NOOOOOOO!!! Kings renounce rights to Dalembert!!
- Thread starter Circa_1985_Fan
- Start date
Please, god no! I'm not about to trade a young solid PF for an aging veteran that has one foot on a banana peel. We don't have to trade anyone!!! We'd be doing the Mav's a favor, so why would we give up a player in the process. From what I've read, the Mav's want Dalembert to agree to a one year deal, so they'll have cap room next offseason. I don't see the logic in that for Dalembert, but who the hell knows. The Mav's have a trade execption, so the only way they can use it is through a sign and trade. I be happy if we can just get their first round pick for next year. It would cost us nothing in return.
Plase stop being disrespectful! If you would not say that to his face then its disrespectful....double standards much?!
But I do agree with the jist of the whole post
Would like add to all those that don't like Dally, how stupid are the Mavs for wanting a player that has so many goaltending calls against his name...the player that disrupts the offense and is apparently not going to provide them with weakside shot blocking?!
But I do agree with the jist of the whole post
Would like add to all those that don't like Dally, how stupid are the Mavs for wanting a player that has so many goaltending calls against his name...the player that disrupts the offense and is apparently not going to provide them with weakside shot blocking?!
Plase stop being disrespectful! If you would not say that to his face then its disrespectful....double standards much?!
But I do agree with the jist of the whole post
Would like add to all those that don't like Dally, how stupid are the Mavs for wanting a player that has so many goaltending calls against his name...the player that disrupts the offense and is apparently not going to provide them with weakside shot blocking?!
But I do agree with the jist of the whole post
Would like add to all those that don't like Dally, how stupid are the Mavs for wanting a player that has so many goaltending calls against his name...the player that disrupts the offense and is apparently not going to provide them with weakside shot blocking?!
Indeed, it remains a miracle how much more we know than the elite teams about shotblockers and their importance. No wonder those incompetents had to have a lockout.
This is assuming that we want him back. Nothing in our behaviour since the end of last season suggests that we want him back at the cost it would take.
Also if we think we might be able to low ball him here and get him for the equivalent of the MLE then we are dreaming. I am pretty sure he would rather sign with Dallas, Miami (amnesty Miller) or any other contender out there for the MLE than he would with us.
We can get him back no doubt and I am still holding to the minimal of chances that it might happen BUT its as clear as daylight that we are not brining Dalembert back because we don't want to pay the market value and now that we signed Hayes, we are even more content than we might have been at the start of the FA (which in itself is troubling to say the least)
Also if we think we might be able to low ball him here and get him for the equivalent of the MLE then we are dreaming. I am pretty sure he would rather sign with Dallas, Miami (amnesty Miller) or any other contender out there for the MLE than he would with us.
We can get him back no doubt and I am still holding to the minimal of chances that it might happen BUT its as clear as daylight that we are not brining Dalembert back because we don't want to pay the market value and now that we signed Hayes, we are even more content than we might have been at the start of the FA (which in itself is troubling to say the least)
If in fact we are no longer pursuing AK, then we should be going after Dalembert.
It's almost seemed as if we're unwilling to pay 8-9 million for him, but if we have the opportunity to pick him up for around that price, then we should looking into it.
But I agree that it appears as if the we've decided that he isn't in our future plans. I'd hate to see him sign somewhere else for 8 million, or even worse, for some team's MLE.
It's almost seemed as if we're unwilling to pay 8-9 million for him, but if we have the opportunity to pick him up for around that price, then we should looking into it.
But I agree that it appears as if the we've decided that he isn't in our future plans. I'd hate to see him sign somewhere else for 8 million, or even worse, for some team's MLE.
I haven't heard anything since we signed Hayes, but Westphal and Petrie were pretty clear when they talked as soon as the lockout was over, and even before the lockout started and said they wanted Dalembert back.
I'd agree with you and say it doesn't look like Dalembert will be back with us, but I keep thinking about that salary floor .. we don't know eactly how the Thornton/Hayes contracts are structured, but if its the same amount anually I think we still need to spend about 4 million more.
The names we have expressed interest in to this point are Dalembert, Barea, and AK.
Barea may sign with the Knicks, AK may not come over from Russia ..
I'd agree with you and say it doesn't look like Dalembert will be back with us, but I keep thinking about that salary floor .. we don't know eactly how the Thornton/Hayes contracts are structured, but if its the same amount anually I think we still need to spend about 4 million more.
The names we have expressed interest in to this point are Dalembert, Barea, and AK.
Barea may sign with the Knicks, AK may not come over from Russia ..
Look I agree that we are still some $4 million + short, provided that the Thornton and Hayes deals are structured "normally" and all the rookies got the 120% of their rookie pay scale. However, I am pretty sure that the team has until the end of trade deadline to hit the minimum mark so there is no rush for us to do that. We tend to love to sit on things for a while and see how it settles. I would not be surprised in the slightest if we don't play under the minimum until the deadline. Even if we don't spend the minimum, we would just split it equally between the rest of the team which would not be the end of the world.
Personally, I think that AK47 thing was always a long shot and highly unlikely to happen. I would therefore re-sign Dalembert and ship out some of the other bigs not named Dalembert, Cousins and for the sake of future, Whiteside and get an upgrade at SF.
The chances of that happening?! HIHGLY, HIGHLY unlikely.
Personally, I think that AK47 thing was always a long shot and highly unlikely to happen. I would therefore re-sign Dalembert and ship out some of the other bigs not named Dalembert, Cousins and for the sake of future, Whiteside and get an upgrade at SF.
The chances of that happening?! HIHGLY, HIGHLY unlikely.
Houston is still a huge problem. Who knows what they are going to do now that they struck out elsewhere, but oddly enough I would be willing to bet they would consider a Daly for Hayes trade an upgrade. Odd.
Suppose it might be promising that Dallas ended up going with Odom with that TPE rather than with Daly. It probably just means Daly wasn't having any of this 1 yr contract stuff, but if it was us who shot down the idea then that would seem to me we were back in the Daly market. Otherwise why would you turn down a TPE and a late first (just assuming the same package would ahve come to us as went to the Lakers).
Also of course note that Golden State could cause problem again if the Clips match the Jordan offer.
Suppose it might be promising that Dallas ended up going with Odom with that TPE rather than with Daly. It probably just means Daly wasn't having any of this 1 yr contract stuff, but if it was us who shot down the idea then that would seem to me we were back in the Daly market. Otherwise why would you turn down a TPE and a late first (just assuming the same package would ahve come to us as went to the Lakers).
Also of course note that Golden State could cause problem again if the Clips match the Jordan offer.
We really need Dally back. We have no legit backup center and Cousins can't guard a lot of big men in the league right now. Dally had to cover the tougher PF's and C's last year. Who's going to be the backup? Thompson? He's a solid backup PF off the bench but he's not a C. Hayes is way too undersized and should get limited minutes and specialized assignments off the bench.
We really need this guy. As good as AK47 is, he's injured often and doesn't fill as big a need as Dally would.
We really need this guy. As good as AK47 is, he's injured often and doesn't fill as big a need as Dally would.
You would expect that we'd be there to make certain that he has offers above the MLE.
Now that we've apparantly lost the opportunity with AK, that leaves cap-space for either Daly, or to absorb some salary back in a trade.
With all that's gone on, I'd still love to be able to pick up Dalembert for a reasonable price.
One thing to note is that you can be below the minimum salary floor till the end of the trade deadline, so there isn't any real urgency to spend money at this time. I hope we do spend it wisely during this period, but it wouldn't be a complete shock to see them hold on to their assets to see what might develop prior to the trade deadline.
Now that we've apparantly lost the opportunity with AK, that leaves cap-space for either Daly, or to absorb some salary back in a trade.
With all that's gone on, I'd still love to be able to pick up Dalembert for a reasonable price.
One thing to note is that you can be below the minimum salary floor till the end of the trade deadline, so there isn't any real urgency to spend money at this time. I hope we do spend it wisely during this period, but it wouldn't be a complete shock to see them hold on to their assets to see what might develop prior to the trade deadline.