Re: Larry Johnson retires

["Simon Kean" <simon@jkean.freeserve.co.uk>]

One interesting point that never seems to be mention in these injury-related
buyouts, is that the actual funds for the "buyout" are paid for in insurance
money. Teams may have to cover the difference between the insurance cover
and the contract - in LJ's case the difference is about 6 million. No small
change, but to pay him out 29 million and only have to fit the bill for 6
mil yourself, (which they are trying to defer anyway) doesn't make them look
like quite the big spenders everyone makes them out to be. I'm fairly sure
Luc Longley's buyout was completely covered by insurance.

No point, just FYI :)

Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://mp3.com/ulcerate
www.ulcerate.net

----- Original Message -----
From: <Georgek27@AOL.com>
To: <celtics@igtc.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: Larry Johnson retires


> In a message dated 10/10/01 1:53:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> wayray@ix.netcom.com writes:
>
>
> > There's no need for the Celtics to be like the Knicks and
> > creatively use their exceptions
>
> The Knicks "creatively" used their exception to sign Clarence Weatherspoon
> when they needed a big man.
>
> When Luc Longley retired they were granted an injury exception but only
days
> in which to use it and they didn't so it expired.
>
> If the league determines that LJ's injury dates back to last season --
which
> it does -- the Knicks will not receive an exception.
>
> As for the buyout -- it counts against the cap just as Radja's counted
> against ours. The Knicks will still be well over the cap and the luxury
tax
> threshold. Also, Camby is bellyaching about the "lousy" contract he
signed.
>
> George