Not unless there is a means to the end. In this scenario, all it does is save Les on the bottomline, while weakening the overall talent base of the team. Im not opposed to dumping Mo and his contract for something a player, who might fit better and has a contract whose terms are more cap friendly ...........but this certainly doesn't fall under that criteria.
Well, the year after next year, Spoon's contract would also come off the books...so for that year definitely, not having Mo's and Spoon's contracts will help - and you have to start somewhere. Who knows, we might be lucky enough to dump both contracts this year!
codell and SJC, The answer you're looking for is that if MoT's contract was off the books, Les would be willing to spend the full MLE last year and this year, which is something he hasn't been willing to do. With the same contracts next year, he may pass again, and no TE, meaning the only way we can improve is trading MoT? We won't get equal talent in return. The solution? Trade MoT for an expiring contract, and get our owner to authorize the use of the full MLE for at least 4 years. So then basically, we'd be trading MoT@8M for 3 years in exchange for that expiring contractf or one year, someone else at roughly 5-6M per year, someone we chose to sign and hopefully were smart about it this time.
Sane, I don't believe that is the case. We did spend the MLE last year, on Pike and JJ (split). As far as this year, the offseason is far from over, so I am not sure how you can be so confident as to say we won't spend it this year.
To the question - why is Mo in every trade? The main reason Mo is in every trade is because he has the $$$. You got to match $$$ in trades. Mo is the way to do it. Mo is still a functional NBA player. It's possible that he can be traded, if the trade partner gets something else they want or gets rid of someone else they want to get rid of. There's plenty of deals like that. It's not impossible. It all comes down to price, and cost/benefit. ------------------------ The other reason. I'll be frank. I don't like him. I don't like his game at all next to Yao. I do think he'd play better with a different coach; I think he could be a very good score-first forward on a looser team, like the Nets or Sonics, or even Cleveland, where he'd have room to operate; he could contribute well in his current scoring backup role on a team like Portland. He could even play a nice role with the Timberwolves. I just don't think he works at all in a slow-it-down possessions offense. He just gets in Yao's way. They can't play together. If Mo were in Atlanta, he'd probably score a lot of points. He can score, he can get down the floor and catch hit the trailer, he can catch off block and spin. He just doesn't play well offsetting Yao. We don't need that. Some other teams can use that. Howard, I think, can play with Yao. So I'm more inclined to keep him. I don't want to trade everybody. I do want to eliminate people that would compete with Yao for the ball, instead of complementing him and playing off him. ------------------------------ For me, almost any deal that exits Mo Taylor is a good deal, because the cost/benefit threshold is very low., given that Mo is a bad fit here. I don't think people really change, dramatically. I don't expect Mo to become a pick and roll, rebounding, passing, positioning helper to Yao and Tmac. I still see him as a moderately above-average talented black hole. If the rest of our team were hungry for an up front scorer, that would be acceptable to a degree. But we have Yao. We need him to dominate. Mo will always be in the way.
Last year, we spent 2.5M on Pike, and 1.5M on JJ I believe. Pike for 3 years and JJ for 2 or 3 years. That's nothing. Full MLE is 36M/6years. The kind of money that brings in a solid piece to a team. Assuming you spend that money right, you can get the right player. Now, I wouldn't want them to spend that kind of money on the players that have gone so far, but some are worth it... Maybe it's worth giving Stromile Swift a shot? Had we unloaded MoT for an expiring contract last year, here's how we'd be going about things now: - Use the TE to find a backup C and a PG. - Give full MLE maximum years to Swift, if they match, that's fine, if not, we've got a prize. - If the Grizz don't match, use a part of that MLE to get help at PF, or just roll out Howard/Spoon and give minutes to the backup C we acquire as well. As much as I'd like to think so, Mo is not a difference maker on this team anymore. Trading him for expiring contracts now would be more valuable. For example, if we traded him to the Celtics for Chris Mihm and Yogi Stewart, then we can go through the season with virtually NO difference in win/loss record, we'd have a backup C, and we would shed 17M in salary of MoT's last 2 years. It may not bring cap relief, but flexibility has its advanatages. Aside from that, we can package those expiring contracts midseason. For example, Portland may decide midseason that a deal like Mih/Yogi/Spoon/AG/TE for SAR/Patterson would suit them perfectly. Just to get rid of Patterson's reputation and the headache of SAR. Flexibility has its value, it's not useless.
Sorry. Thats not correct. Last year, the MLE started at $4.9 MIL. Pike and JJ's salaries last year were a combined $4.7. THe MLE was the ONLY way we could have signed them since we were over the cap. We used the full MLE (less $100,000-$200,00) on JJ and Pike last year. There is no doubt about that. Even with Mo's contract on the books, we can STILL try and get a PF and/or C for the TE and we can still offer Swift the MLE.
I appreciate your response Pasox, but however you are missing my point entirely, much like SJC. I am not contending that we needn't trade Mo, only that it is extremely unlikely that it could happen. If we do get to trade mo it will be for a lower value than Mo himself because of his cumbersome contract. Therefore I believe the dreamcasts should shy away from him because they simply aren't going to happen. And SJC, I can tell you are getting a little pissed at me, but still I cannot let you get away with you giving me a speech about how we would be willing to trade Mo away for a player of lesser value who has only one year remaining on his contract, which is more than Mo's, without giving me a single example of such a player. One of my main problems with dreamcasts on this board is that the other teams involved always end up with the bad contracts and **** players and we always get the all stars and up and comers with the pretty contracts. Let's just be realistic so we can talk realistic Rockets strategy for the up coming season.
