Do we have the worst sallary structure in the NBA?

[e4sym0de]

Just wondering if there is any other team that has more "bad money" committed then the celtics next season?

Humphries 12,0$
Wallace   10,1$
Bass       6,4$
Lee        5,2$
Bogans     5,0$

Thats nearly 39mil commited to only 5 players, with none of them beeing a starter on a contending team most likely.

[LooseCannon]

Just wondering if there is any other team that has more "bad money" committed then the celtics next season?

Humphries 12,0$
Wallace   10,1$
Bass       6,4$
Lee        5,2$
Bogans     5,0$

Thats nearly 39mil commited to only 5 players, with none of them beeing a starter on a contending team most likely.

I'd rather have that situation than $33 million tied up in Amare Stoudemire and Andrea Bargnani.

[aporel#18]

Just wondering if there is any other team that has more "bad money" committed then the celtics next season?

Humphries 12,0$
Wallace   10,1$
Bass       6,4$
Lee        5,2$
Bogans     5,0$

Thats nearly 39mil commited to only 5 players, with none of them beeing a starter on a contending team most likely.

I'd rather have that situation than $33 million tied up in Amare Stoudemire and Andrea Bargnani.

TP. And it's not like Humphries and Bogans are going to hurt our flexibility. The only really bad contract is Wallace, and he should be able to regain some of his value (he'll still be overpaid, probably) outside last year's Nets iso-system.

Bass is slightly overpaid in a rebuilding team, but he's a really good player, and we could swap his 2-year contract for a bad 2-year contract plus future picks, he deserves a chance to win, and we need his minutes for Sully and Kelly.

Lee isn't overpaid, but he didn't play up to his real value last year. I wouldn't mind him in Green for the future, but if there's a good deal for him, I feel the same as with Bass.

The C's have 17M in expirings next season, that's not too bad.

[bfrombleacher]

Elaborating on what's said, the problem is when you're trying to contend and you have money tied up on sub par performers or non performers, like STAT.

The Hawks for the past several years, I think, has been very guilty of this.

I think the one thing the "tanking people" and I would agree on is trying to contend while overpaying multiple players who are "just short" on talent is guaranteed failure.

It's quite intuitive, really. Evaluate talent well, pay the right amount, win.