Damkac wrote:NavLDO wrote:Damkac wrote:
OK, I give up
Instead of a 4 word retort, maybe you'd like to try to explain how either of them have positive value right now. You are a GM of a team--do you want to trade for two players that were indicted by a grand jury on felony charges for aggravated assault? Is that something you see as "positive value"?
And as I mentioned, with Bledsoe currently the 7th highest paid PG and accounting for 20% of the team's salary cap, when he isn't even an All-Star. Teams trade contracts more so than players, and right now, Bledsoe's play isn't worth his salary--next year, it likely (hopefully) will.
So, please enlighten me as to WHY I am wrong, rather than just type out a 4 word retort; that proves absolutely nothing.
Morri bros have amazing production for their contracts and with cap going up it will look even better. But it was written hundreds times here. Most probably one year from now nobody would remember about that charge. Even now their value is definitely positive and in future it will go up.
About Bledsoe, what pg are better than him, not much older than him and on better contract (not including rookie contracts)? Curry, Teague and...?
Saying they have negative value is ridiculous.
But even all those guys on better contracts like Curry and Teague...they will be paid more than Bledsoe....Bledsoe's value is that he is locked in at 14 for four years....few players are locked in that long. Same with Markieff. The main reason Bledsoe doesn't have a ton of trade value is because there are a ton of good pgs in the league so there is little demand for them.
A team like the Knicks though, who's goal is to compete now and not go through a rebuild, may put a higher value on a guy like him than most. Though Knight seems to be more of a triangle/Phil Jackson type.
























