the nets want swift to opt out

[rory]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MyNetsForLife @ Apr 4 2008, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ Apr 4 2008, 11:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Swift is more tradeable than Collins. The Swift trade was good for the Nets imo even if Swift doesn't opt out.</div>
How? They both make 6.2 mil next year.
</div>
I believe Swift is more tradeable because:
1. He has better numbers (career-wise). He has more perceived value as a career 9/5 guy than a 4/4 guy.
2. He makes less money than Collins.
3. "Potential" - He's younger, more "athletic" and has that "former #2 pick" tag on him - which is similar to the "former All-Star" tag that Jamal Magloire had.

 

[#1_War_Poet_ForLife]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rory @ Apr 5 2008, 08:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MyNetsForLife @ Apr 4 2008, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ Apr 4 2008, 11:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Swift is more tradeable than Collins. The Swift trade was good for the Nets imo even if Swift doesn't opt out.</div>
How? They both make 6.2 mil next year.
</div>
I believe Swift is more tradeable because:
1. He has better numbers (career-wise). He has more perceived value as a career 9/5 guy than a 4/4 guy.
2. He makes less money than Collins.
3. "Potential" - He's younger, more "athletic" and has that "former #2 pick" tag on him - which is similar to the "former All-Star" tag that Jamal Magloire had.
</div>
Wrong.

As for being better? Swift would beat him one on one, but Swift is all stats, and Collins is all defense. Hard to measure against each other.

 

[ghoti]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Apr 4 2008, 09:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Petey @ Apr 4 2008, 03:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pegs @ Apr 4 2008, 02:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Petey @ Apr 4 2008, 12:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Why do you guys assume it was a financial move? The savings is minimal, while Thorn has been rumored to have looked at him in the draft, than rumored he would be offered a MLE type deal the season following KMart's departure.

-Petey</div>

Pre-Kidd Trade, it brought us a little more room to keep us under the luxury tax.
</div>

Yes, but everyone seems to be missing out on how Thorn was interested in the draft, and as a FA.

Swift is the only dead weight in the league someone would have swapped for Colllins? I find that hard to beleive.

-Petey
</div>

Actually Thorn's past interest in Stro was talked about when the trade rumors first started. But that still doesn't overcome the fact that Stro sucks and is useless for a winning team.

</div>

This trade seems more like one of Kiki's "Fallen Angel" acquisitions than anything else.

Thorn's past interest in Swift might have greased the wheels, but it seems to me that Kiki would jump at the chance to trade a player he considers useless for a guy who was considered an elite prospect and never panned out.

 

[danxcr]

how much under the cap are we if swift opt outs?

 

[GMJ]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (danxcr @ Apr 5 2008, 04:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>how much under the cap are we if swift opt outs?</div>

Stro is going to make 6 and change next year, and I'm 93% sure we're more than that over the cap, so I'm going to say zero (we're under the luxury tax threshold).

 

[JCB]

What will the 2008-2009 salary cap figure probably be? Around 57-58 million, right?