|
|
Post by Toronto Raptors on May 7, 2007 14:58:25 GMT -5
Which one do you guys choose?
It's basically a poll version of the new rule, so this time everyone can vote on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on May 7, 2007 15:18:36 GMT -5
You should clarify these for people who might have missed the other thread.
Amnesty Clause: One time chance to waive a person off of your team without their salary counting against you
Real Life Salary: One time chance to convert one persons NBA GM League salary to their real NBA salary
Both: You can use both one time
None: You can't use either
|
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Pistons on May 7, 2007 15:46:21 GMT -5
Amnesty Clause: After waiving the player into the free agent market, you can not make a bid for this player.
|
|
|
|
Post by Player Agent 3 [Clippers] on May 7, 2007 16:48:52 GMT -5
Amnesty is more fair to everybody in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on May 7, 2007 17:14:36 GMT -5
I'm not gunna lie...I like the real life salaries idea the most. Some people just screw up once in a while....especially when you're new to the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on May 7, 2007 17:17:51 GMT -5
I'm not gunna lie...I like the real life salaries idea the most. Some people just screw up once in a while....especially when you're new to the game. Says the guy with Tyson Chandler  |
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Pistons on May 7, 2007 17:19:09 GMT -5
I'm not gunna lie...I like the real life salaries idea the most. Some people just screw up once in a while....especially when you're new to the game. Says the guy with Tyson Chandler Stromile Swift actually. Chandler plays for Houston. |
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on May 7, 2007 17:47:48 GMT -5
Says the guy with Tyson Chandler Stromile Swift actually. Chandler plays for Houston. Good eye. They are just as bad though lol. I'd be more willing to cut Swift than Chandler. |
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on May 7, 2007 18:24:30 GMT -5
LOL! Smith is just one example! lol he's a great example though! |
|
|
|
Post by Utah Jazz on May 7, 2007 18:46:30 GMT -5
like amnesty, as it lets you dump one mistake, but you need to sacrifice the player.
hate real salary, as the reason you had to pay so much was that someone else wanted that player. Now you get them on the cheap, which seems a bit unfair.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on May 7, 2007 19:06:07 GMT -5
yeah...looking back at it, i'd like to change my vote. I'm going with Amnesty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Denver Nuggets on May 8, 2007 13:16:12 GMT -5
i think amnesty is fairer on the people who have been smarter with there money
|
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on May 8, 2007 13:19:36 GMT -5
i would like to have both
|
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Raptors on May 14, 2007 17:20:14 GMT -5
BUMP.
|
|
|
|
Post by Philadelphia 76ers on May 14, 2007 17:44:49 GMT -5
Amnesty Rule would be the best both would be gay but i dont even know who i would even cut on my team lol
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on May 16, 2007 17:07:33 GMT -5
We will definitely not be doing the "real life salary" exception this year, but it's not ruled out for the future.
Once I get a list of everyone's financial situation for next year organized (LA Clippers is putting this together), I will decide how much the Amnesty Clause (waive 1 person and their salary) will affect this league. If it hurts too many teams already well under the cap, or doesn't help enough people out, I might not allow it, but chances are that it will be allowed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Miami Heat on May 28, 2007 19:53:12 GMT -5
have we decided on this yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on May 29, 2007 0:25:32 GMT -5
i haven't decided yet, i want to wait for the list of free agents to come out.
|
|
![Player Agent 3 [Clippers] Avatar](http://www.amincousa.com/zcart/images/nba/nba-n24.gif)
