Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by martin:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

You dont gain cap space by not signing a guy to a big contract. You gain cap space by contracts being traded or expiring. Curry made 3 mill for the bulls. They didnt gain 16 mill in cap space from the trade. 60 mill over 4 years doesnt equal 54 mill over 6 years. Walalce averages 15 mill a year. Curry averages 9 mill a year. Ofcourse I know Jcraw was a separate trade. Where did I say he wasnt? If you like Wallace and the Bulls so much why remain a Knicks fan who you seem to dislike so much?

how about this simple math: If Curry had taken the DNA test and passed and signed for 6 years at $60M, would the Bulls had the cap space to sign Ben? No.

Cap space would not have been the issue, because even with the cap space I doubt they sign a max deal with an over 30 player when they just locked in a max deal with their young prospect. Ben was signed out of necessity, and they overpaid, for as great as he is.

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

You dont gain cap space by not signing a guy to a big contract. You gain cap space by contracts being traded or expiring. Curry made 3 mill for the bulls. They didnt gain 16 mill in cap space from the trade. 60 mill over 4 years doesnt equal 54 mill over 6 years. Walalce averages 15 mill a year. Curry averages 9 mill a year. Ofcourse I know Jcraw was a separate trade. Where did I say he wasnt? If you like Wallace and the Bulls so much why remain a Knicks fan who you seem to dislike so much?

OMG, you really don't understand that because the Bulls didn't have to pay Curry anymore means that they cleared even more cap space that allowed them to sign Wallace?

Even most bulls fans on Real Gm say this is 1000% wrong. Currys last deal with the Bulls was 3.8 mill. The most they would gain in cap space ws 3.8 mill by letting it expire. You dont gain in cap space what another team chooses to extend him for after a trade. This was not a sign and trade. The Knicks extended him to a deal that paid 7 mill last year and 8 mill this year. Ben Wallace makes 16 mill this year. Curry made around 2 mill more than Sweets (TT and Ad were a wash). Thats the only cap space they gained from the trade. Not 16 mill they paid Ben wallace.

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

Posted by martin:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

You dont gain cap space by not signing a guy to a big contract. You gain cap space by contracts being traded or expiring. Curry made 3 mill for the bulls. They didnt gain 16 mill in cap space from the trade. 60 mill over 4 years doesnt equal 54 mill over 6 years. Walalce averages 15 mill a year. Curry averages 9 mill a year. Ofcourse I know Jcraw was a separate trade. Where did I say he wasnt? If you like Wallace and the Bulls so much why remain a Knicks fan who you seem to dislike so much?

how about this simple math: If Curry had taken the DNA test and passed and signed for 6 years at $60M, would the Bulls had the cap space to sign Ben? No.

Thats 100% different than saying the Bulls gained 16 mill in cap space this year via the Curry trade. Curry was not entitled to any new deal. If no deal was made at all the Bulls would have gained 3 mill letting Curry expire.

All of this feels like a waste in futility. You and Seats Blue hated Curry 2 months ago. You hated him 1 month ago and you hate him now. How he plays really doesnt seem to make much difference.

This whole thread could just be summarized like this:
Seats Blue and Martin hate Curry
Sugar Ray likes Curry

Thats all that is really being shown no matter what spin goes where

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

You dont gain cap space by not signing a guy to a big contract. You gain cap space by contracts being traded or expiring. Curry made 3 mill for the bulls. They didnt gain 16 mill in cap space from the trade. 60 mill over 4 years doesnt equal 54 mill over 6 years. Walalce averages 15 mill a year. Curry averages 9 mill a year. Ofcourse I know Jcraw was a separate trade. Where did I say he wasnt? If you like Wallace and the Bulls so much why remain a Knicks fan who you seem to dislike so much?

OMG, you really don't understand that because the Bulls didn't have to pay Curry anymore means that they cleared even more cap space that allowed them to sign Wallace?

Even most bulls fans on Real Gm say this is 1000% wrong. Currys last deal with the Bulls was 3.8 mill. The most they would gain in cap space ws 3.8 mill by letting it expire. You dont gain in cap space what another team chooses to extend him for after a trade. This was not a sign and trade. The Knicks extended him to a deal that paid 7 mill last year and 8 mill this year. Ben Wallace makes 16 mill this year. Curry made around 2 mill more than Sweets (TT and Ad were a wash). Thats the only cap space they gained from the trade. Not 16 mill they paid Ben wallace.

Yeah, that's great in theory but in reality you don't let assets walk away for nothing. If they don't trade him, they're obligated to re-sign him. But by trading him, the Bulls don't have to waste that cap space and they get 2 possible lottery picks as well.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

You dont gain cap space by not signing a guy to a big contract. You gain cap space by contracts being traded or expiring. Curry made 3 mill for the bulls. They didnt gain 16 mill in cap space from the trade. 60 mill over 4 years doesnt equal 54 mill over 6 years. Walalce averages 15 mill a year. Curry averages 9 mill a year. Ofcourse I know Jcraw was a separate trade. Where did I say he wasnt? If you like Wallace and the Bulls so much why remain a Knicks fan who you seem to dislike so much?

OMG, you really don't understand that because the Bulls didn't have to pay Curry anymore means that they cleared even more cap space that allowed them to sign Wallace?

Even most bulls fans on Real Gm say this is 1000% wrong. Currys last deal with the Bulls was 3.8 mill. The most they would gain in cap space ws 3.8 mill by letting it expire. You dont gain in cap space what another team chooses to extend him for after a trade. This was not a sign and trade. The Knicks extended him to a deal that paid 7 mill last year and 8 mill this year. Ben Wallace makes 16 mill this year. Curry made around 2 mill more than Sweets (TT and Ad were a wash). Thats the only cap space they gained from the trade. Not 16 mill they paid Ben wallace.

Yeah, that's great in theory but in reality you don't let assets walk away for nothing. If they don't trade him, they're obligated to re-sign him. But by trading him, the Bulls don't have to waste that cap space and they get 2 possible lottery picks as well.

You're not only assuming that they'd have re-signed Eddy, you're also assuming specific details of the re-signing. Maybe Eddy wouldn't like the 20 year contract and would have agreed to only a 1 year deal so that he could prove himself healthy (in which case he'd still be off the cap now). Maybe mid season they'd trade him. We can make all sorts of assumptions. That's why it makes sense to count only salaries that a team is *obligated* to pay when looking at cap space. In this case, the Bulls would have been obligated to pay nothing more had they not made the deal.

You're the one making the biggest and most unrealistic assumption. That the Bulls would let Curry walk for nothing.

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

Posted by martin:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

You dont gain cap space by not signing a guy to a big contract. You gain cap space by contracts being traded or expiring. Curry made 3 mill for the bulls. They didnt gain 16 mill in cap space from the trade. 60 mill over 4 years doesnt equal 54 mill over 6 years. Walalce averages 15 mill a year. Curry averages 9 mill a year. Ofcourse I know Jcraw was a separate trade. Where did I say he wasnt? If you like Wallace and the Bulls so much why remain a Knicks fan who you seem to dislike so much?

how about this simple math: If Curry had taken the DNA test and passed and signed for 6 years at $60M, would the Bulls had the cap space to sign Ben? No.

Thats 100% different than saying the Bulls gained 16 mill in cap space this year via the Curry trade. Curry was not entitled to any new deal. If no deal was made at all the Bulls would have gained 3 mill letting Curry expire.

All of this feels like a waste in futility. You and Seats Blue hated Curry 2 months ago. You hated him 1 month ago and you hate him now. How he plays really doesnt seem to make much difference.

This whole thread could just be summarized like this:
Seats Blue and Martin hate Curry
Sugar Ray likes Curry

Thats all that is really being shown no matter what spin goes where

Posted by tkf:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

Posted by martin:

Posted by SugarRayRichardson:

You dont gain cap space by not signing a guy to a big contract. You gain cap space by contracts being traded or expiring. Curry made 3 mill for the bulls. They didnt gain 16 mill in cap space from the trade. 60 mill over 4 years doesnt equal 54 mill over 6 years. Walalce averages 15 mill a year. Curry averages 9 mill a year. Ofcourse I know Jcraw was a separate trade. Where did I say he wasnt? If you like Wallace and the Bulls so much why remain a Knicks fan who you seem to dislike so much?

how about this simple math: If Curry had taken the DNA test and passed and signed for 6 years at $60M, would the Bulls had the cap space to sign Ben? No.

Thats 100% different than saying the Bulls gained 16 mill in cap space this year via the Curry trade. Curry was not entitled to any new deal. If no deal was made at all the Bulls would have gained 3 mill letting Curry expire.

All of this feels like a waste in futility. You and Seats Blue hated Curry 2 months ago. You hated him 1 month ago and you hate him now. How he plays really doesnt seem to make much difference.

This whole thread could just be summarized like this:
Seats Blue and Martin hate Curry
Sugar Ray likes Curry

Thats all that is really being shown no matter what spin goes where

I agree Bernard, I mean sugar....


The hate continues. Big ben has been dog shyt all year, now the bulls at 12-10 are going ballastic. I remember a few weeks ago it was the Biendrins Jock riding, and then he drops off the map, and you hear no more.. Now its ben wallace? whose next?