Not sure about that. We are not positive that Morey didn't want to keep Fisher. We do still need a real point guard. If Morey said "We really want to keep you," then Fisher might have said "I'll do what I gotta do to get out of this." Not necessarily any principle involved, except self-interest.
He's gambling that he'll have a contract somewhere else next year. Subtract that salary from his 3.4 million. Plus, won't he sign a second contract with someone this year? Which means he'll get two contracts worth of payment for the remainder of this year. Subtract the new team contract for this year from the 3.4 million. Then, if he's part of a winning team, he might even have a longer career than he would with the Rockets. That's more salary as well.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Just to clarify on Patty Mills ... Spurs seem to be hesitating on him because Derek Fisher is now available. Perfectly reasonable.</p>— Mike Tokito (@mtokito) <a href="https://twitter.com/mtokito/status/181874071015919616" data-datetime="2012-03-19T22:45:32+00:00">March 19, 2012</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Do we go after Patty Mills if he's available. I'm not to impressed with Fortson thus far..
Agree on this. However IMHO most people seem to forget that DM's "MAJOR" move was supposed to be done this season, and it got Sterned. I guess DM's still reeling from that, and would prefer to punt another year while he thinks of a new strategy than commit to one move that would shape the franchise for years to come.
Mike Brown has already said that Hill isn't going to play any time soon. The Lakers are contending and not gonna care about developing someone so raw. You'd think the Lakers could at least give him a chance to end it amicably by coming to some sort of an agreement. Because in the end, it seemed that Fisher would prefer to play for a contender than having an extra mil or 2.
^^ Makes sense about Jordan Hill. The Lakers already have Bynum, Gasol, Murphy, McRoberts on the roster. Makes no sense for them to try and work Jordan Hill in since he is really not obviously better than those currently in the rotation. The Lakers did it to save money. If Fisher had not been traded, there is most likely no way he doesn't pick up his player option ($3.4 million), on that amount they have to pay $3.4 million more in luxury tax. Also, this year, Fisher's salary is $550K more than Hill's. So, they save a pro-rated portion of the difference ($150K or so) and $550K in luxury tax. So, the total saving is $550K+$150K+$3.4 mil + 3.4 mil = $7.5 million. As for "amicable separation": I think the Lakers believe that it may end up being a pro-longed divorce negotiation and a ton of bad PR. In fact, there are rumors that the Lakers were worried about how Fish would react to losing his rotation spot to sessions. Don't know if it's true, but guys in the Lakers organization know him better than the rest of us do. Fisher, at this point, isn't worth $7.5 million for a season and a half given that they have the younger Sessions and Steve Blake. Also, one more thing about Jordan Hill: Even if the Rockets want him back next season (doubt it), they can just sign him as a free agent. He will be unrestricted and the Rockets should have plenty of cap flexibility to pursue any free agent.
I'd guess if TWill and Hill had each other's contracts. TWill would've been the one dealt to the Lakers. All they needed was an expiring contract to make the saleries work.
Don't 2nd rounders go for three mil? I seem to remember the Rockets paying that much for some of our recent 2nd round picks.
Yes. The Rockets paid $3mil for their 2nd rounders. 1st rounders generally go for $3mil and/or a bad contract. For example, Phoenix traded Rudy Fernandez(pick 24) along with James Jones(worthless player with a guaranteed salary) to Portland for $3mil.
unrestricted free agent, no trade value. fisher trade - the lakers gave away pick to dump future salary. camby trade - blazers saved money and clean up lockerroom mess.
Apparently having a "superstar" solves this problem. Actually it might be all an illusion. Maybe things are on par. Maybe this is how it looks under the vail of superstars.
Actually, I think T-Will's salary also would have worked in a Fisher trade and would have saved the Lakers another $700k or so. So, either (a) the Lakers preferred Hill over T-Will (going for size; less of a headache?) or (b) Morey refused to give them T-Will, resulting in a $150k savings (or more, if T-Will was bought out, which I doubt) for Les. Coincidentally, that's how much they essentially paid for that first round pick! Yep. I think the last first round pick to be sold for straight cash was the Lakers' #29 pick in 2009, for which the Knicks gladly paid $3M. The Lakers were already stacked and didn't need the guaranteed contract on their books for tax purposes. I doubt you can find too many picks higher than that you can get for "only" $3M cash without also having to give up a future second rounder or take on a bad contract, especially now under the new CBA, which favors teams with cheap rookie scale contracts. By contrast, Morey just got a pick in the early 20s for about $153k. This trade is full of win. False. The Rockets could have gotten a late first rounder for Dragic, who would greatly help several playoff teams make a run this year. I bet such a trade would have been seriously considered if not for the Lowry illness. But the Rockets chose instead to make a run at the playoffs this season. Given that they managed to get a first rounder for Hill, I'm not complaining.
Bima, So can you break down what we actually gave up? You said we paid 153k only? So he waived his option and we bought out just a portion of contract remaining today? So there will be no dead cap money on the books for next year either? If so this is one of the best "small" trades I have seen yet.
