Money in, money out. If Les decides that he doesn't want to be that much over the cap, even if the players don't suck - like Baker, Moochie, Weatherspoon, etc. - then he should just cut one. Even in a 2 for 1 deal, Les still has to take back similiar salary, except in this case almost certainly for more years. So unless they really think they can get that one much above average player, if I was Les, I'd cut Weatherspoon.
People are getting frustrated because you're not even paying attention to what they're trying to tell you. micah put it well. The Knicks make trades like the Kurt Thomas for Quentin Richardson trade (which actually was their first good move in awhile, imo). More plainly, they make moves like trading Nazr Mohammed with 1 year left at 5-6 mill or whatever for Malik Rose with 25+ mill and multiple years left. When a team consistently trades for short term for longer term, higher dollar deals, that's when they'll maintain status over the cap. Keep doing that for a couple years, and you'll get a salary structure like New York's. A model, in the modern CBA era, that has never won. Basically no other team in the league, would take a dead weight contract like Penny Hardaway's for ~40 million for 3 years just to get a pseudo-super star in Marbury. It's just like the logic of the Taylor trade - New York added 10 million in salary by trading Baker/Moochie for Taylor. Sure, they got a modest talent upgrade, but would you suggest signing Taylor for 10 million? You can say a "good owner" would do any trade that upgrades the team, but a reasonable owner would only make trades that upgrade the talent commensurate with the cost. Les has spent reasonably, and when the costs have been justified (TMac trade, Swift trade), he's pulled the trigger. Were you the one who lamented how all the 2nd round playoff teams spent more than the Rockets, only to find 6 of the 8 teams actually spent less?
The deadline being at noon today(?), I guess the Rockets decided to hold onto the players they have and try to make a trade at the deadline?
I believe the deadline is midnight (tonight) not noon. If we decide to wave Vin Baker, he will then become the only player waved by two teams (the other being the Celtics). Talk about finished - one player being waved via the amnesty clause by two teams on the same day. Just for fun, I will like to see the Rox wave him.
Just wondering how the hell is knicks able to afford those salaries. According to hoopshype they have like 4 maximum guys, and common understanding is no team can afford more than 3 maximum contracts. That salaries haven't included MoT and Rose's, etc. Including tax, their payroll will be almost three times as much as that of the most "mid-level' team. Their record sux, so management can not expect attendance to generate revenue. It's just a cash grinder. With almost every team gingerly manipulate at the verge of LT, it just seems the knick is not affected. One question: where the tax goes? I remember read somewhere said that the tax paid will be used to compensate the team under the Salary cap. if that is true?
NIKE, are you saying that it is not this year's salary that will put the receiving team over the cap but subsequent years when the salary begins to escalate. In other words say the 5M we pay this year still lets us remain beneath the cap, but next year when the contract terms escalate the salary to 6.5M then we are 1.5 mil over the cap? Multiply that by a dozen players and you be quite a bit over the cap in no time. Please don't get frustrated I am trying to understand this stuff. No, I don't think so. I remember the thread, but I don't think I said that.
This is a bit off topic, But i wonder how it feels like to be in the NBA NOT because you can play ball(i.e. mooch, reece gaines)
I saw that and was thinking the same thing...getting kicked to the curb on NBA Garbage Day by two teams, the garbage man says, "hey didn't we pick up this same busted up, funky smelling **** on Boston Street a couple of hours ago?"
