Here in a LA radio station there is a rumor going that the Lakers are waiting for the Warriors to release fisher with the luxury amnesty one time provision. Now while I know that there are a lot of people here in the boards that would love to get rid of fisher, I would hate for the Lakers to get Fisher for the veterans minimum while the Warriors wouls still have to pay for Fisher's salary. Getting luxury tax relief but still not being able to lower your salary cap sucks. I rather trade Fisher than to give him away or keep fisher but, definitely not give him away to the Lakers. Fisher is a good veteran influence for the team albeit an expensive one but why help a team in your own division while getting nothing back?
We wouldn't cut him even if we were over the lux tax thresh-hold. Mully wouldnt want to look like an idiot or a bad guy by cutting someone 1 year after he signed them. He still produces as well and has some very good qualities to his game.
They will wait quite a bit, since Fisher's contract won't trigger our luxury tax at least this year. Also, don't consider luxury amnesty as some device to improve the ball club. It really is the last resort for teams to decrease luxury tax. If it allows teams to free luxury tax AND caproom, you will see tons of teams releasing their top players to free up caprooms and sign top FAs. It will give top tier teams awful a lot of benefit, because, currently bad teams can't spend their caprooms to top FAs even if they have cash to spend...
Yeah, I wish it was a situation where they could cut the player, still pay them the money they signed for, but that money is paid under the table and did not count against the salary cap or luxury tax. Fisher is still a good player and a good leader with experience. I doubt we will cut him. Now if LA wants to trade with us for a decent player who will come off the books in less than 3 years, then I will listen...
The funny thing if we did do this, is what happens if there is no luxury tax when he's two or three years from his contract expiring? Granted he doesn't get hurt, he should be able to be moved if some team desperately needs more veterans and less headcases. Or he could just retire. Most guards don't play passed 33 unless they're looking for a ring or they're trying to do the player-coach thing. Better just to hold onto him until some team wants to give us the ideal backup guard or they're going to give us two good players for one. On the Lakers I do like Mihm or Jumaine Jones.
Luxury tax supposedly will hit us two or three years from now, depending on signings or how the rest of the league's average spending is. I just hope he retires or gets dumped somehow in the year we will be taxed. I think we need Fisher in the playoffs next season (hopefully playoffs) because we're relatively inexperienced for that kind of slow, stressful play. He's like ice in the games when it counts, but just utter crap sometimes in regular season. He could be like Robert Horry who does the same sleepwalking in regular season. I mean Fish sure saved Gary Payton's butt a couple of times coming off the bench and Horry was a big game hero for the Spurs.
