Big man carousel—Horford for Valanciunas

[patman66]

horford is huge negative like wiggins. wouldnt touch him with steven adams costing griffin nearly his job.

This isn’t true. He’s a negative asset because of his contract but he’s still a productive player that adds wins to a team. His contract at this point isn’t horrid either.

Wiggins is a more productive player, not to mention a decade younger, and their contracts are a similar size (unless you want to pay Al $15mil to kick rocks next summer and have that dead money on your books).

dead money for one year should not be a problem, if they choose to go that route.

[ecuhus1981]

This isn’t true. He’s a negative asset because of his contract but he’s still a productive player that adds wins to a team. His contract at this point isn’t horrid either.

Wiggins is a more productive player, not to mention a decade younger, and their contracts are a similar size (unless you want to pay Al $15mil to kick rocks next summer and have that dead money on your books).

dead money for one year should not be a problem, if they choose to go that route.

Dead money is objectively less desirable than having a productive player on a tradeable contract.

[patman66]

Wiggins is a more productive player, not to mention a decade younger, and their contracts are a similar size (unless you want to pay Al $15mil to kick rocks next summer and have that dead money on your books).

dead money for one year should not be a problem, if they choose to go that route.

Dead money is objectively less desirable than having a productive player on a tradeable contract.

For sure, I just said it should not be a problem, in that it will not severely hamper their efforts next summer. They are not going to be players in FA and if they do trade for a "star" Horford may have value as an expiring contract as salary ballast to go along with picks. For example as ballast in a Bertrans/Beal trade.