Pistons WAIVE Josh Smith

The Penguin · Post #21 » by **The Penguin** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:12 pm

joeposh wrote:Can someone remind me, when we waive a player if he gets claimed off of waivers, whatever amount he's paid is deducted from our amount owed to him over the remainder of his waived contract, correct?

Perhaps SVG did the math and figured it was better to release Josh, use the stretch provision and take whatever relief we get from the waiver process than to take on other bad/multi-year contracts that would lock up more cap space.

Either way, bold move but probably the right one if he wants any chance of retaining Moose.

That's amnesty. Josh wasn't eligible for that because his contract was signed after the new CBA.

princeofpalace · Post #22 » by **princeofpalace** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:12 pm

TBH, I had reached my breaking point with this team. I simply could not stomache watching Smith play 35minutes a night to the detriment of the team. I am so overjoyed with this move. And, I don't think it hurts our shot at a top pick. Besides, if we want to develop our younger guys then we simply could not justify riding Smith so hard and letting him chuck up 15FGA per game.

We need to teach our young guys how to win, not happening with such a low IQ player in Smith.

fekz · Post #23 » by **fekz** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:12 pm

Hoooly ****. I seen this on facebook and thought it was a fake article! Wow! SVG is not about games!

Post #24 » by **theBigLip** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:12 pm

Good move. If we are serious about fixing the Pistons, this is a good first step. Too bad we couldn't get something in return, but so be it. Smith was never going to fit with Drummond, and he is too old to be part of our rebuild. Jennings should be very nervous :-)

chrbal · Post #25 » by **chrbal** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:14 pm

Stan Van Gundy at the press conference

Post #26 » by **Snakebites** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:14 pm

We are on the hook cap-wise for the whole amount here.

If we were able to get a deal that even slightly removed that cap obligation we'd have done it. If the Kings truly offered that deal in the offseason and we turned it down, it's fairly obvious we waited too long to trade him.

Call it SVG's first major blunder of his tenure (though Meeks might have been that too, hard to say).

It's discouraging, but I'm still thrilled on a personal level that I never have to watch Josh Smith on my team again.

Lucidity · Post #27 » by **Lucidity** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:15 pm

@SpearsNBAYahoo: The Pistons announce that they have waived Josh Smith. Wow.

It's over guys, Christmas Miracles do happen!

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Post #28 » by **theBigLip** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:15 pm

ImHeisenberg wrote:
It also significantly hurts our ability to get a top 5 pick as well.

I don't understand. I think it guarantees us a top 5 pick. Or, maybe not. I guess your point is that we'll actually play better without Smith, then I guess that could happen. It will be interesting how the team reacts.

Kilo · Post #29 » by **Kilo** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:15 pm

Gores EATS $26M rather than giving up another first. WOW. And he clears waivers and can sign with any team for virtually nothing. I wonder what happened behind the scenes - there has to be more to this story.

chrbal · Post #30 » by **chrbal** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:16 pm

Meeks is basically going through his preseason.

Smith was Dumars blunder. This is addition by subtraction at its most absolute.

rmfc · Post #31 » by **rmfc** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:16 pm

Absolutely awful.

Just wow....

Defor · Post #32 » by **Defor** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:16 pm

Yes, yes ,,yes ,yes ,yes, finally and the true will set you free. I don't care about the cost the man had to go, and its good to see we have a GM with the marbles to do it. On a side note not sure I like the new set up for RealGM took me awhile to figure out how to get here to post.

Kilo · Post #33 » by **Kilo** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:16 pm

theBigLip wrote:
ImHeisenberg wrote:
It also significantly hurts our ability to get a top 5 pick as well.

I don't understand. I think it guarantees us a top 5 pick. Or, maybe not. I guess your point is that we'll actually play better without Smith, then I guess that could happen. It will be interesting how the team reacts.

Jerebko will be getting 25 minutes a game now - I guess it depends on if he could handle it.

chrbal · Post #34 » by **chrbal** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:17 pm

We should sign Willie Reed or Adonis Thomas off our Grand Rapids team and just embrace this rebuild.

That and/or use Tony Mitchell, Gigi, and the $2.2 mil in cap room to see if we can pick up someone decent.

mattao313 · Post #35 » by **mattao313** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:18 pm

SVG you da real MVP

captainrebel · Post #36 » by **captainrebel** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:18 pm

Who would have thought this would happen? Who would have thought that Gores would eat this kind of money? I now believe that Monroe really wanted Josh off the roster before he signed a long term contract; but, I guess we will have to wait and see what happens in the off season, that is, if Monroe resigns. Management had a choice between ridding the roster of Smith or lose Monroe. They made the right choice!

Post #37 » by **dVs33** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:19 pm

Snakebites wrote:We are on the hook cap-wise for the whole amount here.

If we were able to get a deal that even slightly removed that cap obligation we'd have done it. If the Kings truly offered that deal in the offseason and we turned it down, it's fairly obvious we waited too long to trade him.

Call it SVG's first major blunder of his tenure (though Meeks might have been that too, hard to say).

It's discouraging, but I'm still thrilled on a personal level that I never have to watch Josh Smith on my team again.

I'm guessing the kings offer wasn't as good as reported. The fact that SVG/Gores are happy to eat that salary means it must have been very hard to trade Smith for anything of use.

Entourage27 · Post #38 » by **Entourage27** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:20 pm

The Penguin wrote:
SMTBSI wrote:
The Penguin wrote:Stunning. I've checked the calendar several times, it's not April 1st.

That was my very literal first reaction too.

gswhoops wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/547074352941117440[/tweet]

5.2mil for 5 years with the cap going up? Frankly, that doesn't even sound too awful, compared to losing Monroe and having to keep Smith for two more years.

Exactly. Even in the Sacto trade they would have to take back Landry or Thompson, you are owed 5-6 mil per year for the next 3 seasons. This is basically that move while tacking 2 more years on and not giving up any assets for a salary dump. Considering the team is loaded with cap space each upcoming summer and no one really outside of Monroe & Drummond to spend it on, it's not really going to hurt all that much.

I would've rather took the trade and waived Thompson and have his 6 mill a year contract get split on the 5 year provision. I am a little upest that SVG couldn't get a deal done but nonetheless I am happy that smith is gone off this team.

Post #39 » by **theBigLip** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:21 pm

captainrebel wrote:Who would have thought this would happen? Who would have thought that Gores would eat this kind of money? I now believe that Monroe really wanted Josh off the roster before he signed a long term contract; but, I guess we will have to wait and see what happens in the off season, that is, if Monroe resigns. Management had a choice between ridding the roster of Smith or lose Monroe. They made the right choice!

I'm not even sure if this is a choice between the two. I guess it does open the door for extending Monroe, but I'm not sure Smith or Monroe are good compliments to Drummond. We really need some shooters, even at the 4. But yes, given a choice between the two, you got to try to get Monroe.

russkopp · Post #40 » by **russkopp** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:21 pm

Carl Landry and Jason Thompson was the deal SVG turned down in the summer. Now being reported.