Atkins is included in the 4. While that's more than usual, it's still not ridiculous. And, again, I don't expect to see him here at the beginning of the season.
True, but in that case, we have a decent prospect playing in Spain to bring over. We wouldn't get a boatload for Sessions in that case, but we would only gain in bringing Rubio over. I'm sure I come off as a homer here, but I see this in a very positive way right now. I have to, I'm a Wolves fan!!
I really like the move. Milwaukee is in a bad spot where they have no room to take on salary, so Minny is able to buy at a value price, getting a young player with upside. The contract is quite reasonable even if Sessions doesn't improve. People are mistaken on Minnesota having too many PG's, first there is no way Rubio is coming over until 2012, three years from now when if Sessions is any good he'll be a free agent. Minnesota has one possible good PG on their roster, the untested rookie Jonny Flynn. Their other PG's are not in the long-term plans. Saying Minnesota has too many PG's is akin to saying the Knicks have too many SF's. Maybe they have too many crappy bodies at that position on their roster, but the real problem is they don't have enough GOOD players on the team. Minnesota has a talent problem, not enough of it. Sessions increases their talent; especially long-term upside potential. I would've liked to add Sessions as a backup to our team but it just wasn't meant to be. I'll get my fix drinking him instead.
Good move by the T'Wolves. Never let a player, even one with Rubio's potential, hold the entire team hostage. If nothing else, this relieves some of the pressure on Flynn.
I haven't heard one thing to support that. In this day and age, a guy who is a locker room cancer with talent doesn't slip under the radar. There's always a reporter who quotes an "anonymous source" . . . I don't have anything to support this, but I think Milwaukee will match. At $4 million/year he'd be making around the same or less than Buck's players Charlie Bell (3.6), Carlos Delfino (3.5), Dan Gadzuric (6.7), Luke Ridnour (6.5), & Kurt Thomas (3.8) Sessions may be inconsistent, but he's worth more than those guys. He has the potential to be a solid (if not really good) NBA PG - you can't let him walk when all it takes to keep him is $4 million/year - a bargain by league standards. Matching Sessions offer will put the Bucks over the luxury threshold for this season, but not by much. AND, they have several expirings after this season and will drop down below the threshold for '10/'11. They will actually have salary cap room, but who cares? What marquee FA is going to sign with them? I know the Bucks drafted Brandon Jennings and they still have Ridnour, but Ridnour is in the last year of his deal. Trade Ridnour's expiring or let him walk. Worry about having Jennings and Sessions on the same roster down the road. There's no guarantee that Jennings is going to be the guy anyways. It makes no sense to let Sessions walk when all it cost you is the price you pay your back-ups.
The problem is when these players got signed. Sessions was just unlucky that he had to hit free agency now, with a bad economy, and a bad market.
Matching Sessions could end up costing $10million+ this season, when you add up Salary, matching dollar for dollar and not receiving the kickback. I don't see Milwaukee matching. They don't have a Paul Allen who can lose millions as if it's a blackjack bet, they have one of the poorest owners in the NBA who has suffered major losses in this economy.
You're right, but it only cost them for one season. After that, they would go back under the cap. Maybe I'm wrong, but I still think they match the offer sheet.
We will find out in a few days! I think they also want to cut salary in future seasons even if they are around the cap. They would rather be right at the league minimum salary for a number of years until they increase their talent and have a playoff roster. Even though Sessions contract in years 2-4 wouldn't put them in luxury tax and is reasonable, they still may have reservations of paying salary to any player who isn't a clear star. Combine the modest expense in years 2-4, the massive expense in year 1, having their best prospect at the same position, overall I just don't believe they'll match the offer.
I just think the Bucks would be stupid to let him go for nothing. This isn't Channing Frye we're talking about here...
I still think Sessions would be a super pickup for the Blazers. If we could trade Blake to Miami, I'd be thrilled if we scored Sessions as the backup PG, to become the starter in 2-3 years. iWatas
If Milwaukee matches they can trade him December 15th, but no earlier. If they matched just to later trade him I think they'd want a team with cap room to take him, such as OKC. But if OKC wanted him why wouldn't they have just made the offer? The more I think about it the more unlikely a match just to trade scenario sounds.
