Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by nyk4ever:

I'm just not interested in locking up role players before I lock up the franchise player.

Right now Nate is a 20-4-4 guard. That is not a role player in the NBA

In '04 Barbosa was 18/4/3.. he is the definition of a role player.

He also got 6 years 42mm$ the same amount that I think Nate should get 7mm a year on average starting the contract around 5.8mm or so. I think Nate is in that fair pay range. I would try to offer him 5 years 37.5 a tad more than 7 but the contract ending at 5 instead of 6. I think that is fair.

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by nyk4ever:

I'm just not interested in locking up role players before I lock up the franchise player.

Right now Nate is a 20-4-4 guard. That is not a role player in the NBA

In '04 Barbosa was 18/4/3.. he is the definition of a role player.

He also got 6 years 42mm$ the same amount that I think Nate should get 7mm a year on average starting the contract around 5.8mm or so. I think Nate is in that fair pay range. I would try to offer him 5 years 37.5 a tad more than 7 but the contract ending at 5 instead of 6. I think that is fair.

Thats the problem Briggs. I think Barbosa is overpaid and I don't want to do the same thing for Nate.

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by nyk4ever:

I'm just not interested in locking up role players before I lock up the franchise player.

Right now Nate is a 20-4-4 guard. That is not a role player in the NBA

In '04 Barbosa was 18/4/3.. he is the definition of a role player.

He also got 6 years 42mm$ the same amount that I think Nate should get 7mm a year on average starting the contract around 5.8mm or so. I think Nate is in that fair pay range. I would try to offer him 5 years 37.5 a tad more than 7 but the contract ending at 5 instead of 6. I think that is fair.

Thats the problem Briggs. I think Barbosa is overpaid and I don't want to do the same thing for Nate.

bring me 2 franchise studs to build around like Nash & Amare in their primes, & by all means i would love to lock up Nate & Lee to longterm extensions... but if u do don't have those franchise guys already in place & decide to lock up those other supplementary guys to lucrative longterm deals, then you're severely limiting your ability to acquire the necessary franchise guys to build around in order to build yourself into a championship contender... i can't understand why some of you guys are having difficulty w/this concept... this is what the 2010 plan is all about... leaving open ur options & having the financial flexibility to make impactful moves that year when those kinds of players will become available.