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!

     

Belineli to charlotte


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, MichaelNewtonII said:

That's all the report said

that's a bad trade for us, Marco was hot garbage last year and he's not a good defender either 

Ugh Hornets, it's not the end of the world but wtf is the direction of this team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JccOldTime23 said:

Considering Rich Cho's draft history I'd say Bellineli is probably better than anyone he would have picked. That said he is a very inconsistent player and a downgrade from Courtney Lee who I'm assuming will now be gone.

Definitely a downgrade and I think Cho knows that. I think the issue is $ with Lee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont feel like looking, but iirc, didnt belinelli sign a 2 yr deal with sac last year?

I ask because it genuinely shows how stupid our FO is and how skittish they are of drafting anyone now bc theyve been so bad at it.  Why do i say that?  Bc why trade a first round pick for a historically inconsistent outside shooter for one year, when if thats what you really wanted, you could target one in the draft and have him for 4 years or so?

Just stupid...  i already had low expectations going in after the last few drafts, but this was an even worse move than I couldve imagined.  We traded a first rounder for a MLE guy who shafted us in FA last year for a dysfunctional Sacramento team.  I give up...

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...