Anyone else sick of "traded only to re-sign in 30" deals?

[Puertorique]

I personally have no problem with the rule. It's a loophole that most teams should look at and take advantage of when the opportunity presents itself. It's like that crappy Brown for Gasol trade, may think it's a gift and a crappy trade, but if my team was to do it I would like it more.

[LApwnd]

I personally have no problem with the rule. It's a loophole that most teams should look at and take advantage of when the opportunity presents itself. It's like that crappy Brown for Gasol trade, may think it's a gift and a crappy trade, but if my team was to do it I would like it more.

Lakers didn't get ANYONE back in that trade, Mckey was only given $1mill pro rated contract to match salaries

[mewald]

This is the same thing you people didn't understand about the Amar'e deal. Running a basketball team is about championships. OWNING a basketball team is about the $$$. And the people that run the team are employed by the people who own it.

Take a financial management class and you'll see, you can't expect to fulfill any mission by spending more than you make. It may work for a season, but in the long term, this strategy works for VERY VERY few organizations. So, sometimes people need to make deals for the almighty dollar.

[mewald]

This is the same thing you people didn't understand about the Amar'e deal. Running a basketball team is about championships. OWNING a basketball team is about the $$$. And the people that run the team are employed by the people who own it.

Take a financial management class and you'll see, you can't expect to fulfill any mission by spending more than you make. It may work for a season, but in the long term, this strategy works for VERY VERY few organizations. So, sometimes people need to make deals for the almighty dollar.

[JustBlaze]

This is the same thing you people didn't understand about the Amar'e deal. Running a basketball team is about championships. OWNING a basketball team is about the $$$. And the people that run the team are employed by the people who own it.

Take a financial management class and you'll see, you can't expect to fulfill any mission by spending more than you make. It may work for a season, but in the long term, this strategy works for VERY VERY few organizations. So, sometimes people need to make deals for the almighty dollar.

Usually a good way to get more profits by owning a team is building it into a championship contender, not giving away players and selling draft picks to save money. <---- That is poor management and ownership. The Spurs used their late 1st and 2nd round picks to draft key pieces to their championship teams. The Suns sold theirs away for money, not even trying.

[Puertorique]

I personally have no problem with the rule. It's a loophole that most teams should look at and take advantage of when the opportunity presents itself. It's like that crappy Brown for Gasol trade, may think it's a gift and a crappy trade, but if my team was to do it I would like it more.

Lakers didn't get ANYONE back in that trade, Mckey was only given $1mill pro rated contract to match salaries

Call it what you want, I think it was a completely lop sided trade done as a favor, I wouldn't be mad if my team got away with either. I don't think the Lakers did anything wrong or should appologize about it either. They did what any team would/should do if a gift/situation like that presents itself. Take it and run, in this case the Lakers ran to a championship. I applaud them for that.

[Too Late Crew]

I think it will be gone in next CBA.

I don't like it becuase its so obvious its a wink wink nudge nudge type deal. To me its really no different than any other tampering that's not in writing. The 30 day thing > The rules say they are not allowed to have a prenegotated agreement with Z for him to return but as long as they don't get caught and their is no proof they get away with it. Like when it happens its some coincidence.

If a team verbally promises to sign a guy for 2 M with a "promise" to give him a big new contract the next year that isn't allowed. its circumventing the cap. The 30 day thing is the same deal.

[Puertorique]

I think it will be gone in next CBA.

I don't like it becuase its so obvious its a wink wink nudge nudge type deal. To me its really no different than any other tampering that's not in writing. The 30 day thing > The rules say they are not allowed to have a prenegotated agreement with Z for him to return but as long as they don't get caught and their is no proof they get away with it. Like when it happens its some coincidence.

If a team verbally promises to sign a guy for 2 M with a "promise" to give him a big new contract the next year that isn't allowed. its circumventing the cap. The 30 day thing is the same deal.

True, however then you are dictating the FA's future. What if said Free Agent never wanted to leave the team, Team A trades him for better player, Team B drops him because they don't really need him he was just a salary add in. Team A says we would love to have you back especially at ($600,000 ex) player says he want's to go back to team A. Nothing wrong with that. Player hit free agency if another team wanted said player they had the choice to claim them off of waiver or offer them a contract. If the player doesn't want to go to another team or want's to return to previous team as a free agent, they should be able to. Especially as a free agent.

[bringinhinkie]

New York Trade Breakdown
Change in Team Outlook: -20.9 ppg, -12.3 rpg, and -4.5 apg.
Incoming Players
Ray Allen
6-5 SG from Connecticut
16.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.7 apg in 36.6 minutes
Outgoing Players
Eddy Curry
6-11 C from Thornwood (HS)
3.7 ppg, 1.9 rpg, 0.0 apg in 8.9 minutes
David Lee
6-9 PF from Florida
20.0 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 3.5 apg in 36.8 minutes
Nate Robinson
5-9 PG from Washington
13.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 3.7 apg in 24.4 minutes

Boston Trade Breakdown
Change in Team Outlook: +20.9 ppg, +12.3 rpg, and +4.5 apg.
Incoming Players
Eddy Curry
6-11 C from Thornwood (HS)
3.7 ppg, 1.9 rpg, 0.0 apg in 8.9 minutes
David Lee
6-9 PF from Florida
20.0 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 3.5 apg in 36.8 minutes
Nate Robinson
5-9 PG from Washington
13.2 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 3.7 apg in 24.4 minutes
Outgoing Players
Ray Allen
6-5 SG from Connecticut
16.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 2.7 apg in 36.6 minutes


rayray cut and returned

CMON AINGE DO IT

[Edrees]

Big Z then has 23 more days ( 30 days from trade date) in which he is a FA for any team other than Cleveland to sign him to any deal. He is not required to go to the highest bidder though, and could in theory turn down more money from Boston to wait for the offer from Cleveland.

The reality is though, the guy just got handed a huge buyout cheque so the difference between a minimum deal for the rest of the year a deal slightly larger isn't really going to matter. I think the other team would have to offer something sweet.

But if no team is willing to pay that much for him, then he's not a good player, so why is it a problem for him to return to his original team? If there is no other team in this entire NBA league that wants him enough to pay him around the cavs are gonna pay, then he's not that good anyway, so what's the crime in him returning to the cavs? It's the rest of the leagues fault for not taking a "good" player for a decent price...

[Too Late Crew]

I think it will be gone in next CBA.

I don't like it becuase its so obvious its a wink wink nudge nudge type deal. To me its really no different than any other tampering that's not in writing. The 30 day thing > The rules say they are not allowed to have a prenegotated agreement with Z for him to return but as long as they don't get caught and their is no proof they get away with it. Like when it happens its some coincidence.

If a team verbally promises to sign a guy for 2 M with a "promise" to give him a big new contract the next year that isn't allowed. its circumventing the cap. The 30 day thing is the same deal.

True, however then you are dictating the FA's future. What if said Free Agent never wanted to leave the team, Team A trades him for better player, Team B drops him because they don't really need him he was just a salary add in. Team A says we would love to have you back especially at ($600,000 ex) player says he want's to go back to team A. Nothing wrong with that. Player hit free agency if another team wanted said player they had the choice to claim them off of waiver or offer them a contract. If the player doesn't want to go to another team or want's to return to previous team as a free agent, they should be able to. Especially as a free agent.

The current rule already "dicates" it though. They can't return for 30 days. Why niot make it till the end of the season?

They have resticted free agency that resticts a FA to siging an offer sheet but being "forced" to stay if their team matches.

Are you restircting their choice? Yes but not much . They still have their choce of 907% of the NBA teams.

[Manocad]

The only people sick of this are the fans of the teams that the players in question don't sign with.

[raleigh]

The only people sick of this are the fans of the teams that the players in question don't sign with.

Which would be, what, 80+% of the fans? Some counterargument you've got there.

[NO-KG-AI]

Well the trade and cap rules are dumb and restrictive anyway, so I don't really care if they find loopholes.

[loscy]

Previously in such a scenario Big Z could resign with the Cavs immediately after clearing waivers. The 30 day rule was introduced in an attempt to combat this practice. The though process was the player would not want to wait 30 days and it would give other teams a large window of time to court such players. Clearly, however, it has not had much of an impact and the waiting period should be lengthened. Maybe not the full season flat out, but something long enough to make these trade deadline deals, buyouts, and resigns impossible.

[LApwnd]

I personally have no problem with the rule. It's a loophole that most teams should look at and take advantage of when the opportunity presents itself. It's like that crappy Brown for Gasol trade, may think it's a gift and a crappy trade, but if my team was to do it I would like it more.

Lakers didn't get ANYONE back in that trade, Mckey was only given $1mill pro rated contract to match salaries

Call it what you want, I think it was a completely lop sided trade done as a favor, I wouldn't be mad if my team got away with either. I don't think the Lakers did anything wrong or should appologize about it either. They did what any team would/should do if a gift/situation like that presents itself. Take it and run, in this case the Lakers ran to a championship. I applaud them for that.

call it what I want? READ the thread topic and tell me who in the LA/Mem trade got bought out and came back to LA?

[Too Late Crew]

Previously in such a scenario Big Z could resign with the Cavs immediately after clearing waivers. The 30 day rule was introduced in an attempt to combat this practice. The though process was the player would not want to wait 30 days and it would give other teams a large window of time to court such players. Clearly, however, it has not had much of an impact and the waiting period should be lengthened. Maybe not the full season flat out, but something long enough to make these trade deadline deals, buyouts, and resigns impossible.

While I'd prefer they be impossible you probaly don't need to go that far. I think that if you lengthen the waiting period to return to the previous team to say the day after the last day to be playoff eligible it would greatly reduce the entire thing. 1. It would reduce the salary a player could make with few games left and 2 If the guiy can't play in the playoffs its much less attractive for him and the team he was traded from. Think the Cavs would hold a roster spot for Z so he could be a backup for the last month of the season and not be in the playoff rotation? Possible but doubtful.