Letting the contract expire doesn't clear any "Usable cap space" .... They will still be over the cap which means they can't spend that $~45m in savings , all they'd have done in that situation is put more space between their cap total and the tax line with no financial vehicle to replace that. Ferntits would safe a few bucks .... Essentially allowing that contract to expire is a waste of a massive asset.
There are NO scenario's in which he's a positive asset this year. Starting in 2022-23 the countdown begins - The closer his contract gets to being an expiring , the better the asset becomes , particularly to a team that wants to operate under the cap OR a team who wants to , or is forced to move out a high cost player. For teams over the cap , MNA salary matching rules allow for +/- 125%+100k in difference between incoming & outgoing salaries. Walls contract alone in that final year allows the Rockets to absorb between $37,793,408 and $59,308,450 in player salary. Essentially you are able to swap this contract for another high value contract(s) of a longer length to preserve the ability to spend those dollars beyond the expiration date of the contract. Otherwise all you have done is created dollars between your cap figure and the tax line that you cannot spend without an exception (which you could have used anyway). The gravity of this is , you are able to dictate which players make up that $37.7-$59.3m in salary .... rather than just being stuck with John Wall. And to top that off you would still have the ability to use your salary exceptions. Where as letting that contract evaporate .... You may have lowered your cap figure but you have no way of spending it. that's the difference between usable space and simple space. Of course the team sending the talented players out is going to want draft compensation ....but the thing here is that John Wall in the final year of his contract doesn't wreck their cap in future years ....
