COde, people just harp on the salary b/c they hate MArbury. No mention of Curry's 10 million, or anyone else. These folks have no plan at all, but just repeatedly say if we get closer to the cap we will sign big free agents somehow. Sounds like a solid way to proceed right?
Posted by codeunknown:
Posted by SlimPack:
Posted by codeunknown:
Posted by SlimPack:
who care if it doesnt put us under the cap, trading marbury will give us a chance of having cap space.
[Edited by - SlimPack on 12-16-2005 10:14 PM]
What does this mean?
having 20 million come off then that means that all we have to do is trade 1 or 2 other guys for expirings and we can be under the cap in two seasons, whatever it is by then, if we dont trade marbury then we dont have a chance of being under the cap and we'll be mediocre for the next 3 or 4 years like islesfan says. although right now we'd have to take a step or 2 up just to get to mediocre. maybe Im over reacting, maybe marbury will eventually learn to run the offense the way LB wants, thats the only way keeping him makes sense, even isiah said he'd consider trading him if he doesn't.
Thats a load of crap. Its more than trading 1 or 2 more guys in addition to Marbury for capspace - it means not signing any more free agents and not re-signing Ariza. In order to trade our over-priced commodities, we'd perhaps have to throw in even more draft picks or young talent. In other words, you're suggesting a total jettison of our assets for what amounts to nothing. That is except for a miniscule chance in the free agent market of 2007. Quite a risk - the downside of which is having 0 assets by 2007. Previously you stated "who cares if it doesn't put us under the cap" - perhaps this is why you shoud start caring.
12/17/2005 3:20 AM