that I was truly wrong about, even though I knew it was a mistake to let Matthews go, I defended that decision on the grounds of the salary cap and what I thought Bell would bring to the table.

In hindsight, the combination of letting Matthews go because they didn't want to pay him the MLE (5.6 Mil), and then signing Bell for a shade over 3 Mil a year was probably one of KOC's all time worst moves.

He really should have paid the Jazz to release him. Now it looks like he hopes to ride someone else's skirt for a title. I wish him the worst of luck.

Crunchtime1 wrote:

I thought Bell would be both a better player and a better locker room guy for us than he turned out to be. I am assuming the the tiff with Corbin was mostly Bell's fault, and even if it wasn't, Bell probably shouldn't have gone to the media with it.

Do you think he could end up on the *****? MJ wannabe wanted him there last time he was a free agent, and with his old assist man Nash there now, it might be worth it for the ***** to offer him a small contract on the chance that he could come off the bench, defend a little bit and hit some wide open three feeds from Nash.

I agree he handled it poorly. In his defense though, one huge reason, and maybe the biggest reason why he signed with Utah, was because he wanted to play for Sloan. Obviously, he did not get to play for Sloan very long.

Great news, but I'm not really sure why a buyout instead of amnestying him. Maybe one of you guys can make sense of it.

Buyout's cheaper I guess. If Jazz amnesty Bell they pay the full salary anyway (if I understand it correctly). May be one of the real guru's round here can correct me if I'm wrong.

outerspacefan wrote:

Buyout's cheaper I guess. If Jazz amnesty Bell they pay the full salary anyway (if I understand it correctly). May be one of the real guru's round here can correct me if I'm wrong.

Right. If they buy him out then they pay only a portion of his contract, but his contract counts against their salary cap. If they amnesty him then his contract would not count against the cap, but they have to pay him his entire contract.

Looks like he Jazz decided either; that saving some money was more important than a little bit of salary cap space, or they wanted to keep the amnesty in case they want to use it for someone else.

zero24gravity wrote:

outerspacefan wrote:

Buyout's cheaper I guess. If Jazz amnesty Bell they pay the full salary anyway (if I understand it correctly). May be one of the real guru's round here can correct me if I'm wrong.

Right. If they buy him out then they pay only a portion of his contract, but his contract counts against their salary cap. If they amnesty him then his contract would not count against the cap, but they have to pay him his entire contract.

Looks like he Jazz decided either; that saving some money was more important than a little bit of salary cap space, or they wanted to keep the amnesty in case they want to use it for someone else.

Running out of options there, and after this summer they won't have anybody left that is eligable for the amnesty provision. The only people left that they could use the Amnesty on are Jefferson, Millsap, Hayward, and Favors, and it seems pretty unlikely that they amnesty one of those guys.

The Jazz were likely just looking to save a couple bucks.

TheMagnus wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

outerspacefan wrote:

Buyout's cheaper I guess. If Jazz amnesty Bell they pay the full salary anyway (if I understand it correctly). May be one of the real guru's round here can correct me if I'm wrong.

Right. If they buy him out then they pay only a portion of his contract, but his contract counts against their salary cap. If they amnesty him then his contract would not count against the cap, but they have to pay him his entire contract.

Looks like he Jazz decided either; that saving some money was more important than a little bit of salary cap space, or they wanted to keep the amnesty in case they want to use it for someone else.

Running out of options there, and after this summer they won't have anybody left that is eligable for the amnesty provision. The only people left that they could use the Amnesty on are Jefferson, Millsap, Hayward, and Favors, and it seems pretty unlikely that they amnesty one of those guys.

The Jazz were likely just looking to save a couple bucks.

Yeah that's what I was thinking. Bell was really the last player they could use the amnesty on. It wouldn't make sense to use it on Al or Milsap with expiring contracts, and there is no way the use it on Favors or Hayward. I would think the cap relief would be more important than a little money? Doesn't make much difference one way or the other though. I'm just glad he is gone.

Where the hell was that amnesty when we were stuck with Ak's max contract?