What's new
By:

2023 NBA Playoffs Discussion Thread

fishonjazz said:
Is there no penalty to just cutting a guy? If not, why dont teams cut guys all the time rather than attach draft picks to bad contracts to get other teams to take them off their hands?
Click to expand...
They traded Russell Westbrook and his expiring contract for players on expiring (or extremely cheap and tradable) contracts that they liked (much) more.

This isn’t that complicated.
 
NUMBERICA said:
They traded Russell Westbrook and his expiring contract for players on expiring (or extremely cheap and tradable) contracts that they liked (much) more.

This isn’t that complicated.
Click to expand...
Im literally just trying to learn about something that I knew nothing about. You explained what the lakers did. When teams have to attach an asset in order to get a team to take the contract off thier hands why dont they just cut the player and keep the asset?
Like lets say a team has duncan robinson and doesn't want the player or the contract. Why would that team give duncan robinson to the jazz along with a draft pick and get nothing in return? Wouldn't it be better to just cut him and keep the pick?

Also, it doesn't really seem like the lakers like the players they got more than westbrook. Westbrook was playing much more than the news iirc. Lakers seem to think the new guys suck ***. Seems like they should have just cut westbrook and kept thier draft pick.
 
fishonjazz said:
Im literally just trying to learn about something that I knew nothing about. You explained what the lakers did. When teams have to attach an asset in order to get a team to take the contract off thier hands why dont they just cut the player and keep the asset?
Like lets say a team has duncan robinson and doesn't want the player or the contract. Why would that team give duncan robinson to the jazz along with a draft pick and get nothing in return? Wouldn't it be better to just cut him and keep the pick?
Click to expand...
Because the salary keeps counting against the cap for the duration of the contract (and you have to pay it). If you cut someone literally all you do is open a roster spot.
 
hgb said:
Because the salary keeps counting against the cap for the duration of the contract (and you have to pay it). If you cut someone literally all you do is open a roster spot.
Click to expand...
So we were doing them a solid by taking westbrook off their hands? Or not? Im confused now. I always thought we were helping the lakers by taking westbrook off their hands. Now I dont know if we were or not.
Sounds like the lakers should have just held onto their pick and waved westbrook. Addition by subtraction. Hell, if they would have waved him sooner maybe they would have been better sooner and got a better seed or something. Wierd that they held onto him so long unnecessarily.
 
fishonjazz said:
So we were doing them a solid by taking westbrook off their hands? Or not? Im confused now. I always thought we were helping the lakers by taking westbrook off their hands. Now I dont know if we were or not.
Sounds like the lakers should have just held onto their pick and waved westbrook. Addition by subtraction. Hell, if they would have waved him sooner maybe they would have been better sooner and got a better seed or something. Wierd that they held onto him so long unnecessarily.
Click to expand...
They could have just dumped him, but I guess they did value what Malik, Vanderbilt and DLo could bring. If they waived Russ, they could only have signed minimum salary guys, after all. And I also think that while getting rid of Russ might have been most important in the playoffs, I don't think they would have been in the playoffs without those three guys.

Edit: Also, Vanderbilt has value for next year on the cheap. And Malik looked like a good deal for next year too, until he fell off a cliff.
 
The funny thing is that trade is for me what most of Minny fab think.
Most of them think they get f... up with Rudy trade paying way too much for a guy who can't shoot and did not have not a good year.... but they think this bad trade was balance by the Mike trade they consider getting for nothing.... and getting rid of Dlo. Not sure they are right. Rudy may have a very good year next year and Mike getting old..... time change fast in NBA. I personally hope that Rudy wil be back to his Jaz level and that Mike will be as good as his last 15 years !
 
FrenchJazzFa said:
The funny thing is that trade is for me what most of Minny fab think.
Most of them think they get f... up with Rudy trade paying way too much for a guy who can't shoot and did not have not a good year.... but they think this bad trade was balance by the Mike trade they consider getting for nothing.... and getting rid of Dlo. Not sure they are right. Rudy may have a very good year next year and Mike getting old..... time change fast in NBA. I personally hope that Rudy wil be back to his Jaz level and that Mike will be as good as his last 15 years !
Click to expand...

They’re kidding themselves if they think trading Russell for Conley equates to trading 4 firsts, a swap, Kessler, Vando and Beasley for Gobert lmao.
 
Elizah Huge said:
They’re kidding themselves if they think trading Russell for Conley equates to trading 4 firsts, a swap, Kessler, Vando and Beasley for Gobert lmao.
Click to expand...
Yes i agree with that. At that stage, Rudy trade is one of the worst trade in NBA. It can change if Rudy play well the next 2 years but it's not done yet.
 
Just a reminder that we took Dante Exum 36 spots ahead of Jokić, Rodney Hood 15 spots ahead and something called a Jarnell Stokes 5 spots ahead.

We also took Enes Freedom 27 spots ahead of Butler, and Alec Burks 18 spots ahead.
 
Murray is killing the Nuggets right now...just 3/15 shooting, 2/9 from 3. He's had some good looks too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top