HARRINGTON to NY

[SheedSoNasty]

All of this recent activity is really starting to get me thinking about what Raef might bring in. Hell, imagine if we could target LeBron (IMAGINE) by clearing out enough room while keeping Roy, Aldridge, and Oden.

:0

 

[Minstrel]

All of this recent activity is really starting to get me thinking about what Raef might bring in. Hell, imagine if we could target LeBron (IMAGINE) by clearing out enough room while keeping Roy, Aldridge, and Oden.

It's do-able, but in order to do it, the team would have to essentially let every free agent go over the next two seasons. So, Frye, Diogu, LaFrentz, Outlaw and Blake would have to be let go (which means not trading LeFrentz for talent) as their contracts expire. And no new contracts could be added unless they expire in 2010.

None of those players are damaging losses except for Outlaw, but it's a big gamble. Paring the roster down to only players who are on rookie deals (and Przybilla) would weaken the team considerably next year. If the team didn't sign James (or another plum free agent), they'd have wasted a year of possible contention for nothing and perhaps have lost ground for the future years.

 

[ehizzy3]

It's do-able, but in order to do it, the team would have to essentially let every free agent go over the next two seasons. So, Frye, Diogu, LaFrentz, Outlaw and Blake would have to be let go (which means not trading LeFrentz for talent) as their contracts expire. And no new contracts could be added unless they expire in 2010.

None of those players are damaging losses except for Outlaw, but it's a big gamble. Paring the roster down to only players who are on rookie deals (and Przybilla) would weaken the team considerably next year. If the team didn't sign James (or another plum free agent), they'd have wasted a year of possible contention for nothing and perhaps have lost ground for the future years.

outlaw is not a damaging loss if we get lebron, maybe i understood you wrong?

 

[Ed O]

outlaw is not a damaging loss if we get lebron, maybe i understood you wrong?

IF we procured LeBron, of course losing Outlaw wouldn't matter too much... but if we have to definitely lose Outlaw for a 10% shot at LeBron... would it be worth it?

Ed O.

 

[Minstrel]

outlaw is not a damaging loss if we get lebron, maybe i understood you wrong?

He's a valuable player. Losing him is part of the risk of going after LeBron (or Bosh, Amare, etc).

Obviously, if we got one of those free agents, I doubt any of us would be unhappy about losing Outlaw. But what if we didn't get one of them?