This is the link to the saucy article by Zach Lowe: http://grantland.com/features/thoughts-from-miami-indiana-conference-finals/ Scola's contract for next season is unguaranteed. It's a likely scenario for the Pacers to release him to make salary space for re-signing Stephenson and to keep under the tax. I would guess the Rockets are after veteran leadership 'cause he's no longer hitting 50% of his mid-range shots.
Lmao. You guys have no clue what this team needs. Scola would be PERFECT for our team. All those open midrange shots T.Jones, Parson or D.Mo pass up, Scola will take and make on a regular basis. Not only that, he can score in the post. He's actually been balling the last 2 games against Miami. But that idiot coach either takes him out, or doesn't play him significant minutes in the 2nd half. The Pacers don't use Scola correctly. If Scola's on a roll YOU FEED HIM. The Pacers go away from Scola when he's hot. I'd take Scola back any day of the week
Oh please. Montejunas wishes he has the post moves that Scola does. When Scola is on the block he looks like he knows what he is doing, while Dmo looks like a chicken with his head cut off. Defense is about the same. I'd love to have him back as veteran leadership cause the guy NEVER quits hustling unlike some on this team, tho he probably would not get much playing time.
Scola would be great for the regular season but he absolutely cannot defend if his life depended on it. In the playoffs, he becomes a liability. What we need is a player like David West.
Sweet! Love could back up Scola next season because, judging from this thread and others on the board, that is very likely to happen! Hooray!
Scola? A great offensive player who can not play any kind of solid defense, what is the point to have him to improve defense in order to pass the first round?
The only positive thing he has is his mid-range shot (and we don't use it in our offense), that's all. You can't argue about Donuts hustle when he's first in the gym and last out. Scola's peak ended couple of years ago and he has nothing to offer at all for us. [youtube]clqHrGiojIo[/youtube]
LOL at the notion that any PF on the roster is currently better than even the current version of Scola. That must be why they were all benched in the playoffs.
If the last year of his contract is non-guaranteed, then isn't his contract over when the Pacers cut him? It would seem silly that the amnesty rules would prevent us from signing a free agent no longer under any contract, when the last year was essentially an option that was not picked up. Plus, I seem to recall the Rockets had to pay a higher amount for the buyout because of the non-guaranteed year, so this would be a double-whammy?
Geesh, the article only mentions that McHale asked if Morey could reacquire him. That's it, there's nothing more to support the ill-conceived notion that Rockets want Scola back than that statement. Much ado about nothing. Actually a well-written article if you take the time to read it.
Zach Lowe did not say that the ROCKETS want Scola back, let alone are working on getting him back. All he wrote was that McHale asked Morey about this possibility. Morey may well have said "he's too old and washed up now, we don't want him" or explained to McHale the contractual amnesty situation.
The waiving team may not re-sign or re-acquire the player for the length of his contract (which includes seasons following an ETO or option), and the claiming team is prohibited from trading the player until the following July 1. If the player is eventually traded, his new team becomes the claiming team. . . . . 2 A protected year is one in which any of the salary is guaranteed. Seasons following ETOs and player options are considered to be protected years, but not seasons following team options (see question number 58). The minimum bid does not include salary in seasons that are completely non-guaranteed, however the team with the winning bid is responsible for paying this salary. Interestingly, the CBA does not specify the minimum bid amount when the entire remaining contract is non-guaranteed, although there is no reason for such a contract to be amnestied. http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q68
