Um I guess I can understand how you misinterpreted me. So I'll just explain my point again... -I know that we can't sign anyone with anything but the minimum without using s&ts etc. -but I'm saying we ARE able to sign a FA other than our own FAs for 3 mil through a sign and trade provided that we are willing and the other team agrees to accept a approximately 3mil contract from us through a sign and trade. Or otherwise a max of 2.6 mil if we were only to use our trade exceptions. -Les is not going to go over the lux tax for the next season because we have no title chances -I'm not sure if we're over to lux tax right now, but I was saying that since the lux tax becomes a hard cap to us then even IF we had the ability to sign someone for 2 or 3 mil we wouldn't do that if we were over the lux tax or only 1 mil below it. Hence we'd stick to minimum contracts. But say we were 3 mil below the lux tax, the possibility of signing a player for 2 or 3 mil becomes bigger as it allows us to do so without reach lux tax territory. I think I should have distanced my argument away from Wafer as he'd be a bad example to use since he's our own FA. But I'm saying its possible we get another team's FA through a S&T for 2 or 3 mil provide we are that much below lux tax limit. Otherwise if we aren't and we're only 1 mil away from the lux tax limit we wouldn't bother to sign anyone other than the minimum contracts anyways. Hope I've explain myself here. And yes I probably should have stated that Wafer is not part of the argument here and hes only available to us for the minimum.
That is the prevailing opinion here, but I couldn't disagree more. Les has never owned a team that he thought couldn't compete and until he does I say it won't happen. Right now I could see us being a playoff team (not too likely) but I can see Les imagining that AB and Landry do make major strides and even Scola having a better season this year, but I doubt he expects Ariza to immediately become a star. And after those guys we're looking at status quo with everyone else and possibly Battier slipping. The rooks are iffy, and Les just doesn't go into a season like that. My fear is that Les tells Morey to make a deal he doesn't want to do. I firmly believe Les is going to throw some money around this season just so he can sleep better. Rockets lottery bound? I really doubt it, even if it's the smart thing to do.
yeah we can agree that we can't sign anyone unless its for the minimum. thats true. but I don't see any worthwhile players that could be part of our future plans that's willing to take the minimum. oh and I just confirmed that we're indeed over the lux tax cap. In that case I guess we won't be signing anyone at all. So the argument we were having becomes moot. We have no chance of signing anyone at all now whether we can or not with whatever trade exceptions we may have had. Now the problem is getting under the lux tax...................... I guess any Battier trade will have us taking back less salary... Battier for Fernandez straight up??? that definitely puts us back below the lux tax
I can see your argument here, but I'm going to have to strongly disagree. Brooks and Battier for Rubio??? Now that doesn't seem like a contending move. In fact totally the opposite. Losing Artest over Ariza??? Doesn't seem like a playoff push move either. In fact Morey and Adelman only offering Artest a ONE YEAR deal proves that we don't really value immediate contending pieces too much other than rentals that allow us to rebuild on the fly. Les LOVES stars and big names. Its been mentioned by Feigen. He'd open up his pockets but only for a STAR. McGrady, Artest, etc is the type of player hes excited to go after. What can the current trade pieces get us? Tmac's worthless til the trade deadline and Brooks can't fetch much either despite his presumed high trade value. The aggressive offers for Rubio, I'm afraid, signals we're lottery bound. A great direction I say. So you saying we're gonna trade McGrady for Nash and Richardson just to get the 8th seed and for Les to pay a bucketload of tax? Les is smarter than that.
I agree with Dclan. Maybe we will trade McGrady for 6 Knicks or Chris Bosch or something. Well Bosch is a bad example, but maybe someone who is pretty good but with a longer contract. We trade our chances in 2010 to someone else in exchange for a good player (please be a big man) now.
Letting Wafer go is a mistake IMO. The guy has ELITE athleticism, and an uber quick first step from the Wing position. And why is everyone so happy with signing Ariza, he was a lot less productive in a lot more minutes than Von was...and Von is younger. DD
whats the point of that? to get to the 8th seed and be swept by the lakers? instead of trading tmac to get 2 or 3 starters whos contracts extend beyond 2010 so we can get into the playoffs as the 8th seed, why not just sign those 2 or 3 starters during the massive free agency pool that is the 2010 free agency bonanza??? that way we get a much better draft pick too. Think about it, if we get the 8th seed and end up with the 20th pick in 2010 draft, (in the west 8th seed = 20th pick), why not tank the season and get a top 5 pick??? those 2 or 3 guys we get from tmac's contract can be signed during FA. Net gain? hell yeah
I agree that we should really keep Von. He is extremely athletic and its not a stretch to say he will be a starter soon. But Ariza is very good in his own right too. MLE for him I say is a great move. We couldn't have gotten Ariza without giving up Von. Thats just the reality. You can't keep everything and give up nothing. Now it'd be awesome if Von is willing to come back for the minimum. If I were Von I'd do it. He'd get tonnes of playtime here with our season of extreme tanking. Too bad his agent is an a$$
I think tanking is inheritantly bad. I don't want players to get used to losing. I don't want a management staff that thinks its ok to lose. And I certainly don't want to buy game tickets to a team that is not trying. I am completely making this up - but what if say the Celtics suddenly got a hankering for Wade or James in 2010 and would trade us KG for T-Mac now. In this fantsay scenario I am assuming that salaries and or filles match and that KG has a contract that rounds for say three years. What is wrong with competing now and when KG gets old, we re-tool then - what ever the free agent market looks like. I recognize that 2010 is a bonanza, but every year there are good players available. But don't tank. It is a slippery slope and a bad idea.
Battier will be traded. Its all part of the plan. Ariza's signing signals much more than wats seen on the surface. signing players through Free Agency is a great way to create value and add talent to the roster for nothing. tanking or not, we're going to lose anyways. players are likely to give far less effort if they know we're playing for nothing. but players like ariza knows and has the professionalism to know that losing is not okay but we have to look at the big picture.
I disagree. Even when players (well, most) know they dont have a great shot at making the finals, they are still going to compete every game. Now, Tracy wont, but the younger players like Ariza, Brooks, Landry, Scola, etc, will continue to play hard. The better they play, the more their stock rises. If they just play at half speed, they know that when they become FA, their chances at a great contract are far less. Every player out there is playing for their career, I'd say thats far greater than nothing.
Ariza is a nice complimentary player, Von is too...the difference is that Von has a much higher ceiling....he can create. Trevor can not. Why spend 6 million a year for less production than you can get from a guy making 2 million. Makes no sense. DD
Ariza is a high-IQ bball player though......and Von plays like a chicken w/ its head cut off... Stupid players don't get u rings!
I don't think Von is stupid, I think he is just very competitive and didn't like having to come out of games. And plenty of players that are not all that bright have won rings..... DD
I dont think Von would play for 2mil. I think he thinks he's worth more than that. I dont. I've never been a fan of Von, but I'd give him a contract for 2mil to see how he improves. But to me, that contract would be a gamble.
I am sorry DD, but Von has no basketball IQ, which has hurt us plenty of times. His problem is his passing. Once he makes a move to the basket, everybody in the building knows he is gonna take the shot.
...ok ill play the game... DD how does von's defense compare to ariza's defense? also, what makes you believe von would play for us for 2 mil?
Robbie, Please don't be obtuse.....my point is that we already have a defensive Wing in Battier....and having two is a problem in it's lack of offense. Better to have a contrast at that point....one creating, scoring wing and one defensive 3pt shooting one. Battier and Ariza and to a lessor extent...Artest are all defensive wings. Wafer was a contrast, and it made the team better, now if they are going to trade Battier for a more creative Wing than it makes some sense. Otherwise, overpaying for a role player and tying yourself up into a Shannon Anderson type of deal is a bad move IMO. DD
Now I know most players are going to still play hard and try to win each game. They will still drive to the hoop relentlessly and play aggressive when they can. But the thing is when we get blown out by the likes of Lakers or Cavs, are we still going to put in the effort we would if we have a good chance of winning? Certainly not. Now I know using blowouts is not the best example, but with the current talent level on our roster thats not injured we're going to see many more blowouts against us than we've ever seen before. Even if we don't talk about blowouts, if the players saw we had no chance of getting to the playoffs, I'm sure most of them would still play hard and aggressive, but would they sacrifice and do the little things that would help the TEAM win??? In that situation I'd say they'd go for individual stats and highlights instead of making the extra pass and play hard D, as you point out, TO GET THEIR STATS AND CONTRACT. Now that does not mean it helps the team. Jermaine Taylor may play hard and get 20ppg, but on a winning team he's going to be much more willing to only get 12ppg to let the team win. He's going to think, if Aaron Brooks is going to score 25 meaningless points per game, why aren't I the one scoring those points? Its not like it makes a difference to the outcome of the team anyways...
