"Brandon Roy" rule won't be used on Brandon Roy (and that's good)

Prove it! If Allen was going to sell the team, I think it would've made a lot more sense to sell it BEFORE the lockout, don't you think? I hardly think a years-long lockout can be good for franchise values in the near term, and I doubt Allen plans that long term given his health history.
In fact, given his health history, I doubt he makes calculations like the one you're suggesting at all!

 

BRoy played for like 20 games this year on his surgically repaired knees. He needs time to adjust. I fully support keeping him.

 

If I win I get this beer:


If you win you get this one:

 

Prove what?

You asked how a hard cap could benefit PA and I gave an example. Now you want me to prove that example? All I did was ANSWER your question.

And if any any of us thinks we can predict what PA will do next with his fortunes . . . they need to step back and check themsleves because they don't know what they are talking about!

 

The Blazers would also be very much under being at all competitive at that point. Welcome to the rebuild, with LMA being the best trade asset. How much is Batum going to cost; that's another question as well.

 

Remind me real quick, who won that series? What good is one game out of five? The guy is getting paid max money to have one good game out of five? I don't think so. There's other guys out there who can serve as a "Microwave" role player. Roy was paid handsomely because he was an All-Star. He's not an All-Star anymore. He's not even a starting shooting guard anymore. You don't pay a bench player 84 million. You people need to stop thinking of Roy as he was and start thinking of Roy as he is.

 

The point is that if Oden/Felton/decent starting PG can be signed after this year, then cutting Roy really does nothing to improve the roster, since the money will have already been spent and the team would be at the cap, or even over it. At that point, it becomes about paying tax money for Roy, plus his salary, and then replacing him with either a rookie or a veteran getting the minimum on top of the "savings" for Roy.

Rasta is all over this one, IMO, and I agree with him. The only way Roy will be waived is if the team is in a total rebuild.

 

Maybe the team should be in a total rebuild. I'm not convinced that this team has the talent to compete with the best in the west. We have some good players, but very little depth and we have nobody to replace what Roy brought to the table pre-injury. We don't have a closer. Aldridge is an All-Star quality talent, and Wallace can be a very good player as well, but outside of those two I'm not really sold on Batum, Felton, or even Oden. I think we should deal some guys, build around Aldridge and look at adding a legit second scorer next to LMA.

 

Well, that's a completely different argument. Perhaps you should start a thread about it, but the point of this thread is that it is unlikely Roy will be waived under the proposed amnesty if the idea is to try and win a few playoff series. I don't often agree with Rasta, but he makes sense in this thread in his hypothetical scenario where Felton and GO are re-signed.

If the idea is to rebuild, then LMA is by far the best asset to acquire the picks/players to do so. I'm not sure anybody else on the roster can get more than equal value at this point, and that includes Gerald Wallace.

 

Completely foolish if they don't use it on Roy

 

Not if you can't replace Roy, though.

 

Roy can't replace Roy. What are we replacing at this point? Certainly not the All-Star player that he once was. I would love to see Roy return to the player of old, but I don't think he can do it. Either way, it's not my choice but I think at this point the team can't afford to hold onto hopes so that he can eat up cap space for the next four years.

 

What cap space? In the scenario Rasta hypothesized about, waiving Roy accomplishes nothing outside of saving some potential tax money. The other option, and I'm not even sure it is possible, is to bring on a similar contract from a team that wants to rebuild in exchange for Roy, and then that other team could waive Roy to clear cap space for a rebuild.

 

Will the NBA allow that? I would deal Roy as an "expiring" contract in a heartbeat but I vaguely remember that not being allowed back in 1999 and I don't think it would be allowed now. Maybe I'm wrong and my memory is off.

 

Ding

 

A second reason is that he's a distraction. McMillan spends time practicing contingency plans for if he can play someday. Management spends time fishing around the league for his trade value. If he has one great quarter, all plans are off the rest of the playoff series.

Same for Oden. There's a mental cost to keeping them both. It's like a business with one profitable line and one product line kept in reserve. Energy is expended on "just in case" scenarios, so real situations get less attention.

 

Ding, ding, ding!!!

 

Why thank you, and may all your dings in life be happy ones.

 

Not so fast on the idea that Brandon won't be in a Blazers uniform this season:

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/32935/more-flexible-amnesty-clause-on-way

This would be great for the Blazers, IMHO, because it would let them look at what Roy, or potentially Oden if they sign him to a new contract, can do this season before having to decide whether to waive them for cap reasons.