I sort of asked this a while back, but why shouldn't the Blazers exercise a bit of patience and hold out for the bigger 2010 free agent class? I've looked it over, and it seems feasible to me. Here are the Blazer's current contracts. Other things being equal, the cap will end up being something along the lines of $63M. The biggest problem to signing free agents will be that Roy and LMA will be due for new contracts. However, we can estimate what those contracts might be. Just to make an educated guess, let's say Roy starts off at $14M and LMA starts off at $10M. If you use those values for LMA and Roy, and add in the other players the Blazers have, you get 11 players at a total of $51.6M Przy $7.41 Oden $6.77 Aldridge* $10.00 Webster $4.86 Roy* $14.00 Bayless $2.29 Batum $1.20 Rodriguez $2.29 Fernandez $1.00 Freeland $0.89 Koponen $0.89 Players 11 Committed Salary $51.59 Projected Cap $63 Cap Space $11.41 If Przy traded $18.82 If Webster traded $16.27 If Both traded $23.68 So if they did nothing but sign those guys to huge extensions, they'd still have around $11M in cap room. That's not enough to sign a max player, but it's enough to sign a significant one. But... if they took the further step of trading Przy and/or Webster, they'd be getting up into the range of being able to offer a max contract. They wouldn't have to trade them overnight, just sometime in the next year or so. I dunno, to me that looks like a fairly attractive option for the Blazers. If you're going to dream, why not dream big?
People are retarded on this issue. Superstar free agents don't sign elsewhere. Hasn't happened in a major deal since Shaq in 1996. Steve Nash was decent in Dallas, but not MVP quality until he went to Phoenix, so that free agent move was not a superstar moving to another team. Gilbert Arenas was OK at Golden State, but only became a superstar after moving to Washington. Elton Brand? Not a superstar. Ben Wallace? Please. Posturing to sign a superstar in the free agent pool is stupid. Get some cap flexibility, but use that space to sign guys that will go around your core, and use the draft to get your core. Superstars move, but they are usually moved in sign-and-trades or regular trades. -Pop
Grant Hill and Tracy McGrady signed with Orlando. They were the first team to clear a ton of cap space to sign big name free agents. I haven't seen anyone else do it since then. Gilbert Arenas was a second-round draft pick for Golden State, so the Warriors couldn't match what Washington offered.
you're right, he was pretty incredible his 2nd year in the league... thats why he was maxed out in his 3rd STOMP
That Warriors team was pretty good. Arenas, Richardson, Jamison, Murphy, etc. They were fun to watch. Then Arenas left, Jamison was traded, and things changed. I feel bad for Warriors fans. They've had some amazing talent come through there with nothing to show for it. Tim Hardaway, Mitch Richmond, Chris Webber, Gilbert Arenas... It's too bad.
All you are missing is the sky is falling and you have three of the most overused phrases on this board.
On that point, we are in complete agreement. Even when it works out on the court, the cost can be a cap-crippling contract. (EG Rashard Lewis)
Because 12 mil (or likely less as the salary cap isn't going to go up to 63 with the state of the economy) isn't nearly enough to sign one of those top notch guys. They already make more than that. The amount they can be offered by other teams in 2010 will be significantly more than that. Nobody is going to sign with us for several million dollars less than they're already making to sign with us.
Because a couple years down the road he'll be superfluous and expensive. Can always trade them. You'll have plenty of pieces to send someone back in a sign-and-trade if need be. But to get someone to agree to a sign and trade, you probably need the credibility to sign them outright. That means more than just cap flexibility. Which is why you need to get more than $12M And even if you do only have $12M, you can get a very good player there, without giving much up. Lastly, if the cap goes down, it will reduce every team's cap room (and the LT and the max salary, which is a % of the cap), so it doesn't disadvantage the Blazers.
