Oregon Ownage wrote:This bleeds into the other deal.............. but if the Lakers want to dump Chapman and not get anything in return (other than 6 mil in cap space next season) then he is hurting himself in the long run and is also not getting good value in return for a player that could command more. This is where the fine line is tough to tow b/c on one hand Chapman was the #7 pick last year and now he is being used to dump a contract and if I were a Lakers fan, I would be up in arms (if I were the Lakers, I would get the best asset back).
On the other hand (commish side), I have to make a determination if the deal should go through and I use different calculations (who is the GM, will they be here for the long run, can they be trusted to rebuild/build up a roster, etc.) from this potential deal and whether it severely hampers the team (unrealistic outlook, move makes no sense, etc.).
In this case, Chapman looks destined to be a role player (barring any article upgrades or a random jump in TC) but not the type of player you would expect from the 7th pick. Lakers are in full tank and have shown that they would rather just unload an asset than wait to get something back in return. Knowing that, GM's should reach out and see what they can get b/c this deal has been available since he was acquired the other day. Be active, send/respond to PM's and you too can be in the position of getting the player.
Same goes for this deal, were talking about a 12 PPG career player here and was known he was available since yesterday. If you were interested, ask what the price will be.
Oregon Ownage wrote:This bleeds into the other deal.............. but if the Lakers want to dump Chapman and not get anything in return (other than 6 mil in cap space next season) then he is hurting himself in the long run and is also not getting good value in return for a player that could command more. This is where the fine line is tough to tow b/c on one hand Chapman was the #7 pick last year and now he is being used to dump a contract and if I were a Lakers fan, I would be up in arms (if I were the Lakers, I would get the best asset back).
On the other hand (commish side), I have to make a determination if the deal should go through and I use different calculations (who is the GM, will they be here for the long run, can they be trusted to rebuild/build up a roster, etc.) from this potential deal and whether it severely hampers the team (unrealistic outlook, move makes no sense, etc.).
In this case, Chapman looks destined to be a role player (barring any article upgrades or a random jump in TC) but not the type of player you would expect from the 7th pick. Lakers are in full tank and have shown that they would rather just unload an asset than wait to get something back in return. Knowing that, GM's should reach out and see what they can get b/c this deal has been available since he was acquired the other day. Be active, send/respond to PM's and you too can be in the position of getting the player.
Same goes for this deal, were talking about a 12 PPG career player here and was known he was available since yesterday. If you were interested, ask what the price will be.
Done
I don't think this addresses the larger concern at all. I would still like an explanation on why it is better for Edmonson to be on the Warriors than waivers, since that is the only thing this trade accomplishes that cutting him wouldn't have. It's a terrible rule that needs to be fixed before next season as it's actively anti-competitive, and at some point a better player is going to move the same way and make a bigger impact.
Cellar-door wrote:I don't think this addresses the larger concern at all. I would still like an explanation on why it is better for Edmonson to be on the Warriors than waivers, since that is the only thing this trade accomplishes that cutting him wouldn't have. It's a terrible rule that needs to be fixed before next season as it's actively anti-competitive, and at some point a better player is going to move the same way and make a bigger impact.
Waivers suits the bad teams as they would have priority (unless someone has cap space and offers a deal) so its not a "free market" as they would higher priority and the only a team would claim him (bad team) would be to get a 2nd out of a deal (maybe a late 1st if he performs really really well).
In terms of anti-competitive I would argue cutting a player is just that. Atleast with trading you are giving other teams options of trying to acquire him than just having a player cut outright. That serves no one but the team cutting the player.
To me the key difference between the two results is the cap hold. By putting the player on waivers, you are allowing one predetermined lucky team (based off their appetite for wanting them) to get the player on a minimum cap hold. If we went the waiver route I'd be in favor of forcing the team to take on the original salary amount (just one year or so) just so we don't get some advantaged team getting a player better than Keith Edmonson for $1M or something like that. (But they can still go over the cap to sign them)
From what I understand our waiver order is just determined by previous year's record until a specific Day, and then by record at the current time. It's still not a fair game at that point.
Edmonson really doesn't mean jack. I think when players get to the caliber of Ricky Pierce and is sent for nothing, that's where it starts to be a gray line. I don't think there's a real solid rule for this that can be made and applied in all situations though.
Oregon Ownage wrote:This bleeds into the other deal.............. but if the Lakers want to dump Chapman and not get anything in return (other than 6 mil in cap space next season) then he is hurting himself in the long run and is also not getting good value in return for a player that could command more. This is where the fine line is tough to tow b/c on one hand Chapman was the #7 pick last year and now he is being used to dump a contract and if I were a Lakers fan, I would be up in arms (if I were the Lakers, I would get the best asset back).
On the other hand (commish side), I have to make a determination if the deal should go through and I use different calculations (who is the GM, will they be here for the long run, can they be trusted to rebuild/build up a roster, etc.) from this potential deal and whether it severely hampers the team (unrealistic outlook, move makes no sense, etc.).
In this case, Chapman looks destined to be a role player (barring any article upgrades or a random jump in TC) but not the type of player you would expect from the 7th pick. Lakers are in full tank and have shown that they would rather just unload an asset than wait to get something back in return. Knowing that, GM's should reach out and see what they can get b/c this deal has been available since he was acquired the other day. Be active, send/respond to PM's and you too can be in the position of getting the player.
Same goes for this deal, were talking about a 12 PPG career player here and was known he was available since yesterday. If you were interested, ask what the price will be.
Done
I will start checking the signings/cuts page to see who's available to trade I guess.
Oregon Ownage wrote:This bleeds into the other deal.............. but if the Lakers want to dump Chapman and not get anything in return (other than 6 mil in cap space next season) then he is hurting himself in the long run and is also not getting good value in return for a player that could command more. This is where the fine line is tough to tow b/c on one hand Chapman was the #7 pick last year and now he is being used to dump a contract and if I were a Lakers fan, I would be up in arms (if I were the Lakers, I would get the best asset back).
On the other hand (commish side), I have to make a determination if the deal should go through and I use different calculations (who is the GM, will they be here for the long run, can they be trusted to rebuild/build up a roster, etc.) from this potential deal and whether it severely hampers the team (unrealistic outlook, move makes no sense, etc.).
In this case, Chapman looks destined to be a role player (barring any article upgrades or a random jump in TC) but not the type of player you would expect from the 7th pick. Lakers are in full tank and have shown that they would rather just unload an asset than wait to get something back in return. Knowing that, GM's should reach out and see what they can get b/c this deal has been available since he was acquired the other day. Be active, send/respond to PM's and you too can be in the position of getting the player.
Same goes for this deal, were talking about a 12 PPG career player here and was known he was available since yesterday. If you were interested, ask what the price will be.
Done
I don't think this addresses the larger concern at all. I would still like an explanation on why it is better for Edmonson to be on the Warriors than waivers, since that is the only thing this trade accomplishes that cutting him wouldn't have. It's a terrible rule that needs to be fixed before next season as it's actively anti-competitive, and at some point a better player is going to move the same way and make a bigger impact.
They dont get it, best let it go lol. Didnt mean to start a fire lol my bad.
Oregon Ownage wrote:This bleeds into the other deal.............. but if the Lakers want to dump Chapman and not get anything in return (other than 6 mil in cap space next season) then he is hurting himself in the long run and is also not getting good value in return for a player that could command more. This is where the fine line is tough to tow b/c on one hand Chapman was the #7 pick last year and now he is being used to dump a contract and if I were a Lakers fan, I would be up in arms (if I were the Lakers, I would get the best asset back).
On the other hand (commish side), I have to make a determination if the deal should go through and I use different calculations (who is the GM, will they be here for the long run, can they be trusted to rebuild/build up a roster, etc.) from this potential deal and whether it severely hampers the team (unrealistic outlook, move makes no sense, etc.).
In this case, Chapman looks destined to be a role player (barring any article upgrades or a random jump in TC) but not the type of player you would expect from the 7th pick. Lakers are in full tank and have shown that they would rather just unload an asset than wait to get something back in return. Knowing that, GM's should reach out and see what they can get b/c this deal has been available since he was acquired the other day. Be active, send/respond to PM's and you too can be in the position of getting the player.
Same goes for this deal, were talking about a 12 PPG career player here and was known he was available since yesterday. If you were interested, ask what the price will be.
Done
I don't think this addresses the larger concern at all. I would still like an explanation on why it is better for Edmonson to be on the Warriors than waivers, since that is the only thing this trade accomplishes that cutting him wouldn't have. It's a terrible rule that needs to be fixed before next season as it's actively anti-competitive, and at some point a better player is going to move the same way and make a bigger impact.
Keith Edmonson is "the goat".
