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!

     

Bosh Returning To Miami


Recommended Posts

If they lost Bosh it would be one of the most epic collapses in NBA history. I agree that Riley is probably sweating to death. I like Riley, but he seems to always have the fortune of having good players land in his lap....like Phil Jackson.

Sent from my iPhone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They need to have a case to make a run at melo. It isn't as bad of a deal as you think

I can buy that this is their thinking. But I can't see Melo going to Miami to be the guy to replace THE guy. Just seems like a no-win situation for him. Who wants to be compared to LBJ?

Sent from my iPhone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised to see Bosh re-sign with Miami, thought he'd end up with Houston. But this gives Miami a chance to retool. Wade should be next to sign. After that they've got to try and make a run at either another max level player, or add two 10-12 million type players. Then try to bring back some of their FAs.

Eg.

- Chalmers / Wade / Melo / Haslem / Bosh

- Chalmers / Wade / Deng / Bosh / Gasol

A bigger role could help Bosh take a lead on offense, but the ideal scenario for them would be to get Melo. Though an addition of Deng and Gasol would give them two good supporting players to form a decent starting five.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If true, Bosh is dumb.

Houston roster would be a favorite with him, Miami well not so much

True, but he's set to earn a lot more in Miami. He's got two rings, and this is the perfect opportunity to try to lead a team to a championship with him as the go to guy. In Houston he's the number three guy again, whereas in Miami he's the number two or one.

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...