mcHAPPY wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Chuck Hayes + Landry Fields
Collapse
X
-
Attitude Is A Choice.
-
Eric Akshinthala wrote: View PostTrading Fields shouldn't be difficult. Even though he hasn't done much here, he has earned a reputation in the league and teams are always looking for good SF's. It may take sacrificing an asset to trade Hayes. If the return is good, why not? If not, hang on to him for a year. But for his salary, he's pretty useful actually.
Comment
-
mcHappy: ``If they aren't traded they are not going to be waived.
They make too much money and would still count towards the cap.
Having $12M in salary opens up a lot of trade possibilities. You waive them and replace with $2M and suddenly not too many options out there.
I'm optimistic a trade is done before the start of the year. 3 out, 1 in or 2 out, 1 in or 3 out, 2 in with any combination of T, Fields, or Hayes. That is a little over $15M in salary.''
That's a good point. But..., if there is no good trade scenario I'd rather waive Fields and keep two of the three non-guaranteed contracts. I think Fields is done in the NBA after this contract, while Hayes is actually pretty decent for a back up.
Comment
-
Eric Akshinthala wrote: View PostTrading Fields shouldn't be difficult. Even though he hasn't done much here, he has earned a reputation in the league and teams are always looking for good SF's. It may take sacrificing an asset to trade Hayes. If the return is good, why not? If not, hang on to him for a year. But for his salary, he's pretty useful actually.
Right now he is an end of rotation player AT BEST.
There are a lot of guys in the league who can fill that need at lower than $8.6M - remember he is in the final year of his poison pill deal. He is only a $6.23M cap hit but he costs over $8.
Comment
-
If they waive one of the expirings, and sign two of the camp contract guys, they will be in the tax. They won't do that, not for an end-of-bencher. And they won't stretch the waived player either, eating into valuable 2015 and 2016 cap room.
Comment
-
-
mcHAPPY wrote: View PostI disagree on the cost.
There is definitely a cost to move him but Dudley had 2 years left on his deal. It is the 2nd year that cost the pick. Fields is up this year.
Comment
-
raptors999 wrote: View PostBucks took salary back. Trading an expiring would cost at least a first round pick. Our pick is more valuable than the Clippers
Just my opinion and happy to disagree.
Comment
-
DanH wrote: View PostIf they waive one of the expirings, and sign two of the camp contract guys, they will be in the tax. They won't do that, not for an end-of-bencher. And they won't stretch the waived player either, eating into valuable 2015 and 2016 cap room.
Comment
-
mcHAPPY wrote: View PostI disagree.
Right now he is an end of rotation player AT BEST.
There are a lot of guys in the league who can fill that need at lower than $8.6M - remember he is in the final year of his poison pill deal. He is only a $6.23M cap hit but he costs over $8.
raptors999 wrote: View PostBucks took salary back. Trading an expiring would cost at least a first round pick. Our pick is more valuable than the Clippers
godkingleonidas wrote: View PostSo which move makes logical financial sense? Holding on to these guys until the trade deadline? Letting them expire at the end of the season?
Comment
-
tenforthewin wrote: View PostWhat can we get from Philly, a rumour circulating the 76ers: Jerami Grant, Dario Saric (prospect), or Alexey Shved?
Personally I like to see we trade Fields to Sixers for Shved + 2015 2nd rounder, then we waive Cherry and have Shved being our third string PG
Brotherly love pic.twitter.com/tebiXeYX8B
— Joel-Hans Embiid (@JoelEmbiid) September 4, 2014
No clue where you got the bunk rumor.
Also, hell no on Jerami Grant. And why would they trade Shved?
Comment
-
iblastoff wrote: View Postwhat reputation do you think landry fields has in the rest of the league?Attitude Is A Choice.
Comment
Comment