Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NBA Offseason Trade/Free Agency Thread


Proudiddy

Recommended Posts

well LA and Chicago are the only other team beside us linked to Stephenson. I don't think Chicago would bid higher that the 5 year $44 million dollar deal Indy already offered him. A nd I know LA has the room but don't think they would bid much higher than that either.

 

As Hornets fans, we already know we would have to pony up more dough to bring in a FA. Do we pull the trigger and offer something in the range of $10-11 million dollars a year for his services? I would probably land him in Charlotte...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well LA and Chicago are the only other team beside us linked to Stephenson. I don't think Chicago would bid higher that the 5 year $44 million dollar deal Indy already offered him. A nd I know LA has the room but don't think they would bid much higher than that either.

 

As Hornets fans, we already know we would have to pony up more dough to bring in a FA. Do we pull the trigger and offer something in the range of $10-11 million dollars a year for his services? I would probably land him in Charlotte...

I would do it, but we need to do it before Melo makes his decision if we're going to. We would also need to ship out Hendo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well LA and Chicago are the only other team beside us linked to Stephenson. I don't think Chicago would bid higher that the 5 year $44 million dollar deal Indy already offered him. A nd I know LA has the room but don't think they would bid much higher than that either.

 

As Hornets fans, we already know we would have to pony up more dough to bring in a FA. Do we pull the trigger and offer something in the range of $10-11 million dollars a year for his services? I would probably land him in Charlotte...

 

 

I say go for it.  I think he can be special.  I feel as a small market team we have to take chances.   I know he has issues, but I like his intensity and feel we need that on this team.  it's not like he's an aging vet either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

many thanks kman, much appreciated.

 

so if utah are determined to keep hayward, they will

 

I'd much rather live in Salt Lake City than fugging Cleveland and it's not even close. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont wanna spend alot of money for Lance with PJ on board.

Would rather have Hayward.

So you don't want to sign a 23-year old with All-Star potential who is the 3rd best FA and plays SG, the weakest position on our team.

But you want to throw a max contract at a guy who is slightly above average at best and plays the same position as our 3rd best player, and highest potential player.

Brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you don't want to sign a 23-year old with All-Star potential who is the 3rd best FA and plays SG, the weakest position on our team.

But you want to throw a max contract at a guy who is slightly above average at best and plays the same position as our 3rd best player, and highest potential player.

Brilliant.

 

I think PJ has more potential in addition to already being a better outside shooter than Lance thus I want PJ to start and get most of the burn at SG. 

 

At SF we have ZERO offense as MKG is only for D and boards. 

 

Our rotation for SG & SF would be PJ, Hayward, and MKG. Not bad if you ask me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think PJ has more potential in addition to already being a better outside shooter than Lance thus I want PJ to start and get most of the burn at SG.

At SF we have ZERO offense as MKG is only for D and boards.

Our rotation for SG & SF would be PJ, Hayward, and MKG. Not bad if you ask me.

Sorry to break it to u. But pj ain't starting. And he prolly only gonna get 10-15 minutes a mighty maybe. Even without lance. But also depends on who we bring in.

Clifford likes veterans. I mean look he started Mcbob over our 4th overall pick. So that shows he's gonna ease him in.

MKG has the most potential and is pretty damn good player. He does everything great Except for shooting. And he's working hard on that. We aren't giving up on MKG and bringing in any sf's to start and take time from MKG... Atleast not right now.

Fact is Stephenson is the best possible free agent we could sign and bring to charlotte. Is really young and could turn into an all star if not a superstar. That's a way higher ceiling than pj has of right now.

So idk if u have a unc thing going on or of u just really like pj that much but don't expect much from him this year with Clifford coaching. Could surprise us tho lol

And oh yeah. Lol at pj being better than lance before he plays a nba game lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...