<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 05:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 05:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 04:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 04:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 10:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Oh he can screw himself. The Nets will get practically nothing in return, I rather they wait the year for him to come back.</div> Why can he �€œscrew himself�€�? He should do what�€™s best for him, just like the Nets do. </div> I just said why, if he would have just left and signed with Russia, I would not have had a problem with it but he gave them an ultimatum. </div> A deadline actually helps the Nets, it gives them an option to make a deal. Just signing with Russia would not have. That�€™s not a valid reason for saying he can go screw himself. Neither one would be, actually. That�€™s business. </div> I can say whatever I want and I agree it its business. Essentially he wants the Nets to give him a $10 million a year contract or trade him to a team that will do that. I like Curly but given his performance last year and this ultimatum this year, yeah he can screw himself, I'll see him next year. </div>Clearly, you can say what you want, but you haven’t backed up why he can screw himself. Because he played poorly? No one would dispute that. Still, that has nothing to do with his right to do what’s best for himself. The Nets do the same thing. </div> When did I say he couldn't do whats best for himself, he should have left and be done with it. Look at my post when it was first announced, I had no problem with it. My problem came when he gave the team an ultimatum, I have a problem with the ultimatum not that he took the money. Don't give this, he did the team a favor, he did it for himself. Like you said, its a business. </div>How is an ultimatum worse than picking up and leaving? It gave the Nets an option. If it is business, you wouldn’t take offense to what he did and say “go screw himself.” You just would have accepted it for what it is: business on both sides.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 05:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 05:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 05:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 04:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 04:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 10:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Oh he can screw himself. The Nets will get practically nothing in return, I rather they wait the year for him to come back.</div> Why can he �€œscrew himself�€�? He should do what�€™s best for him, just like the Nets do. </div> I just said why, if he would have just left and signed with Russia, I would not have had a problem with it but he gave them an ultimatum. </div> A deadline actually helps the Nets, it gives them an option to make a deal. Just signing with Russia would not have. That�€™s not a valid reason for saying he can go screw himself. Neither one would be, actually. That�€™s business. </div> I can say whatever I want and I agree it its business. Essentially he wants the Nets to give him a $10 million a year contract or trade him to a team that will do that. I like Curly but given his performance last year and this ultimatum this year, yeah he can screw himself, I'll see him next year. </div>Clearly, you can say what you want, but you haven’t backed up why he can screw himself. Because he played poorly? No one would dispute that. Still, that has nothing to do with his right to do what’s best for himself. The Nets do the same thing. </div> When did I say he couldn't do whats best for himself, he should have left and be done with it. Look at my post when it was first announced, I had no problem with it. My problem came when he gave the team an ultimatum, I have a problem with the ultimatum not that he took the money. Don't give this, he did the team a favor, he did it for himself. Like you said, its a business. </div>How is an ultimatum worse than picking up and leaving? It gave the Nets an option. If it is business, you wouldn’t take offense to what he did and say “go screw himself.” You just would have accepted it for what it is: business on both sides. </div> I do take it as that. He wants a lot of money for some very crappy production last year. What makes you think its just picking up and leaving? I'm sure the Nets have kept in contact and tried to negotiate, your making it sound like they have done nothing to keep him around. Curly knew what the Nets were willing to offer and after he knew that, he gave them the ultimatum.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 05:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Curly knew what the Nets were willing to offer and after he knew that, he gave them the ultimatum.</div> Not all deadlines are ultimatums. Some are simply deadlines.
he has every right to expect and get the best deal for himself. Look at his last knee injury which he got for playing for the nets. The nets then reward him with an insulting offer, and Europe offers him 5 times more. Geee, this is such a tough decision for him to make. The nets offer was insulting to him, at least he gave the nets a chance to match, even though he already knew they could never do it. You know in America even employees have some rights. Great job by Krstic and agent to do whats best for him and his family. Krstic is gone deal with it. The only mistake Rod Thorn made here was he underestimated the European market and the power of the Euro. For years Rod and company was stealing from that league, and now it comes back to bite him in the ass. Had he figured the power of the Euro market maybe he would have offered Krstic a more professional offer. That being said, Krstic in my opinion wasn't worth 3 million anyway. He was a product that benefited from the big 3. He couldn't do it on his own. I always think he was a bit overrated anyway. see ya Curly
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 05:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 05:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 05:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 05:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 04:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Jul 28 2008, 04:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 10:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Oh he can screw himself. The Nets will get practically nothing in return, I rather they wait the year for him to come back.</div> Why can he �€œscrew himself�€�? He should do what�€™s best for him, just like the Nets do. </div> I just said why, if he would have just left and signed with Russia, I would not have had a problem with it but he gave them an ultimatum. </div> A deadline actually helps the Nets, it gives them an option to make a deal. Just signing with Russia would not have. That�€™s not a valid reason for saying he can go screw himself. Neither one would be, actually. That�€™s business. </div> I can say whatever I want and I agree it its business. Essentially he wants the Nets to give him a $10 million a year contract or trade him to a team that will do that. I like Curly but given his performance last year and this ultimatum this year, yeah he can screw himself, I'll see him next year. </div>Clearly, you can say what you want, but you haven’t backed up why he can screw himself. Because he played poorly? No one would dispute that. Still, that has nothing to do with his right to do what’s best for himself. The Nets do the same thing. </div> When did I say he couldn't do whats best for himself, he should have left and be done with it. Look at my post when it was first announced, I had no problem with it. My problem came when he gave the team an ultimatum, I have a problem with the ultimatum not that he took the money. Don't give this, he did the team a favor, he did it for himself. Like you said, its a business. </div>How is an ultimatum worse than picking up and leaving? It gave the Nets an option. If it is business, you wouldn’t take offense to what he did and say “go screw himself.” You just would have accepted it for what it is: business on both sides. </div> I do take it as that. He wants a lot of money for some very crappy production last year. What makes you think its just picking up and leaving? I'm sure the Nets have kept in contact and tried to negotiate, your making it sound like they have done nothing to keep him around. Curly knew what the Nets were willing to offer and after he knew that, he gave them the ultimatum. </div> Apparently you don't take it as business as usual. Your reaction proves as much. He wants the best deal for himself. The Nets want the same. Neither is wrong, even if ultimatums are used. Business deals have deadlines, after all. You obviously can't wait forever. On the "pick up and leave part" -- it's clearly better that he gave the Nets a deadline rather than just signing with the Russian team outright. A choice is always better. Always. I never said the Nets did nothing to keep him around. Nothing in my post insinuates that. Yes, Curly knew what the Nets were offering. He gave them one last chance to compromise. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that and no reason to say he can screw himself.
Is that what your griping at? Your writing as if I said something extremely hateful, it's just a figure of speech.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dark Defender @ Jul 28 2008, 07:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Is that what your griping at? Your writing as if I said something extremely hateful, it's just a figure of speech.</div> It's pretty clear what I'm responding to. If you'd like to cite something specific, by all means, go ahead. It's a figure of speech that shows you're bothered by his decision, when there's no rational reason for being bothered. That's biz.
thanks again to kobimel--you might get a kick out of this-- <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>According to a report in an Israeli paper - a report that I admittedly cannot read - Krstic is set to accept an agreement to play for a team in Russia. The report was translated by a web site that covers everything Nets and says that Krstic has already reached an agreement with the team.</div> http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/nets/
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Jul 28 2008, 11:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Jul 28 2008, 10:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Jul 28 2008, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (soul driver @ Jul 28 2008, 10:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I can't see us going for Smith; or anything for that matter. I just see us letting him go.</div> I agree. </div> Why? I can totally see Thorn and Kiki being enamored with Smith and they keep hinting at wanting to make some serious moves. So do you not see them making a big move like that because you don't think they want to or because they won't be able to make a deal? </div> Let me make clear that this is just my uninformed opinion. Let's go under the assumption that there was no randomness associated with the Nets' moves so far. that they had a list of players that they wanted to purge from the roster, and either had a list of particular targets to acquire, or a list of attributes to acquire, which have been met by the players that they've obtained so far. Josh Smith is a great player. No doubt. I guess he's mostly a PF and could also play SF, is that correct? The fundamental question is how well he'd fit with the current makeup of the roster, with is clearly SG, SF, and PF-heavy. I mean, your backup PG is a SG, and your starting C could really be a PF; and the two non-roster invites that the team is drooling over would also be SGs that would be asked to play point in a pinch. I just see the Nets' primary objective at this point is to acquire a decent mid-level veteran center, not another PF. To get Smith, you'd have to give up the Nets' best bargaining chips (as I see it), Sean, Swift's contract, and KVH. Not only that, but it would reduce the court time and effectiveness of all these other players the Nets went to such great pains to acquire. I feel like the Nets have one more move left in them--packaging some of these assets (possibly including Hassell) for a $8-$10 million center, and opening up a roster spot for Hodge or Carroll. Getting Smith won't accomplish that. Put a decent center on this team--let's just use Brad Miller as a placeholder here--and suddenly this team looks pretty good. Josh Smith is terrific, but would he help the team as much? </div> I'm a little red-faced on this right now.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dumpy @ Jul 28 2008, 09:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>thanks again to kobimel--you might get a kick out of this-- <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>According to a report in an Israeli paper - a report that I admittedly cannot read - Krstic is set to accept an agreement to play for a team in Russia. The report was translated by a web site that covers everything Nets and says that Krstic has already reached an agreement with the team.</div> http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/nets/ </div> Do they mean NetsDaily, or S2? Either way, those bastards should have linked!
I have no problem with having Krstic go to Europe for a year or two to try to get his game back. We extend the qualifying offer each year, unclutter our front court by not having him on our roster yet retain his rights to possibly bring him back if he chooses to return to the NBA..I would prefer to do that than trade him now because of the potential he showed prior to his injury..He's still young and it would be heartbreaking to see him return to form for another team in the NBA, so I think we cant do wrong paying the (2.7 mil?) to retain his rights..By 2010 we know whether he'll be of use to us so he wont tie up our cash when we need it then because if theres no hope in his return we just stop paying the QO.
$5,669,280 was what he got last year. Qualifying offer is 150%, so about 8.5million per year. We wouldn't pay it, it's just a caphold.
I thought all we had to pay was 2.7 million or something? Am I using the wrong term here or just flat-out wrong? Im pretty sure I read somewhere that all we had to do to keep his rights was pay something in that range yearly.
I think netted said 150% of the previous salary. I'll go look it up I'm wrong: The qualifying offer for all other players must be for 125% of the player's previous salary So 5.6 times 1.25 is 7million
I stand corrected then, I truly thought I read something like that somewhere though, maybe they were wrong too who knows..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_War_Poet_ForLife @ Jul 28 2008, 09:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I think netted said 150% of the previous salary. I'll go look it up I'm wrong: The qualifying offer for all other players must be for 125% of the player's previous salary So 5.6 times 1.25 is 7million</div> http://sportstwo.com/NBA/LeagueSalaries#jump_NJN <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>08/09 Qualifying Offer is $2.8M</div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#1_War_Poet_ForLife @ Jul 28 2008, 09:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>$5,669,280 was what he got last year. Qualifying offer is 150%, so about 8.5million per year. We wouldn't pay it, it's just a caphold.</div> You are mixing up cap holds for salary
