|
In response to
"It wasn't so much that, it was that they're not trading a guy who is effective making them money. -- nm"
by
Tim
|
He's not really "making" them money... they are paying 20% of his salary
Posted by
Stewie (aka whysoserious)
Feb 28 '09, 18:28
|
their bottom line would be better if he wasn't there.
The only value he could have to the Blazers is if they wanted to skirt the nba team salary minimum, but they are well above that.
Turning down those trades was about not wanting to pay old guys all that money in future years. Given the opportunity they wouldn't have taken any of those guys for absolutely nothing. You only pull that trigger if you think the player can win you a championship right now, like Cleveland's legit interest in Shaq and Jamison.
|