Teams still below the minimum payroll

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by PtldPlatypus, Jul 15, 2013.

Moderators: 6

Moderators

  1. BrianFromWA
  2. Chris Craig
  3. Darkwebs
  4. Ed O
  5. PtldPlatypus
  6. SlyPokerDog
Page 2 of 2
  1. illmatic99

    illmatic99 formerly yuyuza1

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    57,711
    Likes Received:
    56,216
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    NYstateofmind
    But what's the point for us? Do we really need to clear up ~4mil of space now? No FA that is still available is really worth that.

    We could use it in an unbalanced trade I suppose.
     
    illmatic99, Jul 23, 2013
    #21
  2. Draco

    Draco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,315
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    From what I just read it sounds like the team only has to hit the minimum salary of $52.8million by the end of the season. If the team is below that amount the difference is paid to the players on that teams roster. So we might see the 6ers stay below the minimum until well into the season so they have trade options.
     
    Draco, Jul 23, 2013
    #22
  3. magnifier661

    magnifier661 B-A-N-A-N-A-S!

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    59,328
    Likes Received:
    5,588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Cracking fools in the skull
    Location:
    Lancaster, California
    Well if it's the 76ers; then something like this could help us.

    http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=n32nr8q

    Pipe dream, I know
     
    magnifier661, Jul 23, 2013
    #23
  4. dviss1

    dviss1 Emcee Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    29,602
    Likes Received:
    27,494
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Pipe dream? Why the hell do we want Singler? Just for some homer nostalgia? Who's gonna start for us at the 2?
    I would rather keep Wright on the bench than start Batum there. We need bench scoring.
    Another reason why I see no reason to bring Singler in:

    He is a defensive liability.

    Nor do I see any logic in paring LMA with someone who is going to take touches away from him all while not playing any defense.

    There is no reason to acquire Monroe unless Aldridge is on his way out too.
     
    dviss1, Jul 23, 2013
    #24
  5. magnifier661

    magnifier661 B-A-N-A-N-A-S!

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    59,328
    Likes Received:
    5,588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Cracking fools in the skull
    Location:
    Lancaster, California
    WTF?!?! Dude it's not singler we want. It's the huge salary savings and Monroe. And Monroe and Aldridge can definitely be a good combo.
     
    magnifier661, Jul 23, 2013
    #25
  6. BrianFromWA

    BrianFromWA Editor in Chief Staff Member Editor in Chief

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    26,096
    Likes Received:
    9,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This. It gives them a lot of flexibility in case they want to trade a player into that spot, etc.

    And it's not like they HAVE to hit that 52.8M threshold. If all else fails and they don't add anyone, all they do is spend the difference on their existing players. Nothing that bad happens.
     
    BrianFromWA, Jul 24, 2013
    #26
Page 2 of 2

Share This Page