Game 26: Charlotte Bobcats (7-17) @ Phoenix Suns (10-15)

[RunDogGun]

It all depends what that second rounder is.

Miami was able to trade Beasley when he was making $4+ million. He still has potential, I'm just not sure Gentry is the coach to tap that.

I'm still on the fence with the signing, because I'm not sure what we had in mind for him. I honestly think they wanted to start him at the four and have Frye be the backup center, but who knows. Then we lucked out picking up Scola on an amnesty waiver, and it became clear that we had to play Beasley at the three. We should just hire the guy he has been working with over the summer as an assistant if we want to get the most out of Beasley. Also, I think we should run him as a point forward in the second unit. Telfair does a fair to poor job running the point.

Either way, we have to get Beasley motivated, or we wasted the signing. Last night, too many guys seemed disinterested in playing at some point in the evening, and we were in the game the whole time.

I still want to know if we had a timeout to take in the final secondsofthat Portland game, and was there any play set up out of the last timeout just in case it played out like it did.

[mybloodisorange]

I have agree with Mooch here. I think are you undervaluing the importance of cap space (ie expiring contracts) as a tradeable asset phrazbit.

One more time... LARGE expiring contracts ARE assets. However, Beasley's contract is not the size of Eddy Curry's AND Beasley will have to be bought out. Furthermore the Timberwolves tried to give Beasley away LAST YEAR when he was a 6 million expiring contract and could get nothing.

So once again... what do you expect to get for it? Maybe we have a different definition of value. We could probably get a 2nd round pick, or some scrub on a similar but longer contract. I dont really think of that as value though.

And it shows how awful this signing was that less than 2 months into him actually playing we are discussing the hope of getting something for him when he eventually becomes an expiring.

Sure right now that is true but we are just 2 months into his contract; we were just pointing out that he has a short contract so this time next year he will start to increase in value with a bigger increase the following year. The point im making is that there really is no downside and dont assume that the team trading for Beas even has to pay him out; they could have him ride the bench till he expires just as easily.

Allow me to invent a random scenario. This time next year a young star on bad team wants to be traded and has 4 years on his deal. We have real assets with value like Gortat and others and Beas is the perfect short/expiring fill in type contract if needed. And I know you think Beas has zero value in the league but I think he does ok coming off the bench playing the 4-that might be an asset to a defensively focused team needing some instant offense off the bench.

He's just a placeholder either way...its just a matter if we can work him into whatever package we try to assemble when going after a top tier player via trade. I think you are being hard on the FO considering there wasnt much talent available once you remove the restricted FA's.

[phrazbit]

Sure right now that is true but we are just 2 months into his contract; we were just pointing out that he has a short contract so this time next year he will start to increase in value with a bigger increase the following year. The point im making is that there really is no downside and dont assume that the team trading for Beas even has to pay him out; they could have him ride the bench till he expires just as easily.

Allow me to invent a random scenario. This time next year a young star on bad team wants to be traded and has 4 years on his deal. We have real assets with value like Gortat and others and Beas is the perfect short/expiring fill in type contract if needed. And I know you think Beas has zero value in the league but I think he does ok coming off the bench playing the 4-that might be an asset to a defensively focused team needing some instant offense off the bench.

He's just a placeholder either way...its just a matter if we can work him into whatever package we try to assemble when going after a top tier player via trade. I think you are being hard on the FO considering there wasnt much talent available once you remove the restricted FA's.

Your random scenario is fine but we could have pulled that off giving anyone a random one year deal, we didnt need to sign Beasley for 3 just to (eventually) have a tradeable contract. If that exact same situation came along NOW Beasley would be a huge detriment because no team would want him for 2 years.

And its not about the lack of quality guys in free agency, I was not expecting us to turn it around in one year. What bothers me is that the Suns went out of their way to go after the WORST player on the market. Beasley is the kind of player that a competent front office would say "No, not a chance, not on our roster, not even for free". Most of the league made that statement last year when the Wolves couldnt dump him, but not us... no... we throw him 18 million. It really worries me that our current "brain trust" thought Beasley should be a high priority and a player to market around. Any team with decent scouting knew full well the trash that Beasley is.

And I dont think a defensive team would want him for instant offense off the bench. It only seems like he is playing better because the team is benefiting from his lack of minutes. He has been pathetic off the bench, shooting something like 30% over the last few weeks. His offense is below average and its impossible to play passable team defense with him on the court. Our only hope to dump him soon is for someone dumber than us to come calling (Detroit? Charlotte?).