MrDollarBills wrote:1)No. But if your plan was to have three max slots, signing Lopez seems like a no brainer especially if you sign him to a deal that will be pennies when the cap rises to 100 mil.
it wouldnt be "pennies". and the cap wont be at 100 million until the following season. it projects to be at 88 million in 16-17. the bottom line is this, we either habe enough for 3 max players, or we sign lopez. there isnt a scenario were both is possible. if it was, then sure, you sign lopez. having lopez at a "bargain" doesnt really matter if it wouldnt allow us to sign the same amount of players as we would without him.
there are better bigs who will be available then brook, id rather taking my chances signing one of them then singing brook. i prefer a risk of getting or not getting one of the top bigs then taking the risk of signing lopez and having him be injured or risk him not become an elite top 15 player.
2)No. But there hasn't been one time in history where an empty roster has lured a superstar player to a team. Like stated above, Amare only went to the Knicks because they were the only dumbasses willing to sign him to a deal that couldn't be insured.
and when in history has a star free agent joined an injury prone player who has played on losing/underachieving teams his entire career? its not like brook is someone guys would be lining up to play
I honestly don't see us getting any of those names. Maybe Horford. Howard will not be worth a max deal. Either way, we need to have something work with to build a team with talent and depth. I know you don't like Brook, but letting him walk for nothing or having an empty roster going into 2016 FA could blow up in our faces.
howard would be more worth a max deal then lopez. he has been an absolute beast and insane force. have you watched any of that series? same last year.
cap space is FAR less likely to blow up in your face. you always have flexibility with cap space. if you can sign players, you can trade for them. you can trade your cap space to aquire young players and first round picks. on the flip side, singing oft injured players who have underachieved and been inconsistent CAN blow up in your face, as it has here for us the past few seasons.
This has NOTHING to do with not liking lopez. even if you love lopez it doesnt make sense to extend him. for example, trader joe, one of the bigger if not biggest lopez supporters on this site, thinks we shouldnt extend lopez. this is after brooks surge. the guy has lopez in his avatar and has fought me tooth and nail onlopez for years.
its about flexibility. if you extend brook, you are basically saying he will be a top 15 player who can be a #2 on a title team. and that doesnt include the injury risk. there are better bigs, bigs who are outstanding defenders available.
you also keep harping too much on free agents. you dont just have to use cap space on free agents. it is super valuable via trade. look at how philly this year and cleveland the years prior stockpiled picks and young players by using their cap space. stars who want out of small markets come into play as well. you dont just need to sign guys,
Also, the "history" of max stars singing as free agents is insanely small. it really wasnt even an option until the past 3-5 years once the CBa started making drastic changes and the salary cap started sky rocketing. we do know that during that time stars have tried to team up, and guys have tried to fore their way to big markets
Lets discuss.
