Online Petition To Keep Brandon Roy

[Masbee]

My thinking is that regardless if he's done or not, he will never be the player he once was, so that contract will be an albatross for it's entirety

Good thing the new CBA allows the Blazers use the amnesty provision next summer as well.

That way, the Roy contract, by definition of the new CBA cannot possibly be an "albatross".

Thus, I wonder why you even mention. It is a moot point.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Good thing the new CBA allows the Blazers use the amnesty provision next summer as well.

That way, the Roy contract, by definition of the new CBA cannot possibly be an "albatross".

Thus, I wonder why you even mention. It is a moot point.

That's a good point. No albatross, just a bad contract keeping us from utilizing all the MLE until they waive him

 

[Masbee]

That's a good point. No albatross, just a bad contract keeping us from utilizing all the MLE until they waive him

You can't use the full MLE in subsequent years in the new CBA.

Thus, we only can use the full MLE this year or next year not both. Waiting to amnesty Roy doesn't affect the team's ability to use the full MLE over a two year period. We get to use it exactly ONCE.

 

[BrianFromWA]

So, you don't want the Full MLE in an abbreviated signing period where there will literally be tons of good free agents (if expensive) playing musical amnesty chairs, but hold onto it just in case Freeland feels like coming over next year?

And it does impact our ability to use the full MLE twice in a 3-year period.

 

[BBert]

So, the sooner we use it, the sooner we can use it again, n'est-ce pas?

Freeland looks as good a prospect as any we might get. It'll be a shame (to me) if we never get to find out. Maybe we can trade his rights for something?

 

[Mediocre Man]

So, the sooner we use it, the sooner we can use it again, n'est-ce pas?

Yes

 

[Further]

Are you sure teams can only use the MLE every other year? I don't remember seeing that, but you could be right.


If true, I don't want to use the MLE this year if we can use it next year to entice Freeland to come over.

 

[Blazinaway]

Are you sure teams can only use the MLE every other year? I don't remember seeing that, but you could be right.


If true, I don't want to use the MLE this year if we can use it next year to entice Freeland to come over.

actually I think if under lux u can use it every yr

 

[Masbee]

Are you sure teams can only use the MLE every other year? I don't remember seeing that, but you could be right.


If true, I don't want to use the MLE this year if we can use it next year to entice Freeland to come over.

I just did some checking, and the reporting of the terms are:

That was a proposal item by the owners that didn't make it.

Sorry for the error.

The MLE (the full and partial) can be used every year.

Amnesty the gimp now so we can overpay some bench fodder!

 

[KingSpeed]

I'm certain that Roy will never be the 2nd-team All-NBA and 2x All-Star again. As stated in the other thread, there are 4-5 reasons why, if you're going to amnesty him, you do it now. Maybe they aren't great reasons, maybe he can be "Game 4 Roy" for a while, but how many times are you going to lose opportunities waiting that ONE LAST TIME? Let's say that we bring him back, and he's injured for 24 games this year, but puts up 15ppg in a 6th-man role when he is healthy. Do you give him ONE LAST TIME to see if his absences were flukes?

Roy is a 3x All Star

 

[Mediocre Man]

I just did some checking, and the reporting of the terms are:

That was a proposal item by the owners that didn't make it.

Sorry for the error.

The MLE (the full and partial) can be used every year.

Amnesty the gimp now so we can overpay some bench fodder!

Your last line is ironic since we can "overpay" some bench fodder like Landry, Hayes or another big guy, or overpay bench fodder Roy 3 times as much

 

[Masbee]

Your last line is ironic since we can "overpay" some bench fodder like Landry, Hayes or another big guy, or overpay bench fodder Roy 3 times as much

Roy gets paid no matter what.

How many times does that need to be said?

So, the choice is not "overpay" 2nd rate player VS. overpay Roy.

The choice is overpay a gimpy Roy AND overpay 2nd rate player.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Roy gets paid no matter what.

How many times does that need to be said?

So, the choice is not "overpay" 2nd rate player VS. overpay Roy.

The choice is overpay a gimpy Roy AND overpay 2nd rate player.

What about using the MLE to bring Freeland over? Was using it on Matthews a waste?

It sounds like you are saying that we should only make changes if they are for "star" players.....but you don't really believe that, do you?

 

[3RA1N1AC]

keep roy, extend oden, use the mle every year, buy draft picks, take on salary via trades, and free chalupas for all

 

[Masbee]

What about using the MLE to bring Freeland over? Was using it on Matthews a waste?

It sounds like you are saying that we should only make changes if they are for "star" players.....but you don't really believe that, do you?

I think Roy should be amnestied. I think it next to impossible that he will be good again for years to come.

The question on amnesty is when might be best to amnesty Roy. I don't think it is a slam dunk plan that he should be cut now.

Wes worked out (so far).

But, we "overpaid" in splashing $35 mil (with a big upfront check) to get him as he was not a proven starter in the NBA.

There are more examples of teams that regret the full MLE contracts they handed out than those who were happy.

Go ahead, make a list of the full MLE contracts that turned out to be excellent values for the team.

Now, under the new CBA, the full MLE (I still don't have confirmation that the Blazers would have the full MLE is they cut Roy) is only $22mil.

That money will get a role player or a 2nd rate talent excited. It WILL NOT make players like a Jamal Crawford caliber talent happy. Not one bit.

So, I stand by my contention that A) full MLE deals historically are hard to extract good value and B) there are a handful of examples of proven vets who needed a change of scenery and were willing to "settle" for the full MLE to find a happy home, but under the new CBA that is less likely than before.

Thus, I am not real excited - as several on this board appear to be - about the idea of adding key pieces to the roster using the MLE.

If your plan is to add 3rd stringers that you hope can turn into solid bench players - you are less likely to be dissappointed.

We need to make trades to add key pieces, not hope for miracles with the new MLE.

 

[oldmangrouch]

We need to make trades to add key pieces, not hope for miracles with the new MLE.

I agree....with one caveat. In looks like Freeland may be the real deal (a starting quality NBA big man). He isn't coming over for the rookie scale, and the MLE is the only shot the Blazers have to offer him more. Given that the team isn't exactly awash in trade assets, can they afford to pass on this chance to upgrade the talent pool?

 

[mgb]

I agree....with one caveat. In looks like Freeland may be the real deal (a starting quality NBA big man). He isn't coming over for the rookie scale, and the MLE is the only shot the Blazers have to offer him more. Given that the team isn't exactly awash in trade assets, can they afford to pass on this chance to upgrade the talent pool?

That can't happen until next summer though, right? So if we keep Roy for a year it won't effect that?