really?
I'm not his biggest fan, but i want to see the Cs challenged on their past off season if for no other reason than to see what it spurs them to do this off season.
I'm all for that. But I think this season also shows why you don't always go "all in" on maximizing a single season's chances. Without Garnett we weren't going to win a title this year. So throwing big money at short term solutions that would handicap the amount we could spend in future years can bite you in the ass big time.
Being a GM is very difficult, I'm glad I don't have such a public and pressure full job. I'd love to get in to work for a team as a stats/video guy though 
I assume you're talking about Pose here. personally, i'd still love to have him.
then you can target guys like Dice and a PG because you'd already have your wing set.
anyway, I'm ready to see what the brain trust is working on for this off season. hopefully it will be a bold move.
In this case it was Posey. But really its any player who you sign for long term money that might mean you can't use the MLE or make a trade for financial reasons.
This year it could be Big Baby. Do we want to committ to paying him relatively long term, say four years, if it could mean next year we'd be up against the upper payroll limit and unable to make any moves?
Same thing with giving a player, like Ariza, a full MLE deal. What does that mean in three years time? Because as much as I want to max out having KG/Pierce/Allen here and Perk/Rondo still on cheap deals, that doesn't mean you can forgoe looking ahead.
another way to look at it however is when you don't sign those guys and don't replace them in other ways, the next season you have more spots to fill and less ways to fill them.
for instance, this season we have three spots to fill and really only the MLE/LLE to do so as far as FAs go.
if we had Pose we'd have less spots to fill with the same money.
now, you can argue that they wouldn't use all the money, but at least they'd have the option.
That's my point though, its not a matter of having the exception to use every year. In the end the payroll of the team is going to be limited in terms of real dollars. GMs need to think in real dollars as much as they do exceptions, salary cap space, and draft picks.
This is all a rehash of past discussions though.
No, I know.
I guess my point is that if they have the exceptions to use (especially on a team so in line to make a run at a Title) they are more likely to spend it than not spend it.
that is to say, if they had signed Posey last season, I would lean toward them spending it again this season looking at who is available and how close we are to another Title.
the temptation of getting that next Title is pretty strong and certainly would add money to the coffers to make up for the money spent on salaries.
Of course any fan would like Danny to spend as much money as possible every year. But the truth is he has a budget. What if he's now able to either sign someone like Wallace or McDyess to a contract or trade some expiring contracts for a longer deal because he didn't sign Posey?
you act like a budget is a cement wall.
sure they have a target, but it's not like some bank vault door closes when they hit the magic number.
the thing that does have vault door is the ways teams can sign players when they are over the cap. all they have are exceptions and minimum salaries.....
as has been noted elsewhere, there is a push pull as far as budgets go because a lot of it has to do with revenue and there was lost revenue this year by exiting the playoffs in the second round.
so now when they are looking at how much they are going to spend in contracts, they are also trying to balance how much a particular addition will increase the chances of going deeper into the playoffs....
Topic: just listening to EEI (re: Sports Sunday show) (Read 5567 times)