<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AlleyOop:</div><div class="quote_post">Pietrus is an asset to this team simply because he'll be a sign-and-trade chip. I honestly don't think we'll be able to re-sign Pietrus (he'll want at least the king's ransom of $50+ mil. that Dunleavy got) so we shouldn't be involved in a discussion of "keeping" Pietrus. Unless we make room for him, he'll be gone one way or the other. IMO, Pietrus should be used as an enticing sweetener in a pot that moves either Foyle or Fisher. If we somehow found a way to move MDJ or Foyle or Fisher, I'd love to re-sign Pietrus at the SF position. But not for 5 years 50 million. He hasn't come close to earning a big payday. He's been way too inconsistent. The way I see it, no one wants Dun, so we're saddled to him, for better or for worse. Give up Pietrus and the draft pick in a "sacrifical move" that allows us to cut Foyle or Fisher. Take back anything reasonable that either expires soon or can play.</div> Who has cap and a need for pg or center? It's got to be Atlanta. If Pietrus is offered to Charlotte I doubt they would want Foyle or Fisher. Bulls might want Pietrus. Hornets could swap Pietrus for J.R. Smith, but I'm not a fan of J.R. Smith. Most other teams are probably over the cap because of overspending and players demanding more and more money for doing less. Jeez, NBA spending has gotten way out of control for almost every team in the NBA... I wish they would structure NBA contracts like they do in the NFL. They need to make it so players will try hard to live up to their deals. None of this Dampier or whoever stuff. Luckily Dallas is still kicking butt despite overspending, they probably didn't need Damp, just Josh Howard and Nowitzki + Terry + Stack has good balance of scoring and can play some defense when focussing on that part of the game.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">I wish they would structure NBA contracts like they do in the NFL. They need to make it so players will try hard to live up to their deals.</div> Amen to that CR2. As far as a trade partner -- I'll be chanting all summer: I want Zaza Pachulia, Josh Childress, and Marvin Williams
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AlleyOop:</div><div class="quote_post">Amen to that CR2. As far as a trade partner -- I'll be chanting all summer: I want Zaza Pachulia, Josh Childress, and Marvin Williams</div> Theres NO way they're going to give up Marvin Williams. You're just dreaming there
Well, I mean, he was no Chris Paul last year. What'd he average, like 8 pts 5 rebs or something like that? Okay yeah I'm dreaming but so what
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">Who has cap and a need for pg or center? It's got to be Atlanta. If Pietrus is offered to Charlotte I doubt they would want Foyle or Fisher. Bulls might want Pietrus. Hornets could swap Pietrus for J.R. Smith, but I'm not a fan of J.R. Smith. Most other teams are probably over the cap because of overspending and players demanding more and more money for doing less. Jeez, NBA spending has gotten way out of control for almost every team in the NBA... I wish they would structure NBA contracts like they do in the NFL. They need to make it so players will try hard to live up to their deals. None of this Dampier or whoever stuff. Luckily Dallas is still kicking butt despite overspending, they probably didn't need Damp, just Josh Howard and Nowitzki + Terry + Stack has good balance of scoring and can play some defense when focussing on that part of the game.</div> Custodian, Why do you even care what multi-multi-millionaire Cohan spends? Or billionaire Cuban? The NFL players get the rawest deal out there, they blow a knee out? Its over. No further monies owed; cut, contract over. You think that's the ideal? Players are overpaid, but relative to what? Teachers? We as a society have made the decision to pay $200/seat and watch commercials and thus fund these contracts. There's no way that the owners will ever roll back prices, whatever they save on salaries, they pocket so we as fans need to say "SPEND TO GET US A WINNER, WHATEVER IT TAKES." Not, don't pay them because its too much. Lousy contracts which make the cap unmanageable? Well okay. But lets look at the Miami Heat; they had Morning and were spending but then signed Eddie Jones and then Lamar Odom. Getting nowhere. Never let their chips just walk. Then they pick Wade and trade for O'Neal. Contender. Warriors just need to sign their players, and make smart trades. No jettison their players.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post">Players are overpaid, but relative to what? Teachers? We as a society have made the decision to pay $200/seat and watch commercials and thus fund these contracts.</div> Heh, lol, teachers get payed like fast food workers and they must earn their check or they'll be fired the following year. That's crap. I totally agree with CR2 that spending has gotten out of control and that 6-7 year guaranteed contracts are bad for the sport. Look at Dampier: he played like a three-legged wildebeast in heat his final year, pouring it all out every night for us faithful fans (just go with me on this). Then he got paid a fat, big ride contract, and... ffffffbbbbhhhhhttttttt <--- that's the sound of a fart. I'm not saying the owners are any less responsible. But two wrongs don't make a right. Owners shouldn't charge so much, and players shouldn't make so much. I know the consumer dictates the market climate. We're buying the tickets and tee-shirts, so why shouldn't they charge more and spend more? But I don't think we're necessarily talking about the size of the paycheck or the amount being spent here. While $10-15 million dollars to play a game for one year sounds insane, I can actually swallow this. What we're talking about is the length of guaranteed contracts, and how it impacts the integrity of the game. I understand the NFL "injury-and-its-over" argument, but this could be easily ammended with injury clauses written into the contract. I applaud the league for successfully shortening the max length of contracts in the player-union talks, but I still think it's absurd. I mean, Adonal Foyle getting 5 years $40 million -- with a team option of over $10 million in his final year!!! -- there's something very disturbing about this. And don't tell me he's putting that back into his charity funds, because you know Foyle is rollin in a 2007 caddy with spinners and hydrolics and sportin the mad bling-bling. That's just how it's done in the NBA. You get paid $50 million, you've got to go get a $15 million piece of ice to pimp around your neck. You know that comes from the value system these players learned during their graduate studies in college. C'mon
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post">Custodian, Why do you even care what multi-multi-millionaire Cohan spends? Or billionaire Cuban? </div> phil, my reasoning is that misspending the fan's money and advertising dollars is what causes us to be burdeoned with such bad investments where we can't easily make trades. But not only this, it also causes more underrated players who deserve to play to be out of job since there's only a limited budget and limited open positions available on a team. With the way some of our guys are playing, they deserve to be released and replaced with somebody who can catch the freakin' ball, understand plays or shoot free throws. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post">Custodian, The NFL players get the rawest deal out there, they blow a knee out? Its over. No further monies owed; cut, contract over. You think that's the ideal? </div> It's not the ideal situation to have no guarantees when a player is laying their body out on the line, but I've seen NFL players rough it out through much worse injuries and that shows real character and heart than most nba players show. The NBA is a marathon compared to the NFL season, but its one of the lighter contact sports compared to football or hockey. I think some players use this as an excuse like Erick Dampier, Olowakandi, etc. I'd like to see some of these basketball players take the game seriously (especially the "harder to replace" 6'11 and up guys). If they don't, I hope the league finds somebody that will be the blue collar kind of guy with decent talent to replace the slackers with bloated deals. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting philsmith75:</div><div class="quote_post"> Players are overpaid, but relative to what? Teachers? We as a society have made the decision to pay $200/seat and watch commercials and thus fund these contracts. There's no way that the owners will ever roll back prices, whatever they save on salaries, they pocket so we as fans need to say "SPEND TO GET US A WINNER, WHATEVER IT TAKES." Not, don't pay them because its too much. Lousy contracts which make the cap unmanageable? Well okay. But lets look at the Miami Heat; they had Morning and were spending but then signed Eddie Jones and then Lamar Odom. Getting nowhere. Never let their chips just walk. Then they pick Wade and trade for O'Neal. Contender. Warriors just need to sign their players, and make smart trades. No jettison their players.</div> Everyone is overpaid compared to teachers, but basketball is the one sport where guys get paid so much money as an individual athlete. It's sickening, but I guess the reason why that is is because there's few guys athletic at 6'3 and over and fewer guys to make a full team (such as football or baseball). Also, I don't know why we're using Miami as an example of overspending. At least those guys made the playoffs a few times with a bloated team salary. Miami didn't sign a sucktard like Adonal Foyle for 5 years, 40 or so million or some crap and at least chose the right time to get a top 5 pick with a greater chance to be a franchise pick. I'd take expiring contract Brian Grant over expiring contract Foyle. I'd bet on the Warriors to get a top 5 draft pick in the weakest draft possible and otherwise get #9-11 in any deeper draft where the quality of player could at least land a Kirk Hinrich. If we had gotten top 5 in the 2003 instead of 2002, we'd be awesome. But we can't help that... Now if we had chosen spending more wisely where we can evaluate certain guys like Dunleavy, Pietrus, or whoever first and add in veterans that can be moved to the bench if necessary if certain guys step up, that would give us more flexibility down the line and not inflate ticket prices so much. But I'm sure the Warriors tried, but had little leverage because they've sucked for so long... So yeah... I'm pretty much down for some guarantees, just make the contracts not as long... because damn it just destroys what we can do until that awesome trade comes along.
Mmm... I do think NBA players' salaries were held in check, especially after CBA set the limit for how much players can get. If you feel otherwise, it's probably because NBA caproom and total revenue increased, so there were more money to spend. Either that or you witnessed one too many overpriced contracts under the nose. Centers being overpaid is not a news, and Dampier gets 'moderate' 10.4 mils per year. Considering the average salary for center is 9 mils, I don't think it's that bad of contract, not to mention I would gladly take his contract over some of our owns. Speaking of Dampier, Cuban chose Dampier over Nash, and Nash got two straight MVPs. While it looked like one of the worst choice in the century, Mavs actually got better, improved their defense, and they are in final. If Dampier somewhat bother Shaqs and Mavs win the championship, did Cuban ultimately make a right choice? Are NBA players overpaid? If you compare to teachers, definitely. But, if you see them in NBA, they get rougly 47% of the revenue, so I really don't think they are overpaid. Certainly, there are teams like Mavs and NY, that doesn't mind spending millions of dollars, but most of teams kept themselves in check with all luxury taxes. It's really unrealistic to demand "Pay whatever necessary to build a winning team, because you have unlimited cash in bank account!" to owners. Because, just like us, they also live with the budget, and it's really unfair to blow their bank account, when they may lose millions of dollars for bringing marginal winning club. It's a GM's job to work with those set budgets, and most of championship teams kept their budget to average to bit over the average. If your owner spend below league average for years like Clippers, yeah you have a right to complain. However, Cohan is spending at least league average, and he will soon spend top 10 in the league if we keep our current contracts. Frankly, in terms of spending money, I don't know how some people can blame Cohan, because he has been quite generous. Also, who said spending money will bring a championship? The league is set up, such as caproom, to reward smart choices, while minimize the affect of spamming cashes. The main reason why Mavs are so good is because they brought right players, not because Cuban spammed cash aimlessly, and we see what happens when a dumb GM spend unlimited cash without any thought in NY. NBA is not baseball, and if you see the lack of talent despite the team spending at least league average, you should blame GMs, not owners for not spending more money. For us, we simply can't stack up talents after talents, or we will be smaller version of NY. I understand many people don't wish to lose any talent and want to add talent to see what happens. However, if we maintain our current salary structure without making any change, we will probably go over the limit in a year or two, and that's not counting any of our rookie resignings. Therefore, we really do need to downsize or at least go through major reconstruction as soon as possible. If your plastic shopping bag is about be ripped because you put too much stuff, you need to remove some items in the bag. If you insist that the bag has to carry all those items and more, the bag will eventually rip, and when that time comes, you will really be in trouble...
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Kwan1031:</div><div class="quote_post">Considering the average salary for center is 9 mils, I don't think it's that bad of contract</div> Kwan, where'd you get that number?
I actually got that number like 3 years ago from some article. The number probably has been changed a bit, but considering how much centers have paid in recent years, I think 9 mils per year for starting center still stands...
Interesting -- though Shaq's $20 million probably skews that figure a bit... actually <picks up calculator> without Shaq it would be 8.65. So not that much. But I dunno, $9 million just seems a bit high. The league average salary is $4.9 million for all players, so $9 million for centers means those forwards and guards are getting jipped!
Well,the high demand position is center, so I'd imagine it would be expensive since it is hard to find tall players that aren't stiffs. Good take Kwan. I guess I'm a little miffed by the way we spend on "market rate" players. And then with other teams like the Bucks who spent quite a bit on certain guys. But yes, I ultimately blame whatever decision-making got us in a rough spot. I mean one doesn't go and just make Adonal Foyle the first free agent signing out of the blue and expect to win without any inside presence. That takes a lot of recreational drugs or alcohol to lock up so many guys, expecting them to make the playoffs.
Yeah, when I said center, it meant starting center. I tried to calculate the exact number, but it was far harder than I expected due to I do not have average salary per year for players or it's also hard to determine who's starting center and who's not. But since league average is 4.9 mils, starting guards and forward should be around 7 mils. And, if it's the case, I don't think 9 mils per starting center is far fatched idea. Whole decision making things... I guess I can go on for hours on Mullin, but...
do the calculation for average starter and (not starting center) and you'll see that it's not that hight
Sam also had this little nugget #2 and Sweetney for #9 and Murphy then we'd have our choice (hopefully) of Thomas, Aldridge or Gay
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Mister Jennings:</div><div class="quote_post">Sam also had this little nugget #2 and Sweetney for #9 and Murphy then we'd have our choice (hopefully) of Thomas, Aldridge or Gay</div> That would be, well, stupid, IMO. I don't mind Murphy being traded but he averaged a double-double at 14 pts. 10 rebs. last year and that means he is an exceptional trade chip. Who the hell wants Sweetney? I mean, if it was the LeBron James draft, then okay, but we're talking about 10-15 players who are all more or less the same in terms of potential. Now if they wanted to go Eddie Curry and #2, then I'd be willing to talk.
I don't think it's stupid, but I'd want another player besides Sweetney, though because he's always out of shape it seems. Then, Murphy is too much like a role player and as far as improvements go, I've seen that he takes his game out further and further away from midrange. His turn-around shot is pretty but he's never going to set people up or contest shots or attract double team attention like Jrich or Baron or possibly Diogu would. That's something I've wanted to see from him, but his improved offense won't ever attract double teams so that there's a chance to get others involved. I mean so what if he lights up Tim Duncan or Dirk Nowitzki and does pretty well on defense. Unless he's playing like that a majority of the 82 games in a season, it's like who cares. People dare him to shoot since he's like 41-42% on field goals or something? I mean we still lost against the Spurs and the Mavs. I mean the production is great from Murph, but the end result wasn't there. I'd like to see a few more defensive stops at the hoop, maybe some steals to mess up the other team's passing game, some assists, but he's not that player. Meanwhile Duncan, Garnett, Nowitzki, Brand, all those guys put up numbers in all sorts of categories. We need that sort of production on defense/offense, not necessarily from a singe player, but the combined forward and center positions. Foyle + Murphy will never give us that consistently and few teams would touch Foyle considering his overall talent and bloated contract. I'm sure there's a better trade where we can save Murphy for when we need to make a bigger deal happen and this will avoid Chicago having to waste free cap money. Besides with Chicago having Hinrich/SG/Deng or Noccioni/PF/Chandler. They may proceed to trade Gordon for a bigger shooting guard or a pick or they may just use the #2 on a PF better than they would get for Murphy. If I've got the #2 and I got a choice of Aldrige/Thomas/Bargnani I ain't giving up the #2 for Murphy and the #9. Then what about other teams? I also don't think Charlotte will do any trades either. As long as they lose money, they want to keep getting the B.A.P. attraction and keep overall team salary down. That means they wouldn't want Murphy. Portland... it's hard to say because they don't even have an official gm right now, do they? They could do so many things, it's scary to be a fan in Portland because the direction is not very clear at all. It's like us, but without the headcases. I guess we can thank our GMs for not going after those type of players.
I like the Murph trade because it puts the choice in our hands. With the 9th, sure we could get a good player or someone might fall, but with the 2nd, we have our choice of maybe Gay, Aldridge, Thomas because at least two of those guys will be there. It also creates playing time for Ike and as the custodian was saying should improve our defense and offense. I was a huge fan of Murphy, he always played hard, scrapped with other players, reliable jumper, solid rebounder, but as it's been said, he keeps drifting further and further away from that, he has become way too finesse on both sides of the court. His rookie year he was like a more skilled Brian Cardinal, he'd get on the floor, get in people's faces, etc. Now it seems like he just loafs through the game, grabbing some boards, knocking down some Js. He rarely passes as well. I may be a little harsh on him, but it's very obvious Murph, Dunleavy and Foyle can't and shouldn't ever be on the floor together. Plus we take out a pretty decent sized contract, so we will be able to resign some of the younger guys down the line. Also I'd like to steal Duhon away from them as well, but I don't know how likely that is. If we keep the 9, we can pray for Gay, but it seems unlikely he'd be there, if he was though, we could move Dunleavy to the bench where I think he could be a lot more effective, he could have the ball in his hands more than when he plays with Baron and he can facilitate the offense, and look for his own shot more often (his post March 15 shot, as opposed to his earlier abomination of a shooting stroke). But once again it all comes down to Baron.
Jennings, it's because Murphy got paid maybe? Once they get the big contract, they start doing less it seems, especially under an agent like Dan Fegan. Only Jrich seems to be more productive than ever in halfcourt or open court style of play and defense, but I think it's because he wants to win and the responsiblity as the "franchise player" falls on his shoulders. Not anybody elses. Here's a big question: If Chicago wants Murphy, is it so they have enough combined salary to go after a big player? It seems like Chicago doesn't have the contracts to make a big deal happen, but we do. Remember the whole Murphy + so and so for KG or Jermaine O'neil deals? I'd like to see what happens if we held on to him long enough over the offseason. But if nobody is getting traded, I'd deal Murphy for a productive starting center. Whether that be Haywood or Magloire or somebody, we need a starting player with bulk, height, athleticism and some skill on both ends. Donut teams never go anywhere in the regular season so we need that center BADLY. The center position is too important on both the offensive and defensive style of play so if Murphy or Foyle can't play either, we need to do something quick or expect the worst next season.
