slick_watts wrote:what's even the point of this? i dunno why bondom is continuing to engage you but doesn't engage me when i actually make sense (but he simply disagrees). you make no sense. the value of schroder's contract was established when he was traded for melo. irrespective of atlanta's intentions or motives, he was traded for dead salary and nobody would even take that contract on 'for free'. there's nothing more to discuss on that front. his contract is poor value and his standing league-wide is low relative to that contract.
Exactly, his value was established between OKC and ATL, how they viewed his value and it was 25M expiring. Which, i don't know how Bondom values cap space, but IMO that is a good value for both sides and for the player.
slick_watts wrote:his actual performance on the thunder is another matter which, in any case, requires more than eight games played to evaluate.
Exactly.
And thus far, IMO, he has done a fairly good job of demonstrating that he can run our secondary and gives us something we've been missing for years.
slick_watts wrote:so remind me, what's the argument here again?
I don't know.
People apparently decided to flip **** when i said the suggested trade involving Satoransky and Fournier was not worth what it looks like we'd be giving up.
I'd love to have Fournier, he's a solid shooting guard that would make a great fourth option.... but its not worth the cost.