I don't see Jordan stamping approval a deal where we have an excessive contract dumped on us...not in MJ's new ownership philosophy and not after we already took a cap hit from BG. Who said you can't throw one of our two first round picks (our own as well as Detroits protected 1st if I'm not mistaken), or even MKG, for a fairly priced 2nd tier player with a bench player to boot? We went down this contract-eating path before in Larry Brown's final years.99% of the trades involve us sending expiring players (usually with + value in terms of cap space, but - value on the court) and draft picks (to compensate for the - value) in return for decent players on big contracts and possibly one good player. It's no secret that the only valuable assets we have right now are cap space, expiring contracts, and draft picks. It's also no secret that any player coming from another team is going to likely be better than what we currently have. But other teams may want to get rid of them because of their massive contracts (Rudy Gay for example).
(Not getting into an argument about an MKG trade...just look at it from an asset standpoint.)
99% holds true for computable trades on espn...and I'm not even sure dumping is even allowable on trade machine. But holistically, with our picks or a current upside asset in the mix, more than 1% of the possibilities would involve non-declining assets. For our declining assets, I would rather let those guys contracts expire or get some younger bench scrubs of equal value with less $ invlolved than incrurring excess contract expense.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks