payitforward wrote::) -- I know....nate33 wrote:We would get zero draft capital for Branham. Nobody gives draft capital to a 10th man on a bad team making double the vet minimum. Branham is salary filler, nothing else....payitforward wrote:I'd rather keep Bagley & trade Branham -- if possible -- for whatever draft capital we can get for him.nate33 wrote:Bagley has value because he is outplaying his minimum salary contract by a ton. And I don't mind trading him because he will be an unrestricted free agent this summer anyhow. If we want him on the roster going forward, it makes no difference whether he finishes the season on our roster. We can still sign him this summer. (Remember, we signed him last summer after trading him to Memphis at the last Trade Deadline.)
The only thing we lose by trading Bagley right now is more games - which is what we are trying to do.All good points, of course. Somehow -- slowly & w/o my noticing it -- Bagley has become one of my favorite Wizards.
Go figure.
Still... I could get used to the idea that every off season we sign him for 1 year, then trade him for some minimal value at the deadline, then sign him again the following off season! It's like free money.
Mine, too.
I think Bagley should become the new Anthony Gill.

















