Chicago-Portland-Toronto

Moderators: Trader_Joe, loserX, Andre Roberstan, HartfordWhalers, BullyKing, Texas Chuck, MoneyTalks41890, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger

User avatar
bullzman23
RealGM
Posts: 14,557
And1: 3
Joined: May 23, 2001
Location: Evanston

 

Post#21 » by bullzman23 » Fri Jan 4, 2008 8:22 am

positivetension wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


Yeah, because financial flexibility isn't important.. Big Ben should find his way to the Knicks.


It doesn't really hurt your financial flexibility. From next season, he'll be a tradeable contract. The season after that he'll be an expiring one. That's really not that bad. Under Boylan he has played quite well.
girlygirl wrote:Sorry, I just don't think MJ changed the game all that much.


www.theslickscript.com
positivetension
Veteran
Posts: 2,765
And1: 1,122
Joined: Dec 21, 2006

 

Post#22 » by positivetension » Fri Jan 4, 2008 8:53 am

bullzman23 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



It doesn't really hurt your financial flexibility. From next season, he'll be a tradeable contract. The season after that he'll be an expiring one. That's really not that bad. Under Boylan he has played quite well.

He played well for 5 games?!? Gee gosh! We better trade for him now! He has three years left on his deal, quit trying to rationalize that it's not a bad contract. I guess Bobby Simmons aint that bad either..

I feel sorry for whatever team has to pay a 34-35-36 year old Ben Wallace.
User avatar
bullzman23
RealGM
Posts: 14,557
And1: 3
Joined: May 23, 2001
Location: Evanston

 

Post#23 » by bullzman23 » Fri Jan 4, 2008 9:11 am

positivetension wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


He played well for 5 games?!? Gee gosh! We better trade for him now! He has three years left on his deal, quit trying to rationalize that it's not a bad contract. I guess Bobby Simmons aint that bad either..

I feel sorry for whatever team has to pay a 34-35-36 year old Ben Wallace.


Ok wow, way to twist my words...

Stop calling it a three year deal. You need to stop counting this season. By the deadline, Chicago will have paid for half of this year's salary.

So basically a team is paying for 1 1/2 seasons before Ben Wallace becomes an expiring contract. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Any team can eat a bad contract for a year and a half.


And him playing well under Boylan, though a small sample size, is still worth noting. It's clear that Wallace was playing uninspired ball under earlier because he hated Skiles.
girlygirl wrote:Sorry, I just don't think MJ changed the game all that much.


www.theslickscript.com
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 57,351
And1: 17,047
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

 

Post#24 » by Schad » Fri Jan 4, 2008 9:25 am

bullzman23 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Ok wow, way to twist my words...

Stop calling it a three year deal. You need to stop counting this season. By the deadline, Chicago will have paid for half of this year's salary.

So basically a team is paying for 1 1/2 seasons before Ben Wallace becomes an expiring contract. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Any team can eat a bad contract for a year and a half.


And him playing well under Boylan, though a small sample size, is still worth noting. It's clear that Wallace was playing uninspired ball under earlier because he hated Skiles.


And yet most would agree that Larry Hughes is one of the worse contacts in the NBA, despite the fact that he too is a year and a half from being an expiring contract. Even a rejuvenated Ben Wallace is a poor fit in Toronto, even if the trade-off is only a 1st rounder. At best, will he remain useful for the rest of this season? If so, how far does that really get Toronto? Wallace would potentially make the Raptors slightly more competitive in the second round (should they get there)...but a first rounder and salary cap hell is a terrible exchange for a payroll nightmare.
Image
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
bullzman23
RealGM
Posts: 14,557
And1: 3
Joined: May 23, 2001
Location: Evanston

 

Post#25 » by bullzman23 » Fri Jan 4, 2008 10:20 am

Schadenfreude wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



And yet most would agree that Larry Hughes is one of the worse contacts in the NBA, despite the fact that he too is a year and a half from being an expiring contract. Even a rejuvenated Ben Wallace is a poor fit in Toronto, even if the trade-off is only a 1st rounder. At best, will he remain useful for the rest of this season? If so, how far does that really get Toronto? Wallace would potentially make the Raptors slightly more competitive in the second round (should they get there)...but a first rounder and salary cap hell is a terrible exchange for a payroll nightmare.


Right, he is a bad contract, but it's a bad contract that is getting better. It's a bad contract for one more season, and then it's a good tradeable, and even desirable contract after that. So you saying it limits your financial flexibility isn't quite accurate. It limits it for one season and then opens up trade options the next year.
girlygirl wrote:Sorry, I just don't think MJ changed the game all that much.


www.theslickscript.com

Return to Trades and Transactions