RealGM

you guys are under the cap right now, right?

does that mean you guys can keep Z for the rest of the season and let him expire?

That would be awesome if he doesn't get to go back to Cleveland

I think you are correct that we could simply keep him inactive.

because of the DMac trade and us now being under the lux tax
threshold, we can play hardball with Z and force him to take
a cheaper buyout if he wants to see the court again this year.

But he should never play a minute for us.

all that said because it's a business and nothing
personal against Z who is a Trav I respect.

dobrojim wrote:I think you are correct that we could simply keep him inactive.

because of the DMac trade and us now being under the lux tax
threshold, we can play hardball with Z and force him to take
a cheaper buyout if he wants to see the court again this year.

But he should never play a minute for us.

all that said because it's a business and nothing
personal against Z who is a Trav I respect.

+1

I think it would be in bad taste to keep Z around. If it was one of the douche Cavaliers like Shaq, I'd keep his ass inactive all year but Z is a good guy who should be let go.

I remember Ilgauskas expressing surprise that EJ didn't use Haywood more against him in the 07 playoffs, acknowledging that Haywood always played him pretty well. I also remember hearing how he counseled Stoudemire, who was trying to make decisions regarding knee surgeries similar to what Ilgauskas had done. He seems nice and well-liked.

I've got nothing against trying to play hard ball, but I'd hate to see him languish when he could be playing somewhere, playing for his next contract.

Personally I'd love to us buy him out but with a provision that he could go anywhere but Cleveland. He wouldn't give us as good of a deal on the buyout in that case but I know Atlanta and Dallas would love to have him so it beats sitting inactive. Basically I just want to f**k the Crabs.

Z is a nice guy so at the end of the day we should just buy him out and let him go back but it just seems wrong helping the Cavaliers (unlike giving them AJ which personally I don't think helps them at all).

the point is to penalize the Travs and Queenie, not Z personally.

like Spence (iirc) suggested - if Z doesn't our terms, he should
go to Queenie to make it up ($$$) to him. Queenie wanted the
trade.

Z will be bought out at a price that is advantageous to the Wizards [because, as has been pointed out, they're now under the lux threshold and can afford to play hardball] and then he will, I assume, return to Cleveland. Teams won't want to trade with us if we're keeping around guys just to spite someone. We don't need Z, we don't want Z and he doesn't want us. Where he goes or what he does after he is bought out here is none of our concern.

I don't get what the fuss is. Nobody owes Cleveland jack. They played hardball on the trade requests and strung the Wiz along while hunting other suitors and targets-- eventually we were the only deal left and they had to come up off a late pick for the all-star stretch forward they coveted. But how is it the team's obligation to allow a buy out for Z so he can skip back to Crabland and play for them for pennies on the dollar?

What's the argument? That we have no use for him? I suspect our young Bigs could learn a great deal from him in the short time left, even simply practicing against him, even if he was sulking half the time I suppose. If Cleveland is disappointed, well that's the gamble they took. I know for a fact Flip Saunders would love to have a guy like Z exemplifying how to efficiently run the mid-high pick and roll/ pick and pop. The only drawback is that he's not happy? Well shxt, he's a highly paid professional, he's not paid to be happy, he's paid to execute. He's owed a paycheck, not happiness.

Truth is since they only offered us a pick this year not in future years, it benefits us most now if Cleveland fails, if anyone can overtake them for that top spot. Okay, I doubt they slide much, but they're only one full game ahead of the Lakers. Some draft years one slot makes all the difference even late in the first round. That's not spite, that's self-interest. Also: f*** 'em. (Okay that part is spite).

doclinkin wrote:I don't get what the fuss is. Nobody owes Cleveland jack. They played hardball on the trade requests and strung the Wiz along while hunting other suitors and targets-- eventually we were the only deal left and they had to come up off a late pick for the all-star stretch forward they coveted. But how is it the team's obligation to allow a buy out for Z so he can skip back to Crabland and play for them for pennies on the dollar?

What's the argument? That we have no use for him? I suspect our young Bigs could learn a great deal from him in the short time left, even simply practicing against him, even if he was sulking half the time I suppose. If Cleveland is disappointed, well that's the gamble they took. I know for a fact Flip Saunders would love to have a guy like Z exemplifying how to efficiently run the mid-high pick and roll/ pick and pop. The only drawback is that he's not happy? Well shxt, he's a highly paid professional, he's not paid to be happy, he's paid to execute. He's owed a paycheck, not happiness.

Truth is since they only offered us a pick this year not in future years, it benefits us most now if Cleveland fails, if anyone can overtake them for that top spot. Okay, I doubt they slide much, but they're only one full game ahead of the Lakers. Some draft years one slot makes all the difference even late in the first round. That's not spite, that's self-interest. Also: f*** 'em. (Okay that part is spite).

Well stated, doc...

Winner, winner - chicken dinner!

Bravo doc, bravo...