So is Griffin, and Griffin isn't undersized. I didn't like Blair before the draft, yet I was blasted for even comparing him to Robert Traylor. At last Traylor got a guaranteed deal out of the draft.
Huh? At best, they are equals at rebounding, and Blair's big body isn't as unique in the NBA. People are still talking about him like he's a lottery pick. He's not. He may not even make an NBA roster next year.
Re: Claver is Portland's Pick (MERGED) In my opinion turning a late first round pick from a couple of years ago into 1.6 million in cap room and a solid senior power forward who has made a living off of tough play and won't demand a lot of PT is a win-win, especially considering that Sergio had made it no secret that he wanted out of Portland. Now he gets a chance to maybe compete with Evans and Udrih in Sacramento for the point guard minutes and I wouldn't be shocked if he got himself some regular rotation minutes in the 15-18 minute range ... or not and it won't matter to me one tinkers damn because he's a king now.
pace adjusted per 40 minutes, Blair is the better rebounder. Only John Bryant of Santa Clara was statistically better.
no fucking shit. There must be something else (eg his knees), because statistically he's one of the best NCAA rebounders in the last few years, like I originally claimed.
Well then son of a bitch! Why didn't we pick John Rebound machine Bryant? KP passed on him 3 times. What a an ass.
Cheaper in what sense? If you cut him you're still on the hook for his salary as a caphold, but if you trade him for an un-guaranteed contract you give yourself 1.6 million more in cap room to play around with in free agency which could be the make it or break it amount in a lopsided trade or a contract offer for a free agent (or two). Cheaper in dollars, but maybe more expensive in opportunity cost
Yes, otherwise we wouldn't have been carrying Steve Francis' bloated deal around for the last two years.
He's not a free agent. Renouncing him still leaves Portland on the hook for his salary and cap hold. If that weren't the case, teams could just "renounce" their bad contracts to get under the cap.
cheaper yes, but if we cut him we still would have to pay his salary. so he still hurts our cap space.. Oops I guess I was too slow
haven't you heard of people saying things like "But we'd have to take on (awful player X) salary" why do you think teams do that...