It's finally July 10, meaning all of the exciting trades and free agent agreements that we've heard about finally can be consummated. The league released the official salary cap and luxury tax figures for 2013-14, so we have a clear idea of exactly how much space each team has to operate with.
July 10 is an important date for another reason: It marks the first day of "amnesty week," the window of opportunity for eligible franchises to wipe one salary off of their cap and tax ledgers, providing them with more flexibility moving forward. ESPN's Marc Stein listed the eligible amnesty able players on 13 qualified teams on TrueHoop, but let's take a deeper look and identify some candidates who should be released via the amnesty provision.

Whittling it down

There are 13 teams remaining that have not used their amnesty provision and still have players on their roster eligible for amnesty: Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles Lakers, Memphis, Miami, Milwaukee, Oklahoma City, Sacramento, San Antonio, Toronto and Utah.

Of those 13 teams, we can safely assume that Atlanta, Boston, Memphis, San Antonio and Utah will not participate in amnesty week, as each of these teams' eligible players are either on rookie scale deals (e.g., Avery Bradley), extremely manageable contracts (e.g., Matt Bonner) or are stars (e.g., Al Horford).

Of the eight remaining teams, we can similarly strike off names like LeBron James, Kevin Durant and Joakim Noah, players who are building blocks for their respective franchises. This leaves us with roughly 10-12 players who stand a chance of actually being amnestied. Here's a look at five candidates, along with a special situation and the reasons why teams would use the amnesty clause on them. I've broken them down into three categories below:


I. TAX RELIEF


Miller
Team: Miami Heat | Player: Mike Miller
Remaining Salary: $6.2 million (13-14), $6.6 million (14-15)

WHY DO IT: Wiping Miller's salary off the books drops Miami's payroll from the top of the "third tier" of the tax threshold (where every portion of team salary $10-$14.99 million is taxed at $2.50 per $1 of salary) to middle of the second tier (where every portion of team salary $5-$9.99 million is taxed at $1.75 per $1 of salary). As evidenced by past offseasons, Miami can expect to replace Miller's skill set and production with significantly cheaper veteran deals.

WHY NOT TO DO IT: While amnestying Miller brings significant cash savings, the Heat don't realize any added flexibility beyond saving some cash. Also, Miller has been instrumental in both of Miami's past two title runs, hitting big shots in pressure situations. As Charles Oakley once told Knicks capologist Frank Murphy in the mid-'90s, "Money Man, if it ain't broke, don't break it!"

II: FLEXIBILITY AROUND TAX THRESHOLD


Kleiza
Team: Toronto Raptors | Player: Linas Kleiza
Remaining Salary: $4.6 million (2013-14)

WHY DO IT: Kleiza by and large has been a shell of himself since his microfracture knee surgery. He's appeared in just 69 games over the past two seasons combined, including fewer than 400 minutes in the 2012-13 season. Using the amnesty clause on Kleiza would drop Toronto under the tax threshold, which would represent a significant financial benefit: Instead of paying a tax, the Raptors would be eligible to receive a tax refund (it's not unlike receiving an unexpected refund from the IRS in April).

WHY NOT TO DO IT: There really is no compelling reason not to. There's been no evidence that Kleiza can recover to even a minimally productive level, and the Raptors have moved on, personnel-wise.


Perkins
Team: Oklahoma City Thunder | Player: Kendrick Perkins

Remaining Salary: $8.98 million (2013-14); $9.7 million (2014-15)

WHY DO IT: While the Thunder aren't in tax territory now, any significant addition of salary (such as using the full midlevel exception) would thrust them there. We've already seen them lose valuable scoring sub Kevin Martin to free agency and miss out on adding Dorell Wright due to salary concerns. So even as Oklahoma City tells us that amnestying Perkins is not an option, we've seen two significant personnel moves backfire due to payroll concerns arising out of Perkins' salary. To make matters worse, Perkins has been one of the least productive starting centers in the league the past few seasons, bringing even greater dissonance between his on-court value and his cap hit. Finally, there's little chance of trading Perkins without attaching a valuable asset like a pick or a promising young talent, so you're stuck with him.

WHY NOT TO DO IT: If you believe (as the Thunder do) that Perkins brings an intangible presence to the locker room, worth upward of $9 million per season, and that that presence is worth more than the services of a player who can be productive on the court, then I suppose you can justify keeping him on payroll. In other words, there's always an opportunity cost to one's actions. More importantly, Oklahoma City's small-market ownership group might have a tough time paying someone to not be on their roster (amnestied players still are due their guaranteed salaries) as well as paying for a replacement.

III: FREEING UP CAP SPACE


Allen
Team: Detroit Pistons | Player: Charlie Villanueva
Remaining Salary: $8.6 million (2013-14)

WHY DO IT: Villanueva's deal was the kind that was immediately recognized by everyone in the industry as an awful signing; everyone other than the Detroit Pistons, that is. Four years later, Villanueva's contract serves as a bitter reminder that having the cap space doesn't necessarily mean you have to use the cap space. Detroit is back in a situation with some cap flexibility (even after the signings of Josh Smith, Will Bynum and Gigi Datome). Letting go of Villanueva's deal would provide the Pistons with a large amount of space to absorb possible contract dumps from other teams at midseason -- the type of transaction that also brings draft picks and young prospects. The Pistons would be able to leverage cap space to accelerate the rebuilding process.

WHY NOT TO DO IT: At his base level, Villanueva brings some value as a stretch 4; his defensive rebounding percentages always have been decent, and he is just two seasons removed from shooting 38.7 percent from 3-point range. As an expiring deal, Detroit might be able to turn him into an asset come trade deadline time.


Salmons
Team: Sacramento Kings | Player: John Salmons
Remaining Salary: $7.6 million (2013-14); $7 million (2014-15)

WHY DO IT: Like Detroit and Villanueva, Salmons' signing three summers ago also was puzzling. The Kings at the time had a glut of guard/wing players, and although many of the names have changed, that glut remains. With a high lottery pick invested in shooting guard Ben McLemore, Sacramento needs to clear some of those bodies off the roster in order to give their rookie a chance to grow. Using the amnesty clause on Salmons would also create a good deal of cap flexibility that Sacramento could use to pursue conduit deals on the trade market, leverage cap room into picks and prospects in return for assuming toxic deals from higher payroll counterparts or facilitating three-way deals. And note a player only has to have been on his team's roster prior to July 1, 2011 to be eligible for amnesty. His contract need not have originated with the team using the amnesty clause.

WHY NOT TO DO IT: Salmons has value on the trade market as a big playmaking guard who (lockout season excluded) is a proficient 3-point shooter. Making him even more desirable on the trade market is the partial guarantee on the second year of his deal: If Salmons is waived prior to June 30, 2014, he is due just $1 million, in effect making him an expiring deal.

IV: THE RIGHT THING TO DO


Bryant
Team: Los Angeles Lakers | Player: Kobe Bryant
Remaining Salary: $30.5 million (2013-14)

WHY DO IT: As I explained in great detail back in April, using the amnesty clause on Bryant would be extremely beneficial for all sides. For the Lakers, it takes them from being the biggest tax offenders to being a non-taxpayer, saving them a considerable amount of money, saving them from future repeater taxes, and giving them a host of mechanisms to improve the team in the short term. For Bryant, it allows him to devote the entirety of the 2013-14 year to making a full rehab of his Achilles tendon injury, rather than the current plan of rushing back to be a shadow of his former self for a Lakers team that's destined to struggle next season. He'd then be able to re-sign with the Lakers as a free agent in 2014, allowing them to also pursue possibly two max-deal level players.

WHY NOT TO DO IT: As I mentioned in my piece in April, if Bryant does not "sign off" on this arrangement (under the table of course; any formal agreement would open the Lakers up to severe cap circumvention penalties), the Lakers would face an incredible public relations challenge. Even if he does go along with it, there's a great chance of drawing the ire of Lakers fans, particularly the portion of the base that identify themselves more with Bryant than with the team.